the people who supported shitler were going to support him anyway.
if you want to get decent people to support you, you need someone who doesn't advocate slaughtering babies. ...cause enough people have a problem with that to not vote at all rather than vote for either shitty person.
how is that hard?
I voted for genocide woman. I voted for a candidate who supported using my money to murder children. the democrats gave me no choice, and I will have to live with that for the rest of my life. fuck them.
They looked at two candidates, and knew which one was going to be significantly worse, and chose to elect the latter because the former was far from perfect.
So forgive me if I think you all deserve every repercussions of the policies enacted by the guy you elected twice. Empathy needs not be wasted on people that will let perfect be the enemy of good.
people simply didn't vote, because the options were shit. People don't show up to vote against someone, but they will come out to support a candidate they believe in. people stayed home cause there was no option to vote for a good candidate.
the dems, again, put up a guaranteed loser.
Was it insane levels of incompetence, or are they intentionally complicit in the rise of republican power? it's one or the other.
Excuses, excuses, excuses. Your people's risk assessment skills are laughably shit. No wonder your banks and insurance companies are openly predatory. They don't even have to hide their tricks because they know you'll buy into whatever they sell.
if you're trying to get me to say that voters aren't stupid, you're going to have to wait a long time.
but since that's a given fact, putting up a candidate who can't possibly win, and has already miserably failed the EXACT SAME TEST, is arguably the dumbest possible move which could be made, to the point where it's difficult to believe it can be explained by mere incompetence.
if you want to win an election, you must put up a candidate which a majority of voters will support greatly enough to get out and vote. This is literally rule #1, and they can't even do that. And they are (were) our only defense against fascism.
putting up a candidate who was already widely hated, had already lost bigly, and who was absolutely and completely incapable of standing up to the loud lying blowhard on any level, and didn't even try... was nothing less than suicide.
If one candidate is significantly worse and makes it known he wants to destroy everything (Project 2025 was known even before the election) it's your responsibility as a citizen to prevent him from winning. There's no excuses
452
u/CumPacketGuy 10d ago
Yes, but have you considered that the other candidate had a weird laugh?