• jim3692@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 个月前

    The ethical stance to take against 2 evil candidates is to support neither.

    This may be the ethical thing to do. However, ethical is not always the best.

    By not voting the lesser evil, you allowed the more evil to win the elections.

    The percentage of people has no direct impact to the end result. In a perfect democratic world, that non-voting majority would sign the elected government to be more careful with their decisions, as people are loosing trust. In the current state of “democracy”, a fascist just took over and started dismantling the country.

    • cool@lemmings.worldBanned from community
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      3 个月前

      I’ve mentioned before how the problem with the lesser evil is that useful idiots stop fighting.

      Since neither side really cares about solving the problems that face us as a species, it’s a loss no matter what.

      • nyctre@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 个月前

        Yes, it’s a loss no matter what. But when you get to decide whether to eat a shit sandwich or a paper sandwich, you either choose to eat the paper sandwich or you’re forced to eat the shit sandwich. Guess you opted for the shit sandwich… enjoy!

        • Amnesigenic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 个月前

          Remove my comments all you want, you spineless halfwits won’t be able to hide from the truth for much longer

          • nyctre@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 个月前

            I know, it’'s called an analogy. :) Might be a bad one, sure, but I wasn’t talking literally. Didn’t think I’d have to explain that. But then again, 77 million people voted for trump, so… not completely surprised either.

          • nyctre@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 个月前

            Yeah, because Harris wouldn’t have caused the shit fest that’s intensifying right about now. Probably wouldn’t have been a great president either, but a meh president is better than whatever the trump+musk combo is. Two months in and it’s already affecting people halfway around the world and somehow you’re glad. That doesn’t say anything good about you, not sure why you’re advertising it.

              • nyctre@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                3 个月前

                Why does it have to be one or the other? People can multi task, you know. Also, I’m not American, democrat, politician, or anything related to running better candidates for you. And something tells me you could have the best candidate the world had ever seen and they’d still not win, so keep telling yourself that it’s not up to you, that’ll surely help.