Look, we had pretty much a textbook trolley problem where it was objectively correct* to pick the track with fewer casualties. But now that the train has gone, we need to lay responsibility squarely with those who tied the casualties to the tracks in the first place.
(*One reason for choosing the other track was to give the democrats their own trolley problem, choosing between getting elected or leaving casualties on their track. And they chose the latter. Now we’re seeing more progressive candidates emerge so arguably it worked. Was it worth the cost? That’s harder to decide since we’d have to estimate the long term costs of a hypothetical scenario.)
But regardless of what the objectively correct choice was, belittling those who disagreed by trivialising their reasons or absolving the architects of the dilemma of responsibility is just wrong.
You’re right about that one phrase, I mixed it up with something else. She did state that she would continue to support arming Israel unconditionally.
Everything else I said still stands, and you haven’t addressed any of it.
OK well Harris sucks but there were only two horsies in the race. Did you vote strategically for the objectively better candidate?
Yes.
Look, we had pretty much a textbook trolley problem where it was objectively correct* to pick the track with fewer casualties. But now that the train has gone, we need to lay responsibility squarely with those who tied the casualties to the tracks in the first place.
(*One reason for choosing the other track was to give the democrats their own trolley problem, choosing between getting elected or leaving casualties on their track. And they chose the latter. Now we’re seeing more progressive candidates emerge so arguably it worked. Was it worth the cost? That’s harder to decide since we’d have to estimate the long term costs of a hypothetical scenario.)
But regardless of what the objectively correct choice was, belittling those who disagreed by trivialising their reasons or absolving the architects of the dilemma of responsibility is just wrong.