Aged Like Milk

one of these is clearly a worse option

Following USA politics as an outsider, this has baffled me greatly the past year and more. Is harm reduction really such a difficult concept? It's like that damn bus scenario, just with only bad options.

Something like: There's five people on the bus, and the brakes stop working, so they vote for what they should do. Two say they should drive off a cliff, and one says they should just swerve and crash into the nearby ditch. Two people don't vote because they want neither. The bus drives off the cliff and everyone dies

And the wholesale destruction of USAID and PEPFAR means people are simultaneously starving to death in chunks of the world, not getting vaccines, and also not getting HIV prevention meds, which means long term, HIV infection is going to increase worldwide over time. That is going to be a massive, silent genocide that will be orders of magnitude worse, but largely undocumented.

That was a serious, serious fuckup on voters parts. Not to mention massive cuts to everyday things like critical medical R&D, science R&D, disaster preparedness, NASA, department of education, PBS and Corp for public broadcasting, department of health, FDA + food safety programs, and many other programs that people take for granted without thinking (housing grants for home buying, federal student loans, food stamps, weather prediction for natural disasters, Medicare/ACA/Medicaid, etc)

His cuts to the IRS are going to result in less money for shit like bridges, roads, and electrical grids too.

Doesn't matter.

The people who voted 3rd party or didn't vote because they were mad about Israel only ever cared about their own personal feelings. If they actually gave a shit about Palestine, they would have made the decision that hurt them the least. That's not what they did.

It was all about their own satisfaction.