Mk23simp

joined 1 year ago
[–] Mk23simp@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Under plurality voting, third parties are objectively bad for the winning chances of whatever party they pull more voters from (and/or bad for whatever major party you personally would vote for, if you personally vote third party). That might be what some people meant by them being "bad", even though they prefer one of those major parties to win (and cheer on anything that makes the other party less likely to win). Although it's certainly possible that some people just think they are bad in general. People do have different opinions, after all.

[–] Mk23simp@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

It's only hypocrisy if they do things that disagree with their own views, and their own views are internally conistent in this case. Their view is not that all third parties are bad, their view is that third parties that have a negative impact are bad. So it doesn't make it hypocrisy just because it disagrees with your straw man of their views.

[–] Mk23simp@lemmy.blahaj.zone 61 points 1 month ago (11 children)

There definitely are better taxes than property taxes. But, since it's a red state, they would probably replace it with a worse one. Or just debt.

[–] Mk23simp@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 month ago (3 children)

If the democrats lose the election, I fully expect them to roll over and let Trump take power. In that case, Trump would have the institutions on his side, even as he seeks to dismantle those same institutions going forward. Democrats constantly show themselves to be willing to play by the rules, even as Republicans show themselves to be willing to bend those rules.

If he loses the election, I expect there will be an attempt to take power anyways (again), but I think that attempt is likely to fail (again) when he doesn't have the institutions on his side.

The degree of difference between the two potential outcomes is quite pronounced. You can say "Both sides bad" and you'd be right, but bad vs good is not a binary, it's a spectrum, and there's a huge degree of difference in how bad the two sides are.

[–] Mk23simp@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (5 children)

We don't live in those "generally" times, currently. One of our candidates is running on a fascist platform, tried to do a fascist coup (and got away with no consequences for it), and has both promised and planned to overthrow democracy if he's elected.

Maybe he would be prevented from doing all that stuff even if he won, but I'm definitely not counting on that. I'm gonna be fleeing like a jew from Nazi Germany because quite frankly that's what I see it potentially becoming, and they've definitely painted a target on the backs of trans people in particular.

I am under no illusions that the democrats will be fully on our side, but when the other side is specifically trying to wipe out people like my partner, they're a very clear choice. I'd much rather live under a government that's not actively trying to wipe us out.

[–] Mk23simp@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 1 month ago (7 children)

We're absolutely planning to live in a blue state. But the ability to be safe even in blue states is in question if Trump gets elected again. If he does, then we're probably gonna try to get out of the country as quickly as possible rather than waiting around to find out.

[–] Mk23simp@lemmy.blahaj.zone 64 points 1 month ago (12 children)

I wrote in "Gaza" on the primary, but come november I am 100% sure that I'm gonna be voting D as hard as I can because my partner is trans and I'd rather not be driven from the country by transphobia, thanks.

Criticising the democrats for when they're not good is absolutely valid, but at the same time, get out and vote for them and mobilize as many voters for them as you can, because the difference in outcome between the two parties with legitimate chances of winning is too great to throw away your votes protesting the lesser of two evils. By all means, keep protesting (In other ways, besides the ballot box), but also do your part to make sure that we get the lesser of two evils, not the greater.

[–] Mk23simp@lemmy.blahaj.zone 114 points 1 month ago (11 children)

This is just a dog-whistle for racism, right? Barely even a dog-whistle. Making fun of a name because it's not european is pretty blatantly racist.

[–] Mk23simp@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 2 months ago (2 children)

I'm pretty sure this is not the type of mirage you linked (which would be above the real horizon) but rather one that is below the real horizon. That is, the ship is seen above the real horizon, but the water near the horizon is hidden by a mirage of the sky. You can faintly make out the real horizon, as well.