• @Ephoron
    link
    -11 month ago

    what you’re doing by “risking” a Trump presidency is potentially going to hurt a lot of people

    This is beyond the pale. You must have checked off on all of your entitlements before you came to this realization. Because what you’re doing by “risking” genocide being normalised is potentially going to hurt a lot of people. Get over yourself and pay attention to what’s going here.

    See how pointless conversation becomes if you just assume your interlocutor is mistaken without a case.

    We might as well be in a school-yard yelling “no you are…”

    If you think a Trump presidency risks more harm than normalising genocide and undermining democracy, then make the fucking case. This is a discussion forum. Discuss. What is your evidence, how have you weighed it, what critique can you offer of the case I’ve made… Give us something beyond childish bleating.

    • @Soup@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      0
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      bUt mUh gEnOciDe!!

      No one is normalizing anything here except you- normalizing the idea that it’s okay to selfishly hurt others by withholding a vote.

      It’s too late now to bother with the details. Bur since you feel you need to have it explained to you why Trump is worse, I’ll bite:

      What you’re doing by pissing away your vote, is you’re essentially giving the middle finger to the LGBTQ+, women, immigrants, and non-Christians- all because of your entitlement and inability to find reason in arguments against your decision. He is going to help Israel finish the job against those that live in a country I’d wager you couldn’t point to onna map a year ago.

      We’re at the eleventh hour. You single-issue “leftists” know better and chose to pull this shit anyway- so at this point I’m going to say you are all purposefully trying to hurt people.

      And to me, that’s as bad faith as it gets.

      • @Ephoron
        link
        11 month ago

        So still no actual counter-argument then? You realise that just saying option 1 is bad doesn’t constitute an argument for choosing it over option 2?

        I’ve argued thay voting for a party supporting genocide will create a norm that supporting genocide is OK, that it doesn’t risk loss of support. That’s a dangerous precedent to set because if politicians find it expedient to support another genocide they will know they can do so without risking their power. Withholding a vote is the only way of ensuring politicians know they will lose support if they are complicit in genocide. Therefore it is the only option to ensure genocide is not normalised.

        I’ve also argued that if we follow a principle of voting Democrat no matter what their policies are, this will set another dangerous precedent that a) politicians do not have to adjust policy to meet the will of the electorate, and b) that we’re effectively thereby creating a one party state.

        Note the uses of phrases like “because…” and “therefore…” These are how you construct an argument. Take some agreed premise and draw conclusions with rational steps.

        Your counter-argument can’t just be “but Trump’s goimg to do bad things to minorities” because that doesn’t counter any of the points in the argument I made. You’d have to disagree with some premise or one of the conclusions therefrom, or argue why you think minority rights are more import than the consequences I’ve reasoned toward.

        And it may alarm you to discover that putting something in alternating capitals doesn’t really persuade anyone of even moderate intelligence of anything. It’s not really a stand in for justificatory reasoning.

        • @Soup@lemmy.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          English
          0
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          I have no idea why I bothered. Enjoy your entitlement and- have a…… day.