• Deceptichum@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Candidate 2: I’m going to give guns and money to the person killing ponies but tell them they shouldn’t do it.

    Leftist: Either way ponies are going to be killed. Let’s try something different.

    Centrist: Noooo, you have to vote for the proxy pony killer who can’t use his position to do anything or else you’ll get a pony killer in power who’ll use his position to do everything.

    • fishos@lemmy.worldBanned
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      You said it so perfectly and I never realized it. “If you elect our guy, he won’t be able to do anything, but at least it’s better than if you elect the other guy. If you elect the other guy, somehow he’ll be able to do everything he wants. But vote for our impotent guy instead. It’s safe!”

      Um what?

      • candybrie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        One follows the rules, and the other often doesn’t even think there are rules. The difference there isn’t hard to suss out. It’s like that joke about playing chess with a pigeon.

        • beardown@lemm.eeBanned from community
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I want a guy who doesn’t think there are rules, and will protect ponies. Why isn’t that a possibility

          • candybrie@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            Because not thinking there are rules into adulthood is a pretty self-absorbed trait, which usually doesn’t go along with things like empathy and compassion.