By my logic, if Harris were elected, the vast majority of Americans would see no meaningful positive change. People would get sick of waiting for these policies that will never reach or help them by design, then they elect another Republican out of spite and apathy.
So just the same things that happened with every dem in the last 50 years.
No positive change is surely still significantly better than seeing a massive downturn and an uprising of a second Nazi regime… I don’t get your point.
We’re all gonna die eventually, so should we be advocating for more murderers?
Sure, but we’re not going to pull off the bandaid by continually voting in the party that is going to fuck us over fsstest. Is it not easier to work with a slow decline than a turbocharged rocket into the ground?
If Democrats made meaningful change at the expense of their rich owners, which is what is required for most problems to improve, then their apathy wouldn’t provoke people to also be apathetic.
Do you think change will be easier to make when a party is in power that is slowly chipping away at your freedoms, or when a party is in place that is going to go full-tilt authoritarian and do as much damage in as little time as possible?
Make it make sense… You are telling me that citizens would have the same quality of life right now and no more to fight for than they currently do under the current administration, had Harris have won? I find that incredibly difficult to believe.
If Harris won then it’s 4 more years of no tangible positive change, then the electorate becomes frustrated and votes in the Republican fascist. Republicans win because Dems fail to improve things.
You are operating in this weird idyllic neolib space where you think a party is their policies, in the real world a party is what they can actually accomplish.
And you don’t seem to realize that when everything exclusively gets worse, and never better, every year, then people are not going to care how worse it gets. They will instead detach from the broken system where everything only gets worse.
I would have preferred Kamala by a ton, voted for her. But I’m not deluding myself into thinking she would make anything better, because that requires forcing her doners to lose money, and she won’t do that, no Democrat will.
By my logic, if Harris were elected, the vast majority of Americans would see no meaningful positive change. People would get sick of waiting for these policies that will never reach or help them by design, then they elect another Republican out of spite and apathy.
So just the same things that happened with every dem in the last 50 years.
No positive change is surely still significantly better than seeing a massive downturn and an uprising of a second Nazi regime… I don’t get your point.
We’re all gonna die eventually, so should we be advocating for more murderers?
So if the only parties available result in decline, when does a party come along that wants to progress instead of stagnate or regress?
Time to grow up as a society and pull this baindaid off that we have apathetically suffered for our entire lives
Sure, but we’re not going to pull off the bandaid by continually voting in the party that is going to fuck us over fsstest. Is it not easier to work with a slow decline than a turbocharged rocket into the ground?
If Democrats made meaningful change at the expense of their rich owners, which is what is required for most problems to improve, then their apathy wouldn’t provoke people to also be apathetic.
Sorry but that’s how it works
This doesn’t answer my question.
Do you think change will be easier to make when a party is in power that is slowly chipping away at your freedoms, or when a party is in place that is going to go full-tilt authoritarian and do as much damage in as little time as possible?
Verifiable reality says no.
Neither of the halfs of the Duopoly are interested in making the necessary changes to improve people’s lives unless those people are rich.
Make it make sense… You are telling me that citizens would have the same quality of life right now and no more to fight for than they currently do under the current administration, had Harris have won? I find that incredibly difficult to believe.
If Harris won then it’s 4 more years of no tangible positive change, then the electorate becomes frustrated and votes in the Republican fascist. Republicans win because Dems fail to improve things.
You are operating in this weird idyllic neolib space where you think a party is their policies, in the real world a party is what they can actually accomplish.
And you don’t seem to realize that when everything exclusively gets worse, and never better, every year, then people are not going to care how worse it gets. They will instead detach from the broken system where everything only gets worse.
I would have preferred Kamala by a ton, voted for her. But I’m not deluding myself into thinking she would make anything better, because that requires forcing her doners to lose money, and she won’t do that, no Democrat will.