3 ms·

It's more of an ethical question. Were the people who voted for Hitler bad people because they voted for a bad person? I'd argue that they were. You can't just

by tormeh 1y ago

It's more of an ethical question. Were the people who voted for Hitler bad people because they voted for a bad person? I'd argue that they were. You can't just vote for a horrible person and then say you had nothing to do with the consequences. I'm not the one you replied to, but I assume this is something family related, a la "just because grandpa voted for Trump doesn't mean he's a bad person".

bluGill 1y ago
People didn't have good choices. There was plenty to not like about the Democrats as well. You can argue who is worse, or even if the concerns are valid, but there are plenty of things many people don't like about how the democrats use their power. As such what was a voter to do? There are a long list of things, and most people are not willing accept that "their side" does anything someone else might not like. Doesn't matter what side. Most people are not even willing to honestly listen to "the other side's" concerns. Waters of the US. All the various "woke" issues which harms someone who isn't a minority who sees someone less competent getting business (and then calling them racist when the feel cheated). Immigration or China taking all their jobs. The above is what I can think of just off the top of my head that many people feel democrats have messed up on. (I don't not agree with this entire list, but I'm sure people will shoot the messenger anyway...)
- krapp 1y ago
  People may not have had a good choice, but they had an obvious choice. The status quo of a Harris term - even considering the likely negatives, her pandering to the right and pro-Zionist stance - would have been objectively preferable to Trump. What is a voter to do? Not vote for the greater evil because they aren't in love with the lesser evil.
  - bluGill 1y ago
    They strongly disagree. This is not a debate here - I didn't vote for Trump for a number of reasons. However I make an effort toiundertand because that is the first step to try to figure out how to win. When you just name call you ensure you lose
    - krapp 1y ago
      The Democrats didn't "just name call," though. They had a platform and everything. Meanwhile no one name calls more than Trump. His party is the party of "fuck your feelings" and "empathy is a sin" after all.
      - bluGill 1y ago
        Why are you lowering yourself to the level of name calling and only talking about name calling?
        krapp 1y ago
        I'm not, and I haven't. And even if I did, trying to turn the conversation to me rather than the subject at hand is base trolling. I could call them all shitheads and that still wouldn't be relevant. They didn't vote for Trump because I hurt their feelings, nor did I vote for Kamala Harris because Trump voters hurt my feelings.
        trealira 1y ago
        Name calling is when you point out uncomfortable truths.
- cycomanic 1y ago
  This is not a "both sides are bad" issue. Literally one side was openly advertising a culture revolution and remaking the US into a fascist state and the other side was using policies to improve minority participation in institutions. Even if you were completely opposed to "woke" issues, the alternative was voting for a dictator.
  - bluGill 1y ago
    Quit shooting the messanger and think. if you cannot understand your ophonents you are no better than them.
    - Braxton1980 1y ago
      >if you cannot understand your ophonents you are no better than them? Literally no. I don't understand serial killers but I'm better than them and to use a more relevant example, I have limited understanding of some racists but I'm better than them (in that specific case). Understanding is only useful for engagement but if a person is being manipulated by lies or exaggerations then what am I to do? Solve a non-existent or exaggerated problem? Tell them their information is wrong?
- Braxton1980 1y ago
  >....As such what was a voter to do? I contend their dislike of the Democrats is based a meaningful amount on Republican lies and exaggerations. For example 1. Blaming Biden wholly for inflation via spending even though it was worldwide, Trump also used government spending to attempt to help the economy, and Republicans controlled congress for half his term. 2. Blaming Biden for not fixing inflation which assumes this was possible 3. Blaming all illegal immigrants for the crimes of some. This is the same as blaming all Black people for the crimes committed by some. 4. Lying about election fraud
- Braxton1980 1y ago
  Why is immigrantion bad, why are illegal immigrants bad? >the various "woke" issues which harms someone who isn't a minority who sees someone less competent getting business Do you have evidence this was a widespread problem? It people are woke, for example Disney decides to put more gay people in movies to promote diversity, what is the government going to do? Why would electing Republicans stop this?
  - bluGill 1y ago
    don't ask me - I'm just a messanger who doesn't believe the full message. I've long supported more immigration what disney does should be their own business. However when a competent person is not allowed to do a job because the government wants a different minoity that hurts me. at best it means that projects are more expensive because there is less competition, at worst someone incompetent is hired and we get junk.
orochimaaru 1y ago
Well, it’s not the popular vote but the electoral college. There may be plenty of people in blue states who voted for Trump because they were fed up with democrats having foisted an unelected candidate on them. They would for the most part know that the vote kinda doesn’t count - e.g. if you live in CA or IL. In this case you’re mostly voting to make a point. So with the current system, that varies. If it’s a popular vote, then I’d say you have a point.
- Braxton1980 1y ago
  >were fed up with democrats having foisted an unelected candidate on them What power was this candidate given? By saying "unelected" you're trying to imply that a person was given power in the government without a vote. =------------------------ The election is a choice between two candidates. It's not "Did you like that the Democrats did X"? It's "Which candidate would make a better president"? The reason is that the effects of the outcome aren't limited to the Democrat party leadeship. For example a student who is deported wasn't responsible for the decision by the Democrat party leadership not to hold a primary but are affected by the outcome of the election. The logical flaw in the voters you are referring to is not comparing choices while making a selection.
Braxton1980 1y ago
>Were the people who voted for Hitler bad people because they voted for a bad person? Depends on what they know or heard. The situation is very different today. The internet gives each person access to all the information. I'm sure time can be a factor but in Germany you have more an excuse. Also, with Germany, the economic situation was used by Hitler and worked to his advantage. There's also the more controversial take but I've only read bits and pieces and many disagree with this as it implies a multigeneration swaying and ingrained cultural change https://www.amazon.com/Hitlers-Willing-Executioners-Ordinary-Holocaust/ https://www.amazon.com/Hitlers-Willing-Executioners-Ordinary...
southernplaces7 1y ago
People voting for Hitler wasn't a problem either way.. Enough of them never voted for him under the German electoral system of the time that he never won enough of a majority to become president of his country. Instead he then used backroom deals with useful idiots and cynics who thought they could use him in favor of their careers, to get himself appointed to a position (chancellor) from which he could become dictator. The more valid criticism based on the above comparison isn't quite so much against American voters as it is against the cynics, spineless opponents and useful idiots inside the federal political system, who have the power to curtail what Trump is attempting as president, but don't for different reasons of their own. I particularly note the other republicans in his party here, who could actually stop Trump's more deranged nonsense but are letting centuries of restrained, relatively democratic and lawful political tradition go to shit for the sake of their own short-sighted ambitious idiocies.
- Braxton1980 1y ago
  I didn't realize Hitler didn't win the 1932 election but became chancellor after the Nazi party obtained a majority in the government and Hindenburg, who won, appointed him. >who have the power to curtail what Trump is attempting as president, but don't for different They won't do this because of his public support.

by tormeh 1y ago

bluGill 1y ago

People didn't have good choices. There was plenty to not like about the Democrats as well. You can argue who is worse, or even if the concerns are valid, but there are plenty of things many people don't like about how the democrats use their power. As such what was a voter to do? There are a long list of things, and most people are not willing accept that "their side" does anything someone else might not like. Doesn't matter what side. Most people are not even willing to honestly listen to "the other side's" concerns. Waters of the US. All the various "woke" issues which harms someone who isn't a minority who sees someone less competent getting business (and then calling them racist when the feel cheated). Immigration or China taking all their jobs. The above is what I can think of just off the top of my head that many people feel democrats have messed up on. (I don't not agree with this entire list, but I'm sure people will shoot the messenger anyway...)

krapp 1y ago
People may not have had a good choice, but they had an obvious choice. The status quo of a Harris term - even considering the likely negatives, her pandering to the right and pro-Zionist stance - would have been objectively preferable to Trump. What is a voter to do? Not vote for the greater evil because they aren't in love with the lesser evil.
- bluGill 1y ago
  They strongly disagree. This is not a debate here - I didn't vote for Trump for a number of reasons. However I make an effort toiundertand because that is the first step to try to figure out how to win. When you just name call you ensure you lose
  - krapp 1y ago
    The Democrats didn't "just name call," though. They had a platform and everything. Meanwhile no one name calls more than Trump. His party is the party of "fuck your feelings" and "empathy is a sin" after all.
    - bluGill 1y ago
      Why are you lowering yourself to the level of name calling and only talking about name calling?
      - krapp 1y ago
        I'm not, and I haven't. And even if I did, trying to turn the conversation to me rather than the subject at hand is base trolling. I could call them all shitheads and that still wouldn't be relevant. They didn't vote for Trump because I hurt their feelings, nor did I vote for Kamala Harris because Trump voters hurt my feelings.
      - trealira 1y ago
        Name calling is when you point out uncomfortable truths.
cycomanic 1y ago
This is not a "both sides are bad" issue. Literally one side was openly advertising a culture revolution and remaking the US into a fascist state and the other side was using policies to improve minority participation in institutions. Even if you were completely opposed to "woke" issues, the alternative was voting for a dictator.
- bluGill 1y ago
  Quit shooting the messanger and think. if you cannot understand your ophonents you are no better than them.
  - Braxton1980 1y ago
    >if you cannot understand your ophonents you are no better than them? Literally no. I don't understand serial killers but I'm better than them and to use a more relevant example, I have limited understanding of some racists but I'm better than them (in that specific case). Understanding is only useful for engagement but if a person is being manipulated by lies or exaggerations then what am I to do? Solve a non-existent or exaggerated problem? Tell them their information is wrong?
Braxton1980 1y ago
>....As such what was a voter to do? I contend their dislike of the Democrats is based a meaningful amount on Republican lies and exaggerations. For example 1. Blaming Biden wholly for inflation via spending even though it was worldwide, Trump also used government spending to attempt to help the economy, and Republicans controlled congress for half his term. 2. Blaming Biden for not fixing inflation which assumes this was possible 3. Blaming all illegal immigrants for the crimes of some. This is the same as blaming all Black people for the crimes committed by some. 4. Lying about election fraud
Braxton1980 1y ago
Why is immigrantion bad, why are illegal immigrants bad? >the various "woke" issues which harms someone who isn't a minority who sees someone less competent getting business Do you have evidence this was a widespread problem? It people are woke, for example Disney decides to put more gay people in movies to promote diversity, what is the government going to do? Why would electing Republicans stop this?
- bluGill 1y ago
  don't ask me - I'm just a messanger who doesn't believe the full message. I've long supported more immigration what disney does should be their own business. However when a competent person is not allowed to do a job because the government wants a different minoity that hurts me. at best it means that projects are more expensive because there is less competition, at worst someone incompetent is hired and we get junk.

orochimaaru 1y ago

Well, it’s not the popular vote but the electoral college. There may be plenty of people in blue states who voted for Trump because they were fed up with democrats having foisted an unelected candidate on them. They would for the most part know that the vote kinda doesn’t count - e.g. if you live in CA or IL. In this case you’re mostly voting to make a point. So with the current system, that varies. If it’s a popular vote, then I’d say you have a point.

Braxton1980 1y ago
>were fed up with democrats having foisted an unelected candidate on them What power was this candidate given? By saying "unelected" you're trying to imply that a person was given power in the government without a vote. =------------------------ The election is a choice between two candidates. It's not "Did you like that the Democrats did X"? It's "Which candidate would make a better president"? The reason is that the effects of the outcome aren't limited to the Democrat party leadeship. For example a student who is deported wasn't responsible for the decision by the Democrat party leadership not to hold a primary but are affected by the outcome of the election. The logical flaw in the voters you are referring to is not comparing choices while making a selection.

Braxton1980 1y ago

>Were the people who voted for Hitler bad people because they voted for a bad person? Depends on what they know or heard. The situation is very different today. The internet gives each person access to all the information. I'm sure time can be a factor but in Germany you have more an excuse. Also, with Germany, the economic situation was used by Hitler and worked to his advantage. There's also the more controversial take but I've only read bits and pieces and many disagree with this as it implies a multigeneration swaying and ingrained cultural change https://www.amazon.com/Hitlers-Willing-Executioners-Ordinary-Holocaust/ https://www.amazon.com/Hitlers-Willing-Executioners-Ordinary...

southernplaces7 1y ago

People voting for Hitler wasn't a problem either way.. Enough of them never voted for him under the German electoral system of the time that he never won enough of a majority to become president of his country. Instead he then used backroom deals with useful idiots and cynics who thought they could use him in favor of their careers, to get himself appointed to a position (chancellor) from which he could become dictator. The more valid criticism based on the above comparison isn't quite so much against American voters as it is against the cynics, spineless opponents and useful idiots inside the federal political system, who have the power to curtail what Trump is attempting as president, but don't for different reasons of their own. I particularly note the other republicans in his party here, who could actually stop Trump's more deranged nonsense but are letting centuries of restrained, relatively democratic and lawful political tradition go to shit for the sake of their own short-sighted ambitious idiocies.

Braxton1980 1y ago
I didn't realize Hitler didn't win the 1932 election but became chancellor after the Nazi party obtained a majority in the government and Hindenburg, who won, appointed him. >who have the power to curtail what Trump is attempting as president, but don't for different They won't do this because of his public support.