Harris' lead over Trump narrows to 46% vs 43%, Reuters/Ipsos poll finds - eviltoast
  • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    2 months ago

    Do you want to just insult people?

    Or are you willing to abide by this subs rules and have a reasonable discussion?

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        You can still vote for someone even if you think we deserve a better candidate, I’ve been doing it for decades at this point…

        There’s no reason to insult people or act like you can’t criticize the least worst option while still holding your nose and voting for them.

        The majority of Dem voters shouldn’t be shocked by that. We’ve been doing it for a long time…

        I can count the people I know who wanted Biden or Hillary as president on one hand but virtually everyone i know still voted for both of them in the last two elections.

        It would just be a lot easier to stop trump if we ran a candidate that Dem voters wanted to be president.

        That shouldn’t be a relevation either

        • TheHiddenCatboy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          I think there’s a time and a place for criticizing our candidates. The time is during the candidate’s term and in the Primaries. During the General, it’s a bad time to do so. And you have to realise: You don’t always get what you want. You say you want a candidate that Dem voters want to be President. The opportunity for that to happen is in the primaries. Unfortunately, the time for that has come and gone.

          Biden won those primaries. The voters for the Democratic Party, who ALL get a say, put Biden up front. And people hammered Biden, including bad actors from the other party as well as from foreign countries, until Biden had no room for error. When he flubbed the first debate, we used the rules for succession, with him stepping down and his VP taking the top spot, like what would happen if he was rendered incapable of serving while he was in office.

          I return to my key point. Trump or Harris are our choices today. No Third Party will win. As long as you are voting for Harris, criticise away. Just know that I will push back against any post that seems to suggest our candidate is horribad and shouldn’t be voted for. Not voting for Harris means we get Trump.

          • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            The time is during the candidate’s term and in the Primaries.

            You think we had a primary?

            And during their term? That’s like saying the best time to negotiate price is after the sale is made…

            Your view only makes sense if you’re operating under the assumption the candidate won’t listen to any criticism or adjust their policy to align with Dem voters more and maximize their chances of winning the election.

            Biden isn’t the candidate anymore, Harris certainly isn’t perfect but I believe she’s at least willing to open a dialog with Dem voters, even after the shit that was pulled at the DNC where she did the opposite.

            Dem voters aren’t Republican voters, telling them to shut up and vote D depresses turnout, what improves Dem turnout is the candidate listening to voters so that they feel part of the party and more likely to support the candidate, even if the candidates position doesn’t change.

            It’s really as easy as that to boost Dem turnout.

            It’s only bad for the Dem candidate if they act like a spoiled toddler who’s told there’s no ice cream till the vegetables are gone

              • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                Yeah…I thought you might be reasonable, but this? This proves you aren’t reasonable.

                Can you try again but this time not violate this subs rules?

                I didn’t bother reading the rest when the very first sentence is an insult

                Edit:

                Rule 3 in case you can’t see the sidebar:

                Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

                • TheHiddenCatboy@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  I just called you unreasonable. We’ll see if the mods think that’s a violation of the TOS. Have a nice life, either way.

                  • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    4
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    2 months ago

                    It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative)

                    It’s literally right there…

                    By your own admission:

                    I just called you unreasonable

                    That’s against civility rules.

                    But what I said still stands, if you try again without the civility breaking parts, I’m willing to spend some time to help you understand.

        • It would just be a lot easier to stop trump if we ran a candidate that Dem voters wanted to be president.

          Okay, so worth asking: how can we win with a different hypothetical candidate who appeals to Dems only but not moderate Republicans? Keeping in mind that individuals in smaller states like in the midwest have more voting power per person and also that the makeup of the Electoral College is such that the GOP has an advantage?