• agitatedpotato@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    There’s a difference between voting for an ideal candidate and not being able to vote for one materially supporting a genocide. “not funding genocide” isn’t an ideal, it’s a bare minimum. If not funding genocide is ‘idealistic’ to you, then I want no part of anything you’re trying to sell and normalize.

    • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      “not funding genocide” isn’t an ideal, it’s a bare minimum.

      Doesn’t matter, that option is not one of the two choices.

      It’s “try to restrain the genocide” or “make genocide worse”. Pick one. And if you say they’re equally bad, you’re an idiot.

      • agitatedpotato@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Who’s trying to restrain the genocide? Last I checked Biden says nice things then does nothing but send more weapons?

        Doesn’t matter, that option is not one of the two choices.

        This is the cause of voter apathy btw, when you tell people there’s no way to stop genocide, they’re not going to feel like they can effect change. And when voter apathy sets in democrats lose. Democrats know this, yet pursue political avenues that foster voter apathy. I live in a blue state, nothing I can do will save the Democrats from themselves.