Biological generative intelligence
When I get bored with the conversation/tired of arguing I will simply tersely agree with you and then stop responding. I’m too old for this stuff.
Biological generative intelligence
I mean, it beats voting for nobody or a third party, which is caring about NOBODY, regardless of how you try to spin it.
I mean, winning isn’t the last step. The democrats are more likely to implement anything meaningful than the republicans, but we’re still going to have to drag them kicking and screaming into doing it. If everyone breathes a sigh of relief and relaxes on November 7th nothing will change. The real work STARTS then.
That has nothing to do with this. That’s the interstate popular vote compact and all it does is make the winner of the popular vote the winner of the election. It does absolutely nothing to end two party dominance, and continues all of the exact same flaws of the existing system but without the electoral college, and even that only in the unlikely event that the compact survives the inevitable challenge in the supreme court. You still only get one vote for one candidate and it comes necessarily at the expense of any others.
But first he will accidentally the whole thing.
Just saving it for you.
Say it with me now!
CRITICIZING 👏 THE 👏 ISRAELI 👏 GOVERNMENT 👏 IS 👏 NOT 👏 CRITICIZING 👏THE 👏 JEWISH 👏 PEOPLE. THEY 👏 ARE 👏 NOT 👏 A 👏 BORG 👏 HIVEMIND.
I can recognize a joke when I see one. Take my upvote.
I was JUST thinking my taxes are too low!
I’m with you. What’s your plan?
Accidentally said the true part out loud.
Exactly. Nothing wrong with a “Nuh uh. I’m not falling for this. You can tell me if you want me to know.”
Exactly. We certainly didn’t after the LAST one.
Wait… what is a pedometer counting???
You did not explicitly declare your goals, but we wouldn’t be having this discussion if one of them wasn’t ending the genocide in Gaza.
I’d further speculate you want to put an end to the 2 party oligarchy and allow people to have choices that more closely align with their values without forced compromise on important issues.
You may have more, but I’d venture these are two primary ones. And I don’t think either of these are achievable through not voting for Harris this election. Because nearly every option for political activity is going to evaporate in an administration that has absolutely NO respect whatsoever for the rule of law or political activity - doesn’t even see the need to pretend. Look no further than what happened to Hong Kong to see what happens when the imperfect democracy is replaced with autocratic control.
I agree with you that we are being forced to choose between 2 genocides. Knowledge of that situation doesn’t change that fact. Awareness of being between a rock and a hard place doesn’t get you out of the trap. But you’ve heard this again and again, and I’ve heard THIS again and again. Correctly identifying a problem is not the same thing as having a solution. I applaud your dedication to the ideal of seeking a third path. You are trying to show me the problem, but I’m well aware of it. I don’t even disagree with you that it IS a problem. I, in fact, agree with every single reason you’ve given for the decision you’ve made. I simply believe that the action you’re taking is totally futile and counterproductive, and won’t achieve any of your stated goals. You don’t agree - that’s fine. Do what you like. I’m waiting for a proposal with even a passing chance of success. I’m not even waiting, as Dr. King says, for a more convenient season. I’m waiting for a plan that will WORK. Dr. King was advocating for direct action which would have the possibility of success. Dr. King said that after he’d built a movement of millions of followers. After he’d organized massive marches. After he’d won the hearts and spirits of so many. He was talking about real action he could take. He wasn’t advocating martyring oneself in a completely futile gesture with a small number of his friends.
I am aware of Dr. King’s quote, and I am aware that the Democrats are not some kind of paragon of progressive ideals, and I fully agree with you that they are far, FAR from ideal, and in fact are fundamentally flawed. But they ARE, as flawed as they are, the only bulwark against something far worse. If we don’t agree on that, we do not agree on necessary priors, and we have nothing more to convince each other of.
Oh, really?
function add(x, y) { let b=x; while(b < x+y) { b++; } return b; }