So, I'm not assuming that you or the person I replied to are in the US specifically.

But in the context of the US, if you (generally) chose not to vote in the 2024 election then you are guilty of doing nothing to prevent the atrocities committed by the Trump administration, when you in fact had the opportunity to do something - which is to say that you are guilty of negligence.

If you encouraged others to not vote then you are complicit in the actions of the Trump administration, because you helped put them in power.

There is no "blame-shifting game" being played here, as there is no need to shift anything. The blame is direct, valid, and undeniable.

The fact that it's only a little is the treat

Climate change please hurry up.

Don't want to get your own hands dirty actually making a change?

Oh yeah like a little bit of cancer. How lucky.

Anyone who voted for trump deserves to get divorced. The lack of morals, the lack of basic human empathy is present in all trump voters.

Maybe if everyone votes for the least capitalist party every time....

It's not blame shifting. The blame sits directly on you, personally, and already had been.
No need to shift it at all.

Uh, yeah, exactly? A little bit of cancer can be fought and beaten. A lot of cancer is a death sentence.

Depends where the cancer is doesn't it now?

Not really, no. Less cancer is always better than more cancer, no matter where it is.

You do know that everyone has a bit of cancer, right? Zero cancer just isn't a thing that happens in an organism composed of trillions of cells. Likewise, zero exploitation and suffering just isn't a thing that happens in a population composed of billions of people.

A little cancer is handled by immune reaction, a little more by medicine and surgery, a lot kills the organism. A little exploitation is handled by social reaction, a little more by political action, a lot kills the population.

No matter where the cancer is, less is better than more. We were in the treatable stage and you clowns insisted on skipping chemo.

No cancer is better, less cancer is not better - it's still cancer. But if you're willing to accept that, go for it; Enjoy your cancer.

And why are you comparing it with a 'harmless' amount of cancer that is naturally removed and not an issue instead of what any normal person thinks of when they hear cancer?

How does that work with electors anyway? I'm under the impression that if you don't live in a swing state your vote is basically a formality.

Zero cancer just isn't a thing that happens in an organism composed of trillions of cells. Likewise, zero exploitation and suffering just isn't a thing that happens in a population composed of billions of people.

No cancer isn't a thing. It's only "better" in an unobtainable, hypothetical, entirely delusional sense. Refusing to settle for less than impossible things is just plain stupid. We were managing with less societal cancer. You skipped chemo because it makes you feel yucky, and now it's metastasized. Are you proud of yourself?

Or, and please hear me out, because you're not going to like it.

The Republican party are directly responsible for putting Trump as the nominee.

The people who voted Republican are directly responsible.

The Democrat party are indirectly responsible by presenting such a poor-looking alternative. "We're not Trump" is not enough.

The people who chose not to vote are the least responsible of all.

You're directing your anger in the wrong direction. It's the corruption within the system you need to be tearing down, not some poor sod on the internet.

What's the plan - to scare them into voting the way you want in the next election? To argue with and win over the millions of extra voters the Democrats needed?

The problem isn't with the people who saw that both sides were bad options - it's with the Democrat party for being a bad option.

No normal person when hearing cancer would think 'harmless everyday mutation' and not 'deadly growing thing'.

There's no difference. Cancer is cancer. Sometimes it's manageable by the immune system alone, sometimes it's fully and irreversibly malignant in multiple organs, usually it's somewhere between. There is no zero cancer, the best we get is small amounts. There is no zero exploitation, the best we get is small amounts.

Sometimes we get the best we can get. Usually, we get a treatable amount. With treatment, the growing thing can be combated before it becomes irreversibly deadly. But skip those treatments because they make you nauseous, and the deadly thing grows bigger.

You couldn't get zero exploitation (obviously, because that's not possible) so you skipped the treatment and now it's growing deadlier. You might as well have skipped chemo to huff essential oils. That's what you look like to the rest of us, the person skipping chemo to treat their cancer with incense and good vibes.

Its exactly how it works, whether you like it or not.

According to every conversation I've ever had with a tankie that leaves you nobody to vote for, because EVERYONE is a capitalist.

CCP? Capitalist. Commie Russia? Capitalist. North Korea? Also capitalist.

What if they were in a state where their vote wouldn't have even remotely changed the electoral vote outcome? It's a strawman blame game you're playing to feel smug about yourself in a generalized approach.

You don't know anyone's personal situation yet you have no qualm placing blame for a worldwide issue on a single individual.

Good for you. You shamed someone for not solving the worlds climate issues with a single fucking vote that may not have even made any difference at all.

Yes. And even in a swing state, it may take a million or more votes to swing it.

The few states with apportioned electors are the outlier.