• Mark@mastodon.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    @oxjox @kbin_space_program Aren’t you creating a distinction without a difference? If things are “fixed” so that everything will forever remain the way his audience wants it (so they won’t have to vote), doesn’t this negate the right to vote? It seems to mean that anyone who DOES want something different is SOL, cause their votes would no longer change anything. If you don’t have to vote to reaffirm your agreement, you’re in an autocracy.

    • kbin_space_program@kbin.run
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      The context in my situation is he already tried to install himself as a dictator.

      See his actions and plan on January 6th, 2020.

    • oxjox@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      doesn’t this negate the right to vote?

      Obviously not. Perhaps it may negate your interest in voting, but certainly not your right to do so.

      So when he says you won’t have to vote, that’s different than saying you’ll be unable to vote.

      There’s a lot more to this country than the few things Christians care about. Even if he were to fulfill the promise, the world still goes on spinning.

      • Mark@mastodon.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        @oxjox As a practical matter, if any vote other than one approved by the existing ruler is rendered meaningless, one has lost the right to vote. It’s not a vote if only one choice is allowed. Any other spin is just semantics.