If you guarantee your vote to someone, they will lose any incentive to act for your benefit. It’s really that simple. And if genocide is not a bridge too far for you, God help you, because obviously there’s no limit to what you’ll put up with.
Anything to not have to grapple with the idea that just voting blue is not enough, huh? And are we going to pretend that Biden didn’t gleeflully pour billions into the genocide?
Is it really that uncomfortable to engage with the idea? This is just an online forum, there is no possible negative consequence to whatever you write. Humor me, try to refute the idea that voting for a politician purely based on the actions of their opponent disincentivizes the politician to do anything for your benefit. Note that I’m not mentioning genocide, morality, blue, green, red or yellow or whatever. As far as I’m concerned this is about a fictional country called Fakeland with two parties.
If you guarantee your vote to a politician, what incentive do they have to give even a single shit about your standards of living?
How do you guarantee a vote? It’s not like you’re telling the politician ahead of time.
You can’t really say you’re against genocide if you knowingly take no action against the candidate that says he wants to glass Gaza so he can build a nice resort there.
Actually he managed to position himself as the peace candidate because Harris kept saying things like “I will ensure America has the most lethal fighting force in the world”.
The idea is that you vote for the most pragmatic option at every election. No vote should be guaranteed, but at the same time it’s still your civic duty to make a choice as a voter.
If you guarantee your vote to someone, they will lose any incentive to act for your benefit. It’s really that simple. And if genocide is not a bridge too far for you, God help you, because obviously there’s no limit to what you’ll put up with.
Good thing Trump ended the genocide!
Anything to not have to grapple with the idea that just voting blue is not enough, huh? And are we going to pretend that Biden didn’t gleeflully pour billions into the genocide?
Yes, don’t vote at all. Better to have more genocide but having the moral high ground of not having voted for less.
Is it really that uncomfortable to engage with the idea? This is just an online forum, there is no possible negative consequence to whatever you write. Humor me, try to refute the idea that voting for a politician purely based on the actions of their opponent disincentivizes the politician to do anything for your benefit. Note that I’m not mentioning genocide, morality, blue, green, red or yellow or whatever. As far as I’m concerned this is about a fictional country called Fakeland with two parties.
If you guarantee your vote to a politician, what incentive do they have to give even a single shit about your standards of living?
How do you guarantee a vote? It’s not like you’re telling the politician ahead of time.
You can’t really say you’re against genocide if you knowingly take no action against the candidate that says he wants to glass Gaza so he can build a nice resort there.
I know. It’s like his opponents threw it away when they didn’t firmly denounce the genocide.
Trump won by promising a greater genocide. Harris said she would do everything to stop it but not stop weapons.
Americans voted for the bigger genocide.
well thats just patently false.
Trump promised to genocide Palestines. In the debate he said he would support Israel more than Harris.
https://truthout.org/articles/trump-encourages-genocide-against-palestinians-saying-finish-the-problem/
https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/donald-trump-middle-east-foreign-policy
https://www.dohainstitute.org/en/PoliticalStudies/Pages/trump-plans-for-ethnic-cleansing-in-gaza.aspx
America chose the candidate that supported genocide over Harris who was against it but said she wouldn’t stop military aid.
Actually he managed to position himself as the peace candidate because Harris kept saying things like “I will ensure America has the most lethal fighting force in the world”.
Trump promised to increase military spending with a trillion dollar military package. Again Harris didn’t promise to be warlike enough.
The idea is that you vote for the most pragmatic option at every election. No vote should be guaranteed, but at the same time it’s still your civic duty to make a choice as a voter.
I understand the idea. I’m pointing out the big flaw in that idea. And I disagree that it’s your civic duty to “just vote”.