LogFAQs > #982453836

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

You're not allowed to be annoyed at bad things that can't be changed? You're literally saying it's not ok to be upset about something that sucks, just because the alternative is worse, lol.

No?

I'm saying if you are going to be upset about something that sucks then you should probably also not be wrong while you're at it.

Being upset at the presidential nominee targeting the center is the wrong thing to be upset about. You can be upset at the system that keeps us in this two party dynamic, but do it recognizing that Harris/Walz have to take every advantage they can between now and election day not because it's fun for progressives, but because it is necessary.

.

For example I had a conversation with my step-father yesterday about NFL. Our favorite team is the 49ers and he likes the team but I follow the team. They lost on sunday, but because I actually watch every second of the game and go above and beyond to understand the factors at play I would say that I had a much better grasp on WHY we lost, and what that means for the rest of this season.

He started the conversation from a perspective of doom and gloom and everything is lost and the season is over because of X, Y and Z.

Throughout the conversation I explained that X, Y and Z were actually negligible factors to the outcome of the game, and that the real issues were A, B and C, and that furthermore D and E were very unlikely events that occurred, that had coinflips just gone the other way we would have won anyways.

Now a conversation between myself and him does not fundamentally change anything about the 49ers. No one from the head office or coaching staff is listening in and taking notes and it will have no bearing on the rest of the season at all, but why should I not make an effort to correct him on what was to me an objectively wrongheaded interpretation of the previous day's loss?

And as Inviso mentioned with something like politics and social media our behaviors and our engagements actually CAN in part shape the amplification of information and ideas. You having the opinion that Harris/Walz should NOT cater to centrist voters might not affect your own personal vote. You projecting that or amplifying OTHER voices who are projecting it can tangibly increase the reach of those posts and potentially put them in front of someone who MIGHT be swayed.

You also typically take the approach of "Look at this, this is a terrible thing that is occurring" and that's basically the end of the thought. Whereas you might instead say "I wish they didn't have to make these kinds of concessions and I personally don't like it, but I understand why they are doing it" which still articulates what you WISH would be happening.