Trying to build viable third parties by voting for them in presidential elections is like trying to build a third door in your house by repeatedly walking into the wall where you want the door to be.
Trying to build viable third parties by voting for them in presidential elections is like trying to build a third door in your house by repeatedly walking into the wall where you want the door to be.
You're viewing a single thread.
The parties are already there or you couldn't vote them, this example is stupid. Supporting parties with blood in their hands is endorsing evil.
Voting for a third party, like trying to walk through a third door, is an indication of intent. Going through the door would be getting them elected to office.
And yes, supporting a party would be endorsing whatever evil policies the party supports—but voting isn’t an act of endorsement. Nobody knows how you vote; it has no meaning as a personal statement. Its only meaning is in the differential effects of the policies of the two candidates your vote decides between, in the most likely scenario in which it is the deciding vote.
You absolutely should support and endorse a party you believe in, but don’t mistake voting in a presidential election for either of those things.
Voting is a direct act of endorsement
Its only meaning is in the differential effects of the policies of the two candidates your vote decides between
There aren't only two candidates.
You absolutely should support and endorse a party you believe in, but don’t mistake voting in a presidential election for either of those things.
There's no confusion, a party perpetrating war and genocide is evil and if you support them you are evil too.
Voting is a direct act of endorsement
endorse | verb [with object]
to declare one's public approval or support of.Your vote is expressly not public—you’re prohibited from keeping or sharing any proof of your vote. In part this is to prevent people from using their votes as signals of anything outside the immediate issue.
There aren’t only two candidates.
In the event that your vote actually decides the election, it does so by giving the winner one more vote than the runner-up; at that point those are the only two candidates at issue. And that’s the only event in which your vote matters.
Spin it as much as you want. Anyone supporting, endorsing, or voting for a party with blood in his hand fueling a genocide is directly complicit in the crime
Go ahead and feel morally superior as your protest vote enables someone way worse to hurt way more people. All the women dying of ectopic pregnancies or sepsis from stillbirths they cannot abort are on you. The GOP will let Russia have Ukraine where they will rape and murder anyone who resists, and they will unconditionally increase funding for Israel's genocidal land grab.
And you will think, "that's not my fault, I voted for the not evil one."
But that's not true, because you could have voted for the person who is willing to negotiate on those things, but you chose to feel better about yourself instead of actually help anyone.
Supporting and voting a party complicit in a genocide is not just a "feeling". Dozens of kids are being murdered daily in gaza, this is already the worst scenario.
All the women dying of ectopic pregnancies or sepsis from stillbirths they cannot abort are on you.
Wrong, these are on people voting for the red and blue party which for a century have been cycling in power promoting the same authoritarian politics.
The GOP will let Russia have Ukraine where they will rape and murder anyone who resists
I encourage you to read about the cold war and check how many military bases the us has spread all over the world. I also encourage you to read about ukraine government corruption and their authoritarian measures and lastly i encourage you to check who usa and russia are in partnership with.
And if Trump wins because of your "morally superior" choice you'll have only succeeded in helping Israel exterminate them faster. There will not be any discussions about whether to pause or halt shipments of arms.
If the red and blue party wins again the genocide goes on. The alternative is something else not one of these two
Yes genocide is bad but have you heard of double genocide? But wait what if triple genocide was on the ballot? Well then you're morally obligated to vote for double genocide. B-but now quadruple genocide is on the ballot. Well shit time to shame everyone for not voting triple genocide because everyone knows 4 is worse than 3 it's simple math losers
Kamala already said that's off the table.
I blame the Armenian genocide on you and you alone.
Deny it all you want, you were complicit AF.
how so?
This post was reported for disinformation. To me this post reads like an opinion and hyperbole.
If we do assume that the post is making a factual claim; I'm not a lawyer and I don't know if voting has ever been used to claim that someone is complicit in a crime. Im open to being pointed to evidence.
Look, you're either saying america is a functional democracy or no citizens are on the hook for the crimes of the government.
Which is it again?