• reallykindasorta@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    6 months ago

    So practical that you’ve all totally lost your moral compass. Who would write their name under a column that has active genocide support marked off? Blows mu mind that you people act like you have some sort of practical moral high ground while actively supporting genocide (voting is an act).

    • dan1101@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      I think Harris could likely change her mind on Israel. Not so for Trump, and the other candidates don’t stand a chance so why vote for them.

        • Quik@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          This may be, but the probability is unarguably higher than with Trump. Voting exclusively for candidates you morally agree on only works if enough people have the same morale (in this case i.e. are educated on Israel and so on) and are also not willing to make compromises.

          Even if unfortunate, this is currently not the case; and you voting independent has smaller chances of changing that than voting democratic. So you will probably have to accept this situation for the moment and choose the “best actually feasible” strategy— and feasible means having the highest probability to win in real life, not merely trying.

          Personally, I’d even argue that it’s unethical to not vote for a candidate like Harris, just because the chances of getting stuff like ranked choice voting or educating voters done (which will then lead to you being able to realistically vote for others) is significantly higher when voting Democrats than… letting Trump win?

          Notice that I don’t say you have to agree with anything else she stands for, you’re trying to achieve certain goals/get out of the very unfortunate current situation, and even a low chance of reaching that is infinitely better than none.