Not voting is a choice. Not voting is saying you’re okay with either option. You’re OK with fascism because you can’t bear to have neoliberalism instead. Maybe you’d rather have genocide of both Arabs and Latin Americans? Maybe you’d rather have a president who has promised to make the genocide worse than one who might put some amount of pressure to make it less bad.

I imagine we can agree no American president has been ideal? Some of the presidents who have given us the most progress in important areas like welfare, civil rights, and environmental protections have also been war criminals. Roosevelt, Kennedy/LBJ, Obama, etc. Imagine where we’d be if no one voted for the lesser evil in those elections, held firm and didn’t vote for the president who would set up concentration camps, or keep us in wars in Asia and the middle east.

Throwing away your vote got us presidents like GWB and Trump. Stalled progress for decades. Evil supreme court justices. In fact, the most underrated job of the president is picking supreme court justices, since the court has made itself the single most powerful institution in the country.

How about you vote for the most potential for progress?

The not voting strategy has never worked before, why would it work this time? You want the let the future of this country determined by someone else?

What are we going to change our vote to? Only two parties can win this year (let’s change that) and the other option is worse on this issue.

Sounds like copium to me. The neolibs have really figured out how to placate the masses. Things aren’t bad enough and the media keeps the majority unaware.

MiLK Is fOr bABieS

I think the answer is simple (they probably mentioned it in the article I’m not reading). Sony makes good hardware and good games. They don’t really need to compete with Nintendo since they kinda do their own thing at this point, and Microsoft is really no better. I also think Playstation is generally regarded as having better exclusives, even during the 360 era where Xbox clearly won.

deleted by creator

Reading stuff like this is so crazy. They just go “hey 150k is a nice big number and should be plenty of heads, let’s just just take way the livelihoods of tens of thousands of actual people to make a number look nicer”

It reads like it’s from 98. The references to Blockbuster, Daimler-Chrysler, McDonnell Douglas, and Bill Clinton tipped me off this was an old one.

Around these parts you can’t just put information without stating your bias. Your bias WILL be assumed and you WILL be canceled.