President Joe Biden is arguing that “there is something dangerous happening in America” as he revives his warnings that Donald Trump and his allies represent an existential threat to the country’s democratic institutions.

There is an extremist movement that does not share the basic beliefs of our democracy. The MAGA movement,” Biden says in excerpts of the speech Thursday in Arizona, released in advance by the White House, referring Trump’s Make America Great Again slogan.

Although voting in the 2024 Republican primary doesn’t begin for months, Biden’s focus reflects Trump’s status as the undisputed frontrunner for his party’s nomination despite facing four indictments, two of them related to his attempts to overturn Biden’s victory in the 2020 election.

  • uberkalden@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Understood, but running with that analogy, it's a fucking stupid reason for turnout to be bad. Leg or head? That's a shit choice! You choose for me.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because some people are bad enough off already a shot to the leg will still kill them, just be slow and painful.

      They're dying either way mate.

      That's not even getting i to how for lots of people, voting ain't a 10 minute stop on the way home from work.

      It's 4 or even 8 hours waiting inline instead of putting food on the table.

      Try to have some empathy

      • oneiros@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        You have misunderstood the metaphor. (edit: Rather, the people you're describing have.)

        You cannot opt out. Someone will take the office.

        • Jeremy [Iowa]@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Rather, I reject the flawed nature of the metaphor and its poor fit. That's true - someone will take office… and you're not obligated to choose to be shot in either the leg or the head. You can, say, make no choice. You can choose, say, the hand.

          We're all going to be shot through what some choose. Some will go for everyone getting headshot, some will go for everyone losing a leg… and roughly the same will decide such a choice is absurd and not make a choice at all. Some few will choose something less damaging entirely.

          • oneiros@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Of course, one has the freedom to cast their vote, or not, as they like. But I can't fathom why someone would "choose" an impossible outcome that ultimately makes the fatal scenario more likely instead of moving the needle toward the survivable one. It strikes me as irrational, which I could ignore if it were mere self-sabotage, but this affects others too.

            • Jeremy [Iowa]@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I can’t fathom why someone would “choose” an impossible outcome that ultimately makes the fatal scenario more likely

              Does voting third party or abstaining somehow increase the count of votes for Republicans? I realize I've been out of school a while, but my understanding was it did not.

              . It strikes me as irrational, which I could ignore if it were mere self-sabotage, but this affects others too.

              Would this be more or less irrational than actively perpetuating the problems with a party and its candidates by guaranteeing them your vote for no reason other than they're not as bad as a different party?

              • oneiros@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Does voting third party or abstaining somehow increase the count of votes for Republicans?

                No, I'm only describing the spoiler effect here.

                Would this be more or less irrational than actively perpetuating the problems with a party and its candidates by guaranteeing them your vote for no reason other than they're not as bad as a different party?

                It would be more irrational, because if the "shoot me in the leg, I guess" party loses, everyone dies, and nobody gets to have opinions about anything ever again.

                I think we can both agree that voting to avoid bad outcomes rather than to select good ones is fucked.

                • Jeremy [Iowa]@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  No, I’m only describing the spoiler effect here.

                  Then the question still applies: in what way would a spoiler increase the count of either establishment candidate? My understanding of basic math is that it cannot.

                  It would be more irrational, because if the “shoot me in the leg, I guess” party loses, everyone dies, and nobody gets to have opinions about anything ever again.

                  That's certainly one opinion on the matter… coincidentally one perfectly aligned with a partisan propaganda viewpoint and, thus far, is nothing but alarmist hyperbole.

                  I think we can both agree that voting to avoid bad outcomes rather than to select good ones is fucked.

                  We sure can.

                  • oneiros@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Then the question still applies: in what way would a spoiler increase the count of either establishment candidate? My understanding of basic math is that it cannot.

                    Correct, and to claim otherwise would be absurd. Have I done that? The absolute count of votes is immaterial. Elections are decided by the proportion of votes cast for each candidate. That's what admits the spoiler effect. Thanks, FPTP.

                    That's certainly one opinion on the matter… coincidentally one perfectly aligned with a partisan propaganda viewpoint and, thus far, is nothing but alarmist hyperbole.

                    It's no coincidence. This is the means by which the establishment perpetuates itself. Doesn't mean both parties are the same.

                    I'm tapping out after this, but I appreciated the discussion. Have a great weekend.