430
Dilemma (lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] CannonFodder@lemmy.world 4 points 4 weeks ago

Maybe you should go back to grade school math.

[-] brynden_rivers_esq@lemmy.ca 11 points 4 weeks ago

This is not a math question in which democrats winning is good and democrats losing is bad. And frankly, even if it were that straightforward, it still wouldn't be the same as voting for a republican, because voting republican is twice as bad on net...so maybe you need to think about your back-of-the-napkin math?

The whole point is that we do not want the Democrats, as they are, to win. We want them to change. We want someone other than genocidiers to run the country. And if they won't change to stop supporting a genocide AND they won't change to win, that's their choice, not mine.

The democrats winning, as they are, would be infinitely worse than the democrats changing.

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago

The democrats winning, as they are, would be infinitely worse than the democrats changing.

Not sure if you’ve been watching the news since the election but Dems winning as they are would be just fine. Changing for the better is of course good, but throwing the country to the wolves was a really dumb idea. As most of us have seen more than ample evidence of.

[-] brynden_rivers_esq@lemmy.ca 11 points 4 weeks ago

I mean...my guy...it's 1% as bad here as it is in Gaza. It would not be just fine. Just fine for you maybe.

They have to change. And It's not some massive crazy line in the sand to not vote for people who actively support genocide. That's like...the lowest possible bar to clear.

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

You do understand that Gaza is much worse off as well, right?

Like, it’s an absolute shitshow-dumpster-fire everywhere now. Not voting Harris was just insanity.

Like, I agree Gaza is and was a preventable tragedy in motion, and that Democrats messed up by not standing up for them. Agreed there. That said . . . We are all so fucked now, in part because of that talking point. Economically, Domestically, Militarily, Environmentally, Socially fucked - because people didn’t vote Democratic.

Y’know who changes the Democrats? Democrats. When there aren’t any in office they’re harder to change, right?

[-] brynden_rivers_esq@lemmy.ca 10 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Gaza is not worse off than if the democrats changed, because if the democrats changed they'd win, as you point out yourself. And then things would be better for Gaza. I know you're saying it's worse off under Republicans than under Democrats...I'm skeptical it would be any different, but whatever, sure, maybe it's 10% worse, idk. None of my business. I'm not voting for 10% less demonic when they could just stop being demons instead.

We're not fucked because we didn't vote for the Democrats, we're fucked because the Democrats decided that continuing to support a genocide was more important than winning. No one should be asked to hold their nose that hard. Getting killed by Nazis would be better than actively helping and legitimizing the diet-nazis. The domestic horror is a rounding error. Feel free to throw in other points if you want too, medicare for all, meaningful environmental regulation, or whatever you want, maybe those would have been enough to make a difference, but I think Palestine is a pretty goddamn huge one. The point is they were not trying to be minimally palatable. I'm sure you know, but in case you didn't, 2020 biden would have beaten 2024 trump...trump didn't win (he did worse than he did in 2020), the democrats lost hard.

The party doesn't cease to exist when it's not in power; they don't need to be in office to change. In fact, I'd say when they're in office they're impossible to change...why change when they're winning? The party platform could say "Israel is conducting a genocide in Palestine and if you vote for us we'll put a stop to US support for it." They could announce that first thing in the morning if they gave a shit. I'd be banging on doors for them tomorrow afternoon, and I don't think that's an unusual position. Since they don't give a shit about the genocide they have to carefully weigh whether it's worthwhile, from the perspective of electoral success, to alienate zionists in order to win the support of people who do give a shit. Fine, I can't control that. But I can control whether I vote for them or not; whether they actually have to consider that or not. Let them decide, but don't look at me askance for not wanting to vote for more support for genocide.

If you voted for Harris, she was explicit, you were voting for continued support for genocide in Palestine. Maybe you can hold your nose and say "relative to trump, some slight reduction in horror there and significant reduction in horror here is enough for me to vote for continued horror there," good for you, I 'aint judging, I don't care. I can't do that.

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

Well I’m not going to change your mind but I hope the three people who scroll by will consider trying to unfuck us all in the midterms in eight months.

[-] brynden_rivers_esq@lemmy.ca 10 points 3 weeks ago

I hope the democrats consider trying to unfuck us; they've got all the power to make that happen.

load more comments (42 replies)
[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago

Dems winning as they are would be just fine.

As far as people who always want to talk about genocide later (once it's complete) are concerned.

load more comments (14 replies)
this post was submitted on 03 Mar 2026
430 points (100.0% liked)

Political Memes

2339 readers
253 users here now

Non political memes: !memes@sopuli.xyz

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS