Something I had forgotten I argued last electoral cycle that this post somehow reminded me: People say (or said) we have to - or had to now - vote for Kamala Harris because she’d lose without our votes. They would also say (said) a third party vote was useless and the same as voting for Trump, since the party would not be able to win. It is the same that is now being argued for the democratic party in general. Yet when I pointed out that since we aren’t voting for genociders like the democrats and therefore their votes are wasted on a candidate thats sure to lose, so they have to vote for the party I want them to vote for, if we are to beat Trump, then that argument is somehow faulty to them. Odd how that is. They can see the issue with the reasoning as long as it does not benefit them.