What do you think is inaccurate with that analogy? (Sure there’s other things on the tracks other than genocide, but genocide is certainly the biggest thing on there imo)
Most of the people I know who are voting for Claudia de la Cruz are also heavily politically active, not just in protests, but are speaking at city hall, volunteering for campaigns, and a couple are even running for office. People who are voting 3rd party know that it is nearly impossible, but flipping that lever and co-signing a genocide isn’t something that is a viable option to many people. Also, if trump is even a viable candidate in this system, we can agree that this system is broken, right?
I don’t agree with the analogy but it’s amazing that people think the best thing to do is nothing, aka not voting or “protest vote”.
What do you think is inaccurate with that analogy? (Sure there’s other things on the tracks other than genocide, but genocide is certainly the biggest thing on there imo)
Most of the people I know who are voting for Claudia de la Cruz are also heavily politically active, not just in protests, but are speaking at city hall, volunteering for campaigns, and a couple are even running for office. People who are voting 3rd party know that it is nearly impossible, but flipping that lever and co-signing a genocide isn’t something that is a viable option to many people. Also, if trump is even a viable candidate in this system, we can agree that this system is broken, right?
I’m not going on with stupid analogies but I will point out many think Nader caused Gore to lose. What would the Overton window be if Gore won? Chow.
Is it a stupid analogy because you can’t explain why you think it’s inaccurate? I swear, liberals treat leftists like republicans treat democrats.
How about you get your guy to stop funding a genocide and maybe then he’ll become a more viable option to people?