• Scubus@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    15 hours ago

    Yes, democrats are vegetative. You can see my comment history, im the first one to point that out. But you are even worse than democrats if you actually thought that trump was the winning option.

      • Scubus@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 hours ago

        🤦

        I’m going to assume you are being intentionally obtuse. Its very simple.

        Trump bad.

        Any other option good in comparison.

        Arguing good option bad means you are arguing in bad faith.

        • MisterScruffy@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          31 minutes ago

          Yes Trump bad, that’s why I want the dems to run a candidate that isn’t a delusional failure so that we can keep Trump from doing bad things. The only way that “good” people can stop bad people is by winning power.

        • Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Any other good in comparison

          Arguing good option bad…

          The second line doesn’t logically follow from the first - you’re talking about a relatively better option all the way to that top line and then you switch from “better than other” to “good” - it’s like going about how in a choice between being knifed twice versus being knifed just once the “just knifed once” is good in comparison and then jumping from that to saying that getting knifed once is good.

          Even beyond that totally illogical jump, the other flaw of logic is treating each election as a unique totally independent choice whose results have no impact on the options available on subsequent choices - I.e. that who the Democrat Party puts forwards and who the Republic Party puts forwards as candidates in an election isn’t at all influenced by how the electorate responded to previous candidates they put forward in previous elections - it is absolutely valid for people to refuse to vote for Kamala to “send a message to the Democrat Party” (I.e. to try to influence the candidates the party puts forward in subsequence election) and it’s around the validity or not of risking 4 years of Trump to try and get an acceptable Democrat candidate in at the end of it that the discussion should be (and there are valid points both ways) not the hyper-reductive falacy you seem so wedded to.

          Choices in the real world are a bit more multi faceted and with much more elements and implications than that self-serving “simpleton” slogan the DNC pushed out in its propaganda which you are parroting.

        • futatorius@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 hours ago

          I think it’s fair to say that, notwithstanding the badness of Trump, the Democratic Party needs vast improvement if it’s going to be part of an effective opposition to Trump and his gang of MAGAfascist oligarchs and lumpen God-bothering thugs. I’d even go so far as to say that, if any resistance emerges beyond finger-pointing and bleating, it won’t originate with the Democrats.