• Scubus@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 hours ago

      🤦

      I’m going to assume you are being intentionally obtuse. Its very simple.

      Trump bad.

      Any other option good in comparison.

      Arguing good option bad means you are arguing in bad faith.

      • MisterScruffy@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Yes Trump bad, that’s why I want the dems to run a candidate that isn’t a delusional failure so that we can keep Trump from doing bad things. The only way that “good” people can stop bad people is by winning power.

        • Scubus@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 hour ago

          I agree. Now that we are not in an election year, it would be a good idea to attempt to do something about that. But spreading division in an election year is why we now have the worst possible outcome. Thats the glory of the two party system and the illusion of choice.

      • Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Any other good in comparison

        Arguing good option bad…

        The second line doesn’t logically follow from the first - you’re talking about a relatively better option all the way to that top line and then you switch from “better than other” to “good” - it’s like going about how in a choice between being knifed twice versus being knifed just once the “just knifed once” is good in comparison and then jumping from that to saying that getting knifed once is good.

        Even beyond that totally illogical jump, the other flaw of logic is treating each election as a unique totally independent choice whose results have no impact on the options available on subsequent choices - I.e. that who the Democrat Party puts forwards and who the Republic Party puts forwards as candidates in an election isn’t at all influenced by how the electorate responded to previous candidates they put forward in previous elections - it is absolutely valid for people to refuse to vote for Kamala to “send a message to the Democrat Party” (I.e. to try to influence the candidates the party puts forward in subsequence election) and it’s around the validity or not of risking 4 years of Trump to try and get an acceptable Democrat candidate in at the end of it that the discussion should be (and there are valid points both ways) not the hyper-reductive falacy you seem so wedded to.

        Choices in the real world are a bit more multi faceted and with much more elements and implications than that self-serving “simpleton” slogan the DNC pushed out in its propaganda which you are parroting.

        • Scubus@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          Nah, thats the logical reasoning of a non two party system. Youre acting as though we actually had a choice, or that democrats would ever capitulate to their base. I hate kamala as much as the next guy, biden was even worse. But what other option was there? Vote Trump, dont vote, vote third party. All of which were a vote for Trump. There was ONLY one correct option in this election.

          If you guys want a decent option, get rid of the two party system, because democrats will never seek to actually improve anything. But they will always be the better choice so long as Americans dont grow a backbone. Which is unrealistic.

      • futatorius@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 hours ago

        I think it’s fair to say that, notwithstanding the badness of Trump, the Democratic Party needs vast improvement if it’s going to be part of an effective opposition to Trump and his gang of MAGAfascist oligarchs and lumpen God-bothering thugs. I’d even go so far as to say that, if any resistance emerges beyond finger-pointing and bleating, it won’t originate with the Democrats.