Perhaps they'll fragment after he dies? A lot of dictatorships don't survive the death of the supreme leader
lurklurk
You have a good point that understanding the voter is a good path to figuring out how to fix this in the future.
We still get to judge them for being awful people, because fooled or not, they effectively are
Dig deep enough in any awful begaviour and you can find causes and explanations, but that doesn't make every behaviour ok
I'd probably vote for the option causing a bit less suffering in Gaza, as hard as I could. I would not refuse to vote because the lesser evil was still bad.
It's not hard really
R is pushing more support for Israel so D is the lesser evil. There's a reason Netanyahu wanted Trump. If you think it couldn't get worse than D level support, stay tuned
Kanye West?
well at least you're consistent...
Btw, your chosen course of actions indirectly supported the option of spending even more tax dollars on killing people in gaza, so you might want to consider breaking your consistent streak of picking the wrong choice and try woting in a way that aligns with your stated goals
i don’t think Russia had a right to invade.
So perhaps you should stop defending the invasion and start arguing for support for ukraine?
the fact that Ukraine had an election since 2014 and that there is public support for a western friendly government does not change that there was an abrupt change in government in 2014. these things are not connected
These things are totally connected. They show that the russian friendly government wasn't acting according to the will of the people. And if you dig deeper you'll probably find that the russian-friendliness was a bit of a sudden decision that the people hadn't voted for, thus the protests.
What are you supposed to do if the government you elected turns out to act against the interest of the people and looks to be compromised by a foreign power?
if you cannot state “Yes this is true” or “No this is false because xyz” then you are not actually saying anything and I’m going to assume you are not discussing in good faith
Well you are free to do so, but I won't agree with your manipulative framing of things. "yes she was raped, but had she been drinking? did she wear makeup? did she wear a short skirt? I'm not justifying it, it's a simple statement of fact"
You're clearly invested in defending an invasion you after a lot of arguing concede is wrong, so you should take a look at yourself and ask why that is
So it's the moral argument of killing kids now in the hope of making a point that might or might not affect future politicians?
I'm mostly curious if and why you think Russia had the right to invade.
I don't agree with your framing of a,b & c.
A & B: Ukraine has had an election since 2014 so apparently there's public support for a western friendly government.
C: preparing to defend yourself from invasion doesn't justify invading
So why do you think Russia were right to invade?
It doesn't have to make sense for people to convince themselves to do it. It will certainly lead to worse outcomes for gaza
If your morals disregard the probable outcomes and is more focused on normative rules you could make some arguments but that kind of purity won't save a single starving child in gaza
Edit: spelling
Huge numbers of Ukrainian refugees in Europe already. They're doing pretty well and integrate quickly
They like what he says and does. There's nothing deeper, they're not fooled, they're not protest voting. A lot of people in germany liked Hitler, a lot of italians liked Mussolini, a lot of russians like Putin, a lot of americans like Trump.
I think most countries have like 20-30% of people who'd love a fascist leader. They're why high-school bullies are popular rather than shunned for being anti-social. They're fine with people getting hurt as long as they can imagine themselves part of the "strong" side, as that's the only win and feeling of safety they get.
Why they're closer to 50% in the US is a more interesting question
Anyone not voting for Harris, really