• corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    26
    ·
    edit-2
    2 hours ago

    If people rejected the least-worse option for Gaza because she was only the least-worse option for Gaza, then blame rests in the hands of a bunch of people who lack the reasoning power god gave a gnat.

    (Edit – so many downvoters against harm reduction. Hockey helmets and seat belts are a good thing)

    • Krono@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      Do you ever wrestle with the moral implications of this?

      If the “least-worse” option that your system produces is aiding and abetting a genocide, then the only moral option is to destroy the system.

      If this is truly the reality of the American system, that genocide is unavoidable, then almost everything is justified. If the Greatest Generation were alive today there would be fascist blood in the streets.

    • herseycokguzelolacak@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      Kamala Harris could have been the president today if she had not run on a pro-genocide platform. She miscalculated, and lost the election as a result.

      • NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Nah, she’s was a genuinely terrible candidate. Her polling was bad enough in the lead up to the 2020 primaries that she dropped out before any of the initial votes came in. Even had Biden not tried to run again and the DNC had hosted primaries in 2024 i’m certain other candidates would have gotten more support.

    • mrdown@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      There was no least worse. Both parties are giving billions to israel to continue the war of extermination and lied about the cease fire talks

    • CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      Why argue that she still deserved everyone’s votes because she’s “the least worse?” Why not make an argument for why you think she made the right decision supporting a genocide? You’re framing this as if she were forced into this position and we should have accepted that, which is completely ludicrous.

      • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        2 days ago

        Why argue that she still deserved everyone’s votes because she’s “the least worse?”

        Because they want no better.

        • Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          They’re fine that POTUS “supports babies being mass murdered abroad”, their problem is that from the two “baby mass murdering in another land supporting” candidates, the one who won is the one that in the US does not do what they would rather they do.

          It’s not at all a Moral stand, it’s a What’s Best For Me stand sleazily being spinned as a Moral stand.