2 ms·
"losing by default" on elmu's "X" is actually totally okay > If we turn our back on the voting population I don't see how refusing to patronize 1 nazi is "tur
by ImPostingOnHN 7mo ago
"losing by default" on elmu's "X" is actually totally okay
> If we turn our back on the voting population
I don't see how refusing to patronize 1 nazi is "turning your back on the voting population". Especially when the voting population doesn't like nazis. It's more like embracing the voting population.
- temp8830 7mo agoBut if far right parties are gaining votes - then some voting population is giving votes to them. Or are you saying that far right parties are not Nazis?
- ImPostingOnHN 7mo ago> But if far right parties are gaining votes Which votes are those again? In the USA, which we're talking about here. If refusing to patronize 1 nazi means the far right gets more voters, we would expect to see that in USA election results over the last year or so. Fortunately, this hypothesis is not borne out in the data. In fact, I'd say your purported correlation is inverted, but I suspect there is a deeper, correlated variable: "doesn't like nazis" -> ( "doesn't vote for nazis", "doesn't patronize nazis" ).
- temp8830 6mo agoWe must be looking at different data. Most of Europe has seen a significant increase in far right support. Italy, France, Germany. And in the US, like it or not, there are people who feel represented by the MAGA movement. And last I checked - they managed to elect a president who invented this acronym. Pretending these people don't exist might feel nice but ignore them at your peril. If this is what "Nazis don't vote" looks like - what would it look like when they start?