Philosophical Vegan Forum

Red wrote: ↑Wed Feb 20, 2019 4:56 pm Most definitely to both.

From time to time, Presidents are pressured into signing bills, but again, Bernie is the uncompromising type.

Is he more uncompromising than other Presidents who have been pressured into signing bills?

It just isn't enough.

And how can we be sure of this?

Still very unlikely. I find it unlikely that the Democrats and Republicans would be able to come to an agreement on energy, since the Dems want more renewables, and the Republicans want more fossil fuels.

How would this be relevant to agreeing on nuclear power?

Are you willing to bank on that?

Yes, but I wouldn't necessarily advise Americans to.

I forgot.

It will be much easier if we discuss this on Discord?

I think Trump is doing a good enough job himself.

It can't hurt to help him.

Those sentences would look very bad out of context!

What do I have to gain?

You will increase the vote share of a third party, potentially getting it to the Presidential debates, and potentially helping it to knock down either racist Trump or anti-nuclear Bernie into the dustbin of history, and potentially getting it to the Presidency where it can reverse the racist policies of Trump, and get more of America on nuclear.

This is all only likely to potentially happen, and may not happen. However, if you don't for them it will definitely not happen.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz wrote: ↑Wed Feb 20, 2019 5:10 pm
Is he more uncompromising than other Presidents who have been pressured into signing bills?

I would definitely say so.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz wrote: ↑Wed Feb 20, 2019 5:10 pm And how can we be sure of this?

It's just how Politics are in America.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz wrote: ↑Wed Feb 20, 2019 5:10 pm How would this be relevant to agreeing on nuclear power?

They'll each propose their own bills that outline all of their energy proposals, like what they're doing with the GND. They don't just make a bill for one thing since it's pretty inefficient (though in a case like this, what makes the most sense).

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz wrote: ↑Wed Feb 20, 2019 5:10 pm It will be much easier if we discuss this on Discord?

No.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz wrote: ↑Wed Feb 20, 2019 5:10 pm You will increase the vote share of a third party, potentially getting it to the Presidential debates, and potentially helping it to knock down either racist Trump or anti-nuclear Bernie into the dustbin of history, and potentially getting it to the Presidency where it can reverse the racist policies of Trump, and get more of America on nuclear.

This is all only likely to potentially happen, and may not happen. However, if you don't for them it will definitely not happen.

I think I'd take my chances with the definitely better option than the possibly better option.

Red wrote: ↑Wed Feb 20, 2019 5:19 pm

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz wrote: ↑Wed Feb 20, 2019 5:10 pm It will be much easier if we discuss this on Discord?

No.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZiyOa0fi0n0

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz wrote: ↑Wed Feb 20, 2019 5:10 pm You will increase the vote share of a third party, potentially getting it to the Presidential debates, and potentially helping it to knock down either racist Trump or anti-nuclear Bernie into the dustbin of history, and potentially getting it to the Presidency where it can reverse the racist policies of Trump, and get more of America on nuclear.

This is all only likely to potentially happen, and may not happen. However, if you don't for them it will definitely not happen.

I think I'd take my chances with the definitely better option than the possibly better option.

How is voting for Trump the definitely better option? It's not going to damage Sanders's chances at winning the Presidency, as you've already revealed. It's just going to take votes away from Johnson. You're taking your chances with the definitely not better option than the possible better option.

Consider it Agent Blue's wager:

1. You vote for Gary Johnson and all or some of those things do happen = You have gained everything/something
2. You vote for Gary Johnson and none of those things do happen = You've lost nothing. If Bernie won, it wasn't because you didn't vote for Trump as your area was going to vote for Bernie anyway.
3. You vote for Donald Trump and all or some of those things could have happened but now didn't = You have lost everything/something
4. You vote for Donald Trump and non of those things could have happened = You've gained nothing. If Bernie lost, it wasn't because you voted for Trump as your area was going to vote for Bernie anyway.

You should pick the possibility of gaining something over the definite not gaining of it.

As for the rest of your post, I don't think there's much to be gained from continuing discussing it. I think it's possible that nuclear power can advance under Bernie despite him being against it, and you don't, and we're not going to know for sure until he becomes President. If you did end up convincing me that Bernie would not be a good President, it wouldn't matter as I don't get a vote in this election. So there's not really any point in discussing it. Plus, if you don't want Bernie to be President, having me supporting him is probably a good thing because then Bernie supporters can be associated with all the other weird shit I advocate for.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz wrote: ↑Wed Feb 20, 2019 5:36 pm How is voting for Trump the definitely better option?

His support for Nuclear.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz wrote: ↑Wed Feb 20, 2019 5:36 pmIt's not going to damage Sanders's chances at winning the Presidency, as you've already revealed. It's just going to take votes away from Johnson. You're taking your chances with the definitely not better option than the possible better option.

Consider it Agent Blue's wager:

1. You vote for Gary Johnson and all or some of those things do happen = You have gained everything/something
2. You vote for Gary Johnson and none of those things do happen = You've lost nothing. If Bernie won, it wasn't because you didn't vote for Trump as your area was going to vote for Bernie anyway.
3. You vote for Donald Trump and all or some of those things could have happened but now didn't = You have lost everything/something
4. You vote for Donald Trump and non of those things could have happened = You've gained nothing. If Bernie lost, it wasn't because you voted for Trump as your area was going to vote for Bernie anyway.

You should pick the possibility of gaining something over the definite not gaining of it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcj8yJk87cs

Red wrote: ↑Wed Feb 20, 2019 5:58 pm

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz wrote: ↑Wed Feb 20, 2019 5:36 pm How is voting for Trump the definitely better option?

His support for Nuclear.

Gary Johnson also supports nuclear.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz wrote: ↑Wed Feb 20, 2019 5:36 pm Consider it Agent Blue's wager:

1. You vote for Gary Johnson and all or some of those things do happen = You have gained everything/something
2. You vote for Gary Johnson and none of those things do happen = You've lost nothing. If Bernie won, it wasn't because you didn't vote for Trump as your area was going to vote for Bernie anyway.
3. You vote for Donald Trump and all or some of those things could have happened but now didn't = You have lost everything/something
4. You vote for Donald Trump and non of those things could have happened = You've gained nothing. If Bernie lost, it wasn't because you voted for Trump as your area was going to vote for Bernie anyway.

You should pick the possibility of gaining something over the definite not gaining of it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcj8yJk87cs

K but if you could pick one, which would it be?:

1. A proto-fascist who thinks that climate change is a Chinese hoax.
2. Somebody who wants to get rid of nuclear power.
3. Somebody who doesn't know what Aleppo is.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz wrote: ↑Wed Feb 20, 2019 6:00 pm
Gary Johnson also supports nuclear.

Trump is basically the same as Johnson in terms of energy.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz wrote: ↑Wed Feb 20, 2019 6:00 pmK but if you could pick one, which would it be?:

1. A proto-fascist who thinks that climate change is a Chinese hoax.
2. Somebody who wants to get rid of nuclear power.
3. Somebody who doesn't know what Aleppo is.

The first, since he's the only pro-nuclear candidate who has the best chance of winning.

Red wrote: ↑Wed Feb 20, 2019 6:02 pm Trump is basically the same as Johnson in terms of energy.

And he's far, far worse than Johnson in pretty much every other area.

The first, since he's the only pro-nuclear candidate who has the best chance of winning.

You're not going to help him to win at all with your vote for him. A vote for Trump will literally change nothing, as you've already revealed that your area is pretty much guaranteed to turn blue. If Bernie loses the election, your vote will not contribute anything to that. Whereas, your vote can change something if you vote for Gary Johnson.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz wrote: ↑Wed Feb 20, 2019 6:08 pm And he's far, far worse than Johnson in pretty much every other area.

What are Johnson's chances of winning?

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz wrote: ↑Wed Feb 20, 2019 6:08 pm You're not going to help him to win at all with your vote for him. A vote for Trump will literally change nothing, as you've already revealed that your area is pretty much guaranteed to turn blue. If Bernie loses the election, your vote will not contribute anything to that. Whereas, your vote can change something if you vote for Gary Johnson.

Either way, my vote will be worthless, given my state. If I lived in Florida or Ohio, that might be different.

Red wrote: ↑Wed Feb 20, 2019 6:14 pm What are Johnson's chances of winning?

This isn't relevant since neither of them have any chance of winning in your state.

Either way, my vote will be worthless, given my state. If I lived in Florida or Ohio, that might be different.

A vote for Johnson won't be worthless because if you increase his vote share to 5%, he can get on the TV debates.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz wrote: ↑Wed Feb 20, 2019 6:17 pm This isn't relevant since neither of them have any chance of winning in your state.

Now that I think of it, voting for Johnson would make Trump less likely to win. Johnson would just steal votes from Trump as Stein did from Hillary, due to the political spectrums.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz wrote: ↑Wed Feb 20, 2019 6:17 pm A vote for Johnson won't be worthless because if you increase his vote share to 5%, he can get on the TV debates.

So what?