I hear you. I think it’s a specific response and I don’t necessarily agree with the force of it. But I also think the Republican analogue since 2009 suggests that absolutist purity tests like that often work. Idk.
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
I mean I think at root what point 6 is getting at is that 2016, 2020, and 2024 each represented the easiest goddamn choices in the world, and that folks are gonna have a hard time with people who continue not to acknowledge that.
That said, there's a point by @supremerobo.bsky.social that you have to give even toxic people a graceful out to get them to be loyal, and often we do have to accept choosing the lesser evil to defeat a greater evil:
I think this is fair, and I think a lot of people are reading this as “he’s talking about *me*” as opposed to people who are looking support and have said things on the record for which they’ll have to be accountable.
Yeah, I think there’s a difference between expecting every rando abstainer to publicly apologize and expecting it from anyone trying to get elected or be a leader in the movement.
Exactly. I don’t even care if you want to explicitly pitch it as harm reduction while not loving the available options, but you had to make a choice and if you thought it was remotely difficult you’re, frankly, morally deficient.
Comments
Refusal to acknowledge this within the online media ecosystem is indistinguishable from intentional sabotage.