But first he will accidentally the whole thing.

Actually, in his case, I’d wager they range from NOTHING to jail time.

Accidentally said the true part out loud.

You did not explicitly declare your goals, but we wouldn’t be having this discussion if one of them wasn’t ending the genocide in Gaza.

I’d further speculate you want to put an end to the 2 party oligarchy and allow people to have choices that more closely align with their values without forced compromise on important issues.

You may have more, but I’d venture these are two primary ones. And I don’t think either of these are achievable through not voting for Harris this election. Because nearly every option for political activity is going to evaporate in an administration that has absolutely NO respect whatsoever for the rule of law or political activity - doesn’t even see the need to pretend. Look no further than what happened to Hong Kong to see what happens when the imperfect democracy is replaced with autocratic control.

I agree with you that we are being forced to choose between 2 genocides. Knowledge of that situation doesn’t change that fact. Awareness of being between a rock and a hard place doesn’t get you out of the trap. But you’ve heard this again and again, and I’ve heard THIS again and again. Correctly identifying a problem is not the same thing as having a solution. I applaud your dedication to the ideal of seeking a third path. You are trying to show me the problem, but I’m well aware of it. I don’t even disagree with you that it IS a problem. I, in fact, agree with every single reason you’ve given for the decision you’ve made. I simply believe that the action you’re taking is totally futile and counterproductive, and won’t achieve any of your stated goals. You don’t agree - that’s fine. Do what you like. I’m waiting for a proposal with even a passing chance of success. I’m not even waiting, as Dr. King says, for a more convenient season. I’m waiting for a plan that will WORK. Dr. King was advocating for direct action which would have the possibility of success. Dr. King said that after he’d built a movement of millions of followers. After he’d organized massive marches. After he’d won the hearts and spirits of so many. He was talking about real action he could take. He wasn’t advocating martyring oneself in a completely futile gesture with a small number of his friends.

I am aware of Dr. King’s quote, and I am aware that the Democrats are not some kind of paragon of progressive ideals, and I fully agree with you that they are far, FAR from ideal, and in fact are fundamentally flawed. But they ARE, as flawed as they are, the only bulwark against something far worse. If we don’t agree on that, we do not agree on necessary priors, and we have nothing more to convince each other of.

Look, I’ve already voted, and I don’t hold any position of power to make any more decisions, and there’s nothing productive to continuing this. My temper is my Achilles heel, and nobody has anything to gain. I’ve heard the arguments from the “Democrats are genociders”, and I will never be convinced that the best way to protect a group of people is let their fate be decided by someone who has explicitly made clear his desire to wipe them out, and I will never not think that people in that camp are insane. They are more than welcome to go take their magical thinking to someone who will listen.

No, you know what… I really don’t want to continue this conversation. Your mind is made up, you do what you feel is right. God bless, I have nothing more to say.

Acknowledging that in a world of 10 billion people, groups do not always have the same overlapping interests or that the best course of action for the most people does not always correspond with the best course of action for one group in particular does NOT equate to pitting groups against each other. That is a childish oversimplification that borders on anime protagonist morality, and unfortunately, the real world doesn’t have writers who ensure that there are perfect solutions to be found if everyone involved is just stubborn enough.

If you don’t support her, even if you think it’s somehow good for Palestinians for her to lose, which it isn’t, you are comfortably throwing minorities, LGBTQ, and progressives in every country around the world into the meat grinder to prove your point. Sacrificing and doing ANYTHING to help one particular group, the consequences for everyone else be damned, isn’t really all that different from the Zionists they purport to be against.

Nor should they. Nobody should shut up about the genocide of Gaza. They SHOULD shut up about the stupid idea that not voting for Harris is any kind of way to help that situation.

Not that I’m not glad, but this kind of endorsement needs time to permeate, and could’ve shut up a large chunk of disingenuous contrarians a MONTH ago.

Literally took the exact words out of my mouth.

“Your honor, rather than pay his outstanding debts, this shiftless f***wit used 75 million dollars to fund a SuperPAC to bother people at their homes for the benefit of the Trump campaign.”

Not the original, but…

https://bash-org-archive.com/

Absolutely. It’s sucked a lot longer than that.

Edit: Sorry! I misread your comment at first. Yeah, now that you say that, that makes the most sense.

But from the standpoint of anti-competitivity and Android vs iOS with Apple…

One’s behavior is denying access to their app store without agreeing to a set of device restrictions, but everything on the app store is available without the app store at developer discretion.

The other is an app store which MUST be installed, and is in fact the ONLY way to get software for the device.

One is CLEARLY more anti-competitive than the other, and yet the one that’s LESS problematic is the one that gets court action. It’s a joke.

https://source.android.com/license

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_(operating_system)

“At its core, the operating system is known as the Android Open Source Project (AOSP)[5] and is free and open-source software (FOSS) primarily licensed under the Apache License. However, most devices run on the proprietary Android version developed by Google, which ships with additional proprietary closed-source software pre-installed,[6] most notably Google Mobile Services (GMS),[7] which includes core apps such as Google Chrome, the digital distribution platform Google Play, and the associated Google Play Services development platform. Firebase Cloud Messaging is used for push notifications. While AOSP is free, the “Android” name and logo are trademarks of Google, which imposes standards to restrict the use of Android branding by “uncertified” devices outside their ecosystem.[8][9]”

Android itself DOES NOT require ANY concessions of ANY kind to Google.

Android itself DOES NOT require ANY concessions of ANY kind to Google. Maybe “opening the app store” means making Google’s services available without requiring those concessions to Google, in which case, that both makes sense and is a great idea.

This is the clearest and most sensible explanation of the situation, but I’m still not sure what’s meant by “opening the app store”. The reality is apps can be sideloaded and distributed freely on Android, even unrooted. Sure, Google requires OEMs to push Google services and tracking, and that’s evil and horrible and nasty, but do they actually force that onto app developers as well?