I think most would consider democracy to be the single issue to vote on. When one candidate has repeatedly said he’d be a dictator “for one day, and then stop” and actively argues in court that the position he’s running for is immune to the rule of law, I’m voting in whatever way is most likely to result in his defeat. As much as I complain about the candidates and the shitty voting system, I cannot compromise on the right to vote.
So your literal argument is that if someone said, “I’ll end democracy in the US, but won’t hurt anyone”, and another candidate said, “I won’t end democracy in the US, but I’m going to conduct a genocide”, you would vote for the genocider? That’s pretty wild.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !politics@beehaw.org
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it’s a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
Where possible, post the original source of information.
If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
If there was ever going to be a single issue to vote on, genocide should probably be it.
Then if you don’t vote for Biden who would you vote for if this is your line in the sand?
Currently, if I don’t vote for Biden, I will probably not vote for anyone at the presidential level, or do a write-in.
I think most would consider democracy to be the single issue to vote on. When one candidate has repeatedly said he’d be a dictator “for one day, and then stop” and actively argues in court that the position he’s running for is immune to the rule of law, I’m voting in whatever way is most likely to result in his defeat. As much as I complain about the candidates and the shitty voting system, I cannot compromise on the right to vote.
So your literal argument is that if someone said, “I’ll end democracy in the US, but won’t hurt anyone”, and another candidate said, “I won’t end democracy in the US, but I’m going to conduct a genocide”, you would vote for the genocider? That’s pretty wild.