The “Uncommitted” movement seeking a change in the Democratic Party’s approach to the war in Gaza on Thursday announced it is not ready to support Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris — while urging voters not to back Republican nominee Donald Trump or third-party candidates who could help Trump win the November election.

The “Uncommitted” group “opposes a Donald Trump presidency, whose agenda includes plans to accelerate the killing in Gaza while intensifying the suppression of anti-war organizing,” the statement continues. Additionally, the group is “not recommending a third-party vote in the Presidential election, especially as third party votes in key swing states could help inadvertently deliver a Trump presidency given our country’s broken electoral college system.”

  • TheHiddenCatboy@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    66
    ·
    2 months ago

    I can get behind this. Sure, we can criticise Team Blue for slow-dragging their feet on protecting Palestinians. Never said we couldn’t. That said, there’s clear consequences to a Trump victory. The Uncommitted have made it clear they grasp this and ask you to vote for Harris, even if they can’t endorse Harris. Staying home, voting third party, or heaven forbid, voting Trump will just make things in the Middle East FAR worse.

    • vzq
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      50
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      deleted by creator

      • Eldritch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        2 months ago

        The ambiguity is ironically a good sign. That she isn’t outright committed to the status quo. But rather not willing to signal her actual position. If she came out strongly against Israel and for Palestine. Unfortunately that would be a large hindrance to her candidacy in the current climate.

        It’s a shame that those illegally occupying Palestine have such influence over our government. Especially after their terrorist attacks of the last few days. Not to mention the decades long slow genocide that’s only accelerated in the last year.

        • mightyfoolish@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          She saw the Genocide Joe protests and is now “ambiguous” on this matter to pretend she isn’t exactly like Biden on this subject.

      • lorty@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        Well, your thought experiment actually just agrees with the uncommitted, since if they don’t want to negotiate now that they want your vote, what hope you have after you lost that leverage?

      • Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Let’s be honest. Without biden/trump it would be a non issue. Trump would smother out all reporting on the subject replacing it with trauma to the American people.

    • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      ·
      2 months ago

      For real, that’s all I’ve been saying whenever people start come in and start bashing on Harris and pushing false equivalence. Like, yeah, Biden is super bad on his policy towards Israel and Gaza; I HOPE Harris will be better; I KNOW Trump will be worse.

      That’s it. That’s the whole dynamic. That’s the only two choices we have as members of the American electorate.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        bashing on Harris and pushing false equivalence

        You claim the Ds and Rs are the same, but you can very clearly see that the Ds are in favor of 10% less infanticide.

        That’s the only two choices we have

        The genocidiers have us by the balls, folks. Nothing you can do but voice your full throated support for one of them.

        • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          2 months ago

          You claim the Ds and Rs are the same, but you can very clearly see that the Ds are in favor of 10% less infanticide.

          Be fair. They’re in favor of 10% slower infanticide.

        • OccamsTeapot@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          2 months ago

          The genocidiers have us by the balls, folks. Nothing you can do but voice your full throated support for one of them.

          Not only that, you must also shout down anybody who says they don’t want to support genocide. Only full loyalty is acceptable.

          Oh so you’re likely voting dem anyway because you aren’t stupid and/or racist but you also say Harris should abide by US law and stop arms sales to Israel? WOW LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE A TRUMP SUPPORTER HERE BOYS

          • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            2 months ago

            It is deeply fucked the way social media has conflated opposing genocide and supporting The Other Team.

            Really reeks of the Bush Era “You’re with us or you’re with the Terrorists!” when it came time to invade Afghanistan and Iraq.

        • holycrap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          2 months ago

          The path to ending the conflict is through boycotts, not the president. But that takes time, so 10% less killing makes sense as a stop gap.

          There is precedent for this. See apartheid South Africa. Palestinian freedom will seem impossible until it becomes inevitable.

          • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            2 months ago

            The path to ending the conflict is through boycotts, not the president.

            US House overwhelmingly passes anti-BDS resolution

            We’ve already seen individual states go so far as to issue state sanctions aimed at BDS movements. US House Resolution 246 seems to be an exercise in vote counting by the AIPAC Lobby to advance a national bill to the same effect.

            Palestinian freedom will seem impossible until it becomes inevitable.

            The South African Apartheid system likely would have held up indefinitely if the US was the only country involved deciding its fate. And the Afrikaners had far less influence over the US Congress than the Israel lobby.

            • Keeponstalin@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 months ago

              Pressure needs to be applied everywhere, from awareness by friends/family to personal BDS to local representatives to DNC delegates to Presidents. Anti-genocide and anti-apartheid momentum has made great strides in the last year, it’s critical to keep that momentum growing. This will definitely be more difficult than the South African Anti-Apartheid movement

        • mightyfoolish@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 months ago

          Don’t you understand the difference? All of them can die of rape and starvation as of now or all of them can die of rape and starvation while Trump is president.

          CaNt YoU SeE tHE DiFeReNcE? (This was annoying to type on mobile.)

          These people are delusional. Somehow there’s many situations we can’t do anything about (like our politicians cannot even show disapproval over rape country called Israel even though we are their biggest benefactors) yet somehow not voting Democrat is the end of the world. We cannot do anything to make anything better but putting pressure on politicians is also bad. Oh, how convenient. Why can’t they admit they have to think of their own interests first (at least the few things the Democrats will allow them).

          • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            CaNt YoU SeE tHE DiFeReNcE? (This was annoying to type on mobile.)

            A for effort

            Somehow there’s many situations we can’t do anything about (like our politicians cannot even show disapproval over rape country called Israel even though we are their biggest benefactors) yet somehow not voting Democrat is the end of the world.

            Was listening to a WTYP episode about stealth jets, and they priced all the different kinds of aircraft in “multiples of ending national poverty”. ($10B is the current working figure)

            The F-22s we used to shot down Chinese weather super spy balloons came in at 20x the cost. That’s the only combat mission the plane has flown since it entered service over a decade ago.

            Why can’t they admit they have to think of their own interests first

            These numbers are so big and these systems are so vast that it’s easy to lose sight of them entirely. The idea that we could all live very comfortable happy lives if a tiny minority were to stop the war profiteering is very difficult for your retail Democrat voter to grasp.

            • mightyfoolish@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 months ago

              That’s the only combat mission the plane has flown since it entered service over a decade ago.

              Interesting story. I do wonder if any of this equipment was made to be used or is there “just in case.”

              The idea that we could all live very comfortable happy lives if a tiny minority were to stop the war profiteering is very difficult for your retail Democrat voter to grasp.

              This is a great summary of the issue.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Biden isn’t dragging his feet…

      He’s moving at light ing speed (for his age) to support Israel’s genocide in anyway he can, including going around congress illegally to avoid a delay of just a few days.

      I just hate how all the blame is put on voters, it’s literally Kamala and her campaign teams job to get votes, and despite how much they hate the thought, that means giving Dem voters what Dem voters want.

      And they don’t want to be citizens of pretty much the only country still supporting the genocide by sending munitions. Especially when it’s a violation of the Legacy Lehey law and bare minimum we should be demanding Israel track the use of US supplied munitions.

      Like. You’re completely underselling the damage Biden and other party leaders are causing…

      And then claiming you can’t understand why people don’t like him or the party’s stance.

      Why dont you spend your time and effort trying to stop a genocide instead of telling people they have to support a genocide?

      Your way even if we win. Still a genocide.

      If we demand Kamala and party leadership stop breaking US and international law, and they actually listen

      Kamala could moonwalk into the oval office and Israel wouldn’t be able to continue their genocide.

      What’s so hard about picking the best path?

      We can stop trump and genocide or just stop trump.

      Seems like an easy choice to me

      • makyo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I mean if I understand you correctly you’re saying bascially the same thing as OP - can hold Biden/Harris feet to the fire while working to re-elect Kamala and defeat Trump.

        • TheHiddenCatboy@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 months ago

          And the fun part is these aren’t my words. These are the words of the “Uncommitted” faction that wants to hold Democrats’ feet to the fire. They’re saying that at the moment, there’s bigger fish to fry – a MAGAt movement that would make everything Team Blue has done look like child’s play in comparison. So, Mr. Give Some Fucks isn’t just arguing with me. He’s arguing with the guys and gals actually advocating for Palestinians.

    • OccamsTeapot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 months ago

      Sure, we can criticise Team Blue for slow-dragging their feet on protecting Palestinians.

      Incredibly generous way to put it. They are providing the weapons that maim and kill the innocent children. I criticise them for the blood on their hands

    • Thanks for this comment, clearing it up!

      I was about to ask this - because if they aren’t endorsing Harris but also asking folks not to vote for the GOP or third parties, then who should we vote for? Surely they’re not saying stay at home and don’t vote, right? (That was the only possibility that seemed not covered by the post’s description.)

      So another way to look at it is - (if one ignores the way they mince words and instead just looks at the practical effect then) they are in fact endorsing Harris, but in a muted fashion to express their displeasure over Harris’s stance on Gaza.

  • vzq
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    deleted by creator

    • TheHiddenCatboy@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      That it’s the advocacy group trying to hold Biden and Harris accountable for the continuation of the atrocities in Palestine saying this should make it clear. The actual people on the ground may feel strongly about Palestinian civil rights, they know where their bread is buttered and that the other realistic alternative in this election is “Orange Hitler”, to use another poster’s euphemism, is just plain horrible.

  • xenoclast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    2 months ago

    Pretty sure if Trump gets elected people will be too busy with their own local genocides to care about Gaza.

  • harrys_balzac@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    2 months ago

    “Well, let’s cross our fingers and hope the Democrats can get out the vote despite our virtue signalling.”

    This announcement is just pointless.

    • TheHiddenCatboy@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      2 months ago

      At least we’re not getting the ‘vote third party’ spiel. I’ll never hold a person’s opinions on the Dems against them. I just don’t want anything done or suggested that will help Trump and his merry band of assholes.

    • nelly_man@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      And his advisor on, and ambassador to, Israel literally wrote a book promoting a one state solution where he said that the US has a Biblical obligation to help Israel win. His ultimate plan is to set up an apartheid state where Palestinians do not have the same rights as Israelis.

  • Soup@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    2 months ago

    And yet they refuse to support the one person that could keep him out of office.

    Fucking geniuses they are!

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      2 months ago

      Israel has already slaughtered a full 10% of the population of Gaza.

      How many Palestinians will be left to save by the time Biden leaves office?

      • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Israel has already slaughtered a full 10% of the population of Gaza.

        idk why you put full here, i feel like just saying 10% would work just as well, seems more semantically confusing to me more than anything lol.

        I’m not sure what it’s trying to imply.

          • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            maybe, i feel like you would just say “10%” or like you said “at least 10%” then, considering that numbers are like, really specific.

            If you weren’t being specific you would say something like “about 10%” implying somewhere around it, 7-13% probably.

            full just reads a little weirdly in that context.

  • freshcow@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    2 months ago

    I think everyone who is being intellectually honest knows full well that Trump would be worse. The problem seems to be that the Democratic party has decided it can take the votes of the left wing of its party for granted. If the left is not willing to actually follow through and withhold their votes, then the Democrats know that they never have to appease them. It’s really a lose-lose situation until the Harris campaign shows some moral courage or takes seriously the possibility of losing votes over this issue.

    • banshee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      “If the left is not willing to actually follow through and withhold their votes”

      Wthholding your vote only helps Trump. Candidates know they have to appease the folks with money. We’re fighting the wrong bad guy - focus on reversing Citizens United.

  • OccamsTeapot@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    2 months ago

    Unsurprising. While people opposed to any criticism of the democrats’ self defeating and inhumane policy on this issue like to pretend it’s all a pro Trump psy op, it’s actually more of a DON’T SUPPORT GENOCIDE YOU EVIL FUCKS type of thing.

    But for the dems it’s fine because the electoral college has the whole country by the balls I guess ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ who are you going to vote for dumb dumb? Orange hitler? Spoiler candidates? Lol didn’t think so, send the bombs boyos

      • OccamsTeapot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        What makes you say that? Is there something I’m missing?

        The Uncommitted group “opposes a Donald Trump presidency, whose agenda includes plans to accelerate the killing in Gaza while intensifying the suppression of anti-war organizing,” the statement continues. Additionally, the group is “not recommending a third-party vote in the Presidential election, especially as third party votes in key swing states could help inadvertently deliver a Trump presidency given our country’s broken electoral college system.”

        I agree with them. Including about this:

        Vice President Harris’s unwillingness to shift on unconditional weapons policy or to even make a clear campaign statement in support of upholding existing U.S. and international human rights law has made it impossible for us to endorse her

        Although I would say obviously people should still vote for her because the political system is broken.

        I was responding to this “news” because it is what many of us have been saying the whole time, only to be met with accusations that this must mean we think trump is better. Obviously he would be much worse for this and everything else. But that doesn’t excuse the dems position.

        • barsquid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          I don’t disagree with any of that. I didn’t read your previous comment as opposing the system in a productive way. The system is garbage but we still have to participate or it becomes worse.

          You will likely get the accusations anywhere you are omitting the part about voting for Harris despite opposing an endorsement. That is due to the prolific MAGA campaigners on here urging people to vote third party and using this issue as the reason.

          • OccamsTeapot@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            You will likely get the accusations anywhere you are omitting the part about voting for Harris despite opposing an endorsement.

            Yeah absolutely. But I don’t really see why anyone should need to add a voting disclaimer if they are criticising the government’s support for a genocide. People can downvote all they want, some things are just more important than party politics.

            That is due to the prolific MAGA campaigners on here urging people to vote third party and using this issue as the reason.

            Yeah I’m sure there are such people and they can get fucked. But in my experience the people receiving these accusations mainly just don’t want the government to support Israel unconditionally. But as you said, without the disclaimer, these people are accused of a bunch of stuff.

            Is it really so hard for people to believe that others actually just care about preventing mass murder? The fact someone can say something like that and get many responses talking about Trump and the electoral college system rather than acknowledging the legitimacy of the problem being raised is truly disgusting to me.

  • mlg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’m honestly doubtful Trump would make any additional difference considering Biden didn’t do anything to reduce Israel’s insanity. He’d still have to let congress pass the big stuff, and Biden approved every single smaller sale bar holding up one shipment temporarily.

    Everyone keeps saying “yeah but Trump would be worse for Gaza” just because he did the whole embassy thing, but this really looks as if it’s maxed out.

    Even from a purely utilitarian perspective assuming this is true, I’d rather take my final stand and be wiped out than to be continuously subjected to essentially warcrime torture for the remainder of my life.

    Harris already made it clear that her policy with Israel won’t change. Her campaign decided that the amount of votes in this group do not matter (which I completely disagree with), which is why she barred them from talking at the DNC, despite the fact that they were offering to endorse her. She went all in on the AIPAC funding and lobby though.

    This is basically their last desperate call to get the DNC to change their minds (probably won’t happen), so I guess I’ll see you all in r------- red Michigan this year.

    • rsuri@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      Everyone keeps saying “yeah but Trump would be worse for Gaza” just because he did the whole embassy thing, but this really looks as if it’s maxed out.

      It’s a lot more than that. Trump also gave a Medal of Freedom, the highest civilian honor, to Miriam Adelson, a billionaire heiress who is actually more extremist even than Netanyahu. She openly opposes Palestinian statehood, wants Israel to annex the West Bank, and wrote an op-ed saying critics of Israel are “our enemies” and “dead to us”. She gave Trump money, so she owns him. The US can do a lot more than send a few weapons to Israel, and this rabid extremist billionaire will ask Trump for everything she can get. And he will do what she says.

  • reddit_sux@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 months ago

    People who are uncommitted because of Gaza are fools to think that their reticence won’t have any consequences in the country.

    Having said that there is no hope for Gazans from US since both the parties are bought and paid for by the Israelis.

    Russia take note - US only lets those foreign countries to influence the election who are willing to buy both the parties.

  • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    UN votes against Israel’s occupation of Palestine: Will it change anything?

    Seems like the rest of the international community is moving on this whether or not the US leadership approves of it.

    Barking up the “Who will you vote for?” tree, when neither American candidate for President has expressed an interest in ending the holocaust in Gaza or prosecuting the litany of war crimes in surrounding Lebanon, Egypt, and Jordan, seems pointless.

    If anything “Vote for Kamala because hey remember that genocide we’re financing via Israel?” seems like its going to scare away more voters than it attracts.

  • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Completely feckless. Effectively an endorsement of Harris despite getting absolutely nothing in return. The people who want the genocide to continue (like Harris) were just proven to be strategically correct in writing off this movement because they knew they could and they’d just come crawling back to the lesser evil. What’s worse is that this spinelessness discredits any future movements or protests on the issue.

    Somehow telling people to vote for Harris is “not an endorsement,” because liberals think you can do the exact same action and it’s meaningfully different if you feel kinda bad while doing it.

    • Ultraviolet@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      2 months ago

      What exactly is your ideal outcome? They successfully prevent Harris from being elected, Trump gets in, funds the construction of the Israeli version of Auschwitz, and the Palestinians getting thrown into gas chambers will think “at least the Americans voted on principle”?

      • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        My ideal outcome is that Harris caves and stops the Israeli version of Auschwitz which is already happening. Failing that, my ideal outcome would be that the protesters establish a credible threat going forward that supporting genocide will result in tangible political consequences. Establishing such a threat is far more important is far more important than any one election, especially when both people are pro-genocide.

        The moment you commit yourself to the ideology of lesser-evilism, you have sacrificed every ounce of bargaining power you might have wielded. The concerns of reliable voters don’t factor into any politician’s calculus. I can’t figure out whether liberals just have terrible instincts regarding wielding power, or if it’s just that they don’t care to wield it because they’re satisfied with the status quo.

        • barsquid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 months ago

          Your words would have more weight if you weren’t in full support of the Uyghur genocide in China.

            • barsquid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              Another .ml user who also loves the genocide of Uyghurs. I’ll make a note that you are a racist like they are.

              I still don’t understand why any of you so-called “leftists” are carrying water for a state capitalist nation that produces hundreds of billionaires. Must be that you actually love authoritarianism and don’t give a shit about economics at all.

        • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          My ideal outcome is that Harris caves and stops the Israeli version of Auschwitz which is already happening.

          the correct strategy here would be to push for full support on harris, under the pretense that “she will do something for palestine” and then after she gets into office (assuming she does) when the “inevitable” nothing gets done for palestine you can then rally support while in office in order to drum up what is more than likely going to be more effective support. Bargaining for something that currently exists in front of you is simply going to be much easier.

          Though this still doesn’t solve the whole problem of shooting yourself in the foot and ending up giving the republican congress more say, or just doing nothing at all, instead of something minor that would’ve been impactful.

          • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            That’s nonsense. Why on earth would she listen to me once she’s already secured my vote and the presidency? She knows that she can do nothing and that I’ll just “pretend” that she will next time too. Of course, I find the idea of acting based on an obviously false “pretense” that’s based on nothing but imagination to be completely ridiculous.

            This is just, “You have to give them everything they want while asking nothing in return” with extra, nonsensical steps. You’re telling me I’m supposed to wait until I have less bargaining power to try to bargain. Of course, there’s already been widespread protests during an election year and the democrats not only did not give an inch, but forcibly suppressed them. So how exactly do you envision people gaining enough leverage for them to actually change?

            • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              mid terms are a pretty common swing point for an unpopular candidate. Between the late term push for legislation to increase the chances of re-election, and the initial push after getting into office to appease the voter base, the midterms are the biggest impact in a governmental term. Plus further down ballot votes can harm the institution as well.

              regardless, even ignoring this, if you don’t think this is going to help. It’s going to be a net positive over somebody like trump winning, so it’s basically what you’re left with here if this problem is so important to you.

              This is just, “You have to give them everything they want while asking nothing in return” with extra, nonsensical steps.

              no this is “you have to give them your vote, and only vote, in the hopes that you can push them later down the lines, to be more useful to your ideals. And considering that the other option is going to be worse, might as well try for this one”

              Of course, there’s already been widespread protests during an election year and the democrats not only did not give an inch, but forcibly suppressed them.

              protests over what? I haven’t heard about any, but i guess i also haven’t been paying much attention. Unless you mean the vote protest, in which case nobody cares. It’s not going to be a significant percent of the voter base anyway.

              • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                mid terms are a pretty common swing point for an unpopular candidate. Between the late term push for legislation to increase the chances of re-election, and the initial push after getting into office to appease the voter base, the midterms are the biggest impact in a governmental term. Plus further down ballot votes can harm the institution as well.

                Oh, ok. So when mid terms come around, and Kamala’s done nothing I want, then you’ll be fine with me withholding my vote, right? Or are you going to be telling me the exact same thing you’re telling me now? If you’re genuinely alright with me withholding my vote during the midterms, what’s the difference between then and now?

                in the hopes that you can push them later down the lines

                How? What method do you expect me to use to push her? And why should I have any confidence in that method working when it’s not working during an election year, when she most needs people’s votes and support?

                protests over what? I haven’t heard about any, but i guess i also haven’t been paying much attention.

                There was a major wave of campus protests this year over the genocide in Gaza, all over the country.

                Again, you just want me to give them everything they want while asking nothing in return and you’re trying to pretend otherwise without offering any sort of coherent strategy. If that’s not what’s happening, walk me through what you expect me to do and when.

                • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 months ago

                  Oh, ok. So when mid terms come around, and Kamala’s done nothing I want, then you’ll be fine with me withholding my vote, right? Or are you going to be telling me the exact same thing you’re telling me now? If you’re genuinely alright with me withholding my vote during the midterms, what’s the difference between then and now?

                  yeah no fucking go for it. Do whatever the fuck you want, you can even do it now if you feel like it. Especially if you’re protest voting for that specific issue, i think that would be a warranted mid term activity to partake it. I mean i might make fun of you for grenading the ability of the government to solve problems, but that’s something we’re both going to do anyway lmao. That parts free real estate.

                  The difference between then and now, is that voting now has the substantial potential to prevent trump from being elected which is obviously going to have very negative consequences in this case. Whereas not voting in the midterms, or even changing your vote in the mid terms is going to have a much less significant effect as it’s only really going to slow/lessen the ability for the federal government to create and push legislation, although probably specifically with the IP thing. Depends on how that goes.

                  How? What method do you expect me to use to push her? And why should I have any confidence in that method working when it’s not working during an election year, when she most needs people’s votes and support?

                  the same way you’re doing it now, just then, signal discontent over certain policy. There’s no reason to have any confidence in anything, but in this case it’s just basic strategic leverage. If kamala losses, and trump wins, it wasn’t your fault, and you didn’t have anything to do with it. If kamala wins, and you don’t get the IP thing you wanted, then you at least didn’t get trump, and you had your part in that. And if kamala wins, and you do get the thing you want, then obviously you’re going to get most of everything that you wanted.

                  As opposed to the current line of thinking where you’re more likely to put trump into office, or if kamala wins, do nothing midterms because you’ve stopped caring by that point. Or maybe you would, but that would be up to chance more than anything.

                  We take the wins we can get, and we line ourselves up to get the best shots that we can, that’s the name of the game.

                  There was a major wave of campus protests this year over the genocide in Gaza, all over the country.

                  i know there have been a large number throughout the year, i’m curious about the last 3 or so specifically. Or have those pretty much died down. I know they were all over the place for a few months a while back though.

                  Again, you just want me to give them everything they want while asking nothing in return and you’re trying to pretend otherwise without offering any sort of coherent strategy. If that’s not what’s happening, walk me through what you expect me to do and when.

                  i mean you can view it like that, i guess, but ultimately that’s not really how it works, politics is mostly a take game for the civilian. We don’t really give them much, aside from tax dollars, but they give us legislation and policies that reflect our ideals. If your ideals don’t match at all you’ve either got a failure of ideals, or a failure of government, which one probably depends on which one is at a larger scale.

                  as for the last bit, see previous.

    • LeadersAtWork@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      Everyone, don’t bother. I have made every reasonable argument against this silly narrative that I could think of since it began and not a single time has any one of these folks gone, “Yeah, Trump/GOP has promised worse” or anything remotely similar. You will receive one of a couple canned responses, which I’ll paraphrase below:

      1. “So you support the genocide?!”
      2. “You BlueMAGA are all the same. You support the genocide?!”
      3. “If you don’t support the genocide you will vote third party!”

      They will not listen to things like how you don’t support the genocide, don’t support war, know things like genocides are horrible, any explanation about how it will get worse, or anything similar.

      Just trying to save you some time.

      • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        liberals think you can do the exact same action and it’s meaningfully different if you feel kinda bad while doing it.

        They will not listen to things like how you don’t support the genocide, don’t support war, know things like genocides are horrible, any explanation about how it will get worse, or anything similar.

        Literally the exact thing I just described. If your actions are indistinguishable from someone who supports genocide, then nobody gives a shit what’s going on inside your head regarding it, least of all politicians.

      • newDayRocks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        Just assume everyone making those arguments are just Maga trolls trying to siphon votes away from democrats. Saves your sanity

        • LeadersAtWork@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I’m fine with the arguments fundamentally. Like yeah, it’s fucking horrible what’s happening. Though also for the last 30 years there has always been a conflict, or voter issue, or something that divides the Center and Left and drives voters away. Now we also have a very real threat to our way of life, or what’s left of it. So it’s frustrating considering how these people may affect even a single person’s willingness to vote, even if they are arguing in good faith.

          • newDayRocks@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            There is no way to distinguish those arguing in good faith vs those who are trolling or arguing in bad faith, because all those parties use the same flawed arguments.

      • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        i got banned for a rather unfortunate string of comments regarding IP, though i will say, it was my fault.

        IP people are in my experience entirely single issues voters. They do not care about anything else, and cannot be made to care about anything else. It’s pretty par for the course as far as issues voters go.