@danirabbit If someone is selling away my rights, I want to know what I personally am getting out of it. Compromise yes, surrender no. Negotiation yes, capitulation no. Progress, yes, appeasement, no. If you can get me one more inch in the trenches, I'll take it. If you ask me to go back, I will never.

@danirabbit Heard it put "How can you possibly vote for the Republicans who actively want to screw you over, instead of the Democrats who have no choice but to screw you over?"

@danirabbit Very much this, and to add insult to this stupid injury, going closer to the right has been proven to be counterproductive because it loses people like you and I, but also doesn't gain anyone, because why vote for fash-lite, if you can just vote for full-fat fash. And yet centre-left parties everywhere (and right-wing parties like your democrats) keep doing it.

@danirabbit same when people questioned the Democratic party not responding to attacks on trans people or attacking people against genocide and demonization of those very people.

@danirabbit Where there is no vision the people perish

@danirabbit imagine telling them "if we want to beat Biden, we're going to ha e to concede on gun rights."

@danirabbit

Want me to compromise on some of my human rights? Okay, you first.

@danirabbit If any more elections happen, choice could be DumpfJunior versus IdiotVance ... now, choose the lesser evil.... the liberalistic capitalism is what enables Fascism #changeMyMind

@danirabbit Probably the same dudes telling Ukraine they’re going to have to give up territory.

@danirabbit

But 'we will do the bad things, but slightly more slowly than the other team' has been a winning electoral strategy for decades!

This is what happens when people look at Duverger's law and don't go 'well Duverger clearly had zero understanding of game theory or psychology, and look, here are a load of counterexamples from the 20th century' and instead go 'yup, that's exactly how politics works in FPTP systems'.

@danirabbit

But 'we will do the bad things, but slightly more slowly than the other team' has been a winning electoral strategy for decades!

This is what happens when people look at Duverger's law and don't go 'well Duverger clearly had zero understanding of game theory or psychology, and look, here are a load of counterexamples from the 20th century' and instead go 'yup, that's exactly how politics works in FPTP systems'.

@danirabbit Ah, it’s Mexico paying for the wall all over again.

They aren’t against Trump, they are against him taking position they see themselves in.

@danirabbit How does losing your rights result in beating Trump? I don't see the logic

@danirabbit wow, sounds like you're talking with ignorant men. That's just embarassing.
Must be frustrating AF, to the point for concerning if that's the majority. I mean what's complex about people are people, treat them like people?
Feels like mainstream US culture is experimenting with a modern dark ages.
Hope aware people mobilise to vote for everyone's sake.

@danirabbit
in theory: if choices are "lose a little" or "lose a lot", it could be rational to vote for "lose a little"

in reality land: FFS, everybody hates Trump right now, why the fuck would you actually think any concessions to their bullshit are actually necessary to win, just get out there and prove you're not an asshole

@danirabbit I kate red-browns.

@danirabbit

Yeah, not conceding shit. As a matter of fact we're going to take it all.

If the SAVE act passes, why would I care if Gavin Newsom is president. If all we do about ICE is make them wear body cams, why do I care if Kamala is president. If I am not allowed to pee in a public bathroom you think I give a shit if a democrat is in the White House? You’re really that privileged and all of this is a fucking game to you and my living conditions are just not real at all for you?