Voting isn’t actually support
On the other hand, making a deliberate choice not to act does mean supporting whatever happens without your action
Interesting. So, by drag’s logic, a Trump voter isn’t responsible for supporting Trump, but a nonvoter is.
It’s amusing to see the kinds of ridiculous knots y’all tie yourselves into trying to twist around language in an attempt to resolve your cognitive dissonance and punch left.
What answer is that? All I’m doing here is interrogating your worldviews, and it seems I’ve found a pretty significant bit of cognitive dissonance, haven’t I?
Not an answer to my question.
Are you asking which of the two major parties in the US is the “second” party, making the US more democratic than if there were a single party?
Yes, that is what I’m asking. To say that having more than one party makes our system more democratic means that there must be at least two parties whose existence both make the system more democratic. So, does the Republican party, whose candidate tried to overturn an election, make the system more democratic? Does the Green party, which the person I responded to said should face legal retribution for their role as a “spoiler,” make the system more democratic? Maybe the Libertarian party? Which one?
First off you didn’t answer the question, second off you put words in my mouth saying that I’m “fixating” on that as “the only possible change.”
Roger that, you can’t answer because your worldview is incoherent.
Downvoters are welcome to answer the question too. Too bad none of them can either 💅
Quick question: is the US more or less democratic than if it were a one party state, and if the answer is more, then which other party is it that makes it more democratic?
Make sure to protect your precious bodily fluids!
That’s a completely ridiculous stance. Most international students are part of exchange programs meaning that for everyone attending one of our schools, one of our students gets to study abroad in a school from their country. These exchange programs allow people to be exposed to new ideas and perspectives and promote cross-cultural understanding, both by our country’s students experiencing other cultures and from foreign students sharing their perspectives and experiences with people at home. Isolating ourselves like that would reduce the spread of knowledge and ideas, for literally no reason.
Just one more year of occupation bro. I promise bro just one more year and it’ll fix everything bro. Bro. Just one more year. Please just one more. One more year and we can fix this whole problem bro. Bro cmon just give me one more year I promise bro. Bro please I just need one more year.
Liberals oppose war challenge level: impossible.
immiserated possibly a billion more
Hmm, this graph must be upside-down or something, weird.
Fascists paint themselves as being a third position that supercedes the left-right dichotomy, but that doesn’t mean it’s actually true. Everything about it is right-wing and it’s not actually as incompatible with capitalism as fascists claim. Every fascist regime has partnered up with capitalists, who often support them into power in the first place.
I never claimed that the Republicans are not unreasonable. As you say, the Tea Party was very unreasonable, and republicans at that time stonewalled Obama, despite his all of his attempts at reasonable compromise. That’s my point, it isn’t new.
My issue is that the narrative of reasonableness is tied to the status quo. When the status quo is failing, then people will be more prone to drastic changes then staying the course. If the two sides are “the status quo” and “not the status quo,” then the worse the status quo gets, the more prone people will be to consider the “not the status quo” option. If you think things are generally headed in the right direction, I suppose that’s fine, but if you feel, as I do, that conditions are deteriorating, then that’s a problem, and if that continues, then it becomes inevitable that the strongest “not the status quo” option is going to win, whether now or later.
That’s why I think it’s a better strategy for the left to embrace progressive policies in a very bold way, in order to present an alternative vision of the future that is distinct from both the status quo and the far-right. Those policies would be the best chance of setting us on a positive path that would prevent things from falling into chaos, while also offering an alternative to the failing capitalist status quo that isn’t fascism. Because the road we’re on currently makes fascism an inevitability.
If what you say is true, and the democrats are now assured victory on the basis of being the only reasonable party left, then why is this election still a toss-up?
The democrats have been pushing that angle with Trump since 2015, and with republicans in general before that.
“Reasonableness” is at the core of democratic messaging, and that’s a problem because what that does is allow the right to set priorities and values uncontested. Bush went into Iraq and Afghanistan, and Obama didn’t stop that, he just said he would conduct the war in a more “reasonable” way. The same thing with Biden’s attempted immigration bill that would’ve expanded the executive’s ability to crack down on immigrants, the idea that cracking down on immigrants is necessary is uncontested, it’s just about doing it in a more “reasonable” way. And when someone’s electoral pitch is being reasonable, it puts them in a weaker position because they’re expected to be reasonable and willing to compromise even when the other side stonewalls them, which republicans always do.
Apart from those things being bad, it’s also not really an effective strategy. Many people are more concerned with whether a politician is on their side and representing their interests rather than whether they are being reasonable. On top of that, many Americans are straight-up anti-intellectual and so the reasonableness angle doesn’t resonate with them. And there’s a certain extent to which reasonableness is socially defined, and so if the current system isn’t working for people and they want it to change, then they’re probably not going to be concerned with existing norms of what is and isn’t reasonable. Essentially, the reasonableness angle can at least potentially come across as elitist.
The democrats squeaked out a win with that angle in 2020, in the middle of Trump’s terrible mishandling of the pandemic, and it’s possible that they’ll squeak out another one now, but if reasonableness was such an effective angle then every election against Trump should’ve been an absolute blowout.
Technicians that will probably demand a commission not a flat rate.
Never heard of anyone in that field doing this. If you walk into a computer repair place and say you need to recover data off a hard drive and they say they need to know how much the data’s worth before they can tell you the cost, you should probably just immediately walk out and go to a different store regardless because that’s probably a skeezy place.
Other countries’ affairs should be a bigger deal in our elections. If the US is going to play world police, then it ought to represent the people it’s policing. Since those people can’t vote, US citizens have a responsibility to learn and understand things from a global perspective and to place their interests on equal level to that of our own. If the US wasn’t so intimately involved in other countries’ affairs, you might have a point, but as it stands, prioritizing one’s own concerns over the people who are being killed and oppressed in our names is unethical and undemocratic.
Also, with just the money we’ve sent to Israel, we could end homelessness. Also, many of our police travel to Israel to be trained in their methods. The violence there also creates refugees which affects immigration. There are lots of domestic issues that are affected by foreign affairs.
Bush is up there but if Netanyahu hasn’t already passed him, he definitely will as the genocide continues.
Real classy language you got there.
No, dancing doesn’t indicate any sort of cognitive impairment at all. There’s plenty of legitimate shit to criticize him for, this is just petty bullshit.
The liberal position is that dancing means you have brain damage and if you don’t agree you’re the enemy. Interesting tact.
Grifters grifting grifters lol.