Less genocide is better than more genocide.
Arguing against less genocide is an activity that increases the ammount of genocide.
This is not a complicated choice and pretending otherwise makes the situation worse.
Edit: I'm reposting my full argument, because why not?
People need to understand that it's possible to vote against genocide.
Donald Trump is Genocide at home and abroad.
Joe Biden is "only" Genocide abroad, and probably less of it.
Therefore, a vote for Joe Biden is a Vote against genocide.
No, it doesn't matter that he's an active participant in the apparatus that's creating the genocide, because if he's in office there's less genocide. Which is the important part, and pretending otherwise is sophistry. If you abstain from voting, you are increasing the likelihood of more genocide and if you discourage others from voting, you are an active participant in the overall social apparatus that is probabilistically increasing the amount of genocide.
The utility calculation is dead simple: more votes for Biden in key states makes more genocide less likely, and discouraging people from voting for Biden makes more genocide more likely. Therefore, discouraging people from voting for Biden is a pro-genocide strategy and voting for Biden in battleground states is an anti-genocide strategy. You should vote for Biden unless you live in a solid blue state, and even then it's not a bad idea.
I also agree that it would be better if Biden actually did something to lessen the genocide
I can't believe you're justifying it as "only genocide abroad." Like wtaf?
Tell the DNC to take their head out of their ass or you're getting the fucking orange you dork.
Not doing everything possible to prevent something is not the same as actively doing it. It's still bad, but if you seriously think it would be a good idea to let fascists take over America because Biden isn't marching troops into Gaza or whatever it is you want him to do, then hopefully there are enough sane people left to make you irrelevant.
Their point was clearly that the total amount of genocide is less in that scenario. It takes an extremely uncharitable reading to imagine that they are saying that genocide doesn't matter if it happens elsewhere (and one that ignores all of the surrounding context within the text itself).
You took that out of context on purpose. Stfu if you can't at least debate in good faith
You say this now like you're not gonna refuse to vote for biden if he takes enough meaningful steps towards stopping the genocide. You genocidal libs are all the same, desperate to make sure nobody votes uncommitted in the primaries and rabidly downvote anything remotely critical of biden, yet too afraid to come out and say you want more dead Palestinians. Go to hell 🌸
I'm not sure how much of what drugs you're talking, but it's obviously the wrong ammount.
Both Republicans and democrats and no matter the president has been bad abroad for others. We should not vote Biden to set a precedence and get some of our voting power back. If you vote red/blue no matter what then your vote or voice doesn't matter.
That would be a great idea if there weren't two supreme court seats ready to be replaced in the next four years.
Siezing control of the courts has already given the far right incredible control over life in the US, and they're looking to cement that control as much as they can.
You're not only talking about fucking over vulnerable people for the next four years, you're actually talking about fucking over vulnerable people for decades.
