After calling for the permanent ‘resettlement’ of all Palestinians from Gaza earlier in the day, Trump said the US would ‘take over’ and ‘own’ the Gaza Strip. The US president said he envisioned ‘long-term’ US ownership of Gaza after Palestinians were moved elsewhere
Well said. And they still entrench themselves in their entitlement thinking that somehow- it’s the people who voted for the one person that could stop him alongside the one person that could stop him- that helped get him elected.
It couldn’t have had anything at all to do with people who couldn’t be bothered to vote at all, or people that purposefully voted third party to “send a message” as they called it.
Now, their protest was either successful or a colossal failure, depending on how you frame their responsibility for the outcome.
I think many just don’t understand or don’t want to understand the complexity of the public opinion guessing game that is attempting to break the vile equilibrium of a two-party-system without spoilering the worse party into power.
At least that’s what I hope, because the alternative is that they actually think Trump is better and I’m trying to get out of the habit of assuming the worst.
In game-theoretic terms, it’s trivial. Unless your third party comes from nowhere to a wide majority in the polls well before election day, choose the lesser evil and STFU until next time. That’s the only strategy that doesn’t lead us into a mess like the one we’re in now.
That’s what I mean. Voting third party isn’t reasonable, unless it polls well enough ahead of time that it becomes a viable choice for people to risk their vote being wasted for the chance to pick a better option. But even then, they need to trust those polls and need to hope that enough other people come to the same conclusion to actually make it so…
If you want to break the two-party-stranglehold, you have to vote third party, but only if enough other people vote third party, and that kind of “guessing motives” or trusting in the other actors to make individually irrational but collectively rational decisions is where Game Theory breaks down.
The theory is clear, but humans aren’t quite so easy to model, and when your game features piles and piles of incomplete information and non-deterministic decisions, things get muddy.
It’s really just plain and simple garden variety entitlement. You’ll find that people with little to lose themselves, have absolutely no issue whatsoever when it comes to sacrificing things that others have to lose.
Wether it be white privilege, affluence, being cis, male, what have you…
The end result will be the same:
People will suffer, and when the smoke has cleared, the entitled will refuse to be held accountable.