2024 ELECTION THREAD
The next presidential race will be here soon! Please see current Bovada odds. Thoughts?
Utilitarianism is so evil that you should choose the opposite actually.
But anyway voting isn't a one time game so considerations are different.
You aren't playing the trolley game, you can actually they to put the trolley maker out of business
It’s more in the realm of applied ethics than normative ethics. I can think of much more extreme examples if you want to bite the bullet on never voting lesser evil.
The problem with withholding votes is a separate problem than what I’m talking about. It’s not a well thought out strategy because if the party wins, you completely take yourself out of the coalition. Even if the party loses they might hate you too much to try to appeal to you and will just move to the right/center to attract more moderates (Clinton triangulation).
Then there’s antiduopoly types that should spend all their time on fixing the electoral system if they don’t like the two party system, although boring electoral reforms seem to be extremely unpopular in America for some reason.
I voted the lesser evil pretty often, which in Italy means voting very very far from my values (no party is even vaguely libertarian leaning).
That doesn't mean I did it every time, and btw one thing a person can oppose is the voting system itself.
In the USA there is the 2 party system but you vote often, and for many things.
They need your vote not only once every four year. There are many primaries, many seats you are voting for.
You can vote Jill Stein for president but vote a Democratic senator for example, and they do notice those votes
[...]
as for how i'd solve the whole peace in the middle east issue, who cares, i don't have that power, so i'm not gonna do a book report on the subject just to make you happy. a lot of smarter people than i have looked into it over the years, feel free to google around for that if you actually care about anything other than wasting my time.
[...]
I was actually asking you who you would support and what policies you would support that you think would accomplish an end to the conflict.
If you don't want to answer, that is fine.
Depends. Maybe not being in prison for your political beliefs is overrated too. You guys seem to idolise countries that didn't have elections and locked up or executed dissidents, so I guess that's all fine and dandy for you, but you probably haven't considered that you won't always be on the "right" side of those in power if and when that happens.
oh right the USA famously does not lock up or execute dissidents
That can't be a serious question.
you can start here but as the great 72o said I aint doing book reports for you guys
Let’s say there are two candidates. One promises to kill 1 million random people. The other promises to kill 10 million people. I say it would be a moral imperative to vote for the one that will kill 1 million.
Everything else is just talking about what the threshold is. Saying you would never vote for the lesser evil though? Just seems like a weird voting strategy. I would actually respect “voting statistically doesn’t matter” people over “
My new best friend
A few examples can easily be found, but they don't allow any equivalence with regimes that lock up and execute a ton more.
The worst one by a very large margin was the internment of japanese-americans by the left-most president in USA history , which the left-most SCOTUS in USA history considered constitutional.
While this is obviously not ideal, the fact that you equate actions the US government took against armed militants to actions the governments you idolise regularly take/took against journalists, authors and such is pretty laughable.
While this is obviously not ideal, the fact that you equate actions the US government took against armed militants to actions the governments you idolise regularly take/took against journalists, authors and such is pretty laughable.
The USA fights against domestic armed terrorists when they try to overthrow the state which is why when China sterilizes all uighur women to genocide their ethnicity it's the same.
If you need to ask, you probably need to do some more reading on the subject of soviet Gulags. Wikipedia is a great place to start.
Hint: saying US prisons are worse than soviet Gulags would be akin to saying US prisons are worse than Nazi concentration camps. Would you be asking for "data" is someone made that comparison?
While this is obviously not ideal, the fact that you equate actions the US government took against armed militants to actions the governments you idolise regularly take/took against journalists, authors and such is pretty laughable.
now hes gonna argue that the people assassinated and thrown in jail on fake charges deserved it. peak liberal right here folks.
the famous armed militant MLK!
A few examples can easily be found, but they don't allow any equivalence with regimes that lock up and execute a ton more.
The worst one by a very large margin was the internment of japanese-americans by the left-most president in USA history , which the left-most SCOTUS in USA history considered constitutional.
Again, while obviously not ideal and a stain on American history, they were not interred for being dissidents.
now hes gonna argue that the people assassinated and thrown in jail on fake charges deserved it. peak liberal right here folks.
Not what I said though, is it? What I said is that you are drawing false equivalences, as per the standard operating procedure for your kind.
d2_e4: The US government doesn't do xyz to people for being dissidents.
Victor: What about these guys?
d2_e4: They were more than just dissidents. They were armed militants.
Victor: So they deserved it then? Standard libtard.
Lol you, Victor. Lol you.
