Kansas Crimson

jfish26 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2024 11:56 am

BiggDick wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2024 11:51 am

jfish26 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2024 11:16 am I mean, of course the fate of the Palestinians "could have been any worse than it already has been under Biden/Harris"

and, for the sake of not scampering away - how do you think it could have been worse? And like, without deflecting to "just wait and see what Trump does!"

It's been estimated that like some 90% of Gazans have already been displaced, Palestinian or otherwise.

Doesn't it sound kinda disingenuous or something to only now at this point so suddenly be like, "but won't someone please think of that last 10 percent!"

Stop putting words in my mouth. That is not anything I have said. As much as you wish I was taking an ideological position, I am not.

As a practical matter, there could be more dead/raped/displaced Palestinians. Israel could be using even more blunt measures/weapons/tactics than it has. Israel could permanently take over Gaza and the West Bank.

Shit, Israel could nuke Iran.

This, not a simple question about who you would have voted for, is silly speculation.

Sorry, didn't mean to put words in your mouth. I was just throwing a hypo out there trying to understand, but let's scrap it.

Instead, let's break down the hypos you do offer. Of course there COULD be more dead/raped/displaced Palestinians. But saying that now seems almost like an insult to all the millions of Palestinians who are ALREADY dead/raped/displaced - overwhelmingly due to the Biden/Harris administration's "who cares if they keep crossing our red lines let's just keep giving them weapons no matter what" support of Israel.

Sure, Israel COULD be using even more blunt measures/weapons/tactics than it has. What do you think those might be? Cuz they've already been dropping 2000 bombs to level entire neighborhoods at a time, already running over entire families with tanks, already attacking food and water and healthcare and aid trucks and humanitarian workers, already attacking refugee camps (that Biden specifically said not to attack btw). What measures/weapons/tactics could get more blunt?

Israel has already been permanently taking over Gaza and the West Bank. All you seem to be concerned about now is, Israel permanently taking over Gaza and the West Bank now that there's a Republican in office to blame, rather than having a Dem in office and very conspicuously not understanding the Israel/Palestine conflict otherwise.

Oh, and Israel has already been attacking Iran. And Lebanon. And Syria. Hopefully it does NOT come to nukes tho. but if it did, and if that would have been one of Biden's red lines, I'm not sure there is any evidence he would have done shit about that red line being crossed, nor any evidence it's any more likely to happen under Trump.

This is all to say, what COULD happen under Trump really is silly speculation, especially when it's offered as a counter to what HAS happened under Biden.

And yea, you're not taking an ideological position. Rather, you seem to be taking a partisan one.

FWIW I dunno if I'm even taking an ideological position, so much as I am simply taking a moral one.

now quick, somebody ridicule me for being on my moral high horse cuz I don't like the idea of my tax dollars paying for bombs dropped on kids!

BiggDick wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2024 11:59 am yea.

already said that.

what, you think I'm one of those saps sitting here googling "how to change my vote?"

Why do you expect to be taken seriously if you would have voted unseriously?

That's what it would be, to choose signaling your morals over doing your part to defeat the vastly more dangerous of the two realistic options.

again dude, what's you're describing sounds less like a democracy and more like some sorta authoritarian bullshit.

Put another way, it's just NOT a good look to try and tell someone they should be compelled to vote for someone. And particularly not a good look to try and tell someone they should be compelled to vote someone under the guise of "saving democracy." That sounds more like, the OPPOSITE of democracy.

It would take a lot for me to tell anyone they voted unseriously. For real, now that's you putting words in my mouth.

I'm not at all telling you that you were compelled to vote for anyone.

You are allowed to be unserious!

Let me ask the question one final way: if you knew that your vote would swing the election, you would vote for who?

I don't think my vote swinging the election would change my answer.

I think both major party candidates are rotten enough that I'd rather give my vote to neither.

If it really came down to that, let the House pick that lesser of two evils, not me.

BiggDick wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2024 12:50 pm I don't think my vote swinging the election would change my answer.

I think both major party candidates are rotten enough that I'd rather give my vote to neither.

If it really came down to that, let the House pick that lesser of of two evils, not me.

I didn't say that.

If you knew that your vote would swing the election, you would vote for who?

West.

In this election, at least. I've already answered that. How many more times would you like me to answer?

And, yes, even if I knew that my vote would swing the election...right on over to the House.

I don't know what else you want me to say here. I also can't help but wonder if these "who would you vote for" hypos are actually meant to distract from the rest of this thread.

Why do you keep watering down the hypothetical? That is what is making this a "distraction" - you keep building little "buts" into your answers!

If you knew that YOUR vote for West would decide the election in favor of Trump - not send it to the House, not send it to a runoff, not what the hell ever else - you would vote for West?

I don't think I've been watering this down, so much as you just keep getting more and more specific.

How would it decide the election in favor of Trump? Like, Kamala's otherwise down exactly one vote? And if I were to vote for her, and it's a tie in this hypothetical state, then what? Still goes to the House? Some runoff election? What?

If that's the case, who cares? I'll still be voting for West.

Now let's get back on topic. And since I've been a sport for your questions, if you'll kindly do the same for mine:

Why are you so worried about what COULD happen to Gaza being so much worse than what HAS happened?

Bonus points if you can also articulate why you explicitly stated you did not understand this issue until a Republican won back the White House.

remember when ousdahl was gonna stay off this side of the boards?


why take a break, change names, and come back with the exact same approach?

BiggDick wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2024 1:28 pm I don't think I've been watering this down, so much as you just keep getting more and more specific.

How would it decide the election in favor of Trump? Like, Kamala's otherwise down exactly one vote? And if I were to vote for her, and it's a tie in this hypothetical state, then what? Still goes to the House? Some runoff election? What?

If that's the case, who cares? I'll still be voting for West.

Now let's get back on topic. And since I've been a sport for your questions, if you'll kindly do the same for mine:

Why are you so worried about what COULD happen to Gaza being so much worse than what HAS happened?

Bonus points if you can also articulate why you explicitly stated you did not understand this issue until a Republican won back the White House.

You are still building outs into questions without them.

If YOUR vote for Cornel West WOULD result in Trump BEING the President, and YOUR vote for Harris WOULD result in Harris BEING the President, how would you vote?

I will say, again, that my comments here have been practical and not ideological; they could be about ANY issue. I know this will make you very sad, but "what COULD happen to Gaza" was really not something that factored into how I voted.

And that is not because I don't care at all, but because it is so fucking obvious that there is not a universe in which things are better in Gaza with Trump in the big chair than with Harris in the big chair.

dude it's not me building outs into questions without them, it's you trying to back me into some "HA! gotcha!" moment for a hypothetical that wouldn't and couldn't ever possibly exist.

But if you really want me to play with pretend hypos, lemme just say I'll vote for Kamala.

Then, I'll organize all the class-conscious types to acquire a bunch of MAGA gear and go cosplay at the inevitable J6 Part Duex. The cover is needed, since they'll let MAGA types walk right in there, as we've seen, but they would def not do the same for me an Cornel and a bunch of of-color and various other pink-haired they/them types.

Japhy can come too, assuming he's not tripping too hard out in the desert. You're invited but only if you bring drugs cuz those'll come in handy. And also only if you avoid all your uppity establishment politics bullshit. I tell you that much for your own safety, as that shit might get you slapped by one of the pink-haired they/thems otherwise.

But, once all the actual magaheads leave their pep rally in their lifted trucks to their cookie cutter suburban homes so they can be home in time for Hannity, the actual comrades will remain for a sit-in. We're not leaving. We ARE staging a revolution! We've been reading up on our political theory and everything, so we actually DO know what the fuck we're doing. It'll be live-streamed too, so the whole world shall know. That's also very important.

We realize every systemic revolution requires a little violence. It's not our fault, it's the ruling class's, cuz it's not like the ruling class ever gives up their power peacefully, right? But that's not what we're going for. The revolution this world needs also needs to be peaceful. That's important here. We'll have a list of demands, and we'll have our demands met.


...either that, or the Capitol Police and the National Guard and whoever will swiftly move in and slaughter us all even faster than Israeli forces slaughtering little brown kids, paid for by you and me. I can't say I'm ready to die, but I'll at least die knowing I'm going down as a sort of 21st century John Brown, but peaceful, cuz that's important, and while have hopefully at least sparked the revolution this world needs.

I think history will be kind to me. Do you not?

I think history will at least be much kinder to me than it will to you spineless hypocritical liberals, and that genocidal fascist Kamala. At least I won't have to be around to actually see her in the big chair, my own vote be damned. In this hypothetical tho, my own vote is an electoral martyr of sorts.

You're sitting here thinking your cute little hypothetical is some sorta either/or partisan checkers, while I just turned it into 5-D chess.

HA! Gotcha!

I vote for the fire department when my house is burning down. If my house is saved, hopefully my vote for the fire department will translate universally.

There's no "gotcha" moment being sought.

Just an answer to the question of precisely how far you'd go to vote your morals.

And you still will not give a straight, unqualified, uncluttered answer to that question.

There is no wrong answer. But I think you perceive this as a gotcha question because - and this very much is the point - it forces you to pick between two things YOU think of as evil.

And I do not mean Trump and Harris.

jfish26 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2024 1:45 pm I know this will make you very sad, but "what COULD happen to Gaza" was really not something that factored into how I voted.

yea, I know.

You haven't paid any mind at all to the issue of Gaza, and even went so far as to admit you didn't even understand it enough to comment on Gaza, that is, until you suddenly understood Gaza well enough to offer the scintillating hot take that Gaza would only be so much worse under a Republican presidency.

And that is not because I don't care at all, but because it is so fucking obvious that there is not a universe in which things are better in Gaza with Trump in the big chair than with Harris in the big chair.

While I don't disagree...we also can't say for sure what will happen in the future, and certainly can't say what will happen in the future as surely as what we know HAS happened and IS happening in real time.

That's all to say, this just sound like even more partisan boogeymanning from you, nothing more.

But, shoot, I'm just glad you suddenly DO care about this shit either way. So now that Trump is gonna be in the big chair again, and since we're so fond of hypotheticals, and since you owe me a hypothetical answer now too:

would you be willing to come march with me in a Free Palestine protest? Since it COULD get so much worse otherwise? Name the time and place bro, let's do it! If you wanna tell the other protestors that you were actually against this all along, I won't tell them otherwise.

jfish26 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2024 2:25 pm There's no "gotcha" moment being sought.

Just an answer to the question of precisely how far you'd go to vote your morals.

And you still will not give a straight, unqualified, uncluttered answer to that question.

There is no wrong answer. But I think you perceive this as a gotcha question because - and this very much is the point - it forces you to pick between two things YOU think of as evil.

And I do not mean Trump and Harris.

bro I gave you your Kamala vote. What more uncluttered qualifications do you want?

Should I just say Kamala and leave it at that?

Should I not even say Kamala, and instead just refrain, "vote blue no matter who?"

yeah, sure, as if THAT doesn't sound fascist.

also what do you mean you do not mean Trump and Harris? What two things do I think of as evil otherwise?

Just the two-party system in itself, with no regard for who's the actual candidates?

Cuz...yea.

And if that's the case, why all this fuss about having to pick from the two actual candidates?

BiggDick wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2024 2:30 pm also what do you mean you do not mean Trump and Harris? What two things do I think of as evil otherwise?

Just the two-party system in itself, with no regard for who's the actual candidates?

Cuz...yea.

And if that's the case, why all this fuss about having to pick from the two actual candidates?

1 - Vote West (preserving your personal moral high ground but sacrificing the big chair (and Gaza) to Trump)

2 - Vote Harris (preserving a least-worst-case scenario for the big chair (and Gaza) but sacrificing your personal moral high ground)

ladies and gentlemen, our next Secretary of Defense:

“Next to the communist Chinese and their global ambitions, Islamism is the most dangerous threat to freedom in the world. It cannot be negotiated with, coexisted with, or understood; it must be exposed, marginalized, and crushed”

and:

“Islamists—and even mainstream Muslims—use aggressive tactics to exploit American ‘tolerance’ as utter weakness in order to achieve accommodations that would never otherwise be tolerated,” he wrote. “I’m not talking about on the battlefield, I’m talking about in our classrooms, city councils, and social media.”

yea, the Islamophobia is appalling.