Sure, the entire world will suffer from a fascist demagogue at the head of the most powerful country in the world
But have you considered that, for a few brief moments of time, we created a lot of value for the shareholders we got to feel smug over the SHITLIBS who wanted to prevent fascism?
As I believe in the abolition of capitalism and the creation of a popular base of support for such a measure, instead of a narrow oligarchy oppressing the proletariat and enforcing its will on society, I am a shitlib. It's a terrible burden to bear. 😔
It's honestly such a shockingly privileged position it almost defies belief that anyone could actually be so dense unless they are operating in bad faith. Yes, there are several serious problems in the world, and absolutely none of them are solved by helping the US slip into fascism. Leftists in particular are supposed to hate fascists, so I can't imagine how anyone with leftist sympathies could possibly want to see what the world looks like with an unrestrained Trunp at the helm. Again, unless they are so privileged they don't think the consequences would affect them personally, in which case I would call any other profession of external empathy which they might bleet ad nauseum, as questionably sincere.
I was making fun of that short-sighted self-serving nature by making a comparison to capitalist conservatives, not asserting that champagne socialists are, themselves, capitalist conservatives (though, functionally, their actions serve the same goals).
There's really not much to know nor is it a complex conflict. Just like The Troubles, it's a colonial conflict pretending to be sectarian/religious in nature.
ETA: And it should be clear that supporting people who want to support more and greater heights of violence isn't going to help.
She's supporting genocide in the same way you are supporting slavery by buying your electronics from China. When are you turning yourself in and going to prison??
Or is this line of reasoning and logic idiotic and unreasonable as you damn well know it is.
A simple google will provide you with articles like this : Harris says bloodshed in Gaza is devastating, emphasizes support for hostage and ceasefire deals
Meanwhile Trump is calling for the extermination of Palestinians.
GTFO with this double standard both sides bullshit.
If Israel running a war causes you to not vote for the non fascist, you are simply a massive moron, nothing else.
Yeah, because that worked out so well when in 2016 when Trump got elected, the GOP got multiple Supreme Court picks, multiple federal judges were given life terms, and Roe vs Wade got struck down. Let's see how that plays out when Ukraine falls, war breaks out in Europe, America becomes a theocratic dictatorship, and what little progress we may have seen with the environment completely falls apart and the world goes full tilt towards becoming an uninhabitable hellscape. Whatever the protest was about will be utterly meaningless.
If you want to protest, you protest AFTER you get sympathetic ears into office, not after you get the opposition elected. Trump gets in, then suddenly he'll give you plenty to protest about, vs protesting when Harris is in office and she actually has a willingness to listen to protests and meet their demands.
If you're that dialed in to the railroad strike this long after the fact, you are absolutely aware that Biden helped get the unions their biggest demands shortly after ending the strike.
Get your bad faith soundbite bullshit out of here.
The UAW struck after the railroad strike. And got Biden to personally come down to ask the what he could do to secure their vote. Both happened while Biden was in office. What are you even saying about why the railroad strike failed?
That is an insane statement. The civil rights era was full of protests and change. The Vietnam War ended because of protests. There are many instances of protests pushing presidents left.
They are either Russian trolls or children who have a Disney level perspective on politics, I think. They don't want to recognize that they have very limited options or the harsh realities surrounding them.
Such people who buy into this logic aren't all that bright. Accelerationists without a comprehension of entropy or a capacity of how this might impact a whole range of other vitally-important issues like women's rights or Ukrainian civilians among dozens over others.
Alas, we know a lot of this is fueled by foreign propaganda.
Social media psyops don't require all of the people to be puppets. You just spread some ideas around that get picked up by normal people, make some opinions get seen by the right people, etc. They are mostly not starting fires, but are simply adding a tiny bit of fuel here and there, which gets amplified by the internet.
All of the excessive online moderation actually works against it. When I started using the internet, there was a golden rule: "don't believe anything on the internet". Nowadays people think platforms will only show them the truth, but in reality you're being put into a filterbubble, an echo chamber of an opinion that keeps fueling itself.
It really depends on which state you live in whether or not you have the luxury of a protest vote. If you live in NY state that has a 20% lead for Harris, sure, some people can vote Jill Stein or something. But if you live in a state that actually might be close or not an obvious blowout, you can't vote that way. You actually have to be tactical with your vote, not idealistic or symbolic.
Whenever I hear people pushing the, you're either with us or against us, kind of rhetoric it makes me shake my head. It should go without saying, but obviously it doesn't, that you don't get to tell other people how to vote, and if you try to, they're going to think you're a raving lunatic. If you actually want to convince them to vote, you might want to consider making a plan for how to reasonably sway their views.
you don’t get to tell other people how to vote, and if you try to, they’re going to think you’re a raving lunatic
Umm...that's the entire way we select leaders. The entire campaign for any office, high or low, is telling people how to vote. That's literally democracy in action.
And it is not wrong to tell people that if they want third party candidates, the path to do so is to start with voting reform. I'm in Oregon, and we're actually making progress on this instead of just bitching about it or running spoiler third party candidates. We have ranked-choice voting on the ballot this year. If it passes, all our state and federal elections will be decided by ranked-choice voting. We'll actually make it viable for progressive third party candidates to run for our US House and Senate seats without just serving as a spoiler for Republicans. We're actually doing something about the two party duopoly.
But you never hear these anti-Kamala trolls suggesting doing something that would actually make a difference. They show up every election, and their platform is ALWAYS "don't vote for the democrat." Doesn't matter what election. Doesn't matter what year. They always find some reason that you shouldn't vote for the Democratic candidate. Their criticisms always attack the Democratic candidate and ignore the Republican.
They're clowns and trolls. Nothing more. They bitch about the two-party duopoly, but they don't actually want to do anything. The truth is they're actually just Republican trolls.
LOL, what rhetoric? I'm generally of the opinion that voting is an end in itself in democracies, and wish we had mandatory/compulsory voting laws. If you live in a democracy there should be obligation to vote, and the citizens should feel confident that we are accounting for the will of the people. But with the electoral college and first past the post system, there are realities of outcomes. There are really only 2 possible outcomes of a presidential race. And if you live in a swing state your vote does a lot more to tip realize one of those 2 outcomes. So the motivation to vote should be to help achieve one of those 2 outcomes that you find more preferable. If you live in a state that is not even close, that is when you don't have to worry much about your vote impacting the outcome and therefore have more latitude. I've voted 3rd party in multiple elections, but I did so in good conscious knowing I wasn't impacting the outcome of actual leadership due to the area I vote in. In pure rational choice model, sure, your individual vote likely won't matter (how often is a race decided by 1 vote?), but if the level of effort to vote is low, might as well do it just in case and for a sense of moral civic duty to a democracy.
I'm going to be 100% with yall that comment and post this shit.
Before I go on, let me say I voted dem and know they would be better for the world over Trump.
But is that's the standard and argument you expect people to vote for, you are in for a rude awakening... To anyone reading this or agreeing with these outright insulting comments and posts about how you know better need to take a long look in the mirror. Because...
If the only support you are giving to the Palestinian and Arab people is voting Dem and having arguments about lesser evils, then you are not helping the situation.
Yes vote dem. But get off your ass and protest, donate, and support those communities currently harmed be democrats disastrous Gaza and Middle East policy. That's how you sway hearts and minds. These fucking backhanded, self serving, ignorant posts and comments won't stop anything but prove to those communities that the democrats base does not give a shit about anything that doesn't directly effect themselves.
Yall are missing the forest from the trees. Not voting for the light genicidal party nor the full genicidal party isn't some gotcha win for Trump. It's a failure on our part to demand our party doesn't continue using our votes to do harm.
call your senators daily and demand they publicly denounce Israel and the IDF. Donate money to organizations that are saving lives destroyed by our bombs. March with your fellow Palestinian and Arab brothers and sisters. Divest and boycott any business with ties to Isreal and the IDF.
But Ya im sure comparing individuals that have lost friends and family to bombs provided by the Democrat administration, to Lord Farquaad. We're better than this. This is just conservative tactics used on a population that we need to vote blue! We are better than this! show some empathy and get involved. I have Palestinian friends and they would spit in your face if you said this kind of shit to their face because it's removing the humanity of the 40k people killed by Isreal via bombs provided by Biden/Harris. If you/we don't care why should they?
Edit: just realized how tone deaf this post is. Who's more like Lord Farquaad? Palestinian and Arab Americans who's friends and family are being displaced, starved, and bombed? Or literally the leadership that didn't even allow Palestinians to speak at a convention and is currently providing bombs and aid to Isreal?
Thank you so much for this detailed response. I think I'm gonna vote for Kamala, not because I think Kamala is gonna do good things for the Middle East.
I'm voting because either we get a president that may or may not listen to protesters, or we'll get one that will wipe out protesting nationwide.
Yeah tell ne qbout it thinking not voting for either one somehow helps trump 😂 same people that failed basic arithmetic clearly. What they really msan to say is that people voting third party are not helping harris..and yeah thats the point and entirely not the same thing.
From now on, whenever I encounter someone who says they're not voting/voting 3rd party, I'm gunna ask if they've tried to reach out to their representatives trying to get them to raise some support for what they believe in. Or if they've tried nothing and are now just giving up. These people are literally supposed to work for us.
Believe it or not, even democratic reps are unreachable when it comes to antiwar positions. Yeah they might be "civil" to your face, they will hear you complain, but then send you a form letter in response, telling you that nothing's going to change and that's good actually. Feels like they could just say "fuck you" and save some steps, but I guess that's just Democracy™ in action.
It's almost like the current and immediate conflict between Israel and Palestinians isn't the singular thing that the world should have serious concern about, and that realistic solutions to longstanding international diplomacy issues are - wait for it - hard.
Some people think an administration and a party that out right lies about a genocide happening care about them. If someone in a position of power, not only ignore but also support clear evidence of genocide and keep repeating statement that means nothing, they are either agent for a foreign country "AIPAC" or they are in it for themselves and have zero care for poor people.
Ongoing genocide isn't at the top of drag's priority list. The top of drag's list is the imminent omnicide due to climate change. Drag thinks omnicide is a bigger deal than genocide.
I genuinely don't know what passes by their brain, but I got banned from commenting on a community on hexbear because I was saying that their little third party wouldn't win anyways and by voting it they were helping trump, and every response was just calling me a genocide apologist because of my support for the dems.
It’s just very odd to me when they say both sides, but trump has openly stated he wants the military to fire live rounds at people protesting in support of Palestine.
Or that trump wants to genocide* Latinos. Or that he has said he wants the military to purge people that don’t support him.
*yes he said deport, but when the cost of such an operation starts rising then he’ll start pushing to instead kill people to lower costs. That’s how it goes every single time this rhetoric takes hold.
Democrats constantly coming up against fascism and fumbling the bag is always someone else's fault.
Nader, Howard Dean, ACORN, Citizen's United, the SCOTUS, lazy uniformed voters, radical leftists and tankies, the Internet, the DSA, Russia, 16000 green party voters in a state with 4.5M ballots cast.
Two organizations are never to blame. You can't blame the Democrats, because they are the most hyper-competent data-driven poll-optimized party to ever exist. And you can't blame the Republicans, because they just worked harder to win based on their strong fundamentals and simply convinced more people with their very popular fascist policies.
When Dems win, they have to compromise with Republicans to achieve a bipartisan consensus. When Dems lose, they have to capitulate to the Republicans because that's what the voters asked for.
Who else is looking forward to--regardless of the outcome of this election--being told throughout 2025 that it is of vital importance that we get in line with the Democratic party above all else so that we can ensure that the Republican candidate does not win the 2030 election?
The concept of electing Trump to help Palestinians is basically the stupidest shit I’ve ever heard, but I guess some people might legitimately believe it.
A large portion of the people you're referring to are Arab Americans. In fact, Trump is now leading with them. I also think Trump would be worse for Palestinians than Harris, but I doubt the best way to convince Arab Americans of that is with condescending memes about how they don't care about the Middle East.
The point of the meme isn't to convince anyone, the point is to yell at people you hate and tell yourself you're so much better than them. Any claim of "activism" and "raising awareness" is transparently false.
Everyone else is a villain huh? I'm petty sure the author thinks their view should be self-evident and doesn't understand why do many people here seem to take actions the author would never consider.
I therefore think the point of the meme is to bring some levity into what would otherwise be helpless frustration.
Have some empathy. Don't think everyone is bitter and miserable.
People are going to die no matter what. It'll be different amounts though. One of the two has called for Israel to "finish the job" and constantly talks about how he likes what they're doing. The other condemns it, but is criticized that the administration isn't doing enough, which is fair, but also I know who I'd want to win if I lived in Gaza. I don't think the people there care how good you feel about "keeping your hands clean" and acting morally superior. They want to live, while these people want to play games.
Let me take a stab at this. As a non American non voter who is interested in the outcome of the election.
There are 3 parties to this discussion: the Harris campaign (Democrats in general), the Gaza issue voter, and the lesser evil voters.
The Gaza issue voters clearly believe a genocide is occuring, sometimes affecting them personally, and funded by their tax dollars. They would like some concessions from the Dems (the only likely party to take any action) and their only bargaining chip is their vote. It is clear to me that, if a large number of Americans felt strongly and this way, action would happen.
The Harris campaign has been non responsive on this issue, trying to tread the thin line, where they not only look powerless politically, but also unwilling to take a moral stand for what is right.
The lesser evil voters are absolutely correct that she is still better than Trump, and in more ways than just Middle east.
What I think all 3 parties need to do:
The lesser evil camp, instead of mocking the hold outs, needs to pressure the Harris campaign to make a change. Maybe even join them! (See the last point)
The Harris campaign, needs to think long and hard about what they stand for, and the implications of the Republican-lite gamble paying off. There needs to be some fear of losing voters who they cannot take for granted as they shift to the right.
Finally the Gaza voters. Its fine to play the game of chicken, keep screaming as loud as you can demanding change, but ultimately (secretly) get to the ballot and vote D.
There's a reason the Democrats always end up tilting right and trying to court some moderate Republicans. There's a reason Harris is spending her efforts trying to pick off some moderate Republicans in the suburbs rather than trying to appease the hard left.
The problem with the hard left voters is that they are fickle and contrarian by nature. Yes, they're talking about Palestine this year, but that's just the cause of the day. The truth is, many on the left will simply look for any excuse not to sully their precious clean hands by voting for a mainstream liberal party. They look for an excuse, any excuse will do. And every four year, they find one. For Kamala it's Gaza. For Biden it was the Crime Bill. For Hillary it was Bernie. There's always some grievance the far left reactionaries will find, their precious excuse not to be one of the normies and vote for the mainstream candidate. They're professional contrarians to the core. They start with the end goal - be a cool outsider above the sludge of normal average politics. And then they work backwards from there. Gaza is simply the cause of the day.
Note, this doesn't happen with the far right. The far right instead recognizes that it's better to support the mainstream right party, but to work continuously to pull them further and further to the extreme. This strategy is why they've been far more successful than the far left. The far right holds their nose, votes for the mainstream candidate, and works to pull the party further to the right in the future. The far left stamps their feet, demands perfection, and takes their ball and goes home. They always find an excuse to not participate. Ultimately, they just want to be the cool kids that are too cool to participate in the normie fight. They will always find an excuse not to support the Democratic candidate. They're petulant children, not voters candidates can actually appeal to.
This is why Dems always pander to the right. It's simply a better strategy. Far left voters are fickle, unreliable, and will always invent a new purity test. They're ultimately politically irrelevant, and they have no one but themselves to blame.
I disagee a bit here. The reason democrats shift to the right is not because of some intrinsic values and republicans and democrats carry. It is due to the sustained (false or cherry picked) propaganda by the right to create issues from nothing (migrant crime, trans issues), and the lack of response by the democrats to this messaging. Mind you Im not talking about the Election cycle, Im talking about the 3 years in between. The reason they didnt tilt right towards issues like abortion is because we have been hammering the counter message for 2 or 3 years, ever since Roe is overturned.
When youve already ceded ground with the public perception that we have immigrant crime, you have no option but to tackle the "perceived" problem by being tough on immigration.
They’re professional contrarians to the core. They start with the end goal - be a cool outsider above the sludge of normal average politics. And then they work backwards from there. Gaza is simply the cause of the day.
Thank you for so eloquently expressing this (and not just the part I've quoted... the whole thing). I wish more people would read and consider what you've written here.
The problem is that any stance on Isreal/Gaza by a Democrat will lose them votes. Hence, the wishy-washy, trying to thread the middle, not really saying anything tactic.
Yes the problem is that the GOP is the hard right nationalists, and people who have put everything on earth below one specific issue the GOP supports. The DNC is made of everyone else. It is much harder to work with a constituency that is not in any type of alignment.
Finally the Gaza voters. Its fine to play the game of chicken, keep screaming as loud as you can demanding change, but ultimately (secretly) get to the ballot and vote D.
This is how you destroy your credibility and ensure you won't be listened to on anything. The Democrats count on the two party system (which they are responsible for, in part) to make us fall in line. They're not going to shift on anything so long as they can write off our objections as empty rhetoric, so long as they can make calculations based on the assumption that we will ultimately fall in line.
This is complete trash. There are not 3 issue voters here. There are two. A non-vote for Harris is a full vote for greater support for genocide. A vote for Harris has a chance to change that. Any other thoughts on it are completely ridiculous.
How is voting for pro-genocide Harris going to reduce genocide?
If you have to choose between losing a hand and losing a whole arm, the correct choice isn’t choosing the hand, it’s fighting back against the system that forces you to make that choice.
Demecrats should also focus on rural issues more. The city voters are all already democrat and the biggest gains come from appealing to issues of rural voters that increasingly feel as an afterthought of the democrat party.
Agricultural subsidies for owner operated farms is for example is a good policy. Solar panel loans where you use the savings on them to pay them back is another.
That reduces food and power prices then you also need a housing policy.
but ultimately (secretly) get to the ballot and vote D.
By this point, it's too late. Probably already too late now.
You dumb fucks never realized that your true power is NOT your votes. It's your voice. It's the power to convince people to stay home. And you just... kept doing that. There's no threat to be made; the act of making the threat IS the damage.
I'm so tired dude. At least in a month most of you will forget all about Gaza and I won't have to hear about it anymore.
the lesser evil camp refuses to pressure the harris campaign and the harris campaign refuses to self reflect on their republican lite gamble; but the gaza voters should give up their only bargaining chip and vote for them anyways?
I doubt the Democrats will learn their lesson when they lose. They didn't became more progressive when Hillary lost when the Bernie voters stayed home. The only shift to the left in the party that happened was when incumbent democrats got replaced by outsiders like AOC. So if you want to punish Democrats do it during a primary and vote an incumbent out.
Yes. That's how the two party system works. Dems are still miles better than Republicans on the issue, and thus don't need to improve. It sucks, but that's the hand that's been dealt I don't see any better strategy to help the people of Gaza. If you see one, feel free to share.
I respect your choice and conviction to "let it all burn", and without people like you there would never be incentive for the Dems to move left. That said, this is not the action I would take, there are far too many things wrong with the Rs right now.
Dem centrists are too lazy to try to influence their politicians to do the right thing. And they pretend the politician is powerless to change their stand. They can change their stand. You can apply pressure during an election. if you'd just try. But you all pretend you are powerless, and then call everyone trying to pressure harris shitty names.
It's even more insane that people claim this after public outcry forced Biden off the ticket.
We have literally seen that it works, you can actually demand more of your elected leaders! But don't tell that to the Blue MAGAts, or they'll shut you down because their favorite talking head told them to shut up and get in line.
I would say they feel there is no personal/social benefit from electing one over the other. The reality is the tarriffs and mass deportations are the stupidest fucking I've ever heard and likely will piss away more money and people than COVID did.
To keep voting blue/red no matter is how you create the very situation we are in. Punishing politicians is how you get them to work for you and not for themselves and pacs.
Not voting is not "punishing" anyone, it's simply abdicating your own power. Political parties aren't businesses you can punish by boycotting their products.
Parties represent the views of those who support them by some combination of getting involved, organizing, donating, and most importantly voting in BOTH the primaries (for the one who best represents you) and the general for whoever won the primary even if it wasn't your primary choice. To wield power you have to win elections. To win you have to please those who will vote for you and if your base won't vote for you, you have to turn to the middle and right to get votes. If your base would show up for you, you could safely move left and still win (republicans always show up and vote for the R, so their party has moved more and more right).
Look what happened after Dobbs. Dem candidates used to be afraid to alienate moderates/conservatives by even mentioning abortion because they needed to get some of those voters to win, but when democrats got motivated by Dobbs and actually turned out for Dem candidates, they immediately stood up loudly for abortion rights and other rights as well, once they knew their base would show up for them. If the Dem base would continue to show up, the party would move more left on the issues, since they'd know they can win with their base and don't have to worry about alienating conservatives.
I didn't say anything about not voting. I think people should vote in a strategic way however. And that means at times you need to vote on the other side or back a different politician.
I do agree that voting in primaries is important. I think there are also things that we can do to help move away from this corrupt system. For example, having ranked choice voting.
I do think that a big problem is that people aren't willing to sacrifice some comfort in the short term for long term gain. If voting temporarily for red because blue isn't listening to you or being corrupt then when they lose they'll learn to listen to you next time. If not them, then someone else. People don't do this and will vote red or blue no matter what which results in shit politicians.
Young voters not voting in primaries is how we got into this situation.
You want politicians who represent you? Gotta vote in primaries! But the elderly, who are a smaller slice of the population, absolutely shit kick the youth in terms of voting in primaries.
Want change? Gotta vote even when it's not trending on social media.
Which why we need a voting system that can end the duopoly without enormous sacrifice. Ranked Choice Voting can do that. If really hate the duopoly, you have no excuse not to join us and get RCV implemented everywhere. Check out FairVote for more info and to locate movements near you.
Literally all Kamala has to do is announce a plan to stop war crimes and gain these votes back. The fact she won't is on her, not on the people concerned over Gaza.
By the way, I don't support Trump, I don't think you should vote for Trump, but if you want to protest by supporting third parties until Kamala changes her policy you have my full support
Why doesn't Trump have to announce a plan to stop war crimes?
Why does Harris always have a higher bar to overcome than Trump? A protest to save lives has failed if more people die because of the protest.
Because everyone knows that Trump is not going to move on this issue, or really do anything good at all. Dems are supposed to be better than Trump, or at least they certainly insist that they are. People holding Kamala to a higher standard are taking the Dems at their word.
Even if Kamala does announce this, does she have the support of Congress to do so? And would Netanyahu even listen if they did? The stuff happening in the Middle East has been going on for decades and I doubt it'll stop anytime soon, unfortunately. Even without Western arms.
Kamala doesn't need the support of Congress. All she has to do is enforce any of the numerous laws already on the books that make it illegal to send arms to a country engaged in genocide.
It's a million times more effective to protest by getting ranked choice voting as our voting system so we can end the duopoly and actually have control over our government when we really need it, like to stop genocides.
Let's imagine a world where we stop sending weapons to Israel. What does a disarmed Israel look like, in your imagination? How will it affect the geopolitical situation in the middle east?
Obviously Israel would stop killing Palestinians if they knew we wouldn't support their existence. They know we'll continue to support them, so that's why they're still killing Palestinians
I voted party for socialism and liberation and you can too!
They’re running Claudia de la Cruz on a platform of Palestinian liberation and an end to arms shipments to israel.
They’re eligible for enough electoral votes to win in an unprecedented landslide!
Even if you can’t protest, door knock, phone bank, picket or boycott, you can still use your vote to tell the two major parties that you won’t accept their genocide.
De La Cruz is a place holder. Nothing more. She’s untested, has no win condition strategy that makes any sense in reality and serves only as a spoiler, and has a barely above zero chance to win.
DO NOT FALL FOR THIS BULLSHIT.
She did nothing the last four years to earn your attention let alone your vote. She has no strategy to make anything she promises actually work because she knows has shown to have little knowledge about how politics work.
That’s why it’s so important that you go out and vote psl!
Even if the de la Cruz campaign doesn’t win, a strong showing helps them get funding, event invitations, media coverage, ballot space and make it more likely people will hear about them.
Even if you don’t actually want psl to grow, a big turnout makes it more likely that the democrats (or republicans, if you generally side with them instead) will adopt parts of the psl platform!
You're way better of spending your time and effort getting ranked choice voting implemented. Then this candidate you support would actually have a chance of getting elected. And with the increased power over our government, stopping the next genocide in it's tracks would be trivial.
For me it’s not an either/or. I’m a communist and I’m supporting a communist party. I don’t think ranked choice will do enough to reform our elections to give up supporting and advocating for psl.
Tbh I don’t think any voting scheme can do enough to reform our elections and I don’t think reforming our elections would do enough to fix the problems with our country.
No one on lemmy has ever made this argument and as usual this community of redditors in disguise believes in the hopium of a candidate more conservative than Obama will change her mind about genocide.
And that people are just gonna vote for her with that reasoning.
Here is someone just three days ago arguing with me about how shaming Trump is shaming people who "oppose genocide," and then calling me a nazi for having to vote within the two-party duopoly if I want to reduce Trump's chances of being elected.
Yeah but those people helping Trump get elected are the Dems pretending genocide is fine. Say what you want about lesser evil but it really isn't the smartest political move to alienate voters who think genocide is bad. The messaging of "if you draw the line at genocide then you're the problem" and blaming voters for not vibing with that instead of, for example, dropping support for Israel and stopping the genocide is just straight up terrible politics. You should be mad at Dems for royally fucking the campaign up instead at people for not buying into this bullshit. Did you also support Biden remaining as candidate after the debate, despite atrocious polling data?
I do get that there is foreign interference going on, but seriously if you were attempting to sway anyone towards the Dems by shaming people for being against genocide - the obviously weakest point of Dems campaign - then in my eyes you're most likely the Russian bot trying to remind people that Dems are terrible. And if you aren't and you actually tried to convice anyone with this argument, then shut the fuck up until the elections are over, if anything you're costing Kamala votes.
Im a non-US non-Voter. But I feel the whole "every vote not for harris is a vote for trump" is quite frankly bullshit. People raising concern for palestinian are not trolling, or russian bots or selfish. You just disagree with them and are resorting to name calling.
Here are some facts:
A) early polls show that in swing states, votes for jill stein hurt trump more than harris.
B) if a third party gets more than 5%, this unlocks federal funding for the next election.
C) voting third party shows the actual voter sentiment of tiredness with the two main candidates. It incentivises other politicians to either form more parties or for the main parties to have candidates that represent the population better.
If everyone just votes for trump or harris, in 4 years you guys will be standing in the same place as now or 2016. It was the exact same rhetoric in 2016 "lesser of two evils". Obviously something needs to be changed.
I don't agree with your sentiment of "both bad". The democrat voters sympathise a lot more with Palestinians than Republican voters. If Trump gets into the white house he has a lot more political breathing space to continue and support the genocide.
Do you remember the Muslim ban he tried to make back when he was president? Biden is an asshole and he lacks the balls to stand up to israel and cut the military aid but Trump can do a lot worse like support an offensive against Iran, Israel's ultimate goal.
I am not telling anyone to vote for trump that guy is for sure bad. USA needs a more progressive leader, more than harris/biden, not just for the sake of US citizens but also everybody else in the world.
Absolutely. The goal here should be: make it easier for her opponent, the man who, in a not-at-all inflammatory gesture, moved the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Clearly aligned with the Palestinian cause. Your strategic thinking is subtle yet effective, the long game is stupid, right?
America doesn't actually have a democracy. You only get a remotely democratic choice between D and R. And even that choice is severely compromised. If you think you have the democratic choice to vote third party, then you've been brainwashed by pro-america propaganda
Y'all tried with Kennedy and the brain rot got him from fucking that bear 🐻 or whatever. Now it's Stein which is so absolutely absurd of a candidate to put up against anyone.
Jill Stein is so bland she couldn't win against a cardboard cutout of herself. She has zero appeal, zero prowess, zero accolades, zero achievements.
If that's the best Russian intelligence can do, the Putin régimes' days are numbered.
"somehundreds of thousands of you maywill die, but that's a sacrifice I'm willing to make" is exactly what vote blue no matter who people are saying to arab americans who are uncomitted voters
And if Trump is elected, ALL of them will die if he gets his way and he admitted as much.
It’s too late in the game to bother educating you on this, but it’s never too late to call out your bullshit.
I will say- it’s very telling how the closer we get to the election, the more .ml accounts are showing up to “nuh-uhhhh! everything any everyone that disagrees with them. Even when proof is provided.
You guys must have recently received your marching orders and are working overtime to accomplish your goal!
Dude. Trump is already complaining that we are supporting Israel enough. You think he's magically going to change his mind and pull the plug on supporting them once he's in office? Fuckin delulu
You think Harris is going to magically change her mind when she's the one doing the current genocide? Trump lies btw. Like all the time. It's in his interest to make it seem like Biden isn't helping Israel enough because the Republican party has more fervent Zionists but he's easily been the most pro-Israel President in history.
If you þink ð solution to democratic softness on Israeli atrocities is to let Trump back into power after he handed ðem East Jerusalem, West Bank, and Golan Heights on a silver platter, you are eiðer a covert zionist agent or an unwitting zionist agent.
Eiðer way, my Amrikani-Falasteeni derriere will consider you as much of an ally as truck flags McGee barely holding back from calling me a towel head and sand n****r mostly because we some ð fuck how have been blessed to avoid peak emboldenment, despite your best efforts trying to "make ð establishment learn ðeir lesson."
You can tell ðese kids are white because ðey actually believe pulling a karen on ð two party system will get ðem a sit down meeting with democracy's manager for a socialism coupon or some shit.
Trump is Netanyahu's favorite candidate. The disrespect to Biden/Blinken ceasefire/restraint timidness is done to make Dems look bad. Blinken is a worthless POS who may not have any serious intent to stop genocide. Both Harris and Bernie, by repeating Israel's right to defend itself, are essentially ok with all Israeli evil, and the unlimited unconditional free weapon support, despite some occasional reserved statements to the contrary. Trump will just use unconditional support for a war on Iran as a means to ethnically cleanse Muslims from the USA.
The "everyone is a Russian Troll" is worse than dead internet theory. Trump is more progressive on not diminishing Russia through Ukraine proxy war. Whether or not he is paid by Russia, ordinary Americans who think diminishing Russia enriches them are victims of disinformation and emotional media manipulation that makes them think support for diminishing Russia/Putin means they care more about Russian prosperity than Russian leadership, and keeping Ukraine nazified on a path to NATO is somehow "liberal". US empire has never before reached this level of evil and recklessness. The popular normalization of this evil is a certain contributor to US decline and imminent collapse.
Actual Russian operatives from foreign ministry would see Iran as an ally, though the massive forced Russian military production increase from Ukraine proxy war on it, means massive opportunity to assist Iran in a conflict if Ukraine gets resolved. It also means ultra high oil prices/profits. A war on Iran would still be US empire emboldened. All elected political leaders in November will take loyalty oaths to Israel, and there is no indication that Harris would stop such a war, or not involve US troops. It is just more certain that Trump would.
A likely end to the war will be Russia keeps the liberated territory, and Ukraine agrees to stay neutral. Ukraine and US will claim victory by not denazifying its rulership. (the only other Russian condition for war starting and continuing)
This is a copypasta, right? I could swear I've seen the exact sentence "Trump is more progressive on not diminishing Russia through Ukraine proxy war" before. And also, please, you have to be joking right now.
Trump is more progressive on not diminishing Russia through Ukraine proxy war
I'm unaware of having used the exact sentence before. The complete absolute madness of wanting a war on Russia or anyone else is what requires propaganda of constant demonization, and the absolute non factual replies "reality is Russian propaganda" shutdown replies that somehow seem convicing in the minds making them. The US empire is pure evil and 100% responsible for Ukraine war. That Trump might launch wars other than Iran is 50/50. Maybe a hotel deal or two will cause peace with China. Biden/Blinken were absolutely terrible on China. "Delete America" is their forced reaction.
It's not really a factor for my voting preference, as Israel is a proxy-nation of the US. If Kamala wins, Gazans die. If Trump wins, MORE Gazans die. We're not getting the heat for it, Israel is. So meh. I don't value human life much anyways. We're all still violent apes who do what we want, and when there are rules against it, we break them and use violence anyhow. At this point, I'm kind of numb to it. I'll protect those close to me, everyone not close to me idgaf. If it starts affecting me or my own, I'll start caring.
I guarantee you have no fucking clue what the word even means in a medical context; because I've not given you enough information in the slightest to be even close to making that kind of diagnosis.