Okay, fine: to the extent that a non-genocide position existed, Harris was it.
But the real point is that even if a person disagrees with you about that, they still should’ve voted for Harris. She was at least objectively not more genocidal than Trump, and infinitely better on basically every other issue.
So did the protest non-voters, even moreso than the Democrat ones.
The non-genocide position was literally impossible to express no matter what you tried to do.
No it existed. Harris is on record saying she’d like to work towards peace talks.
Which is objectively better than option B: vote GOP “finish them off” and option C: literally doing nothing.
Okay, fine: to the extent that a non-genocide position existed, Harris was it.
But the real point is that even if a person disagrees with you about that, they still should’ve voted for Harris. She was at least objectively not more genocidal than Trump, and infinitely better on basically every other issue.
Green Party maybe?
Nope, that has the same effect as not voting.
A non-vote is = support for every candidate
A third party vote doesn’t
Even if the end result is the same it shows you don’t support the winner
Any action other than voting for the only candidate that could beat Trump was effectively a vote for Trump. End of.
Strange that Biden won in 2020 despite 2/3 of the country “effectively voting for Trump” by not voting for Biden🤔