▲ -28 ▼ Joe Biden "drives me crazy"—Former Obama strategist David Axelrod (www.newsweek.com) submitted 2 years ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world 46 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] quindraco@lemm.ee 0 points 2 years ago (2 children) People downvoting you apparently don't believe anyone on Lemmy is: Not a US citizen. 17 or younger come November. An ex-con in a state where that means you can't vote. A current convict unable to vote from prison. 1 and 2 get me the most. Imagine not believing in Italians or children. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] federatingIsTooHard@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) I'm a leftist and I don't vote for capitalists or war criminals. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] quindraco@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) If you're legally allowed to vote in the USA, you almost certainly do vote for capitalists, largely due to fundamental flaws in First Past the Post - you have no way not to. Both abstaining from voting and voting third party are mathematically equivalent to voting for a capitalist, it just makes it messier working out which one you voted for. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] federatingIsTooHard@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) Both abstaining from vot8ng and voting third party are mathematically equivalent to voting for a capitalist no, they're not. calling your storytelling "math" doesn't change its veracity. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] quindraco@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Yes, they are. Obstinately refusing to understand the mathematics of voting doesn't change the math. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] federatingIsTooHard@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago i've seen explications before, but i'm open to the possibility that you have a novel theory that is testable, falsifiable, and valid. permalink fedilink source parent [–] citrusface@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Dude. I'm not talking about people outside of the US. What is so complicated about that. This is a US centric country conversation. I thought it was implied that the people I was speaking about would be US citizens. Here, I will clarify with everyone who has a hard time reading between the lines. IF YOU ARE A US CITIZEN THAT CAN LEGALLY VOTE AND YOU CHOOSE TO USE YOUR VOTE IN A MANNER THAT WILL ULTIMATELY DESTROY MY PERSONAL FREEDOMS AND FURTHER THE SUFFERING OF OTHER PEOPLE FOREIGN OR DOMESTIC, I WOULD RATHER NOT ASSOCIATE WITH YOU. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] federatingIsTooHard@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) I'm a leftist and I don't vote for capitalists or war criminals. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] quindraco@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) If you're legally allowed to vote in the USA, you almost certainly do vote for capitalists, largely due to fundamental flaws in First Past the Post - you have no way not to. Both abstaining from voting and voting third party are mathematically equivalent to voting for a capitalist, it just makes it messier working out which one you voted for. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] federatingIsTooHard@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) Both abstaining from vot8ng and voting third party are mathematically equivalent to voting for a capitalist no, they're not. calling your storytelling "math" doesn't change its veracity. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] quindraco@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Yes, they are. Obstinately refusing to understand the mathematics of voting doesn't change the math. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] federatingIsTooHard@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago i've seen explications before, but i'm open to the possibility that you have a novel theory that is testable, falsifiable, and valid. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] quindraco@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) If you're legally allowed to vote in the USA, you almost certainly do vote for capitalists, largely due to fundamental flaws in First Past the Post - you have no way not to. Both abstaining from voting and voting third party are mathematically equivalent to voting for a capitalist, it just makes it messier working out which one you voted for. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] federatingIsTooHard@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) Both abstaining from vot8ng and voting third party are mathematically equivalent to voting for a capitalist no, they're not. calling your storytelling "math" doesn't change its veracity. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] quindraco@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Yes, they are. Obstinately refusing to understand the mathematics of voting doesn't change the math. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] federatingIsTooHard@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago i've seen explications before, but i'm open to the possibility that you have a novel theory that is testable, falsifiable, and valid. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] federatingIsTooHard@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) Both abstaining from vot8ng and voting third party are mathematically equivalent to voting for a capitalist no, they're not. calling your storytelling "math" doesn't change its veracity. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] quindraco@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Yes, they are. Obstinately refusing to understand the mathematics of voting doesn't change the math. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] federatingIsTooHard@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago i've seen explications before, but i'm open to the possibility that you have a novel theory that is testable, falsifiable, and valid. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] quindraco@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Yes, they are. Obstinately refusing to understand the mathematics of voting doesn't change the math. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] federatingIsTooHard@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago i've seen explications before, but i'm open to the possibility that you have a novel theory that is testable, falsifiable, and valid. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] federatingIsTooHard@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago i've seen explications before, but i'm open to the possibility that you have a novel theory that is testable, falsifiable, and valid. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] citrusface@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Dude. I'm not talking about people outside of the US. What is so complicated about that. This is a US centric country conversation. I thought it was implied that the people I was speaking about would be US citizens. Here, I will clarify with everyone who has a hard time reading between the lines. IF YOU ARE A US CITIZEN THAT CAN LEGALLY VOTE AND YOU CHOOSE TO USE YOUR VOTE IN A MANNER THAT WILL ULTIMATELY DESTROY MY PERSONAL FREEDOMS AND FURTHER THE SUFFERING OF OTHER PEOPLE FOREIGN OR DOMESTIC, I WOULD RATHER NOT ASSOCIATE WITH YOU. permalink fedilink source parent