It’s actually a struggle for me to remain objective on Warren as ive made my decision on her… But objectively wouldn’t it be better to withhold that credit until she proves she isn’t just doing what’s politically expedient for her future as a politician?
Like objectively makes sense to withhold all credit after what she did to Bernie during his campaign and for Biden on super Tuesday?
Thinking about that will inform her motives now. There is no “step in the right direction” when the only thing moving is their mouths
The way you (and others in this sub) approach it is very all-or-nothing and very ineffective.
We should say, “thanks Lizzy for speaking up, we appreciate you and we would ask you to support an arms embargo so that our tax money doesn’t go towards killing innocent children”.
This is exactly what the more effective anti-genocide activists are doing.
Me:brings verifiable information to the subject at hand
You:pivots to personal attacks
If you were an objective observer of this discussion, which of these two parties would you say failed to avoid logical fallacies/engage in effective activism of their cause?
The way you’re approaching genocide is very “nothing is all.” Look at her voting record. Expressing vocally and actually voting are different subjects.
We should say, “thanks Lizzy for speaking up, we appreciate you and we would ask you to support an arms embargo so that our tax money doesn’t go towards killing innocent children”.
Why? It’s not bad to speak up, but if nothing is materially changing, it’s nothing but vibes.
This is exactly what the more effective anti-genocide activists are doing.
Wrong. The more effective anti-genocide activists are Palestine Action, and they are directly sabotaging the tools used to facilitate genocide, not standing and clapping for someone who has voted for genocide for decades.
It’s actually a struggle for me to remain objective on Warren as ive made my decision on her… But objectively wouldn’t it be better to withhold that credit until she proves she isn’t just doing what’s politically expedient for her future as a politician?
Like objectively makes sense to withhold all credit after what she did to Bernie during his campaign and for Biden on super Tuesday?
Thinking about that will inform her motives now. There is no “step in the right direction” when the only thing moving is their mouths
The way you (and others in this sub) approach it is very all-or-nothing and very ineffective.
We should say, “thanks Lizzy for speaking up, we appreciate you and we would ask you to support an arms embargo so that our tax money doesn’t go towards killing innocent children”.
This is exactly what the more effective anti-genocide activists are doing.
deleted by creator
If this is a bit, it’s seriously a really good one.
Yeah i can’t wait for them to find this. I don’t think this is a high energy enough lib to really get a shamethread cooking tho
Me: brings verifiable information to the subject at hand
You: pivots to personal attacks
If you were an objective observer of this discussion, which of these two parties would you say failed to avoid logical fallacies/engage in effective activism of their cause?
The way you’re approaching genocide is very “nothing is all.” Look at her voting record. Expressing vocally and actually voting are different subjects.
Why? It’s not bad to speak up, but if nothing is materially changing, it’s nothing but vibes.
Wrong. The more effective anti-genocide activists are Palestine Action, and they are directly sabotaging the tools used to facilitate genocide, not standing and clapping for someone who has voted for genocide for decades.
Ngl I don’t think you live in reality, when has this approach ever caused change?