|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On September 10 2025 16:15 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On September 10 2025 16:08 Razyda wrote:On September 10 2025 04:46 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 09 2025 23:57 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 09 2025 23:37 Jankisa wrote:On September 09 2025 23:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 09 2025 21:55 Jankisa wrote:On September 09 2025 21:50 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 09 2025 21:46 LightSpectra wrote:On September 09 2025 21:38 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
That one line is US politics in a nutshell. It's not like Democrats couldn't/wouldn't vote for the whole slate of Republican politicians currently in office (including Trump) out of principle. GH repeating another Republican talking point, color me surprised. It's a literal fact. Libs/Dems/ilk rejecting facts that they don't like, color me surprised... That is the difference between you and me, GH, I don't believe that, I know plenty of Americans, I don't think many Democrats would vote for Trump just because he had D next to his name. + Show Spoiler +You derided Democrats for campaigning with Liz Chaney and blamed their electoral failings (partially) on that, that is completely incompatible with what you just wrote.
The fact that you do think that Democrats=Republcians says a lot about you and your view of the world, and to me just shows, once again that you hate the USA and are basically a Tankie. + Show Spoiler +I like the USA, I would be a very different and in many ways less successful and culturally very different person if the USA didn't exist, I don't think you can slot China in the place of USA and have the world be as cool of a place as it is. All of us certainty wouldn't be posting on a TL forum (US company/team) that was created by and for fans of a game like Starcraft.
Unfortunately, Republicans and all conservatives want the USA to be more like China and Russia, most (not even close to all) Democrat politicians want it to be like Clinton's USA or Thatcher's UK.
USA, like most other countries contains multitudes, unfortunately, you guys have a duopoly in your politics, which is a double edged sword, on the one hand, this duopoly makes sure that the pendulum keeps swinging, on the other, it flattens the parties quite a bit, but nowhere close to what you are trying to present it as. I'm talking about "lesser evilists" (which is basically everyone here and the overwhelming majority of the Democrat party). They literally could/would vote for Trump and any other Republican. This isn't disputable. I literally don't think Democrats=Republicans, so that isn't a fact. Republicans, by pretty much any metric, are worse than Democrats. Try to integrate that information into your next assessment please. You make 2 false assertions right from the get go. You can't just say something and pretend like it's an accepted truth. I very much doubt the vast majority of regular posters here who actually have the right to vote in the USA would ever vote for Trump, so that is very much disputable. You might not "think" that, but you write and act in a way where everyone who reads you can come to the conclusion that you do. The burden of proof is on you, and all you do, including this latest screed is to prove us otherwise. + Show Spoiler +Normal people who haven't had their brain fried by politics to the point you have understand that the only way any of us can go through life without losing our minds is by choosing the lesser evil.
In the last 2 presidential elections in Croatia I bit my tongue and voted for a guy who I have a very low opinion of, mostly because from a Social Democrat he turned into a Trump cosplaying populist who seems to be on the take from Russia, but, he is smart, eloquent and shares most of my values, he also doesn't have a lot of power and he serves as a counterweight to our criminal organization party in power.
I could have purity tested him and said fuck this, encouraged most of my friends and family to do the same and split the vote or vote for our version of a Republican, but I didn't, because I choose the lesser evil.
That is an adult thing to do. And I'm OK with my choice, he's still an asshole to Ukraine, but he is the only part of our national voice who spends time criticizing Israel. You get some, you lose some, that's life. You weren't really around for when they were first rationalizing "lesser evilism" , so I don't blame you, but yeah, they would. That's how "lesser evilism", as they've articulated it, works. You can verify that with any one of them. It's objectively (and obviously) true that Republicans ≠ Democrats. I don't have to prove that to you, nor do I have to prove that I believe it to you or anyone else. That assertion is preposterous. Seems you shouldn't go "ignor[ing] all that even when it was mentioned to [you] explicitly in the last page..." and fixate on your "alternative facts" that "don't care about feelings..." while self-congratulating with a "Owned [tankie punk]!" I mean if my options are a) Pol Pot b) 1943 Hitler c) Trump, I would indeed vote Trump. But not against any R or D candidate from the past 100 years. If my options are a) Pol Pot and b) 1943 Hitler, I guess I might abstain. Wasn't that exactly GH position last election, for which he took a lot of heat? I don't think he took a lot of heat for that. I think he took a lot heat for advocating not voting, or voting third party, in the actual election between Trump and Harris. The point Drone is making is that clearly neither Trump nor Harris are as bad as Pol Pot or Hitler and thus holding your nose and voting for the lesser evil is not necessarily the path to hell. GH disagrees and seems to think the red line of unacceptable leaders was somewhere roughly 15 presidents ago, and since then they've all been Pol Pot levels of shit. Which is a pretty bad take and he deservedly took heat for.
Definitely not my position, but it seems most everyone turned into non-voters/Trump voters/anti-Maidan without Pol Pot or Hitler.
On September 10 2025 06:31 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 10 2025 05:03 Zambrah wrote:On September 10 2025 04:46 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 09 2025 23:57 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 09 2025 23:37 Jankisa wrote:On September 09 2025 23:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 09 2025 21:55 Jankisa wrote:On September 09 2025 21:50 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 09 2025 21:46 LightSpectra wrote:On September 09 2025 21:38 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
That one line is US politics in a nutshell. It's not like Democrats couldn't/wouldn't vote for the whole slate of Republican politicians currently in office (including Trump) out of principle. GH repeating another Republican talking point, color me surprised. It's a literal fact. Libs/Dems/ilk rejecting facts that they don't like, color me surprised... That is the difference between you and me, GH, I don't believe that, I know plenty of Americans, I don't think many Democrats would vote for Trump just because he had D next to his name. + Show Spoiler +You derided Democrats for campaigning with Liz Chaney and blamed their electoral failings (partially) on that, that is completely incompatible with what you just wrote.
The fact that you do think that Democrats=Republcians says a lot about you and your view of the world, and to me just shows, once again that you hate the USA and are basically a Tankie. + Show Spoiler +I like the USA, I would be a very different and in many ways less successful and culturally very different person if the USA didn't exist, I don't think you can slot China in the place of USA and have the world be as cool of a place as it is. All of us certainty wouldn't be posting on a TL forum (US company/team) that was created by and for fans of a game like Starcraft.
Unfortunately, Republicans and all conservatives want the USA to be more like China and Russia, most (not even close to all) Democrat politicians want it to be like Clinton's USA or Thatcher's UK.
USA, like most other countries contains multitudes, unfortunately, you guys have a duopoly in your politics, which is a double edged sword, on the one hand, this duopoly makes sure that the pendulum keeps swinging, on the other, it flattens the parties quite a bit, but nowhere close to what you are trying to present it as. I'm talking about "lesser evilists" (which is basically everyone here and the overwhelming majority of the Democrat party). They literally could/would vote for Trump and any other Republican. This isn't disputable. I literally don't think Democrats=Republicans, so that isn't a fact. Republicans, by pretty much any metric, are worse than Democrats. Try to integrate that information into your next assessment please. You make 2 false assertions right from the get go. You can't just say something and pretend like it's an accepted truth. I very much doubt the vast majority of regular posters here who actually have the right to vote in the USA would ever vote for Trump, so that is very much disputable. You might not "think" that, but you write and act in a way where everyone who reads you can come to the conclusion that you do. The burden of proof is on you, and all you do, including this latest screed is to prove us otherwise. + Show Spoiler +Normal people who haven't had their brain fried by politics to the point you have understand that the only way any of us can go through life without losing our minds is by choosing the lesser evil.
In the last 2 presidential elections in Croatia I bit my tongue and voted for a guy who I have a very low opinion of, mostly because from a Social Democrat he turned into a Trump cosplaying populist who seems to be on the take from Russia, but, he is smart, eloquent and shares most of my values, he also doesn't have a lot of power and he serves as a counterweight to our criminal organization party in power.
I could have purity tested him and said fuck this, encouraged most of my friends and family to do the same and split the vote or vote for our version of a Republican, but I didn't, because I choose the lesser evil.
That is an adult thing to do. And I'm OK with my choice, he's still an asshole to Ukraine, but he is the only part of our national voice who spends time criticizing Israel. You get some, you lose some, that's life. You weren't really around for when they were first rationalizing "lesser evilism" , so I don't blame you, but yeah, they would. That's how "lesser evilism", as they've articulated it, works. You can verify that with any one of them. It's objectively (and obviously) true that Republicans ≠ Democrats. I don't have to prove that to you, nor do I have to prove that I believe it to you or anyone else. That assertion is preposterous. Seems you shouldn't go "ignor[ing] all that even when it was mentioned to [you] explicitly in the last page..." and fixate on your "alternative facts" that "don't care about feelings..." while self-congratulating with a "Owned [tankie punk]!" I mean if my options are a) Pol Pot b) 1943 Hitler c) Trump, I would indeed vote Trump. But not against any R or D candidate from the past 100 years. If my options are a) Pol Pot and b) 1943 Hitler, I guess I might abstain. + Show Spoiler +
This does basically says exactly what GH said though (even though you arent american) you would vote for every Republican out of principle, based on what youve said here your principles on when to not vote for someone are somewhere between Trump and Hitler/Pol Pot and if Trump isnt close enough to Hitler/Pol Pot to prevent you from voting for him then the rest of the GOP probably aren't either.
I dont strictly grasp what point GH is making here, but this is the sort of response that I think hes referring to in his post.
Its not like this conversation hasnt been had here before either, its literally true that plenty of people here have said that they would vote for whoever is the lesser of two evils in basically any and every instance which means they would, out of that lesser of two evils principle, be willing to vote for Hitler, Pol Pot, Trump, every GOP scumbag etc.
What GH means to show by highlighting this sentiment Im too tired to glean, but from what I can see his post seems fairly correct + Show Spoiler +, if over broad if taken out of the context of this thread. Basically... Poll: I would vote forYou must be logged in to vote in this poll. ☐ Donald Trump
☐ Viktor Yanukovych
☐ Maidan
|
On September 10 2025 23:01 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On September 10 2025 15:56 Acrofales wrote:On September 10 2025 12:43 Introvert wrote:On September 10 2025 03:36 Acrofales wrote:On September 10 2025 03:04 Introvert wrote:On September 09 2025 23:53 WombaT wrote:On September 09 2025 23:31 Introvert wrote:On September 09 2025 23:12 LightSpectra wrote: They cheered for DACA, for student loan forgiveness, they were silent or totally in denial about Biden's dereliction of duty at the border. DACA doesn't break any laws, the law that regulates student loans explicitly allows for the POTUS to forgive some at his discretion, and Biden explicitly asked Congress for more resources to secure the border and Republicans told him to fuck off because they wouldn't win the election if they couldn't campaign on the border still being broken from Trump's administration. Once again, made-up Republican scandals with no relation to reality whatsoever are used to justify actual authoritarianism. Might as well say that sending in the national guard to violate posse comitatus is totally cool because Obama was going to do it with Jade Helm, even though that was proven multiple times to be a hoax. I've argued about all these things before in this thread so I won't rehash, but all of those things are wrong. I guess quickly your contention about the border is embarrassing considering it was in trouble long before the failed bill and there was no crisis before or after. So again, there are people on the left who will justify anything, and will do so again for whatever the next Democrat does. I mean sure, some will do that. Equally many, especially amongst the further left of the populace will happily admit that the Constitution is too rigid thru outright anachronistic to adequately deal with modern problems. Even aside from the sheer volume of Trump’s trampling, especially in his second term, its conservatives at large who couch so much of their rhetoric and beliefs in adherence to the Constitution, and things like states rights, far more so than the left does. Thus critiques can by themselves be certainly valid, but start to ring entirely hollow when conservatives give their own a pass to trample over their own ostensible sacred cows with much greater frequency. No amount of ‘but the Dems’ can entirely sidestep that. Well first the Trump era has led to a newfound *rhetorical* respect for the constitution by Dems. Second, MAGA is its own thing. But a lot of people take the view expressed in the tweet I linked a little earlier. They see it as tit-for-tat. On September 10 2025 01:51 KwarK wrote:On September 09 2025 23:33 LightSpectra wrote:On September 09 2025 23:20 Jankisa wrote:
Yeah Light, but Introvert will ignore all that even when it was mentioned to him explicitly in the last page, a few months ago, as it was happening because it doesn't fit his version of "reality".
He has alternative facts and his alternative facts don't care about your feelings. Owned, you liberal cuck!
These last 2 posts have made me more convinced then ever that he is just oBlade alt, like Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde but both guys are the same person. Nah, I don't think they're the same. Introvert just repeats mainstream far-right talking points and then has a meltdown when people aren't convinced. oBlade comes up with the most insane shit you've ever heard in your life on the spot, like tariffs are actually good because they reduce corporate waste. Remember when Introvert explained that Seig Heils were the way K-pop mega fans communicate their enthusiasm for K-pop at political rallies? I do. For whatever it's worth the ADL had a similar opnion to mine. What is strange is how this K-pop add on you've been doing keeps changing? Unless I stopped reading closely at some point. I didn't say K-pop and I didn't say it was the fans. Always strange with you lol I think you might be confusing the actual constitution with what the left is wanting: that the government uphold the humanist values that underpin it. And sure, the constitution is securely founded on Lockean principles, and I doubt many of us are Lockeans. But the values of a Lockean society and a government trying to uphold them would absolutely and undoubtedly be preferable to the cronyism and self-aggrandization that seems to be the singular focus of the executive branch at the moment, with neither the legislative nor judiciary branches doing much of anything to halt it. Locke, Madison, Jefferson and Hamilton are all spinning in their graves right now at the travesty that is the "republican" party selling out wholesale to someone who seems, by all accounts, far worse than King George was. Well if humanist values are what underpin the Constitution then we could do with more than the occasional paean to it. I think the Founders would object to much of what we do, but again I think many on the left just a decade ago would scoff at the very idea of caring either way. Like I said, I'm not in favor of any of these thing I just think it has to get worse before it has a chance to get better. Moreover I would say that in much political discourse today the discussion of such principles is highly selective. Hence why DACA can be ok to the vast number of people whose opinion we are supposed to care about but actually enforcing immigration laws is considered unseemly and cruel. It doesn't take much imagination to see why some might start to consider the whole thing a Lucy-and-the-football situation. On September 10 2025 07:44 WombaT wrote:On September 10 2025 03:04 Introvert wrote:On September 09 2025 23:53 WombaT wrote:On September 09 2025 23:31 Introvert wrote:On September 09 2025 23:12 LightSpectra wrote: They cheered for DACA, for student loan forgiveness, they were silent or totally in denial about Biden's dereliction of duty at the border. DACA doesn't break any laws, the law that regulates student loans explicitly allows for the POTUS to forgive some at his discretion, and Biden explicitly asked Congress for more resources to secure the border and Republicans told him to fuck off because they wouldn't win the election if they couldn't campaign on the border still being broken from Trump's administration. Once again, made-up Republican scandals with no relation to reality whatsoever are used to justify actual authoritarianism. Might as well say that sending in the national guard to violate posse comitatus is totally cool because Obama was going to do it with Jade Helm, even though that was proven multiple times to be a hoax. I've argued about all these things before in this thread so I won't rehash, but all of those things are wrong. I guess quickly your contention about the border is embarrassing considering it was in trouble long before the failed bill and there was no crisis before or after. So again, there are people on the left who will justify anything, and will do so again for whatever the next Democrat does. I mean sure, some will do that. Equally many, especially amongst the further left of the populace will happily admit that the Constitution is too rigid thru outright anachronistic to adequately deal with modern problems. Even aside from the sheer volume of Trump’s trampling, especially in his second term, its conservatives at large who couch so much of their rhetoric and beliefs in adherence to the Constitution, and things like states rights, far more so than the left does. Thus critiques can by themselves be certainly valid, but start to ring entirely hollow when conservatives give their own a pass to trample over their own ostensible sacred cows with much greater frequency. No amount of ‘but the Dems’ can entirely sidestep that. Well first the Trump era has led to a newfound *rhetorical* respect for the constitution by Dems. Second, MAGA is its own thing. But a lot of people take the view expressed in the tweet I linked a little earlier. They see it as tit-for-tat. On September 10 2025 01:51 KwarK wrote:On September 09 2025 23:33 LightSpectra wrote:On September 09 2025 23:20 Jankisa wrote:
Yeah Light, but Introvert will ignore all that even when it was mentioned to him explicitly in the last page, a few months ago, as it was happening because it doesn't fit his version of "reality".
He has alternative facts and his alternative facts don't care about your feelings. Owned, you liberal cuck!
These last 2 posts have made me more convinced then ever that he is just oBlade alt, like Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde but both guys are the same person. Nah, I don't think they're the same. Introvert just repeats mainstream far-right talking points and then has a meltdown when people aren't convinced. oBlade comes up with the most insane shit you've ever heard in your life on the spot, like tariffs are actually good because they reduce corporate waste. Remember when Introvert explained that Seig Heils were the way K-pop mega fans communicate their enthusiasm for K-pop at political rallies? I do. For whatever it's worth the ADL had a similar opnion to mine. What is strange is how this K-pop add on you've been doing keeps changing? Unless I stopped reading closely at some point. I didn't say K-pop and I didn't say it was the fans. Always strange with you lol If non-MAGA conservatives continually toe the MAGA line, often enthusiastically, at what point does one have to drop the idea they’re separate entities even if one is being extremel y charitable? Either as some new, chimeric beast, or alternatively one where the parasite has taken over the host. Acrofales more eloquently expanded on what I was touching on earlier, agreed 100% with that. See above. But also, Trump has done a lot of things conservatives have wanted. Roe v. Wade overturned with the help of his appointed justices (wanted for a long time), taxes at the very least not raised (a general preference), securing the border (another long sought goal), a properly skeptical view of the federal bureaucracy (tactics to be debated). And of course the fact that he takes the slings and arrows and doesn't really throw his more conservative supporters under the bus engenders a lot of good will and trust. We saw this with the last administration, a lot can be overlooked when you like most of what you see and when you consider who is attacking "your guy." Could we though? I think most people, American or otherwise, praise the American constitution as a forward-thinking document of its time. But most also recognize that its time was almost 3 centuries ago. It's fair to say that some of the processes and systems it lays out to ensure fair government are, quite simply, not of this time, and the ideals underpinning the constitution are no longer represented. For further emphasis: it took a civil war to get black people *any* rights, and equal rights for women (let alone black people) got torpedoed with the ERA amendment somewhere between failed and eternal limbo. These are very basic protections for humans that in the 18th century it was entirely normal to consider as not-quite-human. Meanwhile we have pragmatic restrictions caused by 18th-century technology, baked into the mechanisms for election. We have a severely underspecified right to bear arms and a plethora of unforeseen consequences thereof. And for some reason a supreme court that ruled that money is speech according to the constitution. Although the latter could just be a total brainfart, and not actually require a constitutional amendment to fix. And I'm not saying other democracies were any better in the 18th, 19th or 20th centuries. The US was generally a leader in humanist values, being one of the first to abolish slavery, recognise women's rights, and generally ensure free and fair elections in choosing their leaders. Quite unlike the contemporary fledgling republic of France (which promptly turned to tyranny and empire instead of the values of Voltaire), or the extreme reticence of other colonial powers such as Brazil, the Ottoman Empire or China to abolish slavery (although neither of the latter two ever claimed any kind of humanist heritage), the US did ultimately uphold the humanist values it was founded on. Similarly, it fought against fascism in WW2, and against Stalinism in the cold war. These are not trivial accomplishments. It is therefore all the more painful to watch the US abandon those values without even so much as a fight. Progress has stalled or receded on equal rights for many minorities (blacks, LGBTQ) and even majorities such as women's rights. Meanwhile you stand by your fascist wannabe tin-pot-dictator, proudly proclaiming the magnificence of his new clothes, all because he pays lip service to things you claim to believe in. Thee same Trump who you claim is lowering taxes is not doing so by being fiscally prudent, but rather by just borrowing more. He claims to be improving government efficiency while renaming the department of defense for no apparent reason. He claims to be reducing government overreach while deploying the national guard without consent. He isn't living by your values, he's bamboozling you with them. And you're gobbling it up like it's ambrosia, because at least he isn't extending DACA! Maybe I misunderstood you. You put it more elegantly than a Dem politician might but bouts of (always latent) dislike of the Constitutional system we have come up evey do often. It's been going on at least a hundred years and i might argue longer. This view that the document is outmoded naturally would make a conservative skeptical of Democrats and their boundary pushing. Why should i trust them at all on defending it when they can barely muster the will to talk about it positively? Now I didn't vote for Trump, but it's incredibly easy to see why so many did. As I said the opposition is really, really bad. For example, I don’t share your views on abortion. We can go down the list. See Trump is not just claiming, things he is actually doing things conservatives want. I listed some of them already. You act like your priorities should be mine, but I think most of the American left has a terrible grasp on people who disagree with them. For example how many people do you think voted for Trump because they thought he was going to lower the debt? Maybe an decent number of people believed it, but most people who care about that issue in the first place didn't. Conservatives have gotten more out of Trump than anyone since Reagan, a remarkable thing to think about. People making political trade-offs, especially since they don't embrace the "dictator-in-waiting" belief make it easy to see how many could vote for him. I watch people slamming GH here everyday for his purity, but yet ever so conveniently they also want every right winger to abstain or vote for a dem because in their own mind Trump doesn't meet the standards they think their opponents claim to have.
I'd say you're broadly right that Trump is serving his voters what they asked for. Economic change for example: he implemented the tariffs that he promised. I think the way he's doing it hurts the American economy, but his supporters thought otherwise when they voted for him. Likewise he's also cracking down hard on immigration, another major promise that got him into office. Insofar I can agree that Trump delivers on major promises.
However, regarding social security Trump voters did not want any reductions (at the same time they believed that government aid to poor people is harmful. Not sure how that works). Trump was in clear opposition to social security.
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/11/13/what-trump-supporters-believe-and-expect/
Overall Trump voters do support him, but not on all things. It'll be interesting to see how this develops as the economy gets worse for everyone except the super elite.
|
On September 10 2025 23:06 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 10 2025 16:15 Acrofales wrote:On September 10 2025 16:08 Razyda wrote:On September 10 2025 04:46 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 09 2025 23:57 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 09 2025 23:37 Jankisa wrote:On September 09 2025 23:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 09 2025 21:55 Jankisa wrote:On September 09 2025 21:50 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 09 2025 21:46 LightSpectra wrote:
[quote]
GH repeating another Republican talking point, color me surprised. It's a literal fact. Libs/Dems/ilk rejecting facts that they don't like, color me surprised... That is the difference between you and me, GH, I don't believe that, I know plenty of Americans, I don't think many Democrats would vote for Trump just because he had D next to his name. + Show Spoiler +You derided Democrats for campaigning with Liz Chaney and blamed their electoral failings (partially) on that, that is completely incompatible with what you just wrote.
The fact that you do think that Democrats=Republcians says a lot about you and your view of the world, and to me just shows, once again that you hate the USA and are basically a Tankie. + Show Spoiler +I like the USA, I would be a very different and in many ways less successful and culturally very different person if the USA didn't exist, I don't think you can slot China in the place of USA and have the world be as cool of a place as it is. All of us certainty wouldn't be posting on a TL forum (US company/team) that was created by and for fans of a game like Starcraft.
Unfortunately, Republicans and all conservatives want the USA to be more like China and Russia, most (not even close to all) Democrat politicians want it to be like Clinton's USA or Thatcher's UK.
USA, like most other countries contains multitudes, unfortunately, you guys have a duopoly in your politics, which is a double edged sword, on the one hand, this duopoly makes sure that the pendulum keeps swinging, on the other, it flattens the parties quite a bit, but nowhere close to what you are trying to present it as. I'm talking about "lesser evilists" (which is basically everyone here and the overwhelming majority of the Democrat party). They literally could/would vote for Trump and any other Republican. This isn't disputable. I literally don't think Democrats=Republicans, so that isn't a fact. Republicans, by pretty much any metric, are worse than Democrats. Try to integrate that information into your next assessment please. You make 2 false assertions right from the get go. You can't just say something and pretend like it's an accepted truth. I very much doubt the vast majority of regular posters here who actually have the right to vote in the USA would ever vote for Trump, so that is very much disputable. You might not "think" that, but you write and act in a way where everyone who reads you can come to the conclusion that you do. The burden of proof is on you, and all you do, including this latest screed is to prove us otherwise. + Show Spoiler +Normal people who haven't had their brain fried by politics to the point you have understand that the only way any of us can go through life without losing our minds is by choosing the lesser evil.
In the last 2 presidential elections in Croatia I bit my tongue and voted for a guy who I have a very low opinion of, mostly because from a Social Democrat he turned into a Trump cosplaying populist who seems to be on the take from Russia, but, he is smart, eloquent and shares most of my values, he also doesn't have a lot of power and he serves as a counterweight to our criminal organization party in power.
I could have purity tested him and said fuck this, encouraged most of my friends and family to do the same and split the vote or vote for our version of a Republican, but I didn't, because I choose the lesser evil.
That is an adult thing to do. And I'm OK with my choice, he's still an asshole to Ukraine, but he is the only part of our national voice who spends time criticizing Israel. You get some, you lose some, that's life. You weren't really around for when they were first rationalizing "lesser evilism" , so I don't blame you, but yeah, they would. That's how "lesser evilism", as they've articulated it, works. You can verify that with any one of them. It's objectively (and obviously) true that Republicans ≠ Democrats. I don't have to prove that to you, nor do I have to prove that I believe it to you or anyone else. That assertion is preposterous. Seems you shouldn't go "ignor[ing] all that even when it was mentioned to [you] explicitly in the last page..." and fixate on your "alternative facts" that "don't care about feelings..." while self-congratulating with a "Owned [tankie punk]!" I mean if my options are a) Pol Pot b) 1943 Hitler c) Trump, I would indeed vote Trump. But not against any R or D candidate from the past 100 years. If my options are a) Pol Pot and b) 1943 Hitler, I guess I might abstain. Wasn't that exactly GH position last election, for which he took a lot of heat? I don't think he took a lot of heat for that. I think he took a lot heat for advocating not voting, or voting third party, in the actual election between Trump and Harris. The point Drone is making is that clearly neither Trump nor Harris are as bad as Pol Pot or Hitler and thus holding your nose and voting for the lesser evil is not necessarily the path to hell. GH disagrees and seems to think the red line of unacceptable leaders was somewhere roughly 15 presidents ago, and since then they've all been Pol Pot levels of shit. Which is a pretty bad take and he deservedly took heat for. Definitely not my position, but it seems most everyone turned into non-voters/Trump voters/anti-Maidan without Pol Pot or Hitler. Show nested quote +On September 10 2025 06:31 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 10 2025 05:03 Zambrah wrote:On September 10 2025 04:46 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 09 2025 23:57 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 09 2025 23:37 Jankisa wrote:On September 09 2025 23:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 09 2025 21:55 Jankisa wrote:On September 09 2025 21:50 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 09 2025 21:46 LightSpectra wrote:
[quote]
GH repeating another Republican talking point, color me surprised. It's a literal fact. Libs/Dems/ilk rejecting facts that they don't like, color me surprised... That is the difference between you and me, GH, I don't believe that, I know plenty of Americans, I don't think many Democrats would vote for Trump just because he had D next to his name. + Show Spoiler +You derided Democrats for campaigning with Liz Chaney and blamed their electoral failings (partially) on that, that is completely incompatible with what you just wrote.
The fact that you do think that Democrats=Republcians says a lot about you and your view of the world, and to me just shows, once again that you hate the USA and are basically a Tankie. + Show Spoiler +I like the USA, I would be a very different and in many ways less successful and culturally very different person if the USA didn't exist, I don't think you can slot China in the place of USA and have the world be as cool of a place as it is. All of us certainty wouldn't be posting on a TL forum (US company/team) that was created by and for fans of a game like Starcraft.
Unfortunately, Republicans and all conservatives want the USA to be more like China and Russia, most (not even close to all) Democrat politicians want it to be like Clinton's USA or Thatcher's UK.
USA, like most other countries contains multitudes, unfortunately, you guys have a duopoly in your politics, which is a double edged sword, on the one hand, this duopoly makes sure that the pendulum keeps swinging, on the other, it flattens the parties quite a bit, but nowhere close to what you are trying to present it as. I'm talking about "lesser evilists" (which is basically everyone here and the overwhelming majority of the Democrat party). They literally could/would vote for Trump and any other Republican. This isn't disputable. I literally don't think Democrats=Republicans, so that isn't a fact. Republicans, by pretty much any metric, are worse than Democrats. Try to integrate that information into your next assessment please. You make 2 false assertions right from the get go. You can't just say something and pretend like it's an accepted truth. I very much doubt the vast majority of regular posters here who actually have the right to vote in the USA would ever vote for Trump, so that is very much disputable. You might not "think" that, but you write and act in a way where everyone who reads you can come to the conclusion that you do. The burden of proof is on you, and all you do, including this latest screed is to prove us otherwise. + Show Spoiler +Normal people who haven't had their brain fried by politics to the point you have understand that the only way any of us can go through life without losing our minds is by choosing the lesser evil.
In the last 2 presidential elections in Croatia I bit my tongue and voted for a guy who I have a very low opinion of, mostly because from a Social Democrat he turned into a Trump cosplaying populist who seems to be on the take from Russia, but, he is smart, eloquent and shares most of my values, he also doesn't have a lot of power and he serves as a counterweight to our criminal organization party in power.
I could have purity tested him and said fuck this, encouraged most of my friends and family to do the same and split the vote or vote for our version of a Republican, but I didn't, because I choose the lesser evil.
That is an adult thing to do. And I'm OK with my choice, he's still an asshole to Ukraine, but he is the only part of our national voice who spends time criticizing Israel. You get some, you lose some, that's life. You weren't really around for when they were first rationalizing "lesser evilism" , so I don't blame you, but yeah, they would. That's how "lesser evilism", as they've articulated it, works. You can verify that with any one of them. It's objectively (and obviously) true that Republicans ≠ Democrats. I don't have to prove that to you, nor do I have to prove that I believe it to you or anyone else. That assertion is preposterous. Seems you shouldn't go "ignor[ing] all that even when it was mentioned to [you] explicitly in the last page..." and fixate on your "alternative facts" that "don't care about feelings..." while self-congratulating with a "Owned [tankie punk]!" I mean if my options are a) Pol Pot b) 1943 Hitler c) Trump, I would indeed vote Trump. But not against any R or D candidate from the past 100 years. If my options are a) Pol Pot and b) 1943 Hitler, I guess I might abstain. + Show Spoiler +
This does basically says exactly what GH said though (even though you arent american) you would vote for every Republican out of principle, based on what youve said here your principles on when to not vote for someone are somewhere between Trump and Hitler/Pol Pot and if Trump isnt close enough to Hitler/Pol Pot to prevent you from voting for him then the rest of the GOP probably aren't either.
I dont strictly grasp what point GH is making here, but this is the sort of response that I think hes referring to in his post.
Its not like this conversation hasnt been had here before either, its literally true that plenty of people here have said that they would vote for whoever is the lesser of two evils in basically any and every instance which means they would, out of that lesser of two evils principle, be willing to vote for Hitler, Pol Pot, Trump, every GOP scumbag etc.
What GH means to show by highlighting this sentiment Im too tired to glean, but from what I can see his post seems fairly correct + Show Spoiler +, if over broad if taken out of the context of this thread. Basically... Poll: I would vote forYou must be logged in to vote in this poll. ☐ Donald Trump
☐ Viktor Yanukovych
☐ Maidan
What conclusions and generalizations do you think we should be making about American voters, based on this sample size of five people on TL (some of whom might not even be American)?
|
On September 11 2025 00:23 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On September 10 2025 23:06 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 10 2025 16:15 Acrofales wrote:On September 10 2025 16:08 Razyda wrote:On September 10 2025 04:46 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 09 2025 23:57 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 09 2025 23:37 Jankisa wrote:On September 09 2025 23:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 09 2025 21:55 Jankisa wrote:On September 09 2025 21:50 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
It's a literal fact.
Libs/Dems/ilk rejecting facts that they don't like, color me surprised... That is the difference between you and me, GH, I don't believe that, I know plenty of Americans, I don't think many Democrats would vote for Trump just because he had D next to his name. + Show Spoiler +You derided Democrats for campaigning with Liz Chaney and blamed their electoral failings (partially) on that, that is completely incompatible with what you just wrote.
The fact that you do think that Democrats=Republcians says a lot about you and your view of the world, and to me just shows, once again that you hate the USA and are basically a Tankie. + Show Spoiler +I like the USA, I would be a very different and in many ways less successful and culturally very different person if the USA didn't exist, I don't think you can slot China in the place of USA and have the world be as cool of a place as it is. All of us certainty wouldn't be posting on a TL forum (US company/team) that was created by and for fans of a game like Starcraft.
Unfortunately, Republicans and all conservatives want the USA to be more like China and Russia, most (not even close to all) Democrat politicians want it to be like Clinton's USA or Thatcher's UK.
USA, like most other countries contains multitudes, unfortunately, you guys have a duopoly in your politics, which is a double edged sword, on the one hand, this duopoly makes sure that the pendulum keeps swinging, on the other, it flattens the parties quite a bit, but nowhere close to what you are trying to present it as. I'm talking about "lesser evilists" (which is basically everyone here and the overwhelming majority of the Democrat party). They literally could/would vote for Trump and any other Republican. This isn't disputable. I literally don't think Democrats=Republicans, so that isn't a fact. Republicans, by pretty much any metric, are worse than Democrats. Try to integrate that information into your next assessment please. You make 2 false assertions right from the get go. You can't just say something and pretend like it's an accepted truth. I very much doubt the vast majority of regular posters here who actually have the right to vote in the USA would ever vote for Trump, so that is very much disputable. You might not "think" that, but you write and act in a way where everyone who reads you can come to the conclusion that you do. The burden of proof is on you, and all you do, including this latest screed is to prove us otherwise. + Show Spoiler +Normal people who haven't had their brain fried by politics to the point you have understand that the only way any of us can go through life without losing our minds is by choosing the lesser evil.
In the last 2 presidential elections in Croatia I bit my tongue and voted for a guy who I have a very low opinion of, mostly because from a Social Democrat he turned into a Trump cosplaying populist who seems to be on the take from Russia, but, he is smart, eloquent and shares most of my values, he also doesn't have a lot of power and he serves as a counterweight to our criminal organization party in power.
I could have purity tested him and said fuck this, encouraged most of my friends and family to do the same and split the vote or vote for our version of a Republican, but I didn't, because I choose the lesser evil.
That is an adult thing to do. And I'm OK with my choice, he's still an asshole to Ukraine, but he is the only part of our national voice who spends time criticizing Israel. You get some, you lose some, that's life. You weren't really around for when they were first rationalizing "lesser evilism" , so I don't blame you, but yeah, they would. That's how "lesser evilism", as they've articulated it, works. You can verify that with any one of them. It's objectively (and obviously) true that Republicans ≠ Democrats. I don't have to prove that to you, nor do I have to prove that I believe it to you or anyone else. That assertion is preposterous. Seems you shouldn't go "ignor[ing] all that even when it was mentioned to [you] explicitly in the last page..." and fixate on your "alternative facts" that "don't care about feelings..." while self-congratulating with a "Owned [tankie punk]!" I mean if my options are a) Pol Pot b) 1943 Hitler c) Trump, I would indeed vote Trump. But not against any R or D candidate from the past 100 years. If my options are a) Pol Pot and b) 1943 Hitler, I guess I might abstain. Wasn't that exactly GH position last election, for which he took a lot of heat? I don't think he took a lot of heat for that. I think he took a lot heat for advocating not voting, or voting third party, in the actual election between Trump and Harris. The point Drone is making is that clearly neither Trump nor Harris are as bad as Pol Pot or Hitler and thus holding your nose and voting for the lesser evil is not necessarily the path to hell. GH disagrees and seems to think the red line of unacceptable leaders was somewhere roughly 15 presidents ago, and since then they've all been Pol Pot levels of shit. Which is a pretty bad take and he deservedly took heat for. Definitely not my position, but it seems most everyone turned into non-voters/Trump voters/anti-Maidan without Pol Pot or Hitler. On September 10 2025 06:31 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 10 2025 05:03 Zambrah wrote:On September 10 2025 04:46 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 09 2025 23:57 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 09 2025 23:37 Jankisa wrote:On September 09 2025 23:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 09 2025 21:55 Jankisa wrote:On September 09 2025 21:50 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
It's a literal fact.
Libs/Dems/ilk rejecting facts that they don't like, color me surprised... That is the difference between you and me, GH, I don't believe that, I know plenty of Americans, I don't think many Democrats would vote for Trump just because he had D next to his name. + Show Spoiler +You derided Democrats for campaigning with Liz Chaney and blamed their electoral failings (partially) on that, that is completely incompatible with what you just wrote.
The fact that you do think that Democrats=Republcians says a lot about you and your view of the world, and to me just shows, once again that you hate the USA and are basically a Tankie. + Show Spoiler +I like the USA, I would be a very different and in many ways less successful and culturally very different person if the USA didn't exist, I don't think you can slot China in the place of USA and have the world be as cool of a place as it is. All of us certainty wouldn't be posting on a TL forum (US company/team) that was created by and for fans of a game like Starcraft.
Unfortunately, Republicans and all conservatives want the USA to be more like China and Russia, most (not even close to all) Democrat politicians want it to be like Clinton's USA or Thatcher's UK.
USA, like most other countries contains multitudes, unfortunately, you guys have a duopoly in your politics, which is a double edged sword, on the one hand, this duopoly makes sure that the pendulum keeps swinging, on the other, it flattens the parties quite a bit, but nowhere close to what you are trying to present it as. I'm talking about "lesser evilists" (which is basically everyone here and the overwhelming majority of the Democrat party). They literally could/would vote for Trump and any other Republican. This isn't disputable. I literally don't think Democrats=Republicans, so that isn't a fact. Republicans, by pretty much any metric, are worse than Democrats. Try to integrate that information into your next assessment please. You make 2 false assertions right from the get go. You can't just say something and pretend like it's an accepted truth. I very much doubt the vast majority of regular posters here who actually have the right to vote in the USA would ever vote for Trump, so that is very much disputable. You might not "think" that, but you write and act in a way where everyone who reads you can come to the conclusion that you do. The burden of proof is on you, and all you do, including this latest screed is to prove us otherwise. + Show Spoiler +Normal people who haven't had their brain fried by politics to the point you have understand that the only way any of us can go through life without losing our minds is by choosing the lesser evil.
In the last 2 presidential elections in Croatia I bit my tongue and voted for a guy who I have a very low opinion of, mostly because from a Social Democrat he turned into a Trump cosplaying populist who seems to be on the take from Russia, but, he is smart, eloquent and shares most of my values, he also doesn't have a lot of power and he serves as a counterweight to our criminal organization party in power.
I could have purity tested him and said fuck this, encouraged most of my friends and family to do the same and split the vote or vote for our version of a Republican, but I didn't, because I choose the lesser evil.
That is an adult thing to do. And I'm OK with my choice, he's still an asshole to Ukraine, but he is the only part of our national voice who spends time criticizing Israel. You get some, you lose some, that's life. You weren't really around for when they were first rationalizing "lesser evilism" , so I don't blame you, but yeah, they would. That's how "lesser evilism", as they've articulated it, works. You can verify that with any one of them. It's objectively (and obviously) true that Republicans ≠ Democrats. I don't have to prove that to you, nor do I have to prove that I believe it to you or anyone else. That assertion is preposterous. Seems you shouldn't go "ignor[ing] all that even when it was mentioned to [you] explicitly in the last page..." and fixate on your "alternative facts" that "don't care about feelings..." while self-congratulating with a "Owned [tankie punk]!" I mean if my options are a) Pol Pot b) 1943 Hitler c) Trump, I would indeed vote Trump. But not against any R or D candidate from the past 100 years. If my options are a) Pol Pot and b) 1943 Hitler, I guess I might abstain. + Show Spoiler +
This does basically says exactly what GH said though (even though you arent american) you would vote for every Republican out of principle, based on what youve said here your principles on when to not vote for someone are somewhere between Trump and Hitler/Pol Pot and if Trump isnt close enough to Hitler/Pol Pot to prevent you from voting for him then the rest of the GOP probably aren't either.
I dont strictly grasp what point GH is making here, but this is the sort of response that I think hes referring to in his post.
Its not like this conversation hasnt been had here before either, its literally true that plenty of people here have said that they would vote for whoever is the lesser of two evils in basically any and every instance which means they would, out of that lesser of two evils principle, be willing to vote for Hitler, Pol Pot, Trump, every GOP scumbag etc.
What GH means to show by highlighting this sentiment Im too tired to glean, but from what I can see his post seems fairly correct + Show Spoiler +, if over broad if taken out of the context of this thread. Basically... Poll: I would vote forYou must be logged in to vote in this poll. ☐ Donald Trump
☐ Viktor Yanukovych
☐ Maidan
What conclusions and generalizations do you think we should be making about American voters, based on this sample size of five people on TL (some of whom might not even be American)?
However many people respond, it's obviously specifically more applicable to posters/"lesser evilism" here. That said, depends on who votes for what.
Which did you (or anyone else) choose?
|
On September 11 2025 00:33 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2025 00:23 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 10 2025 23:06 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 10 2025 16:15 Acrofales wrote:On September 10 2025 16:08 Razyda wrote:On September 10 2025 04:46 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 09 2025 23:57 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 09 2025 23:37 Jankisa wrote:On September 09 2025 23:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 09 2025 21:55 Jankisa wrote:[quote] That is the difference between you and me, GH, I don't believe that, I know plenty of Americans, I don't think many Democrats would vote for Trump just because he had D next to his name. + Show Spoiler +You derided Democrats for campaigning with Liz Chaney and blamed their electoral failings (partially) on that, that is completely incompatible with what you just wrote.
The fact that you do think that Democrats=Republcians says a lot about you and your view of the world, and to me just shows, once again that you hate the USA and are basically a Tankie. + Show Spoiler +I like the USA, I would be a very different and in many ways less successful and culturally very different person if the USA didn't exist, I don't think you can slot China in the place of USA and have the world be as cool of a place as it is. All of us certainty wouldn't be posting on a TL forum (US company/team) that was created by and for fans of a game like Starcraft.
Unfortunately, Republicans and all conservatives want the USA to be more like China and Russia, most (not even close to all) Democrat politicians want it to be like Clinton's USA or Thatcher's UK.
USA, like most other countries contains multitudes, unfortunately, you guys have a duopoly in your politics, which is a double edged sword, on the one hand, this duopoly makes sure that the pendulum keeps swinging, on the other, it flattens the parties quite a bit, but nowhere close to what you are trying to present it as. I'm talking about "lesser evilists" (which is basically everyone here and the overwhelming majority of the Democrat party). They literally could/would vote for Trump and any other Republican. This isn't disputable. I literally don't think Democrats=Republicans, so that isn't a fact. Republicans, by pretty much any metric, are worse than Democrats. Try to integrate that information into your next assessment please. You make 2 false assertions right from the get go. You can't just say something and pretend like it's an accepted truth. I very much doubt the vast majority of regular posters here who actually have the right to vote in the USA would ever vote for Trump, so that is very much disputable. You might not "think" that, but you write and act in a way where everyone who reads you can come to the conclusion that you do. The burden of proof is on you, and all you do, including this latest screed is to prove us otherwise. + Show Spoiler +Normal people who haven't had their brain fried by politics to the point you have understand that the only way any of us can go through life without losing our minds is by choosing the lesser evil.
In the last 2 presidential elections in Croatia I bit my tongue and voted for a guy who I have a very low opinion of, mostly because from a Social Democrat he turned into a Trump cosplaying populist who seems to be on the take from Russia, but, he is smart, eloquent and shares most of my values, he also doesn't have a lot of power and he serves as a counterweight to our criminal organization party in power.
I could have purity tested him and said fuck this, encouraged most of my friends and family to do the same and split the vote or vote for our version of a Republican, but I didn't, because I choose the lesser evil.
That is an adult thing to do. And I'm OK with my choice, he's still an asshole to Ukraine, but he is the only part of our national voice who spends time criticizing Israel. You get some, you lose some, that's life. You weren't really around for when they were first rationalizing "lesser evilism" , so I don't blame you, but yeah, they would. That's how "lesser evilism", as they've articulated it, works. You can verify that with any one of them. It's objectively (and obviously) true that Republicans ≠ Democrats. I don't have to prove that to you, nor do I have to prove that I believe it to you or anyone else. That assertion is preposterous. Seems you shouldn't go "ignor[ing] all that even when it was mentioned to [you] explicitly in the last page..." and fixate on your "alternative facts" that "don't care about feelings..." while self-congratulating with a "Owned [tankie punk]!" I mean if my options are a) Pol Pot b) 1943 Hitler c) Trump, I would indeed vote Trump. But not against any R or D candidate from the past 100 years. If my options are a) Pol Pot and b) 1943 Hitler, I guess I might abstain. Wasn't that exactly GH position last election, for which he took a lot of heat? I don't think he took a lot of heat for that. I think he took a lot heat for advocating not voting, or voting third party, in the actual election between Trump and Harris. The point Drone is making is that clearly neither Trump nor Harris are as bad as Pol Pot or Hitler and thus holding your nose and voting for the lesser evil is not necessarily the path to hell. GH disagrees and seems to think the red line of unacceptable leaders was somewhere roughly 15 presidents ago, and since then they've all been Pol Pot levels of shit. Which is a pretty bad take and he deservedly took heat for. Definitely not my position, but it seems most everyone turned into non-voters/Trump voters/anti-Maidan without Pol Pot or Hitler. On September 10 2025 06:31 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 10 2025 05:03 Zambrah wrote:On September 10 2025 04:46 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 09 2025 23:57 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 09 2025 23:37 Jankisa wrote:On September 09 2025 23:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 09 2025 21:55 Jankisa wrote:[quote] That is the difference between you and me, GH, I don't believe that, I know plenty of Americans, I don't think many Democrats would vote for Trump just because he had D next to his name. + Show Spoiler +You derided Democrats for campaigning with Liz Chaney and blamed their electoral failings (partially) on that, that is completely incompatible with what you just wrote.
The fact that you do think that Democrats=Republcians says a lot about you and your view of the world, and to me just shows, once again that you hate the USA and are basically a Tankie. + Show Spoiler +I like the USA, I would be a very different and in many ways less successful and culturally very different person if the USA didn't exist, I don't think you can slot China in the place of USA and have the world be as cool of a place as it is. All of us certainty wouldn't be posting on a TL forum (US company/team) that was created by and for fans of a game like Starcraft.
Unfortunately, Republicans and all conservatives want the USA to be more like China and Russia, most (not even close to all) Democrat politicians want it to be like Clinton's USA or Thatcher's UK.
USA, like most other countries contains multitudes, unfortunately, you guys have a duopoly in your politics, which is a double edged sword, on the one hand, this duopoly makes sure that the pendulum keeps swinging, on the other, it flattens the parties quite a bit, but nowhere close to what you are trying to present it as. I'm talking about "lesser evilists" (which is basically everyone here and the overwhelming majority of the Democrat party). They literally could/would vote for Trump and any other Republican. This isn't disputable. I literally don't think Democrats=Republicans, so that isn't a fact. Republicans, by pretty much any metric, are worse than Democrats. Try to integrate that information into your next assessment please. You make 2 false assertions right from the get go. You can't just say something and pretend like it's an accepted truth. I very much doubt the vast majority of regular posters here who actually have the right to vote in the USA would ever vote for Trump, so that is very much disputable. You might not "think" that, but you write and act in a way where everyone who reads you can come to the conclusion that you do. The burden of proof is on you, and all you do, including this latest screed is to prove us otherwise. + Show Spoiler +Normal people who haven't had their brain fried by politics to the point you have understand that the only way any of us can go through life without losing our minds is by choosing the lesser evil.
In the last 2 presidential elections in Croatia I bit my tongue and voted for a guy who I have a very low opinion of, mostly because from a Social Democrat he turned into a Trump cosplaying populist who seems to be on the take from Russia, but, he is smart, eloquent and shares most of my values, he also doesn't have a lot of power and he serves as a counterweight to our criminal organization party in power.
I could have purity tested him and said fuck this, encouraged most of my friends and family to do the same and split the vote or vote for our version of a Republican, but I didn't, because I choose the lesser evil.
That is an adult thing to do. And I'm OK with my choice, he's still an asshole to Ukraine, but he is the only part of our national voice who spends time criticizing Israel. You get some, you lose some, that's life. You weren't really around for when they were first rationalizing "lesser evilism" , so I don't blame you, but yeah, they would. That's how "lesser evilism", as they've articulated it, works. You can verify that with any one of them. It's objectively (and obviously) true that Republicans ≠ Democrats. I don't have to prove that to you, nor do I have to prove that I believe it to you or anyone else. That assertion is preposterous. Seems you shouldn't go "ignor[ing] all that even when it was mentioned to [you] explicitly in the last page..." and fixate on your "alternative facts" that "don't care about feelings..." while self-congratulating with a "Owned [tankie punk]!" I mean if my options are a) Pol Pot b) 1943 Hitler c) Trump, I would indeed vote Trump. But not against any R or D candidate from the past 100 years. If my options are a) Pol Pot and b) 1943 Hitler, I guess I might abstain. + Show Spoiler +
This does basically says exactly what GH said though (even though you arent american) you would vote for every Republican out of principle, based on what youve said here your principles on when to not vote for someone are somewhere between Trump and Hitler/Pol Pot and if Trump isnt close enough to Hitler/Pol Pot to prevent you from voting for him then the rest of the GOP probably aren't either.
I dont strictly grasp what point GH is making here, but this is the sort of response that I think hes referring to in his post.
Its not like this conversation hasnt been had here before either, its literally true that plenty of people here have said that they would vote for whoever is the lesser of two evils in basically any and every instance which means they would, out of that lesser of two evils principle, be willing to vote for Hitler, Pol Pot, Trump, every GOP scumbag etc.
What GH means to show by highlighting this sentiment Im too tired to glean, but from what I can see his post seems fairly correct + Show Spoiler +, if over broad if taken out of the context of this thread. Basically... Poll: I would vote forYou must be logged in to vote in this poll. ☐ Donald Trump
☐ Viktor Yanukovych
☐ Maidan
What conclusions and generalizations do you think we should be making about American voters, based on this sample size of five people on TL (some of whom might not even be American)? However many people respond, it's obviously specifically more applicable to posters/"lesser evilism" here. That said, depends on who votes for what. Which did you (or anyone else) choose?
I guess that depends: Who would become the new president if there was a Maidan that somehow prevented both listed leaders from becoming president? Voting for a revolution doesn't really give us any information about who the new person in charge would be. Would it be Bernie Sanders? Would it be the revived corpse of Adolf Hitler? (Hitler isn't American, but neither is Yanukovych lol.) A Maidan might just be another "lesser of two three evils" scenario, right?
|
On September 11 2025 01:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2025 00:33 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 11 2025 00:23 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 10 2025 23:06 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 10 2025 16:15 Acrofales wrote:On September 10 2025 16:08 Razyda wrote:On September 10 2025 04:46 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 09 2025 23:57 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 09 2025 23:37 Jankisa wrote:On September 09 2025 23:18 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
I'm talking about "lesser evilists" (which is basically everyone here and the overwhelming majority of the Democrat party). They literally could/would vote for Trump and any other Republican. This isn't disputable.
I literally don't think Democrats=Republicans, so that isn't a fact.
Republicans, by pretty much any metric, are worse than Democrats.
Try to integrate that information into your next assessment please.
You make 2 false assertions right from the get go. You can't just say something and pretend like it's an accepted truth. I very much doubt the vast majority of regular posters here who actually have the right to vote in the USA would ever vote for Trump, so that is very much disputable. You might not "think" that, but you write and act in a way where everyone who reads you can come to the conclusion that you do. The burden of proof is on you, and all you do, including this latest screed is to prove us otherwise. + Show Spoiler +Normal people who haven't had their brain fried by politics to the point you have understand that the only way any of us can go through life without losing our minds is by choosing the lesser evil.
In the last 2 presidential elections in Croatia I bit my tongue and voted for a guy who I have a very low opinion of, mostly because from a Social Democrat he turned into a Trump cosplaying populist who seems to be on the take from Russia, but, he is smart, eloquent and shares most of my values, he also doesn't have a lot of power and he serves as a counterweight to our criminal organization party in power.
I could have purity tested him and said fuck this, encouraged most of my friends and family to do the same and split the vote or vote for our version of a Republican, but I didn't, because I choose the lesser evil.
That is an adult thing to do. And I'm OK with my choice, he's still an asshole to Ukraine, but he is the only part of our national voice who spends time criticizing Israel. You get some, you lose some, that's life. You weren't really around for when they were first rationalizing "lesser evilism" , so I don't blame you, but yeah, they would. That's how "lesser evilism", as they've articulated it, works. You can verify that with any one of them. It's objectively (and obviously) true that Republicans ≠ Democrats. I don't have to prove that to you, nor do I have to prove that I believe it to you or anyone else. That assertion is preposterous. Seems you shouldn't go "ignor[ing] all that even when it was mentioned to [you] explicitly in the last page..." and fixate on your "alternative facts" that "don't care about feelings..." while self-congratulating with a "Owned [tankie punk]!" I mean if my options are a) Pol Pot b) 1943 Hitler c) Trump, I would indeed vote Trump. But not against any R or D candidate from the past 100 years. If my options are a) Pol Pot and b) 1943 Hitler, I guess I might abstain. Wasn't that exactly GH position last election, for which he took a lot of heat? I don't think he took a lot of heat for that. I think he took a lot heat for advocating not voting, or voting third party, in the actual election between Trump and Harris. The point Drone is making is that clearly neither Trump nor Harris are as bad as Pol Pot or Hitler and thus holding your nose and voting for the lesser evil is not necessarily the path to hell. GH disagrees and seems to think the red line of unacceptable leaders was somewhere roughly 15 presidents ago, and since then they've all been Pol Pot levels of shit. Which is a pretty bad take and he deservedly took heat for. Definitely not my position, but it seems most everyone turned into non-voters/Trump voters/anti-Maidan without Pol Pot or Hitler. On September 10 2025 06:31 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 10 2025 05:03 Zambrah wrote:On September 10 2025 04:46 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 09 2025 23:57 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 09 2025 23:37 Jankisa wrote:On September 09 2025 23:18 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
I'm talking about "lesser evilists" (which is basically everyone here and the overwhelming majority of the Democrat party). They literally could/would vote for Trump and any other Republican. This isn't disputable.
I literally don't think Democrats=Republicans, so that isn't a fact.
Republicans, by pretty much any metric, are worse than Democrats.
Try to integrate that information into your next assessment please.
You make 2 false assertions right from the get go. You can't just say something and pretend like it's an accepted truth. I very much doubt the vast majority of regular posters here who actually have the right to vote in the USA would ever vote for Trump, so that is very much disputable. You might not "think" that, but you write and act in a way where everyone who reads you can come to the conclusion that you do. The burden of proof is on you, and all you do, including this latest screed is to prove us otherwise. + Show Spoiler +Normal people who haven't had their brain fried by politics to the point you have understand that the only way any of us can go through life without losing our minds is by choosing the lesser evil.
In the last 2 presidential elections in Croatia I bit my tongue and voted for a guy who I have a very low opinion of, mostly because from a Social Democrat he turned into a Trump cosplaying populist who seems to be on the take from Russia, but, he is smart, eloquent and shares most of my values, he also doesn't have a lot of power and he serves as a counterweight to our criminal organization party in power.
I could have purity tested him and said fuck this, encouraged most of my friends and family to do the same and split the vote or vote for our version of a Republican, but I didn't, because I choose the lesser evil.
That is an adult thing to do. And I'm OK with my choice, he's still an asshole to Ukraine, but he is the only part of our national voice who spends time criticizing Israel. You get some, you lose some, that's life. You weren't really around for when they were first rationalizing "lesser evilism" , so I don't blame you, but yeah, they would. That's how "lesser evilism", as they've articulated it, works. You can verify that with any one of them. It's objectively (and obviously) true that Republicans ≠ Democrats. I don't have to prove that to you, nor do I have to prove that I believe it to you or anyone else. That assertion is preposterous. Seems you shouldn't go "ignor[ing] all that even when it was mentioned to [you] explicitly in the last page..." and fixate on your "alternative facts" that "don't care about feelings..." while self-congratulating with a "Owned [tankie punk]!" I mean if my options are a) Pol Pot b) 1943 Hitler c) Trump, I would indeed vote Trump. But not against any R or D candidate from the past 100 years. If my options are a) Pol Pot and b) 1943 Hitler, I guess I might abstain. + Show Spoiler +
This does basically says exactly what GH said though (even though you arent american) you would vote for every Republican out of principle, based on what youve said here your principles on when to not vote for someone are somewhere between Trump and Hitler/Pol Pot and if Trump isnt close enough to Hitler/Pol Pot to prevent you from voting for him then the rest of the GOP probably aren't either.
I dont strictly grasp what point GH is making here, but this is the sort of response that I think hes referring to in his post.
Its not like this conversation hasnt been had here before either, its literally true that plenty of people here have said that they would vote for whoever is the lesser of two evils in basically any and every instance which means they would, out of that lesser of two evils principle, be willing to vote for Hitler, Pol Pot, Trump, every GOP scumbag etc.
What GH means to show by highlighting this sentiment Im too tired to glean, but from what I can see his post seems fairly correct + Show Spoiler +, if over broad if taken out of the context of this thread. Basically... Poll: I would vote forYou must be logged in to vote in this poll. ☐ Donald Trump
☐ Viktor Yanukovych
☐ Maidan
What conclusions and generalizations do you think we should be making about American voters, based on this sample size of five people on TL (some of whom might not even be American)? However many people respond, it's obviously specifically more applicable to posters/"lesser evilism" here. That said, depends on who votes for what. Which did you (or anyone else) choose? I guess that depends: Who would become the new president if there was a Maidan that somehow prevented both listed leaders from becoming president? Voting for a revolution doesn't really give us any information about who the new person in charge would be. Would it be Bernie Sanders? Would it be the revived corpse of Adolf Hitler? (Hitler isn't American, but neither is Yanukovych lol.) A Maidan might just be another "lesser of two three evils" scenario, right? Well, pretty sure you already chose... but okay.
You don't typically know who the new president will be (or if there even will be one). Ukrainians didn't before/during EuroMaidan (it ending up being Zelenskyy indefinitely certainly wasn't known by the people in the streets). We can't reasonably expect to know before an AmeriMaidan.
Voting for Maidan in this context is suspending/ending adherence to FPTP two-party (in the US) electoral "lesser evilism" politics, for mass direct action and potentially the forced removal of a democratically elected leader without Hitler or Pol Pot being involved.
|
On September 11 2025 01:32 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2025 01:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 11 2025 00:33 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 11 2025 00:23 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 10 2025 23:06 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 10 2025 16:15 Acrofales wrote:On September 10 2025 16:08 Razyda wrote:On September 10 2025 04:46 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 09 2025 23:57 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 09 2025 23:37 Jankisa wrote:[quote] You make 2 false assertions right from the get go. You can't just say something and pretend like it's an accepted truth. I very much doubt the vast majority of regular posters here who actually have the right to vote in the USA would ever vote for Trump, so that is very much disputable. You might not "think" that, but you write and act in a way where everyone who reads you can come to the conclusion that you do. The burden of proof is on you, and all you do, including this latest screed is to prove us otherwise. + Show Spoiler +Normal people who haven't had their brain fried by politics to the point you have understand that the only way any of us can go through life without losing our minds is by choosing the lesser evil.
In the last 2 presidential elections in Croatia I bit my tongue and voted for a guy who I have a very low opinion of, mostly because from a Social Democrat he turned into a Trump cosplaying populist who seems to be on the take from Russia, but, he is smart, eloquent and shares most of my values, he also doesn't have a lot of power and he serves as a counterweight to our criminal organization party in power.
I could have purity tested him and said fuck this, encouraged most of my friends and family to do the same and split the vote or vote for our version of a Republican, but I didn't, because I choose the lesser evil.
That is an adult thing to do. And I'm OK with my choice, he's still an asshole to Ukraine, but he is the only part of our national voice who spends time criticizing Israel. You get some, you lose some, that's life. You weren't really around for when they were first rationalizing "lesser evilism" , so I don't blame you, but yeah, they would. That's how "lesser evilism", as they've articulated it, works. You can verify that with any one of them. It's objectively (and obviously) true that Republicans ≠ Democrats. I don't have to prove that to you, nor do I have to prove that I believe it to you or anyone else. That assertion is preposterous. Seems you shouldn't go "ignor[ing] all that even when it was mentioned to [you] explicitly in the last page..." and fixate on your "alternative facts" that "don't care about feelings..." while self-congratulating with a "Owned [tankie punk]!" I mean if my options are a) Pol Pot b) 1943 Hitler c) Trump, I would indeed vote Trump. But not against any R or D candidate from the past 100 years. If my options are a) Pol Pot and b) 1943 Hitler, I guess I might abstain. Wasn't that exactly GH position last election, for which he took a lot of heat? I don't think he took a lot of heat for that. I think he took a lot heat for advocating not voting, or voting third party, in the actual election between Trump and Harris. The point Drone is making is that clearly neither Trump nor Harris are as bad as Pol Pot or Hitler and thus holding your nose and voting for the lesser evil is not necessarily the path to hell. GH disagrees and seems to think the red line of unacceptable leaders was somewhere roughly 15 presidents ago, and since then they've all been Pol Pot levels of shit. Which is a pretty bad take and he deservedly took heat for. Definitely not my position, but it seems most everyone turned into non-voters/Trump voters/anti-Maidan without Pol Pot or Hitler. On September 10 2025 06:31 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 10 2025 05:03 Zambrah wrote:On September 10 2025 04:46 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 09 2025 23:57 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 09 2025 23:37 Jankisa wrote:[quote] You make 2 false assertions right from the get go. You can't just say something and pretend like it's an accepted truth. I very much doubt the vast majority of regular posters here who actually have the right to vote in the USA would ever vote for Trump, so that is very much disputable. You might not "think" that, but you write and act in a way where everyone who reads you can come to the conclusion that you do. The burden of proof is on you, and all you do, including this latest screed is to prove us otherwise. + Show Spoiler +Normal people who haven't had their brain fried by politics to the point you have understand that the only way any of us can go through life without losing our minds is by choosing the lesser evil.
In the last 2 presidential elections in Croatia I bit my tongue and voted for a guy who I have a very low opinion of, mostly because from a Social Democrat he turned into a Trump cosplaying populist who seems to be on the take from Russia, but, he is smart, eloquent and shares most of my values, he also doesn't have a lot of power and he serves as a counterweight to our criminal organization party in power.
I could have purity tested him and said fuck this, encouraged most of my friends and family to do the same and split the vote or vote for our version of a Republican, but I didn't, because I choose the lesser evil.
That is an adult thing to do. And I'm OK with my choice, he's still an asshole to Ukraine, but he is the only part of our national voice who spends time criticizing Israel. You get some, you lose some, that's life. You weren't really around for when they were first rationalizing "lesser evilism" , so I don't blame you, but yeah, they would. That's how "lesser evilism", as they've articulated it, works. You can verify that with any one of them. It's objectively (and obviously) true that Republicans ≠ Democrats. I don't have to prove that to you, nor do I have to prove that I believe it to you or anyone else. That assertion is preposterous. Seems you shouldn't go "ignor[ing] all that even when it was mentioned to [you] explicitly in the last page..." and fixate on your "alternative facts" that "don't care about feelings..." while self-congratulating with a "Owned [tankie punk]!" I mean if my options are a) Pol Pot b) 1943 Hitler c) Trump, I would indeed vote Trump. But not against any R or D candidate from the past 100 years. If my options are a) Pol Pot and b) 1943 Hitler, I guess I might abstain. + Show Spoiler +
This does basically says exactly what GH said though (even though you arent american) you would vote for every Republican out of principle, based on what youve said here your principles on when to not vote for someone are somewhere between Trump and Hitler/Pol Pot and if Trump isnt close enough to Hitler/Pol Pot to prevent you from voting for him then the rest of the GOP probably aren't either.
I dont strictly grasp what point GH is making here, but this is the sort of response that I think hes referring to in his post.
Its not like this conversation hasnt been had here before either, its literally true that plenty of people here have said that they would vote for whoever is the lesser of two evils in basically any and every instance which means they would, out of that lesser of two evils principle, be willing to vote for Hitler, Pol Pot, Trump, every GOP scumbag etc.
What GH means to show by highlighting this sentiment Im too tired to glean, but from what I can see his post seems fairly correct + Show Spoiler +, if over broad if taken out of the context of this thread. Basically... Poll: I would vote forYou must be logged in to vote in this poll. ☐ Donald Trump
☐ Viktor Yanukovych
☐ Maidan
What conclusions and generalizations do you think we should be making about American voters, based on this sample size of five people on TL (some of whom might not even be American)? However many people respond, it's obviously specifically more applicable to posters/"lesser evilism" here. That said, depends on who votes for what. Which did you (or anyone else) choose? I guess that depends: Who would become the new president if there was a Maidan that somehow prevented both listed leaders from becoming president? Voting for a revolution doesn't really give us any information about who the new person in charge would be. Would it be Bernie Sanders? Would it be the revived corpse of Adolf Hitler? (Hitler isn't American, but neither is Yanukovych lol.) A Maidan might just be another "lesser of two three evils" scenario, right? Well, pretty sure you already chose... but okay. You don't typically know who the new president will be (or if there even will be one). Ukrainians didn't before/during EuroMaidan (it ending up being Zelenskyy indefinitely certainly wasn't known by the people in the streets). We can't reasonably expect to know before an AmeriMaidan. Voting for Maidan in this context is suspending/ending adherence to FPTP two-party (in the US) electoral "lesser evilism" politics, for mass direct action and potentially the forced removal of a democratically elected leader without Hitler or Pol Pot being involved.
So voting for Maidan would be voting for the devil you don't know over the two devils that you do know?
|
On September 11 2025 01:53 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2025 01:32 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 11 2025 01:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 11 2025 00:33 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 11 2025 00:23 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 10 2025 23:06 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 10 2025 16:15 Acrofales wrote:On September 10 2025 16:08 Razyda wrote:On September 10 2025 04:46 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 09 2025 23:57 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
You weren't really around for when they were first rationalizing "lesser evilism" , so I don't blame you, but yeah, they would. That's how "lesser evilism", as they've articulated it, works. You can verify that with any one of them.
It's objectively (and obviously) true that Republicans ≠ Democrats. I don't have to prove that to you, nor do I have to prove that I believe it to you or anyone else. That assertion is preposterous.
Seems you shouldn't go "ignor[ing] all that even when it was mentioned to [you] explicitly in the last page..." and fixate on your "alternative facts" that "don't care about feelings..." while self-congratulating with a "Owned [tankie punk]!"
I mean if my options are a) Pol Pot b) 1943 Hitler c) Trump, I would indeed vote Trump. But not against any R or D candidate from the past 100 years. If my options are a) Pol Pot and b) 1943 Hitler, I guess I might abstain. Wasn't that exactly GH position last election, for which he took a lot of heat? I don't think he took a lot of heat for that. I think he took a lot heat for advocating not voting, or voting third party, in the actual election between Trump and Harris. The point Drone is making is that clearly neither Trump nor Harris are as bad as Pol Pot or Hitler and thus holding your nose and voting for the lesser evil is not necessarily the path to hell. GH disagrees and seems to think the red line of unacceptable leaders was somewhere roughly 15 presidents ago, and since then they've all been Pol Pot levels of shit. Which is a pretty bad take and he deservedly took heat for. Definitely not my position, but it seems most everyone turned into non-voters/Trump voters/anti-Maidan without Pol Pot or Hitler. On September 10 2025 06:31 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 10 2025 05:03 Zambrah wrote:On September 10 2025 04:46 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 09 2025 23:57 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
You weren't really around for when they were first rationalizing "lesser evilism" , so I don't blame you, but yeah, they would. That's how "lesser evilism", as they've articulated it, works. You can verify that with any one of them.
It's objectively (and obviously) true that Republicans ≠ Democrats. I don't have to prove that to you, nor do I have to prove that I believe it to you or anyone else. That assertion is preposterous.
Seems you shouldn't go "ignor[ing] all that even when it was mentioned to [you] explicitly in the last page..." and fixate on your "alternative facts" that "don't care about feelings..." while self-congratulating with a "Owned [tankie punk]!"
I mean if my options are a) Pol Pot b) 1943 Hitler c) Trump, I would indeed vote Trump. But not against any R or D candidate from the past 100 years. If my options are a) Pol Pot and b) 1943 Hitler, I guess I might abstain. + Show Spoiler +
This does basically says exactly what GH said though (even though you arent american) you would vote for every Republican out of principle, based on what youve said here your principles on when to not vote for someone are somewhere between Trump and Hitler/Pol Pot and if Trump isnt close enough to Hitler/Pol Pot to prevent you from voting for him then the rest of the GOP probably aren't either.
I dont strictly grasp what point GH is making here, but this is the sort of response that I think hes referring to in his post.
Its not like this conversation hasnt been had here before either, its literally true that plenty of people here have said that they would vote for whoever is the lesser of two evils in basically any and every instance which means they would, out of that lesser of two evils principle, be willing to vote for Hitler, Pol Pot, Trump, every GOP scumbag etc.
What GH means to show by highlighting this sentiment Im too tired to glean, but from what I can see his post seems fairly correct + Show Spoiler +, if over broad if taken out of the context of this thread. Basically... Poll: I would vote forYou must be logged in to vote in this poll. ☐ Donald Trump
☐ Viktor Yanukovych
☐ Maidan
What conclusions and generalizations do you think we should be making about American voters, based on this sample size of five people on TL (some of whom might not even be American)? However many people respond, it's obviously specifically more applicable to posters/"lesser evilism" here. That said, depends on who votes for what. Which did you (or anyone else) choose? I guess that depends: Who would become the new president if there was a Maidan that somehow prevented both listed leaders from becoming president? Voting for a revolution doesn't really give us any information about who the new person in charge would be. Would it be Bernie Sanders? Would it be the revived corpse of Adolf Hitler? (Hitler isn't American, but neither is Yanukovych lol.) A Maidan might just be another "lesser of two three evils" scenario, right? Well, pretty sure you already chose... but okay. You don't typically know who the new president will be (or if there even will be one). Ukrainians didn't before/during EuroMaidan (it ending up being Zelenskyy indefinitely certainly wasn't known by the people in the streets). We can't reasonably expect to know before an AmeriMaidan. Voting for Maidan in this context is suspending/ending adherence to FPTP two-party (in the US) electoral "lesser evilism" politics, for mass direct action and potentially the forced removal of a democratically elected leader without Hitler or Pol Pot being involved. So voting for Maidan would be voting for the devil you don't know over the two devils that you do know?
Voting for Maidan in this context is suspending/ending adherence to FPTP two-party (in the US) electoral "lesser evilism" politics, for mass direct action and potentially the forced removal of a democratically elected leader without Hitler or Pol Pot being involved.
I don't know about/am not interested in this "devil" rhetoric.
|
How the revolution leads to a state that is not a 2 party system is not a question we should ask tho.
|
On September 11 2025 02:12 Gorsameth wrote:
How the revolution leads to a state that is not a 2 party system is not a question we should ask tho.
He's just using soundbites he heard from his local community college revolutionary after school club. He doesn't have answers to those, nor does he have a bonafide firm candidate to choose. Everyone is evil and there aren't any that should be allowed to "rule" after his non-violent but totally violent revolution takes place. Better to just move along.
|
On September 11 2025 00:33 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2025 00:23 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 10 2025 23:06 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 10 2025 16:15 Acrofales wrote:On September 10 2025 16:08 Razyda wrote:On September 10 2025 04:46 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 09 2025 23:57 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 09 2025 23:37 Jankisa wrote:On September 09 2025 23:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 09 2025 21:55 Jankisa wrote:[quote] That is the difference between you and me, GH, I don't believe that, I know plenty of Americans, I don't think many Democrats would vote for Trump just because he had D next to his name. + Show Spoiler +You derided Democrats for campaigning with Liz Chaney and blamed their electoral failings (partially) on that, that is completely incompatible with what you just wrote.
The fact that you do think that Democrats=Republcians says a lot about you and your view of the world, and to me just shows, once again that you hate the USA and are basically a Tankie. + Show Spoiler +I like the USA, I would be a very different and in many ways less successful and culturally very different person if the USA didn't exist, I don't think you can slot China in the place of USA and have the world be as cool of a place as it is. All of us certainty wouldn't be posting on a TL forum (US company/team) that was created by and for fans of a game like Starcraft.
Unfortunately, Republicans and all conservatives want the USA to be more like China and Russia, most (not even close to all) Democrat politicians want it to be like Clinton's USA or Thatcher's UK.
USA, like most other countries contains multitudes, unfortunately, you guys have a duopoly in your politics, which is a double edged sword, on the one hand, this duopoly makes sure that the pendulum keeps swinging, on the other, it flattens the parties quite a bit, but nowhere close to what you are trying to present it as. I'm talking about "lesser evilists" (which is basically everyone here and the overwhelming majority of the Democrat party). They literally could/would vote for Trump and any other Republican. This isn't disputable. I literally don't think Democrats=Republicans, so that isn't a fact. Republicans, by pretty much any metric, are worse than Democrats. Try to integrate that information into your next assessment please. You make 2 false assertions right from the get go. You can't just say something and pretend like it's an accepted truth. I very much doubt the vast majority of regular posters here who actually have the right to vote in the USA would ever vote for Trump, so that is very much disputable. You might not "think" that, but you write and act in a way where everyone who reads you can come to the conclusion that you do. The burden of proof is on you, and all you do, including this latest screed is to prove us otherwise. + Show Spoiler +Normal people who haven't had their brain fried by politics to the point you have understand that the only way any of us can go through life without losing our minds is by choosing the lesser evil.
In the last 2 presidential elections in Croatia I bit my tongue and voted for a guy who I have a very low opinion of, mostly because from a Social Democrat he turned into a Trump cosplaying populist who seems to be on the take from Russia, but, he is smart, eloquent and shares most of my values, he also doesn't have a lot of power and he serves as a counterweight to our criminal organization party in power.
I could have purity tested him and said fuck this, encouraged most of my friends and family to do the same and split the vote or vote for our version of a Republican, but I didn't, because I choose the lesser evil.
That is an adult thing to do. And I'm OK with my choice, he's still an asshole to Ukraine, but he is the only part of our national voice who spends time criticizing Israel. You get some, you lose some, that's life. You weren't really around for when they were first rationalizing "lesser evilism" , so I don't blame you, but yeah, they would. That's how "lesser evilism", as they've articulated it, works. You can verify that with any one of them. It's objectively (and obviously) true that Republicans ≠ Democrats. I don't have to prove that to you, nor do I have to prove that I believe it to you or anyone else. That assertion is preposterous. Seems you shouldn't go "ignor[ing] all that even when it was mentioned to [you] explicitly in the last page..." and fixate on your "alternative facts" that "don't care about feelings..." while self-congratulating with a "Owned [tankie punk]!" I mean if my options are a) Pol Pot b) 1943 Hitler c) Trump, I would indeed vote Trump. But not against any R or D candidate from the past 100 years. If my options are a) Pol Pot and b) 1943 Hitler, I guess I might abstain. Wasn't that exactly GH position last election, for which he took a lot of heat? I don't think he took a lot of heat for that. I think he took a lot heat for advocating not voting, or voting third party, in the actual election between Trump and Harris. The point Drone is making is that clearly neither Trump nor Harris are as bad as Pol Pot or Hitler and thus holding your nose and voting for the lesser evil is not necessarily the path to hell. GH disagrees and seems to think the red line of unacceptable leaders was somewhere roughly 15 presidents ago, and since then they've all been Pol Pot levels of shit. Which is a pretty bad take and he deservedly took heat for. Definitely not my position, but it seems most everyone turned into non-voters/Trump voters/anti-Maidan without Pol Pot or Hitler. On September 10 2025 06:31 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 10 2025 05:03 Zambrah wrote:On September 10 2025 04:46 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 09 2025 23:57 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 09 2025 23:37 Jankisa wrote:On September 09 2025 23:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 09 2025 21:55 Jankisa wrote:[quote] That is the difference between you and me, GH, I don't believe that, I know plenty of Americans, I don't think many Democrats would vote for Trump just because he had D next to his name. + Show Spoiler +You derided Democrats for campaigning with Liz Chaney and blamed their electoral failings (partially) on that, that is completely incompatible with what you just wrote.
The fact that you do think that Democrats=Republcians says a lot about you and your view of the world, and to me just shows, once again that you hate the USA and are basically a Tankie. + Show Spoiler +I like the USA, I would be a very different and in many ways less successful and culturally very different person if the USA didn't exist, I don't think you can slot China in the place of USA and have the world be as cool of a place as it is. All of us certainty wouldn't be posting on a TL forum (US company/team) that was created by and for fans of a game like Starcraft.
Unfortunately, Republicans and all conservatives want the USA to be more like China and Russia, most (not even close to all) Democrat politicians want it to be like Clinton's USA or Thatcher's UK.
USA, like most other countries contains multitudes, unfortunately, you guys have a duopoly in your politics, which is a double edged sword, on the one hand, this duopoly makes sure that the pendulum keeps swinging, on the other, it flattens the parties quite a bit, but nowhere close to what you are trying to present it as. I'm talking about "lesser evilists" (which is basically everyone here and the overwhelming majority of the Democrat party). They literally could/would vote for Trump and any other Republican. This isn't disputable. I literally don't think Democrats=Republicans, so that isn't a fact. Republicans, by pretty much any metric, are worse than Democrats. Try to integrate that information into your next assessment please. You make 2 false assertions right from the get go. You can't just say something and pretend like it's an accepted truth. I very much doubt the vast majority of regular posters here who actually have the right to vote in the USA would ever vote for Trump, so that is very much disputable. You might not "think" that, but you write and act in a way where everyone who reads you can come to the conclusion that you do. The burden of proof is on you, and all you do, including this latest screed is to prove us otherwise. + Show Spoiler +Normal people who haven't had their brain fried by politics to the point you have understand that the only way any of us can go through life without losing our minds is by choosing the lesser evil.
In the last 2 presidential elections in Croatia I bit my tongue and voted for a guy who I have a very low opinion of, mostly because from a Social Democrat he turned into a Trump cosplaying populist who seems to be on the take from Russia, but, he is smart, eloquent and shares most of my values, he also doesn't have a lot of power and he serves as a counterweight to our criminal organization party in power.
I could have purity tested him and said fuck this, encouraged most of my friends and family to do the same and split the vote or vote for our version of a Republican, but I didn't, because I choose the lesser evil.
That is an adult thing to do. And I'm OK with my choice, he's still an asshole to Ukraine, but he is the only part of our national voice who spends time criticizing Israel. You get some, you lose some, that's life. You weren't really around for when they were first rationalizing "lesser evilism" , so I don't blame you, but yeah, they would. That's how "lesser evilism", as they've articulated it, works. You can verify that with any one of them. It's objectively (and obviously) true that Republicans ≠ Democrats. I don't have to prove that to you, nor do I have to prove that I believe it to you or anyone else. That assertion is preposterous. Seems you shouldn't go "ignor[ing] all that even when it was mentioned to [you] explicitly in the last page..." and fixate on your "alternative facts" that "don't care about feelings..." while self-congratulating with a "Owned [tankie punk]!" I mean if my options are a) Pol Pot b) 1943 Hitler c) Trump, I would indeed vote Trump. But not against any R or D candidate from the past 100 years. If my options are a) Pol Pot and b) 1943 Hitler, I guess I might abstain. + Show Spoiler +
This does basically says exactly what GH said though (even though you arent american) you would vote for every Republican out of principle, based on what youve said here your principles on when to not vote for someone are somewhere between Trump and Hitler/Pol Pot and if Trump isnt close enough to Hitler/Pol Pot to prevent you from voting for him then the rest of the GOP probably aren't either.
I dont strictly grasp what point GH is making here, but this is the sort of response that I think hes referring to in his post.
Its not like this conversation hasnt been had here before either, its literally true that plenty of people here have said that they would vote for whoever is the lesser of two evils in basically any and every instance which means they would, out of that lesser of two evils principle, be willing to vote for Hitler, Pol Pot, Trump, every GOP scumbag etc.
What GH means to show by highlighting this sentiment Im too tired to glean, but from what I can see his post seems fairly correct + Show Spoiler +, if over broad if taken out of the context of this thread. Basically... Poll: I would vote forYou must be logged in to vote in this poll. ☐ Donald Trump
☐ Viktor Yanukovych
☐ Maidan
What conclusions and generalizations do you think we should be making about American voters, based on this sample size of five people on TL (some of whom might not even be American)? However many people respond, it's obviously specifically more applicable to posters/"lesser evilism" here. That said, depends on who votes for what. Which did you (or anyone else) choose?
I didn't, the options are nonsensical.
There's nothing about stamping a ballot that prevents you from going out in the street. The people that did Euromaidan, no one dug into their brain to check if they had voted in the Yanukovich/Tymoshenko election and sent them back home due to lack of revolutionary credentials if yes. You are allowed to do both.
Your TL poll is single choice, there's no choice between voting and direct action in the real world, they're parallel things. Whether you go to the voting booth and what you do there; whether you go to the town square and what you do there - these are completely separate.
Not only that, but it's the optimal move for Maidan fans to hedge with voting. If Maidan happened instantly and was successful, the vote didn't matter, you lost 30min of your life or however long it took you to vote and nothing else. If Maidan was late or didn't happen at all, as you can see the difference in misery can be significant depending on who won.
You know all of this already, you are capable of understanding 5th grade logic. We don't have to rehash it every other month.
|
Zelensky wasn't the leader that came out of the Maidan either. They had an election after the Maidan, useing the same system they had before, which elected a new leader that had nothing to do with the revolution, beause people were unhappy with what the revolution gave to them. If anything the Russian invasion of Crimea was as a result of Maidan, I wouldn't call the Maidan a sucsessful example of a revolution nor were the people rewarded for their efforts.
Useing Ukraine as an example its like saying we had a Maidan as Nixon resigned due to watergate. Viktor was supposed to be the candidate that would bring them to Europe and away from Russia.
|
On September 11 2025 02:01 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2025 01:53 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 11 2025 01:32 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 11 2025 01:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 11 2025 00:33 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 11 2025 00:23 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 10 2025 23:06 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 10 2025 16:15 Acrofales wrote:On September 10 2025 16:08 Razyda wrote:On September 10 2025 04:46 Liquid`Drone wrote:
[quote]
I mean if my options are a) Pol Pot b) 1943 Hitler c) Trump, I would indeed vote Trump. But not against any R or D candidate from the past 100 years.
If my options are a) Pol Pot and b) 1943 Hitler, I guess I might abstain.
Wasn't that exactly GH position last election, for which he took a lot of heat? I don't think he took a lot of heat for that. I think he took a lot heat for advocating not voting, or voting third party, in the actual election between Trump and Harris. The point Drone is making is that clearly neither Trump nor Harris are as bad as Pol Pot or Hitler and thus holding your nose and voting for the lesser evil is not necessarily the path to hell. GH disagrees and seems to think the red line of unacceptable leaders was somewhere roughly 15 presidents ago, and since then they've all been Pol Pot levels of shit. Which is a pretty bad take and he deservedly took heat for. Definitely not my position, but it seems most everyone turned into non-voters/Trump voters/anti-Maidan without Pol Pot or Hitler. On September 10 2025 06:31 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 10 2025 05:03 Zambrah wrote:On September 10 2025 04:46 Liquid`Drone wrote:
[quote]
I mean if my options are a) Pol Pot b) 1943 Hitler c) Trump, I would indeed vote Trump. But not against any R or D candidate from the past 100 years.
If my options are a) Pol Pot and b) 1943 Hitler, I guess I might abstain.
+ Show Spoiler +
This does basically says exactly what GH said though (even though you arent american) you would vote for every Republican out of principle, based on what youve said here your principles on when to not vote for someone are somewhere between Trump and Hitler/Pol Pot and if Trump isnt close enough to Hitler/Pol Pot to prevent you from voting for him then the rest of the GOP probably aren't either.
I dont strictly grasp what point GH is making here, but this is the sort of response that I think hes referring to in his post.
Its not like this conversation hasnt been had here before either, its literally true that plenty of people here have said that they would vote for whoever is the lesser of two evils in basically any and every instance which means they would, out of that lesser of two evils principle, be willing to vote for Hitler, Pol Pot, Trump, every GOP scumbag etc.
What GH means to show by highlighting this sentiment Im too tired to glean, but from what I can see his post seems fairly correct + Show Spoiler +, if over broad if taken out of the context of this thread. Basically... Poll: I would vote forYou must be logged in to vote in this poll. ☐ Donald Trump
☐ Viktor Yanukovych
☐ Maidan
What conclusions and generalizations do you think we should be making about American voters, based on this sample size of five people on TL (some of whom might not even be American)? However many people respond, it's obviously specifically more applicable to posters/"lesser evilism" here. That said, depends on who votes for what. Which did you (or anyone else) choose? I guess that depends: Who would become the new president if there was a Maidan that somehow prevented both listed leaders from becoming president? Voting for a revolution doesn't really give us any information about who the new person in charge would be. Would it be Bernie Sanders? Would it be the revived corpse of Adolf Hitler? (Hitler isn't American, but neither is Yanukovych lol.) A Maidan might just be another "lesser of two three evils" scenario, right? Well, pretty sure you already chose... but okay. You don't typically know who the new president will be (or if there even will be one). Ukrainians didn't before/during EuroMaidan (it ending up being Zelenskyy indefinitely certainly wasn't known by the people in the streets). We can't reasonably expect to know before an AmeriMaidan. Voting for Maidan in this context is suspending/ending adherence to FPTP two-party (in the US) electoral "lesser evilism" politics, for mass direct action and potentially the forced removal of a democratically elected leader without Hitler or Pol Pot being involved. So voting for Maidan would be voting for the devil you don't know over the two devils that you do know? Voting for Maidan in this context is suspending/ending adherence to FPTP two-party (in the US) electoral "lesser evilism" politics, for mass direct action and potentially the forced removal of a democratically elected leader without Hitler or Pol Pot being involved. I don't know about/am not interested in this "devil" rhetoric.
Not knowing anything about this revolution doesn't sit well with me. AmeriMaidan could go very well or very poorly, or somewhere in the middle. It depends on what the new politics are, who the new leader is, how elections will work in the future (if there are any), etc. Advocating for a revolution without any context doesn't actually mean that things will necessarily get better. Are you in charge of the revolution? Am I in charge? Is MAGA in charge? Voting completely in the dark, without knowing what you're voting for, might do even more damage than voting for a lesser of two known evils. That was the tie-in between when I said "voting for the devil you don't know over the two devils that you do know" and when you said that you were "talking about "lesser evilists"".
|
United States43511 Posts
On September 11 2025 01:32 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2025 01:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 11 2025 00:33 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 11 2025 00:23 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 10 2025 23:06 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 10 2025 16:15 Acrofales wrote:On September 10 2025 16:08 Razyda wrote:On September 10 2025 04:46 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 09 2025 23:57 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 09 2025 23:37 Jankisa wrote:[quote] You make 2 false assertions right from the get go. You can't just say something and pretend like it's an accepted truth. I very much doubt the vast majority of regular posters here who actually have the right to vote in the USA would ever vote for Trump, so that is very much disputable. You might not "think" that, but you write and act in a way where everyone who reads you can come to the conclusion that you do. The burden of proof is on you, and all you do, including this latest screed is to prove us otherwise. + Show Spoiler +Normal people who haven't had their brain fried by politics to the point you have understand that the only way any of us can go through life without losing our minds is by choosing the lesser evil.
In the last 2 presidential elections in Croatia I bit my tongue and voted for a guy who I have a very low opinion of, mostly because from a Social Democrat he turned into a Trump cosplaying populist who seems to be on the take from Russia, but, he is smart, eloquent and shares most of my values, he also doesn't have a lot of power and he serves as a counterweight to our criminal organization party in power.
I could have purity tested him and said fuck this, encouraged most of my friends and family to do the same and split the vote or vote for our version of a Republican, but I didn't, because I choose the lesser evil.
That is an adult thing to do. And I'm OK with my choice, he's still an asshole to Ukraine, but he is the only part of our national voice who spends time criticizing Israel. You get some, you lose some, that's life. You weren't really around for when they were first rationalizing "lesser evilism" , so I don't blame you, but yeah, they would. That's how "lesser evilism", as they've articulated it, works. You can verify that with any one of them. It's objectively (and obviously) true that Republicans ≠ Democrats. I don't have to prove that to you, nor do I have to prove that I believe it to you or anyone else. That assertion is preposterous. Seems you shouldn't go "ignor[ing] all that even when it was mentioned to [you] explicitly in the last page..." and fixate on your "alternative facts" that "don't care about feelings..." while self-congratulating with a "Owned [tankie punk]!" I mean if my options are a) Pol Pot b) 1943 Hitler c) Trump, I would indeed vote Trump. But not against any R or D candidate from the past 100 years. If my options are a) Pol Pot and b) 1943 Hitler, I guess I might abstain. Wasn't that exactly GH position last election, for which he took a lot of heat? I don't think he took a lot of heat for that. I think he took a lot heat for advocating not voting, or voting third party, in the actual election between Trump and Harris. The point Drone is making is that clearly neither Trump nor Harris are as bad as Pol Pot or Hitler and thus holding your nose and voting for the lesser evil is not necessarily the path to hell. GH disagrees and seems to think the red line of unacceptable leaders was somewhere roughly 15 presidents ago, and since then they've all been Pol Pot levels of shit. Which is a pretty bad take and he deservedly took heat for. Definitely not my position, but it seems most everyone turned into non-voters/Trump voters/anti-Maidan without Pol Pot or Hitler. On September 10 2025 06:31 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 10 2025 05:03 Zambrah wrote:On September 10 2025 04:46 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 09 2025 23:57 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 09 2025 23:37 Jankisa wrote:[quote] You make 2 false assertions right from the get go. You can't just say something and pretend like it's an accepted truth. I very much doubt the vast majority of regular posters here who actually have the right to vote in the USA would ever vote for Trump, so that is very much disputable. You might not "think" that, but you write and act in a way where everyone who reads you can come to the conclusion that you do. The burden of proof is on you, and all you do, including this latest screed is to prove us otherwise. + Show Spoiler +Normal people who haven't had their brain fried by politics to the point you have understand that the only way any of us can go through life without losing our minds is by choosing the lesser evil.
In the last 2 presidential elections in Croatia I bit my tongue and voted for a guy who I have a very low opinion of, mostly because from a Social Democrat he turned into a Trump cosplaying populist who seems to be on the take from Russia, but, he is smart, eloquent and shares most of my values, he also doesn't have a lot of power and he serves as a counterweight to our criminal organization party in power.
I could have purity tested him and said fuck this, encouraged most of my friends and family to do the same and split the vote or vote for our version of a Republican, but I didn't, because I choose the lesser evil.
That is an adult thing to do. And I'm OK with my choice, he's still an asshole to Ukraine, but he is the only part of our national voice who spends time criticizing Israel. You get some, you lose some, that's life. You weren't really around for when they were first rationalizing "lesser evilism" , so I don't blame you, but yeah, they would. That's how "lesser evilism", as they've articulated it, works. You can verify that with any one of them. It's objectively (and obviously) true that Republicans ≠ Democrats. I don't have to prove that to you, nor do I have to prove that I believe it to you or anyone else. That assertion is preposterous. Seems you shouldn't go "ignor[ing] all that even when it was mentioned to [you] explicitly in the last page..." and fixate on your "alternative facts" that "don't care about feelings..." while self-congratulating with a "Owned [tankie punk]!" I mean if my options are a) Pol Pot b) 1943 Hitler c) Trump, I would indeed vote Trump. But not against any R or D candidate from the past 100 years. If my options are a) Pol Pot and b) 1943 Hitler, I guess I might abstain. + Show Spoiler +
This does basically says exactly what GH said though (even though you arent american) you would vote for every Republican out of principle, based on what youve said here your principles on when to not vote for someone are somewhere between Trump and Hitler/Pol Pot and if Trump isnt close enough to Hitler/Pol Pot to prevent you from voting for him then the rest of the GOP probably aren't either.
I dont strictly grasp what point GH is making here, but this is the sort of response that I think hes referring to in his post.
Its not like this conversation hasnt been had here before either, its literally true that plenty of people here have said that they would vote for whoever is the lesser of two evils in basically any and every instance which means they would, out of that lesser of two evils principle, be willing to vote for Hitler, Pol Pot, Trump, every GOP scumbag etc.
What GH means to show by highlighting this sentiment Im too tired to glean, but from what I can see his post seems fairly correct + Show Spoiler +, if over broad if taken out of the context of this thread. Basically... Poll: I would vote forYou must be logged in to vote in this poll. ☐ Donald Trump
☐ Viktor Yanukovych
☐ Maidan
What conclusions and generalizations do you think we should be making about American voters, based on this sample size of five people on TL (some of whom might not even be American)? However many people respond, it's obviously specifically more applicable to posters/"lesser evilism" here. That said, depends on who votes for what. Which did you (or anyone else) choose? I guess that depends: Who would become the new president if there was a Maidan that somehow prevented both listed leaders from becoming president? Voting for a revolution doesn't really give us any information about who the new person in charge would be. Would it be Bernie Sanders? Would it be the revived corpse of Adolf Hitler? (Hitler isn't American, but neither is Yanukovych lol.) A Maidan might just be another "lesser of two three evils" scenario, right? Well, pretty sure you already chose... but okay. You don't typically know who the new president will be (or if there even will be one). Ukrainians didn't before/during EuroMaidan (it ending up being Zelenskyy indefinitely certainly wasn't known by the people in the streets). We can't reasonably expect to know before an AmeriMaidan. Voting for Maidan in this context is suspending/ending adherence to FPTP two-party (in the US) electoral "lesser evilism" politics, for mass direct action and potentially the forced removal of a democratically elected leader without Hitler or Pol Pot being involved.
The Maidan did not bring Zelenskyy to power. That’s a Russian talking point that you’ve repeatedly said and repeatedly been corrected on. There was a subsequent democratic election that was internationally recognized between the Maidan and Zelenskyy. That election brought Zelenskyy to power in the normal way, no revolution involved.
|
On September 11 2025 03:42 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2025 01:32 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 11 2025 01:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 11 2025 00:33 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 11 2025 00:23 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 10 2025 23:06 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 10 2025 16:15 Acrofales wrote:On September 10 2025 16:08 Razyda wrote:On September 10 2025 04:46 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 09 2025 23:57 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
You weren't really around for when they were first rationalizing "lesser evilism" , so I don't blame you, but yeah, they would. That's how "lesser evilism", as they've articulated it, works. You can verify that with any one of them.
It's objectively (and obviously) true that Republicans ≠ Democrats. I don't have to prove that to you, nor do I have to prove that I believe it to you or anyone else. That assertion is preposterous.
Seems you shouldn't go "ignor[ing] all that even when it was mentioned to [you] explicitly in the last page..." and fixate on your "alternative facts" that "don't care about feelings..." while self-congratulating with a "Owned [tankie punk]!"
I mean if my options are a) Pol Pot b) 1943 Hitler c) Trump, I would indeed vote Trump. But not against any R or D candidate from the past 100 years. If my options are a) Pol Pot and b) 1943 Hitler, I guess I might abstain. Wasn't that exactly GH position last election, for which he took a lot of heat? I don't think he took a lot of heat for that. I think he took a lot heat for advocating not voting, or voting third party, in the actual election between Trump and Harris. The point Drone is making is that clearly neither Trump nor Harris are as bad as Pol Pot or Hitler and thus holding your nose and voting for the lesser evil is not necessarily the path to hell. GH disagrees and seems to think the red line of unacceptable leaders was somewhere roughly 15 presidents ago, and since then they've all been Pol Pot levels of shit. Which is a pretty bad take and he deservedly took heat for. Definitely not my position, but it seems most everyone turned into non-voters/Trump voters/anti-Maidan without Pol Pot or Hitler. On September 10 2025 06:31 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 10 2025 05:03 Zambrah wrote:On September 10 2025 04:46 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 09 2025 23:57 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
You weren't really around for when they were first rationalizing "lesser evilism" , so I don't blame you, but yeah, they would. That's how "lesser evilism", as they've articulated it, works. You can verify that with any one of them.
It's objectively (and obviously) true that Republicans ≠ Democrats. I don't have to prove that to you, nor do I have to prove that I believe it to you or anyone else. That assertion is preposterous.
Seems you shouldn't go "ignor[ing] all that even when it was mentioned to [you] explicitly in the last page..." and fixate on your "alternative facts" that "don't care about feelings..." while self-congratulating with a "Owned [tankie punk]!"
I mean if my options are a) Pol Pot b) 1943 Hitler c) Trump, I would indeed vote Trump. But not against any R or D candidate from the past 100 years. If my options are a) Pol Pot and b) 1943 Hitler, I guess I might abstain. + Show Spoiler +
This does basically says exactly what GH said though (even though you arent american) you would vote for every Republican out of principle, based on what youve said here your principles on when to not vote for someone are somewhere between Trump and Hitler/Pol Pot and if Trump isnt close enough to Hitler/Pol Pot to prevent you from voting for him then the rest of the GOP probably aren't either.
I dont strictly grasp what point GH is making here, but this is the sort of response that I think hes referring to in his post.
Its not like this conversation hasnt been had here before either, its literally true that plenty of people here have said that they would vote for whoever is the lesser of two evils in basically any and every instance which means they would, out of that lesser of two evils principle, be willing to vote for Hitler, Pol Pot, Trump, every GOP scumbag etc.
What GH means to show by highlighting this sentiment Im too tired to glean, but from what I can see his post seems fairly correct + Show Spoiler +, if over broad if taken out of the context of this thread. Basically... Poll: I would vote forYou must be logged in to vote in this poll. ☐ Donald Trump
☐ Viktor Yanukovych
☐ Maidan
What conclusions and generalizations do you think we should be making about American voters, based on this sample size of five people on TL (some of whom might not even be American)? However many people respond, it's obviously specifically more applicable to posters/"lesser evilism" here. That said, depends on who votes for what. Which did you (or anyone else) choose? I guess that depends: Who would become the new president if there was a Maidan that somehow prevented both listed leaders from becoming president? Voting for a revolution doesn't really give us any information about who the new person in charge would be. Would it be Bernie Sanders? Would it be the revived corpse of Adolf Hitler? (Hitler isn't American, but neither is Yanukovych lol.) A Maidan might just be another "lesser of two three evils" scenario, right? Well, pretty sure you already chose... but okay. You don't typically know who the new president will be (or if there even will be one). Ukrainians didn't before/during EuroMaidan (it ending up being Zelenskyy indefinitely certainly wasn't known by the people in the streets). We can't reasonably expect to know before an AmeriMaidan. Voting for Maidan in this context is suspending/ending adherence to FPTP two-party (in the US) electoral "lesser evilism" politics, for mass direct action and potentially the forced removal of a democratically elected leader without Hitler or Pol Pot being involved. The Maidan did not bring Zelenskyy to power. That’s a Russian talking point that you’ve repeatedly said and repeatedly been corrected on. There was a subsequent democratic election that was internationally recognized between the Maidan and Zelenskyy. That election brought Zelenskyy to power in the normal way, no revolution involved.
The American Revolution gave us Donald Trump!
|
Oh, nonono, what GH implicated in the other thread is that Maidan was a violent, foreign instagated coup and that the call that so many Russian propagandists (including the ones from the thread that posted it very recently) keep bringing up between the EU and American ambassador stating their perferences (of which no one came into power) is the ultimate proof of that.
The facts, tho, bare a different picture. The parties that were there before Maidan were there after it, people voted, a president was picked and despite that president later losing to Zelenskyy he's still a Zelenskyy supporter.
If it ever happens, and I did say that in my opinion, if the current trends continue Republicans/MAGA coalition won't give up power without it, but after this "AmeriMaidan" the most logical outcome is still a Democratic party with Republicans splintering into two or three parties.
I would love to see Democrats splintered as well, SocDems and others, while existing and problematic in some ways are still there, the issue is that they are all being smothered by the duopoly.
But the current issue is not the duopoly, even tho it does carry the most blame for getting America where it is, the issue is populism, Trump, fascism and guys cheering it on.
|
Charlie Kirk has been shot in Utah at an event.@dailymail
onservative influencer and Turning Point CEO Charlie Kirk has reportedly been shot after gunfire rang out at an event at Utah Valley University on Wednesday.
Chaos erupted at Kirk's Q & A session and students ran for safety.
The right-wing firebrand, 31, was reportedly shot in the neck area and a suspect is in custody following the shooting.
Jesus...
|
On September 11 2025 03:42 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2025 01:32 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 11 2025 01:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 11 2025 00:33 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 11 2025 00:23 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 10 2025 23:06 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 10 2025 16:15 Acrofales wrote:On September 10 2025 16:08 Razyda wrote:On September 10 2025 04:46 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 09 2025 23:57 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
You weren't really around for when they were first rationalizing "lesser evilism" , so I don't blame you, but yeah, they would. That's how "lesser evilism", as they've articulated it, works. You can verify that with any one of them.
It's objectively (and obviously) true that Republicans ≠ Democrats. I don't have to prove that to you, nor do I have to prove that I believe it to you or anyone else. That assertion is preposterous.
Seems you shouldn't go "ignor[ing] all that even when it was mentioned to [you] explicitly in the last page..." and fixate on your "alternative facts" that "don't care about feelings..." while self-congratulating with a "Owned [tankie punk]!"
I mean if my options are a) Pol Pot b) 1943 Hitler c) Trump, I would indeed vote Trump. But not against any R or D candidate from the past 100 years. If my options are a) Pol Pot and b) 1943 Hitler, I guess I might abstain. Wasn't that exactly GH position last election, for which he took a lot of heat? I don't think he took a lot of heat for that. I think he took a lot heat for advocating not voting, or voting third party, in the actual election between Trump and Harris. The point Drone is making is that clearly neither Trump nor Harris are as bad as Pol Pot or Hitler and thus holding your nose and voting for the lesser evil is not necessarily the path to hell. GH disagrees and seems to think the red line of unacceptable leaders was somewhere roughly 15 presidents ago, and since then they've all been Pol Pot levels of shit. Which is a pretty bad take and he deservedly took heat for. Definitely not my position, but it seems most everyone turned into non-voters/Trump voters/anti-Maidan without Pol Pot or Hitler. On September 10 2025 06:31 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 10 2025 05:03 Zambrah wrote:On September 10 2025 04:46 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 09 2025 23:57 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
You weren't really around for when they were first rationalizing "lesser evilism" , so I don't blame you, but yeah, they would. That's how "lesser evilism", as they've articulated it, works. You can verify that with any one of them.
It's objectively (and obviously) true that Republicans ≠ Democrats. I don't have to prove that to you, nor do I have to prove that I believe it to you or anyone else. That assertion is preposterous.
Seems you shouldn't go "ignor[ing] all that even when it was mentioned to [you] explicitly in the last page..." and fixate on your "alternative facts" that "don't care about feelings..." while self-congratulating with a "Owned [tankie punk]!"
I mean if my options are a) Pol Pot b) 1943 Hitler c) Trump, I would indeed vote Trump. But not against any R or D candidate from the past 100 years. If my options are a) Pol Pot and b) 1943 Hitler, I guess I might abstain. + Show Spoiler +
This does basically says exactly what GH said though (even though you arent american) you would vote for every Republican out of principle, based on what youve said here your principles on when to not vote for someone are somewhere between Trump and Hitler/Pol Pot and if Trump isnt close enough to Hitler/Pol Pot to prevent you from voting for him then the rest of the GOP probably aren't either.
I dont strictly grasp what point GH is making here, but this is the sort of response that I think hes referring to in his post.
Its not like this conversation hasnt been had here before either, its literally true that plenty of people here have said that they would vote for whoever is the lesser of two evils in basically any and every instance which means they would, out of that lesser of two evils principle, be willing to vote for Hitler, Pol Pot, Trump, every GOP scumbag etc.
What GH means to show by highlighting this sentiment Im too tired to glean, but from what I can see his post seems fairly correct + Show Spoiler +, if over broad if taken out of the context of this thread. Basically... Poll: I would vote forYou must be logged in to vote in this poll. ☐ Donald Trump
☐ Viktor Yanukovych
☐ Maidan
What conclusions and generalizations do you think we should be making about American voters, based on this sample size of five people on TL (some of whom might not even be American)? However many people respond, it's obviously specifically more applicable to posters/"lesser evilism" here. That said, depends on who votes for what. Which did you (or anyone else) choose? I guess that depends: Who would become the new president if there was a Maidan that somehow prevented both listed leaders from becoming president? Voting for a revolution doesn't really give us any information about who the new person in charge would be. Would it be Bernie Sanders? Would it be the revived corpse of Adolf Hitler? (Hitler isn't American, but neither is Yanukovych lol.) A Maidan might just be another "lesser of two three evils" scenario, right? Well, pretty sure you already chose... but okay. You don't typically know who the new president will be (or if there even will be one). Ukrainians didn't before/during EuroMaidan (it ending up being Zelenskyy indefinitely certainly wasn't known by the people in the streets). We can't reasonably expect to know before an AmeriMaidan. Voting for Maidan in this context is suspending/ending adherence to FPTP two-party (in the US) electoral "lesser evilism" politics, for mass direct action and potentially the forced removal of a democratically elected leader without Hitler or Pol Pot being involved. The Maidan did not bring Zelenskyy to power. That’s a Russian talking point that you’ve repeatedly said and repeatedly been corrected on. There was a subsequent democratic election that was internationally recognized between the Maidan and Zelenskyy. That election brought Zelenskyy to power in the normal way, no revolution involved.
There was an interim government followed by two elections. The first won by Poroshenko, the second by Zelensky. I have no idea how anyone can take GH seriously. He is completely clueless.
On September 11 2025 04:07 Doublemint wrote:Charlie Kirk has been shot in Utah at an event.@dailymail Show nested quote +onservative influencer and Turning Point CEO Charlie Kirk has reportedly been shot after gunfire rang out at an event at Utah Valley University on Wednesday.
Chaos erupted at Kirk's Q & A session and students ran for safety.
The right-wing firebrand, 31, was reportedly shot in the neck area and a suspect is in custody following the shooting. Jesus...
The Christofascists said their takeover would be bloodless if the liberals let it. Guess they were right. Ironic. ;-)
|
|
|
On September 11 2025 03:06 Sermokala wrote:
Zelensky wasn't the leader that came out of the Maidan either. They had an election after the Maidan, useing the same system they had before, which elected a new leader that had nothing to do with the revolution, beause people were unhappy with what the revolution gave to them. If anything the Russian invasion of Crimea was as a result of Maidan, I wouldn't call the Maidan a sucsessful example of a revolution nor were the people rewarded for their efforts.
Useing Ukraine as an example its like saying we had a Maidan as Nixon resigned due to watergate. Viktor was supposed to be the candidate that would bring them to Europe and away from Russia.
That's wrong. Poroshenko was a supporter of the protests from the start. It's what made him popular. Without it he wouldn't have become president. Zelenskyy's election in contrast was not because of Euromaidan. He won as a political outsider against corruption.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
