Comment on [deleted]

• can@sh.itjust.works ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  You don’t think one sucks even a little less?

  source
• Passerby6497@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Not voting is a choice that inherently favors republicans due to how consistent they tend to vote. So vote or not, you’re still supporting one candidate or another.

  source

  • ReallyKinda@kbin.social ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Active support of something totally morally unacceptable seems more morally culpable than refusing to participate. I don’t think most people are consequentialists—the how matters.

    source

    • PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Emotionally yes, mathematically, no, exactly the same, and so morally, exactly the same

      source
  • mister_monster@monero.town ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    You can’t scare people into supporting something they find abhorrent this time. This rhetoric is not going to work. We are talking about a fucking genocide my dude. You’re delusional if you think “but pussygrabber” is going to motivate principled people.

    source

    • Belastend@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      That would imply the p7ssygrabber would stop the genocide. He wont. He will accelerate it.

      source

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        It doesn’t matter. No amount of genocide is acceptable.

        source
      • mister_monster@monero.town ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        I don’t know what he would do, I doubt veryuch different, and way less apologetic about it. But it doesn’t matter what he would do, what matters is the optics. One has a track record of funding genocide, the other doesn’t. This will sway a lot of people to at the very least stay home.

        source