I don’t understand why it is irrelevant and how voters choosing greater evil proved this.
What are you even trying to say - that there’s no such thing as lesser evil because voters chose greater evil? Or that Kamala is no lesser evil, because voters chose greater evil?
Democrats do not get to run on fearmongering. They get to run on hope.
When the response to genocide is “Trump would be worse!” there is no hope offered. Everything in this campaign was fearmongering. And Democrats do not get to run on fearmongering to make people support their genocidal fascism.
Instead they should have provided actual policies to give hope. No genocide. Healthcare. Union rights. Not Liz Cheney.
Just so I understand, you are taking credit for Trump winning by saying that Harris would have won if people like you didn’t sit back and do nothing while fascism took over?
I’m not sure if, as a leftist, taking credit for the upcoming downfall of America and its people is a great survival strategy. Things are about to get really bad in this country, and people are going to choose sides like their lives depend on it. Are you absolutely certain you want to be self-identifying as a person who put Trump back in the White House?
Harris did not win. Proving the lesser evil argument failed to win over voters.
People didn’t choose the lesser evil, they only chose their kind of evil. Which is unquestionably the greater one.
Your argument of lesser evil is irrelevant. The voters have proven this.
Fearmongering is how Fascists win over voters. Kamala was the lesser Fascist.
And here you are gleeful that the greater fascist won…
I wonder if they have a word for people like you? Oh yeah, “fascist”.
I don’t understand why it is irrelevant and how voters choosing greater evil proved this.
What are you even trying to say - that there’s no such thing as lesser evil because voters chose greater evil? Or that Kamala is no lesser evil, because voters chose greater evil?
Democrats do not get to run on fearmongering. They get to run on hope.
When the response to genocide is “Trump would be worse!” there is no hope offered. Everything in this campaign was fearmongering. And Democrats do not get to run on fearmongering to make people support their genocidal fascism.
Instead they should have provided actual policies to give hope. No genocide. Healthcare. Union rights. Not Liz Cheney.
Not “fascism but a little less than Trump.”
Proving nothing of the sort. Bigotry, misogyny and ignorance won over the voters.
Just so I understand, you are taking credit for Trump winning by saying that Harris would have won if people like you didn’t sit back and do nothing while fascism took over?
I’m not sure if, as a leftist, taking credit for the upcoming downfall of America and its people is a great survival strategy. Things are about to get really bad in this country, and people are going to choose sides like their lives depend on it. Are you absolutely certain you want to be self-identifying as a person who put Trump back in the White House?
You do not understand.
I am saying Harris should not have tried to be a lesser evil but a greater good.
You could do a “this is worthless” meme with this comment right here.
Doing a little less genocide is bad
Not doing genocide is good.
How is this so difficult to understand?
Because not doing genocide is not on the menu. You have a little less genocide or a lot more genocide. That’s your lot
If you refuse to choose because you don’t like either, you end up with the one you like the least.
Indeed. My argument is Chef Harris should have put that on the menu.
Imagine the stakes. Not genocide vs genocide! The moral imperative on the ballot!
She could have, if enough people voted for her.
Enough people would have voted for her if she did. But she did not.