We’d still be seeing genocide. Harris was very open about viewing Iran as a massive enemy and refusing to put any stops to giving Israel weapons. She publicly stated she wanted our military to get stronger when talking about Iran and had no problems with Biden going around Congress to support Israel.
But that’s all fine cause at least then it’s just be overseas and nothing happening at home (ignore that Biden gave massive funding to ICE also and encouraged police to deal with college protestors)
In Israel, yes. That was never a fucking choice we had, considering that some 75% of this fucking country still thinks Israel is our friends-to-the-end ally.
That’s what ‘harm reduction’ means. It doesn’t mean “I’m doing this because it will lead to socialism and a good outcome.” It means “Our policies currently don’t get anywhere near enough support for our candidate to win, and there are only two realistic outcomes; we should cast our vote, one act which costs ~20-30 minutes of our time, with the realistic option that gives us the LESS fucked result which results in LESS harm and more room for us to fucking WORK AND ORGANIZE so that we can get a fucking time when two fuckwits aren’t our only options - whether by the ballot or the bullet.”
But that’s all fine cause at least then it’s just be overseas and nothing happening at home (ignore that Biden gave massive funding to ICE also and encouraged police to deal with college protestors)
“Harris would have totally invaded Iran and tanked her own approval numbers!”
I see you’re a very stable genius, just like the current president.
Look ya’ll seem to love the % Hitler things so I’ll put it like this. The choices you see are 100% Hitler and 99.99999% Hitler, but ignore the several 0% Hitlers also standing there wanting votes and have plans on how not to be Hitler then get upset when people support 0% Hitler over 99.99999999% Hitler. Like I said, I view harm reduction as being 0 harm which means supporting 0% Hitler.
Considering the third party candidates available in the USA, there were no “0% Hitler” candidates, unless you only view some genocides as worth opposing.
I’m not upset that people support “0% Hitler”; I’m upset that people act like solipsistic morons when voting. If more people actually supported “0% Hitler” and they had a chance to win, this wouldn’t be a problem.
So how do you get more people to support 0% Hitler if you constantly publicly yell at the people who do?
“Don’t waste your vote on a candidate who is still polling under 1% in a race where there is a grotesquely worse candidate and a less-bad candidate both at near 50%” isn’t telling you “Don’t support 0% Hitler”, it’s telling you "Work on building support for 0% Hitler before you try to enter an election that requires a fucking plurality of the nation’s population to agree with your choice."
And and yes there was a 0% Hitler choice in the race
I’m sorry that you don’t think Ukrainians and Uyghurs are human beings, but unsurprising given your positions thus far.
We’d still be seeing genocide. Harris was very open about viewing Iran as a massive enemy and refusing to put any stops to giving Israel weapons. She publicly stated she wanted our military to get stronger when talking about Iran and had no problems with Biden going around Congress to support Israel.
But that’s all fine cause at least then it’s just be overseas and nothing happening at home (ignore that Biden gave massive funding to ICE also and encouraged police to deal with college protestors)
In Israel, yes. That was never a fucking choice we had, considering that some 75% of this fucking country still thinks Israel is our friends-to-the-end ally.
That’s what ‘harm reduction’ means. It doesn’t mean “I’m doing this because it will lead to socialism and a good outcome.” It means “Our policies currently don’t get anywhere near enough support for our candidate to win, and there are only two realistic outcomes; we should cast our vote, one act which costs ~20-30 minutes of our time, with the realistic option that gives us the LESS fucked result which results in LESS harm and more room for us to fucking WORK AND ORGANIZE so that we can get a fucking time when two fuckwits aren’t our only options - whether by the ballot or the bullet.”
“Harris would have totally invaded Iran and tanked her own approval numbers!”
I see you’re a very stable genius, just like the current president.
Look ya’ll seem to love the % Hitler things so I’ll put it like this. The choices you see are 100% Hitler and 99.99999% Hitler, but ignore the several 0% Hitlers also standing there wanting votes and have plans on how not to be Hitler then get upset when people support 0% Hitler over 99.99999999% Hitler. Like I said, I view harm reduction as being 0 harm which means supporting 0% Hitler.
Considering the third party candidates available in the USA, there were no “0% Hitler” candidates, unless you only view some genocides as worth opposing.
I’m not upset that people support “0% Hitler”; I’m upset that people act like solipsistic morons when voting. If more people actually supported “0% Hitler” and they had a chance to win, this wouldn’t be a problem.
So how do you get more people to support 0% Hitler if you constantly publicly yell at the people who do?
And and yes there was a 0% Hitler choice in the race
“Don’t waste your vote on a candidate who is still polling under 1% in a race where there is a grotesquely worse candidate and a less-bad candidate both at near 50%” isn’t telling you “Don’t support 0% Hitler”, it’s telling you "Work on building support for 0% Hitler before you try to enter an election that requires a fucking plurality of the nation’s population to agree with your choice."
I’m sorry that you don’t think Ukrainians and Uyghurs are human beings, but unsurprising given your positions thus far.
Considering Biden armed and supported Israel WAY more than Ukraine I wouldn’t say he or Harris view them as people either.
The only true way for people to see mass support for a good candidate is voting for them in the general. Bad choices don’t deserve a single vote.
You really don’t remember, do you.
Yes, we get it, you believe Ukrainians and Uyghurs deserve it and that apologia for genocide is a good choice rather than a bad one.