175
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 10 Nov 2023
175 points (100.0% liked)
the_dunk_tank
15863 readers
570 users here now
It's the dunk tank.
This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml
Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
“Not voting is a vote for Trump”
Wait a moment, this logic doesn’t work. Why are we only focusing on the Democrat perspective? Surely the same thing is true for Trump voters. “Not voting is a vote for Biden”.
The only logical conclusion is that not voting is in fact a neutral act, like it obviously fucking is.
Not voting is a vote for Trump, but according to Republicans not voting is a vote for Biden. So they cancel each other out to net 0 difference. Math
If we’re going off their completely nonsensical logic, yes.
In reality, not voting isn’t a vote for anyone because it’s not voting.
Sure, if we are making electoral discussions in the US essentially we arguing how many angels can dance on a pinhead. The least they could do is keep their angel-logic internally consistent though
Every result has a 50% chance of happening. It either happens or it doesn’t
This line of thought is logical for libs, because they do not understand that one votes for a candidate, rather they think one votes against a candidate. I used that lib logic about not voting to do a bit recently, feel free to steal it
it's not a vote for Trump because I don't owe the democrats a vote
To be fair, its based on who you would've voted for if you had voted. The message is for people who would've voted democrat. What they ignore is this acknowledges that democrats need to play to their base, which they dont do. Democrats always play to the non-existant center and rely on chastizing their left wing to get their votes. If a democrat actually played to the center of their own party they be wildly left wing in US terms.