• Feathercrown@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 day ago

    But that is literally superior to making things worse. It’s not about feeling anything, it’s about outcomes.

    • VasovagalSyncope@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      13 hours ago

      At some point things need to get better.

      So we need a party that is interested in change instead of stagnation.

      The DNC has been stagnating and rotting my whole life.

      Nothing has gotten meaningfully better under their leadership.

      • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        13 hours ago

        I wouldn’t say nothing, but yes your core argument is true. That doesn’t invalidate what I said however.

        • VasovagalSyncope@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 hours ago

          You shouldn’t make arguments for things to not get better

          That is what you are saying when you reject solutions to the problem.

          • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 hours ago

            I’m not doing either of those things. I’m pointing out that things staying the same is preferable to them getting worse. Of course positive change is also better than stagnation. Those are both true. It’s a pretty simple scale IMO, progress > stagnation > regress. I don’t see where the misunderstanding is coming from; do you think I wouldn’t prefer progress?