• 1 Post
  • 38 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: August 15th, 2023

help-circle
  • I never claimed to support genocide. I claimed that it is better to vote for the better option of the two. You are moving the goal posts.

    I’ll make it simple for you by reframing my position, as a simple syllogism so maybe you’ll stay on topic:

    Premise one: Kamala’s policy on Palestine (and pretty much every other policy) was better than Trump’s.

    You’ve asserted without evidence that Kamala’s policy is the same as Trump’s. That is factually false. They may be close, but they are not the same. Even if Kamala lied about her policy and continued Biden’s policy of providing unconditional resourcing, it is still better than Trump’s policy of providing even more unconditional resources.

    Premise two: If one is presented with only two options, and one of those options will be selected no matter what, one should select the better option.

    You have not provided any refutation to this point whatsoever.

    Premise three: No one other than Kamala or Trump could have won the election

    You’ve also not refuted this in any way

    Conclusion: Because Kamala’s policies made her the better option of the two options, and one of them would certainly become president, one should have voted for Kamala.

    Unless you are able to refute the accuracy of the premises or show that the conclusion does not follow from those premises, you have nothing to stand on.

    Whether or not you can “support this” is irrelevant. Whether or not it “crosses a line” is irrelevant. Voting is not endorsement, nor is it support of a candidate or all their positions. It is one of your few ways to peacefully influence the direction of the country. You want a viable party that is anti-genocide? Me too. That option didn’t exist. Go run for office. Go make that party. In the meantime, stop rolling over for the fascists and letting them get their way.





  • None of that changes the fact that you had a choice between one possible future and a worse possible future, and you opted not to choose and to allow the worse future to arrive.

    I’ll make it simple for you by reframing my position, the position you were attempting to mock, as a simple syllogism:

    Premise one: Kamala’s policy on Palestine (and pretty much every other policy) was better than Trump’s.

    You’ve asserted without evidence that Kamala’s stated policy is not true and that she would follow Biden’s established policy of providing unconditionally continued resourcing. Even if that is true, it is still better than Trump’s policy of providing even more unconditional resources.

    Premise two: If one is presented with only two options, and one of those options will be selected no matter what, one should select the better option.

    You have not provided any refutation to this point whatsoever.

    Premise three: No one other than Kamala or Trump could have won the election

    You’ve also not refuted this in any way

    Conclusion: Because Kamala’s policies made her the better option of the two options, and one of them would certainly become president, one should have voted for Kamala.

    Unless you are able to refute the accuracy of the premises or show that the conclusion does not follow from those premises, you have nothing to stand on.


  • You are changing the subject instead of defending your position.

    Biden has nothing to do with it. He wasn’t running for President.

    Kamala’s position was to strive for a ceasefire, and Trump’s position was to give Israel whatever they need to get the job done.

    By voting 3rd party, you’ve taken the position that these two options are identical in your eyes. Either Israel continues with likely similar reluctant support, or Israel continues with encouragement and unlimited support. Which do you think will lead to more Palestinian deaths?

    On top of this, this was Kamala’s weakest policy, and she still clearly wins out. You are not only willing to throw the Palestinians under the bus, you’re willing to throw trans people, women, and immigrants under the bus too. All of this so you can be on your high horse and pretend to be morally superior while enabling the worst future for everyone. Good job.





  • Kamala was not insistent that Israel have free reign like Trump was. Kamala said that she wanted a cease fire, and Trump wanted Israel to finish the job. In the context of these two candidates, they are clearly not the same.

    Voting third party is not a “fuck you” to anyone. No one who matters gives a shit about a third party vote.

    A third party vote is a waste of a vote and no different from abstaining. A third party vote is simply shrugging in the face a fascism. Trump loves it, because it opened the way to his election.








  • I will use PayPal when making purchases, mostly to keep from giving my payment information directly to yet another company that could handle it improperly.

    Not to say that PayPal wouldn’t misuse the information too, but it’s one company that might misuse my information vs many companies, so I’ll go with the one.




  • I found this a bit confusing, but I think the core of this is really that Waffle House staff don’t get a choice on whether or not they buy a meal during their shift. Is that right?

    I kind of got that gist from the article, but nothing super clear. It said that employees pay for the meal whether they eat it or not, which if you ordered food and didn’t eat it, that’s kinda on you. I think it should be saying that they are charged for the meal whether they ordered it or not, if that’s what is happening.