• OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 days ago

    I just did. My answer is neither.

    You’ll have to elaborate on why that isn’t an option in your hypothetical if you don’t accept that.

    • null@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 days ago

      Do you just not understand what a hypothetical is?

      For those reading, the reason Objection won’t answer this very simple question is because they’re smart enough to know exactly where I’m going with it, and they know that it reveals their position as indefensible.

      This is the Lemmy Lefty playbook to a T.

      • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 days ago

        Of course I understand what a hypothetical is, and I answered what I would do in the situation you presented me with. You don’t accept that answer for some arbitrary reason, but you won’t explain why it wouldn’t be an option.

        My position is perfectly defensible. This is like asking a vegan “Would you rather eat pork or beef?” and when they reject both options, you claim that it means their position is indefensible.

        • null@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          5 days ago

          Of course I understand what a hypothetical is, and I answered what I would do in the situation you presented me with.

          No, you created your own hypothetical and answered based on that. My hypothetical has only 2 possible answers, and you refuse to answer it because you know it dismantles your stance.

          The hypothetical you presented about asking a vegan if they’d eat pork or beef is perfectly valid by the way. If they answered “neither” they would also not be answering the question. But that wouldn’t make veganism indefensible, don’t put words in my mouth.

          • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 days ago

            Both options are fundamentally unacceptable to me. There is no conceivable situation where I would vote for either.

            If you’re somehow compelling me to act against my will, then, I don’t know, I might pick one randomly, or I might pick the one you don’t like out of spite, or I might pick the one you do like out of the hope you’ll be merciful to me in the future, since in this universe you can apparently control my body against my will.

            • null@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              5 days ago

              There is no conceivable situation where I would vote for either.

              Since you refuse to engage, let’s rephrase:

              Which would be the better outcome, Trump winning, or Kamala winning?

              • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                5 days ago

                Kamala winning, at least in the short term, but it does set a bad precedent if it means the democrats learn they can support genocide and get away with it.

                  • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    5 days ago

                    I’m not a psychic, so it’s difficult to say, but I will answer Kamala since you are so insistent on unambiguous answers.