• Deceptichum@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    23
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Candidate 2: I’m going to give guns and money to the person killing ponies but tell them they shouldn’t do it.

    Leftist: Either way ponies are going to be killed. Let’s try something different.

    Centrist: Noooo, you have to vote for the proxy pony killer who can’t use his position to do anything or else you’ll get a pony killer in power who’ll use his position to do everything.

    • PugJesus@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      8 months ago

      Leftist: Either way ponies are going to be killed. Let’s try something different.

      “Something different” here meaning “handing over the position to the worse of the two options”.

        • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          Do y’all just, sincerely not understand what “lesser evil” means? Yes, the lesser evil is still bad. We know. That’s what “evil” means. Both options suck, one sucks measurably more, so you choose the one that is less bad.

          None of these “Both sides!” Leftists ever seem to offer specific or workable alternatives. It’s always something vague like “Have our voices be heard, take back the country from the oligarchs!” And I feel that, but like, how? What specific candidate or action is going to prevent both from winning?

    • GBU_28@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      You literally can’t try something different, in this election. It’s physically impossible. Leftists should be channeling this energy to the next election, and building a viable candidate that truly meets their needs.

    • fishos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      8 months ago

      You said it so perfectly and I never realized it. “If you elect our guy, he won’t be able to do anything, but at least it’s better than if you elect the other guy. If you elect the other guy, somehow he’ll be able to do everything he wants. But vote for our impotent guy instead. It’s safe!”

      Um what?

      • candybrie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        One follows the rules, and the other often doesn’t even think there are rules. The difference there isn’t hard to suss out. It’s like that joke about playing chess with a pigeon.

        • beardown@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          I want a guy who doesn’t think there are rules, and will protect ponies. Why isn’t that a possibility

          • candybrie@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            Because not thinking there are rules into adulthood is a pretty self-absorbed trait, which usually doesn’t go along with things like empathy and compassion.

            • beardown@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              There aren’t rules. Trump is proof of that

              A socialist with that same attitude towards rules, norms, and civility would be the ideal option. That isn’t possible under our system. However, a fascist with those views is possible.

              And the neoliberal erosion of living standards will just make the fascists more appealing to normal people. So if the fascists don’t win in 2024 then they’ll win in the near future unless we have a massive expansion of the welfare state that helps median Americans, not just the incredibly poor