• zbyte64@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    59
    ·
    1 month ago

    She had so many chances to make this election easier. Could have had a Palestinian talk during the DNC, and that would have likely changed this story.

    • pjwestin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 month ago

      Yeah, earlier in her campaign, I was optimistic that she was just trying not to undermine Biden’s foreign policy, and that she would eventually take an at least slightly more critical position on Israel. So far, though, she’s seems entirely committed to Israel’s escalating violence, and she won’t even make the smallest gesture towards the Palestinian community. I didn’t expect her to denounce Israel, but staying lock-step with Biden on this is looking like political suicide.

  • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    59
    ·
    1 month ago

    Angry with the Biden administration – and, by extension, Kamala Harris – for its support for Israel, Arab Americans may be willing to overlook Trump’s history of closeness with Israel’s hard-right leaders.

    So, these individuals could be described as the common clay of the new West?

    • Fidel_Cashflow@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      1 month ago

      yeah man, denigrate them more, that’ll surely get them on your side! maybe a touch more smug condescension? anything except engaging with their concerns, of course.

      • capital@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        I call conservatives dumb too.

        These people aren’t special. Just a different kind of dumb.

        Similar in the way they vote against their own interests.

        • Fidel_Cashflow@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          1 month ago

          personally, I think ignoring the concerns of voters in a historically very important swing state months before the election is a recipe for a disastrous rerun of 2016, and should be avoided if you’re actually concerned with winning, protecting democracy, etc. but I guess we’ll see if the strategy of “fuck you, vote for me” works out this time 🤷

    • TheOubliette@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      1 month ago

      You see no difference between people put off by settler-colonial genocide and… settler colonists? What?

            • TheOubliette@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              1 month ago

              I’m not feigning. I don’t know what point you were making. Perhaps you could expound using more descriptive terms?

              It seems that you are currently so agitated that my honest statement of not knowing what you mean must actually be a sneaky bad faith strategem.

                • TheOubliette@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  Oh, so is it amnesia then? Because you seemed pretty clear on the topic of discussion until I cornered you. Then, magically - or just conveniently - you have forgotten what we’re talking about.

                  Feel free to rephrase and expound on what you said. I do not see how it applied to what we were talking about, and therefore don’t see its meaning.

                  And pretending to be psychic and read my mind (or, perhaps, hallucinating) via the internet doesn’t make you right. How is that even rational?

                  As I said, I recognize behaviors and clichés. And you have not yet contradicted a single prediction and have accidentally confirmed a few.

                  Why should anyone believe what you say when it’s clearly either a bad-faith argument full of disinformation or evidence of your ignorance and inability to comment intelligently on this topic?

                  I have made no bad faith arguments nor presented any disinformation. Please do your best to not make things up and to address what I have actually said.

                  And, of course, you should be against genocide and act accordingly.

        • TheOubliette@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          1 month ago

          It’s a great movie, I always tell people to watch it!

          In the movie, this is a reference to the racist townspeople in the “Western”. It’s poking fun at the Westerns that romanticized allegedly good and pure settlers (colonizers) and to sympathoze with them. You weren’t supposed to think of them as, in Wilder’s terms, “morons”.

          Parent was just trying to call people morons. It’s not a clever reference, I got it. But those people are, specifically, Muslims so put off by the genocide of Palestinians that they’d vote against the administration supporting that grmocide. I would say their political acumen is more developed than the genocidal sheepdogging that we see in this thread, people that can’t even say the word genocide trying to imply they’re the adults in the room. At least they can understand basic leverage and independent action.

          But I was making note that the “morons” reference in Blazing Saddles is about settler-colonists whereas the people parent wanted to call morons are literally people that are reacting against settler colonists and their supporters. I think that is an oversight that can only be made through chauvinism, personally. The person wants to feel better than those moved by genocide, they want it to be as narrow as “those people are stupid”. They can’t contend with the content.

        • TheOubliette@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 month ago

          Yes I know the reference, parent is just calling them stupid really. Though I appreciate you taking the time to explain it and write it up! I wrote a comment to this effect but explaining what I am saying in regards to it here.

          Good movie BTW, everyone should watch it, especially if you have ever seen a garbage chauvinist pop Western like anything with John Wayne in it.

          • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 month ago

            Good movie BTW, everyone should watch it,

            Correct.

            Western like anything with John Wayne in it.

            There’s a movie I would suggest watching called In Harm’s Way. Admittedly it’s a WWII movie and not a Western, but it’s…without wishing to spoil let’s just say it’s the most nuanced John Wayne film I’m aware of.

    • enbee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 month ago

      these folks are doing logical loop de loops

  • 2ugly2live@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    55
    ·
    1 month ago

    Okay, but, abandon her for whom exactly? Just not vote? Vote 3rd party? I am not going to say Harris is perfect, but this is cutting off your nose to spite your face.

        • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          23
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          Any anti-genocide candidate, Claudia De La Crúz is best but Jill Stein is often pushed as an alternative.

          It’s important to note that Duke said he supports Stein because Stein is against funding Israel, and David Duke hates Jewish people, he doesn’t care about genocide. He supported Trump in 2016 and 2020 but said Trump is too supportive of Israel for 2024.

          • Lightor@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            1 month ago

            You mean the same Jill Stein that was endorsed by former KKK leader, seems like a solid choice…

            • GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              15
              ·
              1 month ago

              You were just so excited to use this talking point that you couldn’t be bothered to note that he was responding to it in the very comment you used it on.

                • GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  ·
                  30 days ago

                  You formulated it as though you were bringing up something new: “you mean the same X who Y” is for introducing something new into the conversation in relation to X, with X here being Jill Stein. If you had just used David Duke as X and “who lead the KKK” as Y, it wouldn’t have been an absurd contribution.

                  Though it would still be a silly one, since people know who David Duke is, it’s not some obscure fact. He’s the single most recognizable name in connection with the KKK, perhaps along with the long-dead D.W. Griffith (but probably not).

            • thoro@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              15
              ·
              30 days ago

              Dick Cheney endorsed Kamala.

              Neither of these facts alone necessarily implicate the candidates. You really have to consider the context. Being endorsed by someone hardly means you keep their company.

            • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              13
              ·
              1 month ago

              I understand, you asked me who the anti-genocide groups were supporting, not a vetted list of everyone who has come out in favor of each third party.

              • Lightor@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                edit-2
                29 days ago

                Didn’t ask you anything actually lol.

                Edit: This comment I will forever save to show the group think and mindless nature of lemmy politics. I simple called out that I didn’t ask anything and I’m being downvoted for stating that fact and nothing else. Goes to show you, facts don’t matter to these people.

                • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 month ago

                  Ah, you were a different user jumping in, my bad. Either way, that’s what was asked originally.

                  My personal opinion? Claudia De La Crúz all the way.

                  It’s important to note that Duke endorse Stein because she supports ending support for Israel, and Duke hates Jewish people, he doesn’t care about genocide at all.

            • krolden@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              30 days ago

              Its like lemmy world is just democrat bots that respond with these canned attack responses any time Jill stein is mentioned

            • sorval_the_eeter@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              29 days ago

              I’m not a Jill Stein voter, but I dont think she can control who endorses her so it doesnt make a lot of sense holding that particular thing against her.

            • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              29 days ago

              David Duke supports Jill Stein for one single reason: because Jill Stein does not support Israel and Trump does.

              Duke even reluctantly endorsed Stein because she is Jewish.

              And Stein called him trash and disavowed him.

              If you call Jill Stein a white nationalist because of Duke you call every single person who does not support Israel a white nationalist

              • Maggoty@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                29 days ago

                It is nice to hear she disavowed him. But no it’s not like his attempt to associate with her makes her racist too. It’s just a reminder that she has less chance of winning this election than you do. And citing morals to vote for the party that has transparently turned itself into nothing more than a spoiler is just ridiculous. It’s like rooting for the outfield fans in the home run zone in baseball. (If they lean over and catch it, it’s a home run.)

        • KiloGex@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          29 days ago

          Funny enough, that’s exactly who they’re planning on voting for, too! The way they put it, voting for Stein is their way of not voting for Trump but ensuring he beats Harris.

    • basmati@lemmus.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      1 month ago

      No, it’s cutting off a cancerous growth yourself because you can’t afford healthcare. You might die to metastasis, you might die to blood loss, but if you leave the growth alone it will kill you.

      And yes most are planning on voting third party.

      • 2ugly2live@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        1 month ago

        I guess that just doesn’t make sense to me in the current political landscape. We know the third party isn’t going to get the votes, and we also know that Trump is not only not going to save Gaza, he’s going to do everything in his power to make this country worse as well. Currently, voting third party is throwing your vote away. I’m not saying I’m in love with the system or that it isn’t fucked, but we have two options this election. Neither of them is going to save Gaza, but I don’t see why damming the whole country, as well as yourself, to a worse existence, is the more sane option.

        • basmati@lemmus.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 month ago

          It’s a basic philosophical question.

          Say you find yourself locked in a room with a gun, and two people tied to a chair. A voice announces that if you kill one of them, you and the other go free, if you don’t kill anyone or if you kill yourself, everyone dies.

          Your solution to this, voting Harris, is trust the voice is telling the truth and figure out who is the worse person so you don’t feel as bad about being a murderer.

          Their solution is not being a murderer.

          Maybe the voice is telling the truth, and thus the voice will be a murderer, but they won’t be – you would be though with your choice. Maybe the voice is lying, in which case they made the right choice and you objectively made the wrong one, the worst one.

          Most humans, ideally, would choose to not be murderers, even if that means a psychopath does a murder “because” you refused to.

          • 2ugly2live@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            19
            ·
            1 month ago

            In your example, their solution is absolutely being a murderer. They didn’t pull the trigger, but they condemned those people to death. They know that refusing is killing those people, that their refusal is the cause for those peoples deaths. I’m not saying that I don’t think Gaza is important, or that it’s not worth fighting for, but I extend that same importance to my countrymen as well. I think the woman who may need an abortion is important, even if I never get one. I think that my neighbor’s kids should have a save school, and not be laden I’m debt, even thought I don’t plan to have children.

            I cannot stop what’s going on in Gaza. It’s a horrible, terribly bitter pill to swallow, but it is the truth. However, I’m not going to set everyone else on fire so we can all burn together in solidarity. Too many other people’s lives are at stake. And I’m not saying their lives are more important than those in Gaza, I’m saying they’re just as important. Kill one person, or kill everyone. I would rather save someone than no one.

            • basmati@lemmus.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              12
              ·
              1 month ago

              Exactly, you think being a murderer is okay.

              That is the core philosophical difference.

              You are completely okay with killing innocent people. These people are not, normal people are not.

              This difference cannot be reconciled. These people will never think the way you do, and thank every God ever imagined for that, as someone needs to be the moral party if only as an example of how normalized and justified pure evil is.

              • 2ugly2live@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                16
                ·
                1 month ago

                That’s not at all what I said, and I think you know that. Wanting to help someone is not the same as wanting to kill someone else. My vote doesn’t save Gaza, because there is unfortunately no option, but my vote could still help someone. Not voting, or throwing it away, literally doesn’t help anyone.

                I hope you find peace with your indecision and your cowardice should the rest of the country not be able to make up for your inactivity. But I’m sure those suffering in Gaza will feel better knowing that someone in Texas is bleeding out in the parking lot. That’ll show 'em.

              • Scirocco@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                30 days ago

                Fucking ridiculous.

                A vote for anyone OTHER than Harris directly results in MORE Gazan suffering.

                Trump will not restrain Israel. On the contrary, he will encourage them to ‘end it’ and achieve “peace” by ACTUALLY genociding all remaining Palestine resistance.

                • basmati@lemmus.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  30 days ago

                  There already has been no restraint from Biden. Genocide is genocide, and Harris supports genocide.

                  I’m not voting for genocide, there is no moral argument to do so.

                • sorval_the_eeter@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  30 days ago

                  restrain Israel

                  Are you really so deluded to beleive all of Bidens play acting about how he was seeking peace all this time? He used 0% of his levers to make peace happen and 100% of his levers to encourage Israels murder spree.

              • Djtecha@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                30 days ago

                How are you not a murder in your role play here? By doing nothing everyone dies, that blood is ALSO on your hands for inaction.

                • basmati@lemmus.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  30 days ago

                  I’m not the one murdering them, quite literally. Just like in real life, there is no mystical unstoppable force of nature in play. It’s another person, like you. Their choices aren’t your choices.

                  To put it another way, if you sold a kid a bike and he later crashes and dies despite the bike having no faults, are you responsible? Most would correctly identify that you are not responsible in that scenario, as the kid is responsible for what they did with the bike.

          • Scirocco@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            30 days ago

            This is ridiculous. The most harm-reducing outcome for actual Gazans (not to mention everyone else) is if Harris wins.

            Because, either Harris will win, or Trump will win.

            There is NO other possibilty and no amount pseudo-philosophy word games will change that fact.

            • basmati@lemmus.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              30 days ago

              How is being genocided without restraint better than being genocided without restraint?

        • meowMix2525@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          30 days ago

          The right already has everything they need for “damning the whole country” with or without Trump - Roe V. Wade being overturned, all this trans panic bullshit, immigration suddenly being everyone’s uncle’s top issue, utter climate inaction, etc. - it’s all happening under Biden’s administration. What makes you think the Democrats are suddenly going to turn heel and do something about it? If they had any interest in doing anything about it, why wouldn’t they be running on that? If we can’t move them on the highest crime against humanity - genocide - by threatening their power in choosing not to support their campaign, what makes you think you’ll be able to move them on anything else by protesting in ways that they can easily ignore and let their opposition stamp down with police response and media circus, just as long as you come back to vote for them in 4 years?

          What makes you think your protests won’t just end up like BLM, with the media smearing you and cops descending upon you with military vehicles, riot shields, and rubber bullets as soon as the protests become disruptive; as democrats stand by and grand stand out of one side of their mouth while out of the other they are refusing to defend you and going so far in the opposite direction of answering your demands that they put the very kind of person you’re protesting against - a cop in this case - up for the highest offices in the land?

          Neither of them is going to save gaza, and neither of them is going to save us either. One of them is just more annoying than the other and I personally am going to need a much more compelling reason to vote Democrat than that. By voting third party I am showing them that I am engaged in politics and my vote is on the table but only if they come and meet me where I am, as I have hit a wall in what I’m willing to support. They will either get the message and adopt more popular policy - realizing that the right will never trade Republicans for Republicans-lite and they need the left to win - or they will keep disengaging their base from their party and have a much harder time winning elections. That’s their choice to make, not ours.

          • 2ugly2live@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            30 days ago

            One side is way more than just “more annoying.” You’re throwing away your vote, period. We cannot be single issue voters, because there isn’t only a single issue at stake. The right will vote against their own self interests every time it the right says they hate the right people.These elections are how they get their players in place. This is how we got here. The players the right have placed in courthouses, congress, the senate, and the supreme court are there reasons we lost Roe v Wade in the first fucking place.

            I’m not going to sit here and think that the dems are going to fix every single problem, but I know for a fact Trump would make it worse. People pulled this same shit last election, and the one before. Thinking that, “Oh, well, they’ll see that I’m not gonna vote and then they’ll change.” Magats will vote against their own self interest because they’re damn near a cult. We vote against our own self interests to, what, prove ourselves a point? Teach our politicians a lesson? Make it harder for the Bernies and AOCs to have even a ice cubes chance of hell of even discussing change? For some reason, we can’t see the forest through the trees. It’s so frustrating. People like you want to make it seem like a vote for Harris is a vote for genocide knowing damn well is the only sane option we have. Because you mean to tell me you really fucking think the Republicans are going to handle Gaza with care? Or that they’ll be just a little worse to work with? You genuinely believe that?

            So tell me, at the end of this “protest,” what’s the plan? We absolutely know that the third party is going to lose, so it’s either Trump or Harris who have any reasonable odds of winning. So Harris loses, are you happy in this situation? The Republicans will actively block anything to help anyone, but I guess no one getting help is better than anyone getting help in your world. I’m not happy with my choices, but I’m a fucking adult, and adults have to make tough decisions. Adults have to weigh the options. Adults have to look ahead. I know right now I have no feasible candidate to vote for that can assist with Gaza right now, but I know one of those candidates is not going to go on live television and stir a race war by claiming Haitian immigrants are eating fucking cats and dogs. I know one of those candidates doesn’t believe that there are active abortions going on at nine months. I know one of those candidates isn’t going to continue to restrict the rights of citizens in their own country that they don’t like. I know one candidate isn’t going too be too busy sucking Putin’s dick for money and compliments to govern.

            Right now, let’s say you and your family are poisoned (not because of what you believe, but go with me here). We give you two cups. One will not only do nothing for you, it will actually make your condition worse and much more painful. Another one may help you, it could even have the antidote, but all you know is that it will not make your condition worse and will at the very least slow the spread, giving you time to think of a plan should it fail. Whatever you pick, your family has to pick too. Your choice in this scenario is to stare at both cups, willing one to change into the antidote with inaction while you continue to succumb to poison. Your family pleades to at least not make their deaths worse, to at least take the possible antidote, or at least give them time, but you’re like, “no, no, no, I think these cups are starting to get that I’m not easily swayed!”

            I am sorry that we’re in this situation, but we are. Voting for third party is throwing away your vote. If that’s what you wanna do, I can only hope that the rest of us have more sense to make up for it.

            • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              30 days ago

              Just curious, but is there a red line the US could cross for you to abandon it? A red line where the Dems and Reps are beyond salvaging, and you would work outside the electoral system to enact change?

              • 2ugly2live@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                30 days ago

                In this current landscape, no. Come November, this is it. These are the choices we have. I have to look at everything and find the lesser of two evils. It sucks, but it’s where we are. No, I am not at all pleased with what Harris has had to say about Gaza, but it’s not as if I have another, reasonable option to vote for in the next three weeks. So who do I think it going to be “better” for the next four years while we try again. Neither of them is likely to passify me when it comes to Gaza, but one of them believes in trans rights. Unfortunately, that is better than nothing.

                One month before the election is not time to stand on business, the players are set. Now next year, and the next following years until we end up at the next election, absolutely. I have no problem making my voice heard and attempting change when it could actually do something. It’s like, when they tell you to put your own mask on before helping someone else in a plane. Both Gaza and America need “air.” We can even say that, while America is “light headed,” Gaza has already lost consciousness. As much as I wish I could kill two bird with one stone and pick the better candidate and the one against genocide, I can’t, there’s no a “joint mask” that’s fallen for me to pick. But if I put on my mask first, take a deep breath, I’ll get time to try again, maybe even save someone. If I don’t take that mask, no one is getting help and I’ll just pass out too.

                I have to do what I can in this moment, and right now that’s trying to put the more sane of the two candidates in office.

                • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  30 days ago

                  So who do I think it going to be “better” for the next four years while we try again.

                  You aren’t going to try again, like all liberals you’re going to sit on your hands for 4 years and contest Leftists for trying to push for actual change. That’s the problem, liberals can only say they are unhappy with the status quo but work their hardest to perpetuate it.

                  If I don’t take that mask, no one is getting help and I’ll just pass out too.

                  All you’re doing is putting on a mask with a hole in it.

                  Really, all you’re saying is that you would vote for Hitler if 101% Hitler was his opponent and shame voters for voting for a leftist instead.

            • meowMix2525@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              29 days ago

              All of that text and you didn’t address a single thing that I said.

              You don’t need to explain your line of thinking to me. I’ve been beaten over the head with it. I used to have the same line of thinking. It does not hold up to reasoned criticism and it simply is not possible to defend at this moment without minimizing genocide. Try it. Try having this conversation with someone that is watching their loved ones be murdered indiscriminately by our tax dollars. Go tell them how your chosen social issue is more important than Palestinian lives, that it justifies supporting with your vote and tax dollars a country that is bombing and starving living human beings, who are mostly children, and see if you feel so righteous at the end of it.

              The Democrats do not care about any of your issues. They care about winning, and they care about fundraising. When their fundraising is actively threatened by your issues, the only way to get them to move on anything is to threaten their ability to win elections. Look: Biden just fucking did it, a legitimate threat to cut off aid (still only a threat but it’s a start), and I guarantee you it would not have happened if this election was smooth sailing for Kamala. No thanks to you and all of you screeching about the end of the world if Trump wins.

              Both of your cups are poisoned, so call their bluff. Refuse to drink the poison and demand an option without poison. The cups did not just materialize there as immutable objects, they were put there by politicians that need us more than we need them and have the power to change what goes in the cup. Do not for a second let them deceive you into thinking otherwise.

              If they see they cannot win without you, they will move mountains to come meet you. Lesser evil voting does not allow for that exchange to happen. In fact it actively undermines it. That is how we got here, that is how we keep ratcheting to the right. Not any of your bullshit about unelected judges.

            • meowMix2525@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              30 days ago

              Not Jill Stein, if that’s what you’re asking. Looking like Cornel West but I haven’t fully reviewed my options. Might also write someone in. It’s less about the particular candidate and more about the message I’m sending.

              • Orygin@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                29 days ago

                Yeah that’s what I was wondering. Not really following us politics apart from the constant bombardment of it on Lemmy, so I’m also curious about what other candidates exist.

                • meowMix2525@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  29 days ago

                  Ah gotcha. Didn’t know any better and assumed you were JAQing off trying to make a point.

                  I also find Claudia De La Cruz compelling but she would be a write-in candidate in my state as she’s not on the ballot here.

                  Hey, if you’re that curious, here’s an idea. Throw some darts at a map and drop the addresses into onyourballot.vote411.org. It’ll spit out a list of all the local and federal races and what candidates are on the ballot for them in that particular district.

        • Scirocco@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          30 days ago

          Trump’s plan for Gaza and peace in the Middle East to let Israel kill absolutely everyone that they want to.

          Anyone who thinks Trump would produce a better outcome for the people of Gaza is not thinking clearly.

          In the current political system, voting for a third party in earnest or in protest (for national offices) is a blatant waste of your vote

          By all means, vote in third party candidates in local, county and even state elections. Vote to eliminate the electoral college. VOTE for Ranked-Choice/Instant Runoff voting.

          These are the ways to break the two party deadlock.

          Jill Stein has co-opted the Green Party, and turned it into a blatant pro-trump shill organization, on behalf of Russia/Putin.

          Greens once ran good candidates across the country who won a fair number of local races and took office in places where they could have a good positive effect. No more. Sadly that party has been swindled and hoodwinked by a putinist grifter.

    • Fidel_Cashflow@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      36
      ·
      1 month ago

      single issue voters

      the single issue is the eradication of their families and friends

      yeah man I wonder why they don’t support that

    • TheOubliette@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      1 month ago

      The single issue: genocide

      Why are you sheepdogging for genociders? You have always had the option of saying nothing and educating yourself instead.

            • TheOubliette@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              17
              ·
              1 month ago

              I responded directly to what they said re: there being multiple issues they want to weigh. That was their response up me challenging complicity in genocide and asking why the person I was responding to was sheepdogging for genociders. They are trying yo be euphemistic and retreat to the thought-terminsting clichés that reinforce complicity in genocide, which also means avoiding even using the word. So I recontextualized their attempt to decontextualize while still directly addressing it.

              Please feel free to tell me which specific parts you would like to see addressed or responded to. I certainly already replied to the first sentence, which was the main point of deflection.

            • TheOubliette@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              1 month ago

              Preventing someone from gaining power who will continue genocide

              There could not be a candidate this describes more than Harris. You know, from the Biden-Harris administration behind the genocide happening right now. The one supplying bombs to burn refugee children alive. Have you heard their screams?

              I am told Democratic voters are empathetic and strategic. But all I see is racist normalization of genocide and toeing the party line.

              find new targets for genocide

              That’s a Dem specialty! They have a knack for stoking and supporting genocides. Heck, Obama got one started in Yemen. Even NGOs were saying a vhikd was killed every minute for years by this. Why do you think they are so resilient and steadfast against this genocide and Western attempts to free up Zionist shipping lanes? Did you even know what was done to Yemen?

              and turn the country into a dictatorship?

              Given that the current “system” has you shilling for genocide you should already question whether you live in a democracy.

              Though all of this lesser evilism is also premised on nobody remembering that Trump was already president for 4 years and it was basically the same shot as under Biden. In fact, Biden came in from the right, normalizing the pandemic and slashing benefits for the public, then did the usual, “I’m just a widdle president I can’t do nothin’” act when the SC overturned Roe v. Wade. Ah, but now that there is a genocide to support, unlimited billions for Israel, don’t worry he can bypass Congress. Do you see how the system functions? Do you feel enfranchised? How much less enfranchised were you under Trump?

              They’re on the same team. Why do you think Harris’ team is celebrate endorsements from Republican war criminals? A human that cared would spit in their faces and announce charges. You are not provided with such an option for your mainstream party “choices”. They laugh at their committed voters, I’ve seen it in person.

              Choosing the lesser of two evils is the way it works. If you want the greater of two evils then it’s your choice to not participate.

              No, that’s the way you are told it works by your masters so that you work for them instead of against them. You’ll notice that I am not voting for any genociders. Did I break reality!? Or just deviate from a focus group-tested party talking point?

        • jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          30 days ago

          well I’m gonna say… if enabling genocide doesn’t make you a single issue voter I suspect you’re morally deficient of an individual. Frankly while genocide is enough Harris has a number of issues you’re free to overlook by claiming people are ‘single issue’ just because a thread is covering a particular topic.

          • doesn’t support labor. (won’t commit to keeping khan, will break a strike whenever convenient)
          • won’t be effective at reducing inflation/cost of living.
          • won’t be effective at humane immigration.
          • won’t be effective at health care reform. both at a cost and medicinally via weed/psychedelics legalization.
        • TheOubliette@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          22
          ·
          1 month ago

          It is not a complex issue. There is a genocide and there are increasing calls to support those genociders electorally. Instead of supporting genociders, you should oppose them.

          Liberals call “issues” complex in order to speak euphemistically about the horrible things they support. They do not actually have an understanding of the alleged complexity, it is just a lazy thought-terminating cliché. When you do understand something, you can discuss it directly. At the moment, you are apparently more afraid of using the word genocide than actually being complicut in it yourself. Is this the “complexity” you are referring to? Your personal discomfort? I suspect so.

          Unless you’d like to explain how it does…

          Being consistently against genocide is the first step towards actually fighting against it. I have set the bar very low. Can you clear it?

            • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              20
              ·
              1 month ago

              A 1000 year Middle East conflict “isn’t a complex issue”?

              Israel as a settler colonial entity is around 100 years old. Before that, Christians, Muslims, and Jews lived in the same area with very little sectarian violence for around 800 years.

            • zbyte64@awful.systems
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              18
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              Dude, Palestinians lived largely in peace with Jews in what was called Palestine until WW2. This is not an ancient conflict unless you believe antisemitic propaganda. The state of Israel is compensation for the Holocaust, paid for with land from the Palestinians.

              • njm1314@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                12
                ·
                1 month ago

                Well no there were Zionist terrorists killing people in that area before World War II. We tend to gloss that over in history though for some reason, maybe it’s because so many people that were targeting were the British and everyone was just kind of okay with it.

              • sorval_the_eeter@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                30 days ago

                The state of Israel is compensation for the Holocaust,

                The state of Israel was secured through bribery and a will to try to appease an extremist terrorist group who the UN hoped would settle the eff down if they were given the land they had been killing people trying to steal. They didnt end up appeased, and the world didnt owe them land for the holocaust anyway. They should take that up with Germany and bill them for it, not the rest of us.

            • Keeponstalin@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              16
              ·
              1 month ago

              No, it’s been a little over a 100 years of Settler Colonialist Zionism. Zionism has not existed for 1000 years.

              ‘Palestine: A Four Thousand Year History’ by Nur Masalha gives a detailed account of it’s history before British Occupation and ‘A History of Modern Palestine’ by Ilan Pappe gives a detailed account of it’s history since the British Occupation.

              Origins of Zionism

              Zionism is a settler colonialism project that was able to really start with the support of British Imperialism. Zionism as a political movement started with Theodore Herzl in the 1880s as a ‘modern’ way to ‘solve’ the ‘Jewish Question’ of Europe.

              Since at least the 1860’s, Europe was increasingly antisemitic and hostile to Jewish people. Zionism was explicitly a Setter Colonialist movement and the native Palestinians were not considered People but Savages by the Europeans. While Zionist Colonization began before it, the Balfor Declaration is when Britain gave it’s backing of the movement in order to ‘solve’ the ‘Jewish Question’ while also creating a Colony in the newly conquered Middle East after WWI in order to exhibit military force in the region and extract natural resources.

              That’s when Zionist immigration started to pick up, out of necessity for most as Europe became more hostile and antisemitic. That continued into and during WWII, European countries and even the US refused to expand immigration quotas for Jewish people seeking asylum. The idea that the creation of Israel is a reparation for Jewish people is an after-the-fact justification. While most Jewish immigrants had no choice and just wanted a place to live in peace, it was the Zionist Leadership that developed and implemented the forced transfer, ethnic cleansing, of the native population, Palestinians. Without any Occupation, Apartheid, and ethnic cleansing, there would not be any Palestinian resistance to it.

              Herzl himself explicitly considered Zionism a Settler Colonialist project, Setter Colonialism is always violent. The difficulty in creating a democratic Jewish state in an area inhabited by people who are not Jewish, is that enough Palestinian people need to be ‘Transferred’ to have a demographic majority that is Jewish. Ben-Gurion explicitly rejected Secular Bi-national state solutions in favor of partition.

              Quote

              Zionism’s aims in Palestine, its deeply-held conviction that the Land of Israel belonged exclusively to the Jewish people as a whole, and the idea of Palestine’s “civilizational barrenness" or “emptiness” against the background of European imperialist ideologies all converged in the logical conclusion that the native population should make way for thenewcomers.

              The idea that the Palestinian Arabs must find a place for themselves elsewhere was articulated early on. Indeed, the founder of the movement, Theodor Herzl, provided an early reference to transfer even before he formally outlined his theory of Zionist rebirth in his Judenstat.

              An 1895 entry in his diary provides in embryonic form many of the elements that were to be demonstrated repeatedly in the Zionist quest for solutions to the “Arab problem ”-the idea of dealing with state governments over the heads of the indigenous population, Jewish acquisition of property that would be inalienable, “Hebrew Land" and “Hebrew Labor,” and the removal of the native population.

              Visualizing the Ethnic Cleansing

              Peace Process and Solution

              Both Hamas and Fatah have agreed to a Two-State solution based on the 1967 borders for decades. Oslo and Camp David were used by Israel to continue settlements in the West Bank and maintain an Apartheid, while preventing any actual Two-State solution

              How Avi Shlaim moved from two-state solution to one-state solution

              ‘One state is a game changer’: A conversation with Ilan Pappe

              One State Solution, Foreign Affairs

              Historian Works on the History
                • Keeponstalin@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  9
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  A 1000 year Middle East conflict “isn’t a complex issue”?

                  This is what you said in the context of the current conflict, which is Israel engaging in Genocide of Palestinians. That is a result of Zionism, which is fundamentally a Settler Colonialist Ideology that has only been around for a little over a hundred years, not a thousand.

            • TheOubliette@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              11
              ·
              1 month ago

              A 1000 year Middle East conflict “isn’t a complex issue”?

              I already stated what is not complex. It is that there is an ongoing genocide and that you and others are sheepdogging for the perpetrators. I stated it directly and your response continues this pattern of avoiding even mentioning the term genocide even though it is the topic of this thread and the points I have made.

              Re: “1000 year middle east conflict”, this is itself an ahistorical, chauvinist absurdity that papers over the real modern history of colonialism and Zionism and usually has a few dashes of Islamophobia thrown in as well, though yo be honest I would not be surprised if the people sheepdogging for genociders were not particularly familiar with the details of that reference.

              More realistically, the “it’s complex” line serves as a way to avoid thinking about or interrogating the topic, it is a way for the ignorant to feel secure despite knowledgeable troublemakers telling them specific but inconvenient things. Like, say, that you should oppose genocide.

              Either you’re obviously too ignorant to hold intelligent opinions on this matter, or you’re clearly arguing in bad faith by stating obvious falsehoods.

              At the moment I’m trying to navigate middle schooler level chauvinist talking points and asking you to address what I say rather than what you make up. Oh, and to remind you of my main and original point, the one you are afraid to even mention!

              Why should anyone take you seriously?

              This is Lemmy, there is a limit to which anyone should take anonymous forum comments seriously.

              But you should take genocide seriously. If you are not knee-jerk advocating against it, and are instead trying to support its perpetrators, you had better have the very best knowledge and justifications, better than I can even imagine, to make a case for why you support those carrying out the greatest crime.

              Everyone should take genocide seriously and that is what people should listen to in my messages. They should also recognize that the responses to my advocacy require dishonest behaviors.

              Naturally, as the election approaches, liberals will increasingly panic and try to shut down anything that disagrees with their (pro-genocidal) party line. But I have and will continue to peel those with empathy and honesty off of that track.

                • TheOubliette@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  Cherry picking a single detail out of a complex situation doesn’t suddenly make it a simple situation.

                  Is it a “detail” that fails to include very important context (none of which you can seemingly specify) or is it genocide, something with so much weight that you are afraid to even mention it despite my repeated reminders that it is the topic here?

                  One of the challenges of evasive and bad faith behavior is that the little quips and pretenses can easily become inconsistent.

                  Anyways, the actual topic is pretty straightforward. There is a genocide. You should not support those perpetrating it and should instead work against them. So far, you have offered no rebuttal to this outside of straw men and vagaries and posturing.

                  That is logically fallacious. As is the rest of your argument, which is based on that logical fallacy.

                  Parrots can repeat many phrases they hear, but they don’t understand their meaning.

                  Logical fallacies are a set of ways a person can make errors in thinking. The whole point of them is that some nerds thought they were common or important enough to deserve a name. Reflexively accusing me of logical fallacies without naming any, right after I explained how you were using one? Obviously schoolyard “I’m rubber you’re gkue” pantomiming. No understanding, no applicability, just defensive posturing.

                  And blaming me using disinformation

                  What disinformation? What did I blame you for?

                  because I pointed out the fact that your argument is both fallacious and nonsensical, does not make you right either.

                  Can you tell me when I said or implied, “when I use disinformation against you it means I’m right”? I think you are very confused in both thought and language at this point. You’re relying on quips and phrases that simply do not apply.

            • sorval_the_eeter@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              30 days ago

              Its not 1000 years old. Zionists lie about that to make it seem intractable. Arabs and Jews got along fine for the entire 800 year period of the Ottoman empire which ended in the early 1900s. Learn some history so you dont embarass yourself. its 80 years old, since the land theft, murder, and terrorism of the Nakba, done by Israelis.

    • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      1 month ago

      There is no difference because Harris knows her good little gooses steppers will vote for her no matter what she does or who she kills.

    • sorval_the_eeter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      30 days ago

      Do you consider war crimes, mass murderand sending in our troops to assist in a far right wing colonial war – all done with our tax dollars to be a “single issue” like… school vouchers or Amtrak funding? It seems a very dishonest or at best an inaccurate method to weigh issues against each other.

    • jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      30 days ago

      I mean their single issue is Harris supports murdering their friends and family via her Israel proxy. If you’re going to have a single issue to decide your vote I can’t think of a better one.

      Personally Harris lost my vote for two main reasons:

      • her continued support of genocide. while its true israel has a right to defend itself, it doesn’t have a right to support of the US while doing so. we have laws on the books for this precise reason and they need to be enforced.
      • her unwillingness to commit to supporting labor. won’t commit to khan, will likely happily break a striking union whenever she can as evidenced by the train union and wouldn’t have ‘changed a thing’ comment.

      There are a bunch of other things I could overlook but not those two. I jokingly sent my friend a message yesterday.

      God it amazes me to watch a candidate who is part of a historically low approval admin go ‘im not wrong its the voters who are wrong’. repeatedly.

      my friends response? ‘I can’t tell which candidate you’re talking about’ which was precisely my point.

  • Don Escobar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    1 month ago

    This group is the single greatest gift to the 2024 trump presidency and he doesn’t know it yet!

  • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    30 days ago

    Because Trump who literally said Muslims should wear a “Special ID at all times” back in 2015 is obviously gonna be much better…

    • KiloGex@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      29 days ago

      And Trump will just skip the middleman and bomb Gaza and Palestine himself. You’re talking about the guy who moved the embassy to Jerusalem, after all.

  • darth_tiktaalik@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    29 days ago

    Great so now we can have a more certain Trump presidency. Why limit yourself to just one genocide when you can have this guy in power here too:

    “How about allowing people to come to an open border, 13,000 of which were murderers, many of them murdered far more than one person, and they’re now happily living in the United States. You know now a murder, I believe this, it’s in their genes. And we got a lot of bad genes in our country right now,”

      • darth_tiktaalik@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        29 days ago

        Here’s a talking point for you, but from the Republican party’s policy platform:

        DEPORT PRO-HAMAS RADICALS AND MAKE OUR COLLEGE CAMPUSES SAFE AND PATRIOTIC AGAIN

        By “pro-Hamas” they mean all the free Palestine protestors.

    • pewter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      29 days ago

      Based on the article, that’s very clearly what they want.

      EDIT: anyone who’s downvoting me should try explaining why the Democratic mayor of a Muslim majority town that hates pride flags is endorsing Trump. Some people clearly don’t mind if Trump wins.

        • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 month ago

          I think calling Arab-Americans stupid for refusing to vote for genocide is racist. Harris is handing Trump a victory because she can’t cease US support for Israel.

          • Guy Dudeman@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            I don’t think anyone is calling anyone stupid for calling for an end to the genocide. But what’s stupid is when people think that Trump will somehow stop the genocide.

            Oh and btw… I was banned from world news. LOL.

              • capital@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                1 month ago

                Meaning these people are consciously assisting continuing what they believe is a genocide abroad AND making things worse here too?

                Or do they not understand FPTP voting?

                • GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  As so many Harris-voting lemmitors have instructed me, stopping the genocide is not on the effective ballot as-presented, so no, they are not assisting continuing what is absolutely a genocide. The goal is that they either pressure Harris to not be a ghoul, because they presume she cares about winning more than aiding genocide (this is most likely false) or, if Harris sticks to her guns and either loses or wins by such slim margins that it makes the Dem winning next election without stopping Israel much more hazardous, they (the Muslim/Arab voters) can extract concessions, because even electoral politics doesn’t end with one election cycle, and some strategies aimed at maximizing some long term result can introduce a risk or even a guarantee of short-term costs.

                  I don’t believe, like I think those voters do, that Dems would trade Israel slaughtering with impunity even for a guaranteed victory, but I think them demonstrating that unwillingness has its own value, since the DNC needs to be brought down. I don’t expect you to agree to this and am not terribly interested in persuading you, I’m just offering an explanation.

              • Guy Dudeman@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 month ago

                Then why not vote for the other people, who will possibly make it a slightly less bad genocide? What’s wrong with less bad?

                • davel [he/him]@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  30 days ago

                  You’d have to ask them. If your family or the families of people in your community were being slaughtered by the incumbent administration, you might discover you have a red line after all. Fortunately for you, you’ll probably never really know.

            • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              1 month ago

              When you are faced with high numbers of marginalized people refusing to vote for candidates contributing to the genocide of friends, relatives, and people of a similar heritage, and your response is that they are “stupid,” rather than trying to understand why they are acting in that manner, you assert yourself as more “enlightened,” and the marginalized people as uniquely stupid. That is why it is racist.

              • capital@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 month ago

                It’s like you didn’t even read what I wrote.

                It’s NOT uniquely stupid. Dummies vote against their interests all the time (see comment about white Christians).

                And it doesn’t take any special enlightenment to acknowledge how FPTP voting works. In fact, it’s so simple, you’d have to be pretty stupid to be unaware.

                But keep ruining that word to the point of meaninglessness.

                • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  30 days ago

                  I read every word of what you wrote.

                  Arab-Americans are refusing to vote for genocide at much, much higher rates than other ethnicities. My answer is what they have been saying themselves: they can’t vote for continued genocide of their friends, family, and people of a similar background. Your answer is that it’s because Arab-Americans are uniquely stupid among ethnicities in America, which is racist.

    • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      1 month ago

      Other way around. Both parties support Israel because Israel helps secure the Petro-Dollar, by which the US dominates the Global South with predatory IMF loans.

      • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 month ago

        And it’s the cork on land migration out of Africa into West Asia and eventually Europe.

        And it’s strategically important for the Red Sea trade route connecting Asia to the Mediterranean (although they’re having a little trouble with this one lol)

        And it’s the laboratory for surveillance and detainment and border walls, where they can live test technology and strategies that get exported to prisons and borders and cities around the West.

        And it’s a place for antisemitic governments to send all their Jewish citizens.

        And, of course, there’s a large apocalyptic cult of Christians that believe we need to immanentize the eschaton so Jesus can return.

        Israel serves so many functions!

  • apotheotic (she/her)@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    30 days ago

    Context:

    • I am not an american, so there may be some missing knowledge for me about the american electoral system.
    • I abhor Israel’s genocide in Gaza, and I abhor the biden administration’s support of (and Harris’ seeming continued support of) the genocide.
    • My understanding is that Trump is just as, if not more supportive of the genocide in Gaza, and on top of this has his sights on doing some truly terrible things in the US re: minorities, trans rights, etc

    So with that context, my question is thus: It seems clear that Trump wouldn’t change anything about the genocide in Gaza, and that he would bring more evil than the current status quo. So if you’re an american voter, you obviously can’t let Trump get in. But, Harris is gross to vote for as well, even if its a “lesser of the two evils” thing. What do you do? As far as I understand its basically one or the other, you dont really have any third party to vote for right?

    • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      30 days ago

      It’s more of a difference in practical values. At what point does the “lesser evil” itself become intolerable evil? Some people insist that you should vote for Hitler over 101% Hitler, that there is no intolerable level as long as there is a miniscule difference. Others have firm red lines in the sand, like genocide, where they advocate for abandoning them and pushing as hard as you can, even advocating for moves outside the electoral system like revolution.

      • apotheotic (she/her)@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        29 days ago

        So to put this in more practical terms, one would neither vote for Hitler or 101% Hitler, and instead vote for The Other Person who Isn’t Much Hitler At All, or abstain or something, and protest and take action in other ways?

        • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          29 days ago

          The “correct” answer is to vote for “Not Hitler” and join a revolutionary org, such as FRSO or PSL in the US.

          • averyminya@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            29 days ago

            Which candidate who opposes both Russia and Israel’s genocide has a path to the presidency? Legitimately, fully feasible path in 3 weeks to get this candidate to have 270 electoral votes?

            • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              29 days ago

              The point isn’t to win the presidency, but to show the votes the Dems threw away by being genocidal, and again, joining revolutionary orgs.

              • averyminya@beehaw.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                29 days ago

                So throw the country to the fascists polluting our homes, destroying our education system, rallying up people who enjoy committing hate crimes to other Americans. It’s the Democrats fault we will repeat the events of 2016.

                Got it.

    • ResoluteCatnap@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      29 days ago

      Your understanding is solid for not being an American. You’re not missing anything substantial-- people who are voting 3rd party think that the “dems need to learn” and that the dems can’t do whatever they want so their vote is supposed to be a punishment. But as you point out that if they really cared about this issue then they would vote for Harris because trump will do worse on this issue and all around. The time to make changes to our political system is not when you vote for president, but in the years leading up to that.

      In other words, people voting for 3rd party or Trump over this issue are morons. It sucks that our political system is what it is but if you knowingly vote for anything other than the candidate promising not-fascism, then you are supporting fascism.

      I just hope enough democrats understand this. I’m not happy with gaza either but our country is still recovering from the first shit show presidency of Trump, and fascists are closely watching this election.

      • jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        30 days ago

        In other words, people voting for 3rd party or Trump over this issue are morons

        incorrect you’re missing context of reliably blue states. I most certainly dont need to vote for democrats and can essentially do what I want w/ respect to the presidential ticket.

        All the nonsense from the liberal idiots in the democratic party miss this critical contextual bit of information. I happily vote 3rd party whenever there is one that aligns more closely with my goals. its just rare one does; because it simply doesn’t matter in my state for the outcome.

        My ballot typically goes:

        • 3rd party for pres
        • dem/independents for most local positions

        all this blue no matter who are just brain dead lunacy by the party is essentially: The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final and most essential command.

        Hopefully some day we’ll be able to have reasonable conversations about the toxicity of the democratic party but we just are not there yet and unfortunately the Ukrainians and Palestinians are paying the price in blood and harris doesnt have the backbone to challenge her corporate owners. Biden lost my support when he broke the train union strike. I believe he and harris would have broken the port workers strike as well if it wasn’t a month before the election.

        things that prevent me from voting for harris:

        • wont enforce the leahy laws with israel. israel absolutely does have a right to defend itself, it doesn’t have a right to be supported by the US tax payers. if the MIC wants money there is a far more moral war going on we can increase support for. (HUGE red flag)
        • wont commit to keeping Ms khan. (HUGE red flag)
        • i don’t trust her w/ respect to union support. I believe she’ll break unions just like biden did. which is why he lost my support.
        • her continuous attempts to gaslight the american people over biden’s mental decline makes her untrustworthy as an individual.

        until then I’ll continue advocating for and campaigning for election reform and primarying useless democrats. She could probably swing my vote if she commits to khan and never breaking a strike as those are important to the health of our country and economy but at this point its clear she wont shift.

        • ResoluteCatnap@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          29 days ago

          I’m glad you took one sentence out of context to tell me why youre not a moron. Good for you… the context of the article is a swing state. While your ticket may not matter, in your opinion, telling this to other people is in direct support for facism. Gtfo

          Edit: oh and i missed that its a 2 day account only commenting on this shit. Say hello to Russia for me and welcome to my block list

          • jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            29 days ago

            you’re upset I deconstructed your entire position in a couple of paragraphs and think burying your head in the sand will resolve the obvious problems with your positions. (hint: they won’t)

            learn how to influence your politicians. voting for them when they dont support your interests doesn’t work. being afraid of their opposition doesn’t work. What have you done to fix FPTP voting issues? What have you done to prevent genocides?

            I only quoted a single sentence you’re entire post was predicated on it. you’re the only moron because you lack contextual awareness; unlike the Palestinians in swing states. Good on them and I wish them the best of luck, I’m rooting for them and emailing my congress critters so they know that harris doesnt have my support is she continues her israel non-sense and issues with khan.

            edit: seems like the pressure is working now harris just needs to come out and say she’ll continue the enforcement of leahy and a cessation of hostilities. keep up the good work people few days left.

    • P_P@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      30 days ago

      You always vote against the fascist and the guy who staged a coup. It’s that simple.

      • Cethin@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        30 days ago

        This is correct. There are plenty of actions to be taken outside voting, but voting is quick, easy, and the bare fucking minimum. Vote and do whatever else you think you should do. If you don’t vote (or just throw it away) then you’re complicit in whatever happens.

        • macabrett[they/them]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          29 days ago

          So by that logic, if you vote for Harris and the genocide continues then you’re complicit in whatever happens.

          In fact, if you voted for Joe Biden, you’re already complicit in a genocide.

          • Cethin@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            29 days ago

            Sure, and you have to accept your actions and your reasoning for them, and there are very good reasons to support Harris instead of Trump. Doing nothing and pretending you aren’t complicit doesn’t actually make it true. Your gotcha question is only appropriate for children.

    • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      29 days ago

      This is limiting the scope of thought to four years.

      Democrats winning means genocide becomes fully normalized forever, whereas if Trump wins it means four more years of genocide but the democrats will have learnt they cannot ignore the left.

      In the short term Trump will be more damaging, but in the long term it is very debatable which is worse.

      • darth_tiktaalik@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        29 days ago

        Democrats winning means genocide becomes fully normalized forever,

        Even more so if the guy who openly said murder is a genetic predisposition wins.

        Who for the record is Donald J Trump.

        • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          29 days ago

          Genocide is already normalized for republicans. If democrats get to normalize it as well, there will be no non-genocide option in 2028.

          When you never draw a red line you signal that they can keep pushing the boundaries of evil.

      • apotheotic (she/her)@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        29 days ago

        Hmm. I can understand this perspective. I guess its a bit tough. As a trans person I would find it very hard to do anything that isn’t actively working against trump being in power, because if he gets in power it’s very likely that my life will be in danger (if I was an American). But at the same time, as mentioned before, it wouldn’t be an easy sell for me to be voting pro-harris.

        I guess your scenario doesn’t mean you’re going to vote for trump, just that you’ll vote third party or spoil your ballot?

        • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          29 days ago

          Directly voting for Trump will have the opposite effect. It will show democrats they should be more like Republicans because everyone was voting for Trump.

          By putting the votes in a visible place (a third party), the democrats will observe they are missing out on a lot of votes which are directly cast for a left wing agenda. And instead of Dick Cheney they might show up with a left winger in their next campaign to win over those third party voters.

          Donald Trump will not be a benefit in the short term. But rewarding democrats for only appealing to right wing voters will not be a benefit in the long term. They will shift even more to the right in 2028.

    • authorinthedark@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      30 days ago

      they exist, but the electoral system is designed to keep them from gaining power. And since (most) states use first past the post, secondary preferences aren’t taken into account, so if you vote third party when you would have voted for Harris otherwise you increase Trumps chance of winning. There’s some argument to be made that voting third party or not voting might influence democrats in the future to change their policy to appeal to those voters but I don’t know how realistic that is.

    • zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      1 month ago

      How would you feel if the US was sending weapons to a country that was killing your friends and family? What would you do?

        • jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          30 days ago

          narrator: and then, under harris, it continued to get worse.

          biden admin is about to cause an regional outbreak of war. causing our friends and family to be pulled into it. all because he wouldn’t redirect a few boats to ukraine. I have 0 interest in trump but harris needs to pull her head out of her ass and commit to enforcing the leahy law w/ israel.

      • capital@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 month ago

        Vote to hurt more people domestically and continue killing my friends and family… wait…

      • Shdwdrgn@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        1 month ago

        Trump stated earlier this year that if re-elected, he would ask Israel to make the Gaza issue “go away” in under a week. It’s one thing to be supplying the weapons, but quite another to have the most powerful country give their approval to do whatever it takes to end the conflict to Israel’s benefit. There was a Palestinian newspaper article I saw a couple months ago that gave the opinion that under Harris they would get bombed, but under Trump they would cease to exist. Of course when I linked that in a similar discussion I was accused a picking my sources, because hey what does a Palestinian newspaper know about Palestine?

          • Miles O'Brien@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            Trump says a lot of stuff. It’s usually awful. But he’s not much of a do-er

            This sure does read a lot like MAGAts saying “he doesn’t mean it like that” *when he has repeatedly demonstrated he means the thing he saidď

          • Shdwdrgn@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            1 month ago

            Agreed that we don’t know unless he’s given the chance to try something, but it’s not exactly something I’d like to “fuck around and find out”. There have been a lot of reports from people who were on his team during his last term that are talking about how he was talked down from extreme actions, and this time his people already know what they’re getting in to and are ok with it. I can only hope Harris can be better than Biden, but we do know Trump was willing to let his own nation (California) burn just because they didn’t all vote for him.

              • Shdwdrgn@mander.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 month ago

                Voting third-party could lead to Trump winning. He has already stated he will cut all support to Ukraine, which also leads to genocide, not to mention what he is threatening to do to everyone of color here at home. Face it, no matter how you vote, you’re going to be a party to genocide. The only available option is to vote in favor of the least amount of damage being threatened by all parties. Yes, even Jill Stein is a problem here because her stated purpose is to spoil the Democrat vote (which leads me to distrust her “concerns” over Gaza even if she does have a history of voting against Israel).

                Besides which, if you’re a US citizen then you’ve been a party to genocide your entire life, between our direct interference in the elections of other countries, to straight-up installing leaders of our choice, to simply withholding aid to civilians because our government didn’t want to step on any toes. You’re living the good life because our nation kills people for profit, so don’t pretend like you’re not already a party to it.

        • GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          but quite another to have the most powerful country give their approval to do whatever it takes to end the conflict to Israel’s benefit.

          Israel already has approval! The arguments on the phone are kabuki theater

          • davel [he/him]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            30 days ago

            The New Deal was an attempt to save capitalism from the threat of socialist revolution. The Great Depression left the working class in grave financial straits, and socialism was a foreign & domestic threat. This was before the socialists were purged from labor unions, before the Cold War and the House Committee on Un-American Activities. The Democratic Party didn’t make concessions to the working class out of the kindness of its heart.

            Over decades, those temporary concessions have eroded along with any threats to the capital order: the collapse of the Soviet Union and the rise the US’s neocolonial hegemony; the end of history. The Democratic party is to the right of Reagan now, and some in the Republican party are itching to remove even the trappings of democracy.

    • zbyte64@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 month ago

      The important thing here is that I don’t have to be civil to these people. We should shame them at every chance and equate them to literal MAGA. Only then will we win the election, which is what this is about and is not some distraction.

  • Lightor@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 month ago

    I don’t get this. 3rd party will never win. Ever. There are two real options. Vote for the one that offers the best outcome for you. Not doing that is accepting that you are ok with the worst of the two, because you had a chance to keep them out of office and choose not to.

    • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 month ago

      I don’t get this. 3rd party will never win. Ever. There are two real options.

      People are voting third party because you believe there are only 2 real options.

      Vote for the one that offers the best outcome for you.

      Gotcha, we should vote for Claudia De La Crúz.

      Not doing that is accepting that you are ok with the worst of the two, because you had a chance to keep them out of office and choose not to.

      Both Trump and Harris are the worst options, that’s why we are going against them.

      • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        30 days ago

        How is voting for her the best option. Literally all she can do is benefit the Republicans by pulling votes from the Dems. Hell, in Georgia they’ve literally ruled that votes for her won’t be counted even though she’s on the ballot.

        Her winning the US Presidential election is less-likely than winning the power all 25 consecutive times by finding the winning ticket on the ground at random truck stops in Malaysia.

        • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          30 days ago

          For a few reasons.

          1. If you have no red line in the sand, then that gives the Dems free reign to do whatever they please.

          2. It helps boost PSL’s platform, which is revolutionary, and therefore important to get new members

          3. If she gets more than 5% of the vote, then PSL gets better ballot access and public funding

          4. It helps delegitimize the electoral system.

        • jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          30 days ago

          context matters. you have no idea what state many people live in. I, for example, live in a reliably blue stronghold. harris will win no matter how I vote. so I don’t vote for democrats when when there is a better option on the ballot.

          There is no value in voting for a party that doesn’t support my values/interests. I personally don’t like many of de la cruz’s policies, they are poorly constructed, however I think she likely has a better moral compass and backbone than harris does. I’m giving harris until the end of the week to fix her positions on khan and ideally irsael, but i doubt she will so she wont be getting my vote.

          • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            30 days ago

            I personally don’t like many of de la cruz’s policies, they are poorly constructed

            Which policies do you believe are poorly constructed?

            • jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              29 days ago

              literally every single one she listed… she’s certainly not a unifying figure that socialism needs. she isnt dog whistling shes full throat fog horning and poorly.

              The 100 largest corporations in America should be seized from their billionaire owners and turned into public property.

              good luck. that’ll take years and won’t fly for a lot of people. nor will it fix the problem. all its doing is triggering an immediate immune response from the unthinking masses. Nor does it address daily issues working american’s are experiencing. I understand what shes going for, but she doesn’t know how to accomplish it effectively.

              Overthrow the Dictatorship of the Rich — Build a Democracy That Serves the Working Class

              sigh… same problem as above. removing the FBI and NSA will have little to no material impact on working americans.

              End the Rule of Money and Lock Up the Corrupt Elite

              yeah okay. again get what shes going for but non of that can be accomplished without a supportive congress. What to over throw the system? great I’m right there with you. but have an actual workable plan.

              End All U.S. Aid to Apartheid Israel. End the Genocide and Free Palestine & Cut the Military Budget by 90% — Peace, Not War with China & Russia!

              sigh. so completely cripple our economy, and trade one relatively friendly genocidal country for two unfriendly genocidal countries. sounds like a great plan.

              End the war on black america.

              sigh reparations, i get it i really do. but its just another aspect of the race war and sadly black americans are not yet populous enough to pull it off. could just as easily have said ‘build a social safety net to support working americans’

              Defend Women’s rights, full equality for lgbtq people

              again great cause, but lacks the acume to identify the levers to pull to make it a reality.

              Save the planet from capitalism

              sigh. again just isolating herself from many american’s who believe in capitalism.

                • jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  29 days ago

                  incorrect, Im a socialist. she just doesn’t know how to be effective at getting the change we all desire; and I doubt she’ll be good as a president. shes hurt and angry and lashing out. she should run locally for a governor position and prove she knows how to develop and build worker run cooperatives before trying her hand at the national stage.

                  the first step is following khan by breaking non-competes, then provide support and resources for worker run organizations.

  • enbee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    1 month ago

    stop paying your taxes too, that shit is funding the genocide