In what world will a politician never disappoint you?
I’m generally in full control of myself and even I disappoint myself - fringe third party candidates is not the political messiah some people think they are.
In a world where “politician” isn’t a career, or even a thing that exists, and instead people make decisions communally and horizontally. It’s called anarchism.
You not knowing or being able to imagine alternatives, doesn’t mean none exist.
The question was why do we need to accept that politicians will disappoint you, implying that they had something they believed would not disappoint them.
In what world will a politician never disappoint you?
I’m generally in full control of myself and even I disappoint myself - fringe third party candidates is not the political messiah some people think they are.
In a world where “politician” isn’t a career, or even a thing that exists, and instead people make decisions communally and horizontally. It’s called anarchism.
You not knowing or being able to imagine alternatives, doesn’t mean none exist.
Being able to imagine alternatives doesn’t mean they’re realistic.
How realistic do you think this is?
I don’t understand how this is the argument against third party. Why does the candidate need to be the Messiah to be better than Kamala?
The question was why do we need to accept that politicians will disappoint you, implying that they had something they believed would not disappoint them.
I thought it was a third party candidate.
Apparently it was anarchism.
Rookie Lemmy mistake.