Snapz

You're argument hinges on a "both sides are the same" false premise. It's just not true. January 6th was unprecedented in the 250 years of this country. Things are different, this is not the time historically for political posturing. This isn't a Romney versus Obama election. Shit is fundamentally different and you're likely operating from the muscle memory of a time when it was a more of a "polite disagreement". This is the "grandpa sitting with an assault rifle at the polling place" timeline. Wake up.

This post, at this time, is very obviously pointed at influencing the US election. This analogy represents the entirety of the US population eligible to vote in that election and the two dominant political parties in the US as a country with two party politics - a flawed degradation of the system originally designed to be sure, which is a separate conversation you can have, but there is an objective truth that one of two parties will win this election. Period.

That objective truth acknowledged, there is no neutral or third option here, regardless of how hard some may try to convince themselves otherwise. You have no moral high ground in the middle or to the side, you'll either vote for assured destruction or you'll vote for a chance at stopping it. You missed your chance to fundamentally shift our political structure the 4 years, and 200+ years, prior. So now we come to the table as adults, get Harris in as the better option, and then as soon as she's sworn in and has the power to do so, we fill the streets in protest and demand the immediate end to this.

trump and his people have literally talked out loud about how great the "beachfront property" will be for Israel once they annihilate Gaza and the Palestinian people. There is no maturity in the false vitriol and attempts to solicit votes for trump/stein/no vote (which are all the same enthusiast vote for trump and for the assured destruction of every last Palestinian person.

Couch fuckin', boot lickin', normal human man.

Ha ha, good. So how long have you been reading this thread?

Access to data is a human right. Should be managed as utility or public service like the library and not for profit.

If you're in a poorly made boat that has a hole in it with two other people...

And you are all actively sinking in that faulty boat, about to die in the middle of the ocean...

And one of the people states they will make more holes so you all drown....

And the other wants to work to keep the boat floating enough to get to shore, but not to your ideal...

Who do you help in that moment, or do you fold your hands and sink on principle? And you understand that sinking is not a moral victory here, because you've effectively supported the person who wanted to make more holes and sink the boat.

If you don't get to shore, you won't live to attempt to sue that horrible boat company to hold them accountable and keep others from using their faulty boats. And if you don't help the person bailing out water, the person making more holes will kill you all with less effort.

The "people" above are to represent general philosophies of the two "sides" in this discussion, not insightful candidates. There is no option to truly stay neutral here, direct action or willful inaction, both have impacts that you are responsible for.

What do you do?

If you're in a poorly made boat that has a hole in it with two other people...

And you are all actively sinking in that faulty boat, about to die in the middle of the ocean...

And one of the people states they will make more holes so you all drown....

And the other wants to work to keep the boat floating enough to get to shore, but not to your ideal...

Who do you help in that moment, or do you fold your hands and sink on principle? And you understand that sinking is not a neutral, moral victory here, because you've effectively supported the person who wanted to make more holes and sink the boat.

If you don't get to shore, you won't live to attempt to sue that horrible boat company to hold them accountable and keep others from using their faulty boats. And if you don't help the person bailing out water, the person making more holes will kill you all with less effort.

The "people" above are to represent general philosophies of the two "sides" in this discussion, not individual candidates. There is no option to truly stay neutral here, direct action or willful inaction, both have impacts that you are responsible for.

What do you do?

The "sides" originally compared are trump and Harris and their general approaches to governance - international diplomacy being a part of that overall equation and not the whole. Again, YOU FUNDAMENTALLY MISUNDERSTAND the original point with an inherent bias in your processing of information it seems.

First "liberal" is a general descriptor of personal philosophy and not a party, liberal transcends party affiliation as it's a point on a spectrum within a party - you're failing in trying to speak to "leftists" versus "democrats" or more accurately, establishment democrats specifically.

Next, you claim to be a leftist, but leftists have more reason than you in my experience (source: am walking, talking, protesting, voting leftist AND a rational adult who understands emergency triage enough to know you need to assess a situation and survive the small battles to win the larger conflict). Your position isn't "leftist" it's maybe ignorant, misinformed anarchy - you want to burn shit down because it hurts your brain to make a plan.

And you also seem to be fixated on America while not living here or being a citizen abroad, which is another layer to this whole exchange? Where is your passionate attack of Israel focused on specifics of their inflicted and ongoing genocide - nowhere. That's because its similar for you to attack this middle layer and feel like you're "helping" - you aren't helping shit with your shallow, misdirected vitriol.

Well, your "liberal" comment to start, but more importantly, your repeated, performative missing of the point of the original statement. That wasn't the comparison made. All of your "counterpoints" center back to your same core misunderstanding of the original statement. Doesn't slow you down a tick though, does it?

Showing your ass, buddy

Nobody thinks they are entitled to votes. This is about triage during an emergency.

To make it simple, let's assign a number out of 100 - Likelihood that a second trump presidency enthusiastically and loudly helps Israel escalate and "finish" their genocide in Gaza: 98.9

Likelihood that post inauguration, a Harris presidency does something that doesn't go as far as the above, but still does meaningful damage, just more quietly through diplomacy and weapons shipments: 32

Now it isn't great that the Harris number isn't zero, even negative, but the reasoning for her campaigns current position is likely a combination of election politics plus the vestiges of Biden's outdated and misguided position on blind support for an Israel that's in his mind and not in front of him.

So first up in a triage... You get Harris in because less likelihood for absolute annihilation. I'd then wager a likely softening at worst to full end of support at best once Biden and election are out of the active picture. Most importantly, we eject Harris because a Harris presidency will preserve your right to protest Harris. A second trump presidency likely leads to the end of American democracy and the freedoms Americans take for granted.

After a Harris admin victory she needs to be sworn in the following January, but on day one, I fully support that we FILL the streets across the country, a la Vietnam era protests. We block freeways and interrupt commerce until a Harris administration ends all US support of Israel's genocide. We will have that right and that chance with Harris, you'll get shot in the fucking eye and tackled into an unmarked minivan if you try that in a second trump administration.

Realize the weight of this decision, and listen to Stein's own campaign telling you they are doing to get trump elected. Time to get WIDE awake and ADULT on the reality here.

Minimizing is you've perception through misinterpretation. You're a child and I'm not minimizing the genocide that Israel is actively perpetrating.

You ding dongs just lazily skim headlines, post as perceived support for your argument and don't realize that the article content just highlights how laughable your stated position is - the article that you posted basically talks about these generally horrible people tried everything they could to get on board with trump's horseshit through their well developed deny/lie skillset... and they couldn't. Them supporting a Harris vote speaks more to the failure of trump to state any rational coherent plan that these evil selfish cowards could get on board with. These fuckers want the USA to live so they can try to fuck it again in the future, so they endorse the adult in the room.

republicans needs Democrats to rebuild the jenga board every other election cycle so they can have something to headbutt on their next turn. trump wants to take the already toppled board, shove a few pieces up his ass and set the rest on fire Bertie flipping the entire table. Then he wants to make you walk the floor covered in broken, flaming Jenga blocks barefoot. And during all of this, kid rock music is playing VERY LOUD.