You're viewing a single thread.
I don't get it.
Plenty of people on Lemmy immediately attacked you if you mentioned that Biden was going to tank the election or that he had mental health issues, and even though they became a little bit less aggressive after the debate, they still insisted and would call you a Trump supporter if you even suggested that the Democrats should have someone else run. Now that Biden is out of the race and Kamala is projected to have a much better chance than him, they've been proven wrong, but none of them will apologize for having denied reality.
You want an apology for that?
That's dumb as shit.
That's like going to a restaurant that sells hot dogs and hamburgers and ordering a pizza. No, they say. We only have hamburgers and hot dogs. Which would you prefer? And you just keep saying pizza. You get frustrated and leave. You come back next week and see that they added pizza to the menu, and you want an apology because last week they refused to sell you pizza that wasn't available?
We're all happy about Biden bowing out, but last week pizza wasn't an option, it was only hamburgers and hot dogs, and talking about pizza just reduces voter motivation, which is great for Trump. (I didn't want to spoil the good names of hamburgers and hot dogs by assigning Trump's name to either)
So no, no apology, but you should feel fortunate that it worked out despite your dissent.
What a disengenuous analogy.
You keep saying that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
"disingenuous
adjective
not candid or sincere, typically by pretending that one knows less about something than one really does"
Was this analogy sincere? Did you know it was flawed when you said it?
Completely sincere
Then you're right. It wasn't disingenuous. Merely stupid.
Might just be beyond you. That's ok.
OK, I'll fix it for you.
You walk into a restaurant. It's the only restaurant in town - indeed, your only available source of food at all. It has a menu of one dish only, changing every four years. It's been hot dogs for the past four years. Not your favorite, but tolerable.
A sign posted on the door says that the menu should be determined by the will of the customers, and broadly describes a process for them to express their preference. In practice, two factions of chefs have emerged. They each consult with their own set of customers about proposed menus, and narrow them down to two final options. For some reason, Team Hamburger wants to put poison in the hamburgers, and their customers agree.
You sit down for a nice hot dog and say to your friend, "Not only do I think pizza tastes better, I think it would stand a better chance of averting a mass hamburger poisoning. We could change our minds about trying for hot dogs again." Your friend retorts, "We are already committed to hot dogs. Stop talking about pizza. Pizza is impossible. It's not going to happen. And frankly, that kind of talk makes you sound like you want poisoned hamburgers. You don't want poisoned hamburgers, do you?"
A week later, pizza happens. Does your friend owe you an apology?
in this analogy, the hot dogs/hamburgers (whichever one is biden) are moldy and you get yelled at for wanting something a bit fresher
And here you have it: the serf mentality of the median American. Speaking out against your in-group, lest things could ever become better? Madness, better tell everyone to shut up about the fact that the ship is sinking, at least we're not directly ingesting arsenic. If things ever become better, thank the heavens that they happened to fall down that way, because that behavior leaves you at the behest of whoever is leading the chorus, even if that person had been clearly screwing up for months, with no hope of ever influencing it yourself.
That poster has a point. I'm a Brit here, so no skin in the game. You're more focussed on being right that trying to comprehend that people look at things differently.
No one thought Biden was good, but he was the candidate and most know that name recognition is key in US elections. Most presential candidates fail on their first run. Kamala, despite having some OK polling numbers still has to get through to disengaged American voters who do not follow politics and probably know little more than the attack lines heropponents will throw at her this campaign. They have to define her before others do. This option is riskier than you realise, the only thing that changed was Biden became a riskier option than before.
Things are less black and white than you want them to be. Nuance and grey area is key, despite being inconvenient.
Ha. It's funny that you think you understand me. You're way off the mark.
What I want is FAR from what even Harris is going to bring to the party, but in the reality that we live in, you have to take small steps towards the goal. Not throw a tantrum when you don't get everything you want right now.
but in the reality that we live in, you have to take small steps towards the goal.
What are those steps, and what is the goal?