|
|
Post by zou on Oct 25, 2024 17:14:22 GMT
I've a long-standing thought that a wolf in sheep's clothing can be more dangerous than a wolf in wolf's clothing.
In that election, more troubling (by far, IMO) is the absolute handbag in absolute handbag's clothing.
But if you are offered the choice of two handbags, there is always the possibility to say no thank you. |
|
|
|
Post by geoffr on Oct 25, 2024 17:18:15 GMT
It's nearly here. How will it go? What will it mean? I've no idea how it will go though I suspect Trump is the more likely winner - certainly in the popular vote as he makes all the right populist noises that appeal to the rednecks and similar non-thinkers...  What will it mean? Trump wins: nationalism, protectionism and WW3 gets a bit more likely Trump doesn't win: The American civil war part 2? Civil war 2 remains a possibility, US politics is seriously polarised. |
|
|
|
Post by peterba on Oct 25, 2024 18:30:23 GMT
But if you are offered the choice of two handbags, there is always the possibility to say no thank you.
But... if you are going to end up having one or other of the two handbags, it makes sense to choose the less offensive of the two.
Saying "No thank you" to both doesn't make them both go away.
|
|
|
|
Post by zou on Oct 25, 2024 18:45:39 GMT
But if you are offered the choice of two handbags, there is always the possibility to say no thank you.
But... if you are going to end up having one or other of the two handbags, it makes sense to choose the less offensive of the two.
Saying "No thank you" to both doesn't make them both go away.
It won't make them go away, you're right. To do that you'd probably need to be a bit more pitchforky, at the very least. But apparently people are ok with genocide so long as an orange guy doesn't do it. 'The wall' (that Obama started, if I recall correctly) was the thing Dems attacked Trump over, claiming it as a symbol of his nastiness. Now they are saying he is bad because he didn't build enough of it. Dems don't care about policy, just who is doing it. |
|
|
|
Post by zou on Oct 25, 2024 18:46:30 GMT
But if you are offered the choice of two handbags, there is always the possibility to say no thank you.
But... if you are going to end up having one or other of the two handbags, it makes sense to choose the less offensive of the two.
Saying "No thank you" to both doesn't make them both go away.
And if enough people say no to the false binary, then actually you do stand a better chance of them not being on the next ballot. |
|
|
|
Post by zou on Oct 25, 2024 18:53:54 GMT
But if you are offered the choice of two handbags, there is always the possibility to say no thank you.
But... if you are going to end up having one or other of the two handbags, it makes sense to choose the less offensive of the two.
Saying "No thank you" to both doesn't make them both go away.
Sorry, this should be the last quote of your post! Two things. One, if you are not *required* to vote for either, why on earth would you endorse even a 'lesser' evil. Second, if actively engaging in genocide isn't a red line, what would be? |
|
|
|
Post by peterba on Oct 25, 2024 18:56:12 GMT
Are you saying that you'd be more comfortable with the orange turd in office?
|
|
|
|
Post by zou on Oct 25, 2024 19:00:37 GMT
Are you saying that you'd be more comfortable with the orange turd in office?
I thought I made it clear that I consider them both unfit for office. |
|
|
|
Post by kate on Oct 25, 2024 19:03:08 GMT
Are you saying that you'd be more comfortable with the orange turd in office?
With him, you know what you are getting, whether you want it or not. With Harris, you'll get screwed, but with a smile on her face. Stands for a party with one ethos, acts like the other. Remind you of anyone? KS? Kiss your ass goodbye Starmer. |
|
|
|
Post by peterba on Oct 25, 2024 19:03:56 GMT
I thought I made it clear that I consider them both unfit for office.
You certainly did.  But ONE of them is going to be. |
|
|
|
Post by zou on Oct 25, 2024 19:04:52 GMT
Are you saying that you'd be more comfortable with the orange turd in office?
With him, you know what you are getting, whether you want it or not. With Harris, you'll get screwed, but with a smile on her face. Stands for a party with one ethos, acts like the other. Remind you of anyone? KS? Kiss your ass goodbye Starmer. Nice segue! |
|
|
|
Post by zou on Oct 25, 2024 19:06:48 GMT
I thought I made it clear that I consider them both unfit for office.
You certainly did. But ONE of them is going to be. Even so, what do you stand to gain by choosing to endorse one over the other. Other than the knowledge that genocide wasn't your red line. |
|
|
|
Post by willien on Oct 25, 2024 19:13:25 GMT
You certainly did. But ONE of them is going to be. Even so, what do you stand to gain by choosing to endorse one over the other. Other than the knowledge that genocide wasn't your red line. Damage limitation.
Edit - If I had a US vote and abstained then if Trump got in I would feel I had colluded in his victory and I regard a Trump Presidency as massively worse than a Harris one.
|
|
|
|
Post by peterba on Oct 25, 2024 19:13:43 GMT
I thought I made it clear that I consider them both unfit for office. With him, you know what you are getting, whether you want it or not. With Harris, you'll get screwed, but with a smile on her face. Stands for a party with one ethos, acts like the other. Remind you of anyone? KS? Kiss your ass goodbye Starmer.
I've no intention of falling out with you two, so - having stated my view - I'm now out of this discussion. (with a smile ) |
|
|
|
Post by zou on Oct 25, 2024 19:14:39 GMT
Even so, what do you stand to gain by choosing to endorse one over the other. Other than the knowledge that genocide wasn't your red line. Damage limitation. For whom? |
|
But ONE of them is going to be.