I’m sorry, do you think that candidates for election should be supporting opinions that the majority opposes? Is that where we’re at? The point of democracy is to reflect the will of the people; if you don’t like the will of the people, it’s your job, as a dissenter, to try to change it. The idea that candidates in a democratic system should be running on platforms that say “To hell with what the people think” is some really absurd Soviet style shite.
The point of democracy is to reflect the will of the people; if you don’t like the will of the people, it’s your job, as a dissenter, to try to change it.
Oh my god were so close buddy, let’s bring it home
What’s the correct course of action for dissenters? I’m doubting that it’s whipping votes for the candidate you’re dissenting against but you seem like an expert so I’ll ask you
The idea that candidates in a democratic system should be running on platforms that say “To hell with what the people think” is some really absurd Soviet style shite.
So you’re saying supporting the Palestinian genocide is the will of the people, and as such Biden should continue doing it? Is that the real take here? Was the disgust with genocide the fake indignation I thought it was?
What’s the correct course of action for dissenters?
Protest, for one. Which is ongoing.
I’m doubting that it’s whipping votes for the candidate you’re dissenting against but you seem like an expert so I’ll ask you
Haven’t we already been over this? Limited choices, mass support, lesser evil, all that jazz?
So you’re saying supporting the Palestinian genocide is the will of the people, and as such Biden should continue doing it? Is that the real take here? Was the disgust with genocide the fake indignation I thought it was?
No, I’m saying that support for the Palestinian genocide remains widespread, and thus the idea that a politician with a realistic-but-narrow-shot at being elected should suddenly, and without consultation of popular opinion, reverse the stance, or else you’ll vote for the one who wants MORE genocide, is deeply unserious at best. As voters in the minority, we cannot realistically expect our opinions to be represented by candidates who must win the vote of the majority.
I would be deeply upset at the prospect of voting for someone who thought that gay rights didn’t matter, but if you ask me who to vote for in 1948, I’m sure as shit not going to make any decision that puts Strom Thurmond in office no matter how badly I want to make a protest vote.
In your opinion, what does protest look like? Is it flowery parades, or are they loud and threatening? It’s there an implication of disobedience, or is it accompanied by the reassurance that you’ll still support them if the protest fails?
Haven’t we already been over this? Limited choices, mass support, lesser evil, all that jazz?
I’m not talking about how you’re actually voting, I’m talking about what you’re doing right now.
No, I’m saying that support for the Palestinian genocide remains widespread, and thus the idea that a politician with a realistic-but-narrow-shot at being elected should suddenly, and without consultation of popular opinion, reverse the stance, or else you’ll vote for the one who wants MORE genocide, is deeply unserious at best
A- were not talking about voting for the opposition, we’re talking about not supporting Biden, and while I realize that’s the same thing to you it is not the same thing to tens of millions of infrequent or undecided voters who will sooner not vote for Biden than vote for Trump
B- I think the suggestion that Biden’s stance on israel has ever been based on popular opinion is itself deeply unserious, but it also makes Biden himself seem deeply unserious for doing something so goddamn depraved just because he thinks it’ll make him more popular.
I have zero expectation that my opinion will be represented by Biden or the dems, but not because I think they’re unpopular (they’re not) or because I withhold my vote (it won’t). But I expect that by highlighting the depravity of electoral bullshit I might create enough discontent that one or two people get off their ass and join a socialist organization, and that’s worth it.
Sorry that the idea of democracy reflecting the opinions of the majority is so alien to you. I understand autocracy might be more your speed.
So it’s acceptable to support genocide as long as it’s a majority opinion? Are we morally relativistic now? It’s that what’s happening?
I’m sorry, do you think that candidates for election should be supporting opinions that the majority opposes? Is that where we’re at? The point of democracy is to reflect the will of the people; if you don’t like the will of the people, it’s your job, as a dissenter, to try to change it. The idea that candidates in a democratic system should be running on platforms that say “To hell with what the people think” is some really absurd Soviet style shite.
Oh my god were so close buddy, let’s bring it home
What’s the correct course of action for dissenters? I’m doubting that it’s whipping votes for the candidate you’re dissenting against but you seem like an expert so I’ll ask you
So you’re saying supporting the Palestinian genocide is the will of the people, and as such Biden should continue doing it? Is that the real take here? Was the disgust with genocide the fake indignation I thought it was?
Protest, for one. Which is ongoing.
Haven’t we already been over this? Limited choices, mass support, lesser evil, all that jazz?
No, I’m saying that support for the Palestinian genocide remains widespread, and thus the idea that a politician with a realistic-but-narrow-shot at being elected should suddenly, and without consultation of popular opinion, reverse the stance, or else you’ll vote for the one who wants MORE genocide, is deeply unserious at best. As voters in the minority, we cannot realistically expect our opinions to be represented by candidates who must win the vote of the majority.
I would be deeply upset at the prospect of voting for someone who thought that gay rights didn’t matter, but if you ask me who to vote for in 1948, I’m sure as shit not going to make any decision that puts Strom Thurmond in office no matter how badly I want to make a protest vote.
In your opinion, what does protest look like? Is it flowery parades, or are they loud and threatening? It’s there an implication of disobedience, or is it accompanied by the reassurance that you’ll still support them if the protest fails?
I’m not talking about how you’re actually voting, I’m talking about what you’re doing right now.
A- were not talking about voting for the opposition, we’re talking about not supporting Biden, and while I realize that’s the same thing to you it is not the same thing to tens of millions of infrequent or undecided voters who will sooner not vote for Biden than vote for Trump
B- I think the suggestion that Biden’s stance on israel has ever been based on popular opinion is itself deeply unserious, but it also makes Biden himself seem deeply unserious for doing something so goddamn depraved just because he thinks it’ll make him more popular.
I have zero expectation that my opinion will be represented by Biden or the dems, but not because I think they’re unpopular (they’re not) or because I withhold my vote (it won’t). But I expect that by highlighting the depravity of electoral bullshit I might create enough discontent that one or two people get off their ass and join a socialist organization, and that’s worth it.