• CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    3 days ago

    Why argue that she still deserved everyone’s votes because she’s “the least worse?” Why not make an argument for why you think she made the right decision supporting a genocide? You’re framing this as if she were forced into this position and we should have accepted that, which is completely ludicrous.

    • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      3 days ago

      Why argue that she still deserved everyone’s votes because she’s “the least worse?”

      Because they want no better.

      • Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        They’re fine that POTUS “supports babies being mass murdered abroad”, their problem is that from the two “baby mass murdering in another land supporting” candidates, the one who won is the one that in the US does not do what they would rather they do.

        It’s not at all a Moral stand, it’s a What’s Best For Me stand sleazily being spinned as a Moral stand.