Synthead @ Synthead @lemmy.world

Posts

16

Comments

573

Joined

2 yr. ago

Re-posting a reply for a similar comment:

The opposite, actually. It's a lesser of evils.

Personally, I believe that Trump would deliver significantly more harm than most candidates. He's the Republican leader.

I don't agree with a handful of things that Biden has done. I believe that the situation with Hamas and Israel is much more nuanced than "arm Israel to the teeth." We're on the same page with this.

I can decide that I don't like Biden because of his stance with Israel, and choose to vote for another candidate. Let's say that the election is extremely close between Biden and Trump. And let's say that there is a reasonable amount of people like me, who have decided not to vote for Biden.

If enough people do what I would be doing, and vote for a candidate that might get 5% of votes or so, then that's 5% of the vote that could have gone to defeating Trump. However, because the election was so close, Trump wins.

If you protest the majority candidate in the election, you might as well check the box for your opponent and submit your vote. Voting is a dumb game that shouldn't be a dumb game, but it is what it is.

If a third-party candidate has an extremely unlikely chance to win, now what?

This person is right. You can openly hate the way the US votes and refuse to be a part of the status quo, but this is how the system works now. If you want your current voting power to have a current impact, then you need to vote in a way that the current system works.

I'm very strongly principled myself, and greatly dislike how petty the voting ideals are. I also greatly dislike how little impact most people have in changing the way we vote. It very much feels like organized systems of corrupt power when you peek into the US system at any angle.

Therefore, if you're strongly principled like me, I highly recommend that you observe these efforts as different principles:

• We should vote in a way that gives us a voice with real impact (present day problems)
• We should strive to change and shape both politics and our voting system however possible (present day and future problems)

Make your impact now and for the future. Don't choose to be silent by not playing the game that is put in front of you. It's dirty, it's gross, and it's political, but it is currently how your voice gets heard. While doing so, also be the change you want to see in the world by pushing for the ideals you are after.

So if you vote for a "so-called third party candidate," then we won't get Trump? Please help clarify how this works.

There certainly are ways to vote for your party that will result in your party being weaker, therefore making the opposing party stronger. Call it whatever you want.

Re-posting a reply for a similar comment:

The opposite, actually. It's a lesser of evils.

Personally, I believe that Trump would deliver significantly more harm than most candidates. He's the Republican leader.

I don't agree with a handful of things that Biden has done. I believe that the situation with Hamas and Israel is much more nuanced than "arm Israel to the teeth." We're on the same page with this.

I can decide that I don't like Biden because of his stance with Israel, and choose to vote for another candidate. Let's say that the election is extremely close between Biden and Trump. And let's say that there is a reasonable amount of people like me, who have decided not to vote for Biden.

If enough people do what I would be doing, and vote for a candidate that might get 5% of votes or so, then that's 5% of the vote that could have gone to defeating Trump. However, because the election was so close, Trump wins.

If you protest the majority candidate in the election, you might as well check the box for your opponent and submit your vote. Voting is a dumb game that shouldn't be a dumb game, but it is what it is.

The opposite, actually. It's a lesser of evils.

Personally, I believe that Trump would deliver significantly more harm than most candidates. He's the Republican leader.

I don't agree with a handful of things that Biden has done. I believe that the situation with Hamas and Israel is much more nuanced than "arm Israel to the teeth." We're on the same page with this.

I can decide that I don't like Biden because of his stance with Israel, and choose to vote for another candidate. Let's say that the election is extremely close between Biden and Trump. And let's say that there is a reasonable amount of people like me, who have decided not to vote for Biden.

If enough people do what I would be doing, and vote for a candidate that might get 5% of votes or so, then that's 5% of the vote that could have gone to defeating Trump. However, because the election was so close, Trump wins.

If you protest the majority candidate in the election, you might as well check the box for your opponent and submit your vote. Voting is a dumb game that shouldn't be a dumb game, but it is what it is.

This is where ranked choice voting would help.

The soot from a building fire will absolutely give you cancer. Most deaths from a building fire are caused by the contaminants in the air and not the fire itself. It's very nasty, and I wouldn't shrug it off. At the very least, it will taste nasty. At most, it will give you health complications.

If everyone voted for what they truly wanted and believed in, there would be no more political duopolies.

I agree. However, this is not the reality we live in. If you vote for a candidate that gets 2% of votes, then they will lose, and the leading candidate that represents your party will not get your vote. This gives your political opponents an advantage by your choosing.

Right, the voting system is bad. I don't like it, either. However, if the dominating candidates are Biden and Trump, and you voted for lesser Democrat candidate, then Biden doesn't get your vote. If Biden gets too little votes, then your next president is Trump. You wouldn't have chosen it explicitly, but it is your implicit vote.

That being said, if Biden has some strong competition and another candidate is appearing favorable, then it makes sense to vote for them. Voting for someone you know is going to lose is just acting in principle without making any impact on the election.

Heads up that there are ways to look up locations for access point ESSIDs. You can basically narrow it down to an address. If you share a neighbor's ESSID also, it greatly helps ensure that they have the right address.

I wouldn't be quick to assume that this means a failing disk. There would probably be more sporadic issues if this were the case.

Yes, please don't be a single-issue voter. There is no perfection in politics, so don't pretend that this is the only thing that matters and pursue to make your vote meaningless. A lost vote from you is a vote for them.

I'd wash sealed containers first, then go for it.

You do have a right to your computer. After content is delivered to you, you have downloaded data, and your own hardware and software acts to consume said downloaded data. After it is downloaded, even if it is in a browser in a cache, it is considered offline content. This also applies to streaming media chunks, too: once it's downloaded, you have acquired it locally.

I don't personally enjoy the status quo, but they're not obligated to serve me any videos if they don't want to. However, if they have given me media to consume on my devices, it's up to me to decide how I consume the media that was already delivered.

That's exactly what I said, yeah

Yep, they can send me 500s if they want to, too

I sure do, although OLEDs pretty much have an infinite black level, and the color range is unparalleled to LCDs.