“Yes don’t vote at all to get rid of fascism”

  • TheDoozer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    1 day ago

    There’s two sides to this argument, and one is wrong and the other is right.

    One says “Both sides do it, so it’s okay that my side does it.”

    The other says “Your side does it. A few on my side do it, too. But it doesn’t matter, we should stop both sides from doing it.”

    • Donkter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      21 hours ago

      “It happens on both sides! you don’t condemn it on your side, isnt that hypocritical?!”

      “I… Actually condemn everyone doing it and I think me and you should look for and support people who don’t support this heinous thing.”

      “…”

      “So, do you condemn the people on your side doing it as wel-”

      “But look at this person who has done it on your side!”

  • DarkFuture@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    1 day ago

    Both sides’d themselves into proto-fascism. And taking us along for the ride.

    Fucking morons.

    • FlyingCircus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      20 hours ago

      Why are you blaming leftists for Trumps win? We make up like 1% of the population, tops. You should instead point the finger at Republicans for voting for him. Or the Dems for running a totally weak and ineffectual campaign. (Or how about the oligarchs who only want to divide us so that they can rob us blind?)

    • Absolutely. Trump only goes more insane. At least with Kamala we would have had a chance to push left policies, and they wouldn’t be going directly to fucking fascism, unlike t-Rump.

      • 13igTyme@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        21 hours ago

        I always just post this article.

        Literally the first fucking sentence.

        Vice President and Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris said Washington will continue to pressure Israel and other players in the Middle East to reach a ceasefire deal in Gaza

  • MetalMachine@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 day ago

    Difficult to vote between genocide and genocide. At least with one you punished the other candidate for it.

  • Ledericas@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    1 day ago

    “both sides”= a disengenious comment by conservative mainly also uses the same thing to say thier not as bad.

    • MetalMachine@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 day ago

      “Both sides” also used by liberals to tell you it doesn’t matter they voted for genocide because trump will do the same

      • 13igTyme@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        21 hours ago

        Funny words coming from the fake “progressive” that claimed boths sides and sat at home or threw away a vote.

      • Ledericas@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        20 hours ago

        both sides is primarly used by conservatives, 100% of the time, lol. its pretty obvious even on reddit. thier talking points often are right wing in nature and pretty disengeniously disguised. i have never seen a “liberal” if there is anything left of center right in america, say that at all.

  • Michael@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Maybe there would be more than Side A and Side B if we had voting reform and Democrats didn’t systematically sue third-parties off the ballot.

    People (not just authoritarians) criticize Side A because they have way more tallies than most have been led to believe. Everybody who pays any amount of attention knows that Side B has a lot of tallies. What good comes out of specifically pointing out the tallies of Side B when literally everybody on non-conservative social media is blasted with the knowledge of those tallies? If you want somebody to preach to the choir or inform you about Side B’s tallies, just ask. If you think people paying attention to or being informed about Side A’s tallies is dangerous and harmful, just say so.

    Side A tolerates third-world exploitation (labor, resources, goods) that the US economy still relies on, they tolerate the US economy still relying on slavery and child slavery, they tolerate or support US imperialism and regime change, they refuse to address or come up with solutions for the fresh water crisis (by 2030, demand will exceed supply by 40%), they refuse to properly address many issues that the US people face (the economy, the housing crisis, the health care crisis, etc.), they support harmful policies like fracking, they have allowed corporations/et. al to go out of control under their power, and they generally have not advocated for strong regulation and protections for the American people. Yes, Side B is undesirable, but Side A is insufficient.

    If Side A’s hands are always tied in a two-party system, then they should impeach the bad actor, push voting/election reform and term limits, and hold fair and democratic primaries and elections. Side A not propping up extreme right-wing candidates (like Trump) and telling the media to take them seriously would be nice, too.

    1/3 of Americans don’t vote and plenty of people only voted Kamala because they didn’t want Trump (and there are other factors than Gaza, misogyny, and Jill Stein voters at play to explain why people didn’t come out to vote for her). Plenty of people probably don’t want Trump (or anybody like him) if they’ve been paying any attention and didn’t fall for the propaganda.

    Side A would get bonus points for not alienating progressives, for supporting the loosening of requirements for ballot access (and stop engaging in lawfare to restrict ballot access), and for supporting fair and inclusive debates on public property where they would have to address perspectives and topics that are potentially uncomfortable or inconvenient for them.

    I realize there are plenty of unserious actors who run for president (like Kayne West) who would try their best to poison open debates and abuse expanded ballot access, but there has to be some fair mechanism to filter (openly racist and insane) people like him out. Perhaps a competency test of sorts with independent observation would be appropriate.

    And I realize a lot of people find Jill Stein to be harmful (and individuals like her), but maybe we shouldn’t arrest her (or any other presidential candidate) and put her in a black site, shackling her to a chair for 8 hours, because she wanted to be present at the presidential debate?

    This is an unprecedented time for the American people, with human rights and due process in jeopardy. We are facing multiple serious crises with no solutions or progress in sight - voting and election reform, in addition to term limits, are all urgent and necessary.

    I don’t care if you want to vote for Side A no matter what — we can only suppress criticism and stay in denial of major issues for so long before (e.g.) the fresh water crisis hits us and humanity is completely and utterly unprepared.

    • Bamboodpanda@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 day ago

      I appreciate the depth of your response. You’re right, critiquing Side A doesn’t mean endorsing Side B. It means demanding better from those who claim to represent us. The meme calls out false equivalency, but that shouldn’t silence legitimate concerns about the system itself.

      It’s like this: if the house is on fire, I’ll vote to put out the biggest flame, but I’m also going to ask why the fire keeps spreading, and who’s refusing to fix the wiring. Reform isn’t a distraction; it’s how we stop the next blaze before it starts.

      Thanks for adding a more nuanced layer to the conversation.

    • FlyingCircus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 day ago

      There’s also the fact that both sides support capitalism, which is an evil ideology that has killed more people than communism ever did. Like for real, capitalism kills 10 million people every year just through starvation and withholding lifesaving medication. That means that every decade capitalism kills more than even the highest estimates of communism’s total headcount over the last 100 years (which, btw, those estimates include Nazis killed in WW2).

      • Zealousideal_Fox_900@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Hey cockhead, look up the fucking holodomor, and don’t just read the denialist BS.
        Or the Katyn Massacre.
        Or the Blagoveshchensk Massacre.
        Or the Kyiv Massacre.
        Or the Amur River Massacre.
        I can go on, if you’d like?

        • FlyingCircus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          20 hours ago

          Ok great, you can name a bunch of the events that make up the alleged 100 million deaths caused by communists. That doesn’t take away from the fact that capitalist governments have FAR more blood on their hands.

          And we can debate back and forth on the historicity of the events you named, but you should at least know that the Holodomor was literally coined by a self-proclaimed fascist to try and conflate Nazi crimes with Soviet errors.

      • Michael@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Whether they use them intentionally or not, we need voting reform. In the 2024 election, third-parties barely made a dent — they weren’t a spoiler.

        FPTP is exactly why third-parties can be a “spoiler”. There are plenty of valid alternative voting systems to explore that are way more fair and democratic.

        And it doesn’t sound very democratic of the Democratic Party to repeatedly and systematically restrict ballot access through lawsuits. Ballot access is hard enough for third-parties to achieve in most states.

        • Ledericas@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          20 hours ago

          its well known Republicans have funded 3rd parties to do this, not all of them but enough that its suspicious. its not all of them.

  • ZMoney@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    2 days ago

    Can we just stop having this discussion? It’s so boring. Both sides misrepresent the other. Tankies are stupid. Also nobody is a tankie. The Biden administration sanctioned a genocide. Every other US president is a war criminal. This discussion never goes anywhere.

    • nyctre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      So you propose ignoring the propaganda and hope it’ll go away? Doesn’t sound like a very good plan.

      • orcrist@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        2 days ago

        What propaganda are you even talking about? It sounds like you’re trying to continue a discussion by ignoring the comment that says the discussion is pointless.

        • nyctre@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          2 days ago

          “both sides are the same” for example. Do you really need me to list all the propaganda they repeat? Just go to .ml or grad and you’ll see. The discussion is not pointless because ignoring them and not responding to their bullshit isn’t gonna work.

  • kittenzrulz123
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    2 days ago

    Leftists: Maybe we shouldn’t fund genocide and perhaps the average worker should be able to afford to put food on their table

    Liberals: HOW DARE YOU PROMOTE YOUR RADICAL TANKIE AGENDA, DONT YOU KNOW THE GDP AND STOCK MARKET ARE GOING UP WHICH MEANS THE ECONOMY IS GOOD SO STOP COMPLAINING. IN FACT THE POLITICANS DONT EVEN NEED TO GIVE YOU ANYTHING BECAUSE THEY DESERVE YOUR VOTE, NEVER BLAME THE SYSTEM, NEVER ASK FOR CHANGE AND NEVER THINK ABOUT WHO PULLS THE STRINGS

      • ssfckdt
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        I mean this is literally a strawman post so

        • ILoveUnions@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          Not especially. Many groups of people, conservatives and leftists and “centrists” alike, love to suggest the parties are equal. I’ve heard it in real life. I’ve heard it online. All over reddit when I was still on it and lemmy even now.

          Though I wouldn’t especially attribute the logic to tankies, so in that way, perhaps

          • ssfckdt
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            god tier politics challenge: ask a blue dem to name the last time the Ds did something the opposite to what the Rs have done, and was actually good for the average American

            (Not proposed, mind you, but did)

          • diffaldo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            2 days ago

            Prominent leftists I know argue that democrats dont deliver meaningful change but they still encourage people to vote. they say dems go harder against progressives than they do against republicans. And I agree with them.

            • ILoveUnions@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              2 days ago

              Not voting does nothing. It doesn’t deliver meaningful change. It doesn’t help. Doesn’t fix.

              There’s a lot to lose by not voting. It’s a privilege to vote and run for office, and as a Republic, it’s people’s civic duty to use it.

              If you don’t like it, running for election yourself, organizing, unionizing, those are the strongest methods to realistically to fight back. Revolution rarely comes as long as people are moderately comfortable — and that’s the only other option.

              For presidential, there’s only 2 options. But if you go down to local level, third parties can be viable.

              Only just over 60% of democracies go back to democracy after being authoritarian, and I have never been one to play with gambling the odds

          • Iceman@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 days ago

            Ofc it’s a straw man! It’s at least so vague and free from annotation that the only way it works at all is for the reader to apply there own.

      • kittenzrulz123
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        2 days ago

        That was entirely based on my interactions with liberals, yes I was acturally called a Tankie for caring about basic human dignity

  • wpb@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Wait I’m lost, are we talking foreign invasions done by the US vs foreign invasions done by China? Or the number of victims of Hamas vs the victims of the IDF? What are we counting here? Military bases abroad?

    • Aabbcc@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      2 days ago

      What are we counting here?

      Evil policies supported by democrats vs evil policies supported by republicans

        • orcrist@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          2 days ago

          There have been many at various times, and it also depends on your values, obviously. It also depends on whether you’re looking at things in specific times as opposed to generally.

          There have been many times when many mainstream Democrats were pro-censorship but most Republicans were not.

          Then there are other situations that I think are edge cases and therefore interesting. For example, Obamacare did make life better for real numbers of Americans, but it also guaranteed that we wouldn’t be looking at universal healthcare for a few more decades, if ever. And that was a law pushed for and passed by Democrats. Of course you could argue that it’s better than nothing, maybe it was, but medical debt is far worse now than it ever has been, and predictably so. So then you wonder why Democrats pushed for it, and we all know the answer to that, corruption. Of course they would say that it’s the best they could do, but is that even true? We’ll never find out, cuz they didn’t try.

          So how do you rate rate these gray area situations? Things that are better than nothing but worse than a lot, but the politicians are only voting for them because they are corrupt.

          • HalfSalesman@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            Sure, but on average when some self proclaimed leftist’s opening is “Democrats did a bad thing” in a vacuum my immediate assumption is they’re a campist/tankie, accelerationist, or a rightwing psyop and my instinct is to immediately challenge them (most of the time… sometimes its me critiquing the dems)

            Sometimes it turns out they’re giving an earnest critique but usually not.

            • Aabbcc@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              1 day ago

              What in the word salad are you talking about.

              Leftists say funding Israel’s war crimes is bad. Check mark in both columns.

              • HalfSalesman@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 day ago

                That’s not a critique of democrats, that’s a critique of a portion of democrats and all of republicans.

                • Aabbcc@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  It’s a critique of the democrats that were in the running for president

            • Kentifer@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 day ago

              Who made you the arbiter of another person’s earnestness? Can you read minds? And if you’re the one criticizing the Dems, does someone else take over?

              • HalfSalesman@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 day ago

                I’m the arbiter of who I trust is arguing coherently or in good faith and I am ultimately not trusting of the average internet poster by default.

                I’ve been arguing on dedicated internet debate spaces for a very very large portion of my life and I have a good eye for when someone isn’t worth being taken seriously.

    • Goldholz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      Talking about how some people deny or justify the horrendous things done by Lenin, Stalin, Mao, the Kim Dynastie, Malenkov, Khrushchev, Brezhnev, Ulbricht, Honecker, Guevara, Ho Chi Min, and so on and all their helpers, because others also did horrendous things and both have to be called out for it. Justification of unneccesary murdering shows you are in favor for that which is unacceptable

      • wpb@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        2 days ago

        If we take “kill” to mean like manslaughter through poor policy and famine, probably Mao, by an order of magnitude. But I’m guessing that’s not what you’re thinking about, because that’s kind of a silly comparison. It’s like asking “who killed more Americans, Mao or the US”, to which the answer is both obvious and completely uninteresting.

        So I’m gonna take it to mean “murder”, like the killing of landlords during the cultural revolution. And then it’s actually kind of close, and I’m not sure who’s killed more Asians. So the most liberal estimates for Mao there are 7 million, but the range is pretty big. The most conservative estimates put him at 2 million.

        Let’s look at the US’ kill count. I know of bombing campaigns in Korea, Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia. Respectively, the ranges here are 300k-2M, 1.5M-3.1M, 80k-350k, 50k-150k. So that’s a range of 1.9M-5.6M. Then there’s the suppression of the movement for independence in colonized phillipines, which adds 200k, and Afghanistan, 250k. So that puts us at 2.5M-6M for the US to 2-7 for Mao.

        It should be noted that I’m not counting indirect deaths via training and arming dictatorships (if someone hands an assassin a gun, and the assassin kills your mother, the first person is not a murderer, but they are culpable in some way. If we add these, you get Timor, and the murder of leftists in Indonesia in the 60s, among others, which adds another 1-1.5M to the US count.

        So I guess it’s kind of close. I gotta say, I’m a little surprised, I always thought Mao was much worse, but the US is a strong contender.

        • PyroNeurosis
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

          Woah! We skipped over the Pacific theater of WWII entirely it looks like.

          Also skipping all MidEast action, but that can be considered a different tally for purposes of this exercise.

          But realistically we should also have approximately similar timeframes for both- otherwise we just inflate US counts artificially.

          • wpb@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 day ago

            You’re welcome to include Iraq, Iran, South America, Africa, Gaza, Turkish Kurds, and so on. You’re welcome to restrict to some arbitrary timeframe, you’re welcome to exclude indirect fatalities. Ultimately it’s a fairly futile exercise. But I do know that if we restrict to the period including the invasion of Vietnam by China and onward, the US “wins” very, very comfortably.

            And I object to your use of the word artificial. These are human lives that were snuffed out for the sake of greed. These were people, like your father, your mother, your friends. There’s nothing artificial about these numbers.

      • kkj@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        2 days ago

        It’s only a gift if you get it for free. Israel funded Hamas to make themselves look more sympathetic.

            • DMCMNFIBFFF@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              23 hours ago

              Gaza was under siege by Israel, but it was coping.

              Hamas then did their stupid attack on Putin’s 71st birthday, inflicting relatively insignificant damage to Israel;

              but it was an excuse that Israel used/is using for the current bulldozing of Gaza (and, IIUC, more of the West Bank).

              Perhaps when the Riviera has been fully developed, Netanyahu should send the leaders of Hamas some gift baskets.

                • DMCMNFIBFFF@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  9 hours ago

                  IIUC, 50 years ago, the UN GA passed a motion that Zionism was racism.

                  Did that scare the people of Israel?

                  I predict that Israel will still have relations with much of the world as dealing with Israel is more profitable than dealing with Arabs in Golan, West Bank, and Gaza; and Netanyahu won’t go to jail, particularly as his 80th birthday is less than 60 months away.

  • Hikuro-93@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    There’s those who commit unintended mistakes, then there’s those who give in to the temptation of behaving badly in their moments of weakness, and then there’s those who can’t wait for any given opportunity to behave maliciously and justify it by saying they aren’t the only ones doing it.

    Hey, don’t judge me for commiting ethnic cleansing! Hitler did it as well, after all! And that one single bad apple in your group is mildly racist as well, so you’re no better!

  • Goldholz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    2 days ago

    Another classic:

    Me: gives my definition of tankie Tankie: so <name of leftist who doesnt match the given definition> is a tankie too?

    And ofc: Shunning a dictatorship and pointing out their horrible doing, means you obviousely cant be left, nooo you must be a libertarian or fascist.

    And one of my favorit tankie talking points: "Democracy is when you have to be approved by the government in order to even get on a list. That you can either vote for the state party or “no”, like it was in east germany, and 99.4% voted for the state party but then suddenly after the dictatorship fell, 4 years later they dropped down to 16.4 %. aah yes seems legit. Truely a grand democracy.

  • HalfSalesman@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    73
    ·
    2 days ago

    People who refuse to vote when there is a clearly superior option deserve whatever the greater evil brings forth when they win.

      • Iceman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 day ago

        “I would proudly vote for Hitler if slightly to the right of Hitler was on the ballot”. Good fucking job, you’re voting for Hitler. If you vote for Hitler you also deserve slightly to the right of Hitler.

      • HalfSalesman@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        Given that you can act (in this case vote), your hands are more dirty permitting the worse evil to win through inaction.

        You don’t get to clean your hands of things when you have the power to act to effect the outcome.

        So saying “People voted for evil” is a selective self-benefiting myopia. Vote abstainers are not virtuous, they are a narcissists.

      • tamman2000@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        And people who didn’t vote for the lesser evil could have helped avoid the greater evil, but chose not to.

    • tomenzgg@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      2 days ago

      Even when there isn’t a clearly superior option; there’s no excuse to not vote in the U. S. when the right to vote is such a pivotable portion of your history. We are barely over a half century away; only a mere 60 years. Unconscionable.

      • Kentifer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 day ago

        If voting is a right, then surely not voting is also a right. You seem to be confusing it with the word “responsibility.”

        • tomenzgg@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Considering I never said that one doesn’t have the right to not vote, I don’t believe I am; but you are correct that I consider it a responsibility.

      • DarkFuture@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        Non-voters are beneath Trump supporters in my opinion. They’re the lowest of the low. A complete failure to understand their civic duty that a ton of people died to allow them to have. At least Trump supporters get involved. In the worst, dumbest possible way, but involved nonetheless.

      • Fenrir @lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        2 days ago

        On the one hand, corporatist party, on the other, literal fascists. Yes, clearly there is no superior option.

          • DarkFuture@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 day ago

            I simply cannot grasp why some people believe voting 3rd party in a presidential election isn’t one of the dumbest possible things you can do in life.

            Like, beyond the fact that the 3rd party candidate with the most votes in 2024 got a whopping HALF OF A SINGLE PERCENT of the total votes cast, meaning a 3rd party literally cannot win, there’s still the reality that even if they did win, no 3rd party has A SINGLE MEMBER IN CONGRESS, so if a 3rd party presidential candidate actually won, they wouldn’t be able to do shit, because they’d have literally ZERO allies in Congress.

            I’m pretty sure anyone voting 3rd party for president has absolutely no clue how our government works. They have no concept of the reality they live in.

            • DMCMNFIBFFF@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              22 hours ago

              I simply cannot grasp why some people believe voting 3rd party in a presidential election isn’t one of the dumbest possible things you can do in life.

              You might want to say that to Michiganders who voted for Stein (and Oliver) because of Gaza and the US presence in the Middle East.

              The 2024 Presidential election isn’t the only one in US history: there have been 57 others.

              Trump had few allies in Congress before 2016, but now members are the Republican caucus are falling all over themselves to curry favour from him.

              I’m pretty sure anyone voting 3rd party for president has absolutely no clue how our government works. They have no concept of the reality they live in.

              You are so correct—as members of the herd generally are. I like people who resort to exaggerations, over generalizations, and distortions.

            • DMCMNFIBFFF@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              edit-2
              1 day ago

              It is a vote, and over 1.5 million Americans (excluding those for RFK) made such votes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election#Results

              IMO, progressives (who’s not too bothered by Stein’s cozying up to Russia a bit) from California, most of New England, DC, Maryland, Hawaii, or Washington (state), and yet yammer on about how bad third parties are because they split the Democrat vote, are probably stupid, or at least ignorant, and should give some of the time they spend watching CNN or Vaush to reading election stats.

              • DarkFuture@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 day ago

                how bad third parties are because they split the Democrat vote, are probably stupid, or at least ignorant, and should give some of the time they spend watching CNN or Vaush to reading election stats.

                Hey, I don’t need to comment because you said it all for me.

              • HalfSalesman@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 day ago

                Election stats? You ever hear the phrase “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics”

                Stats on their own given a poor analysis of an average joe/jane can mislead just as much if not more than a talking head can.

                The core fact remains that voting for a third party under a first past the post system is risking permitting the greater evil to win.

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

                  Yes, I think it’s from Twain.

                  I backed my assertions with stats, however poor you think they are as analysis.

                  What do yo back up your assertions with, other than lame DNC, CNN, and Vaush talking points?

  • pcalau12i@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    2 days ago

    Using the term “tankie” while defending a party carrying out a modern day holocaust is quite something.

    • nyctre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 days ago

      Defending and arguing that the two parties aren’t the same isn’t the same thing. Just check out last week’s news involving trump. Just last week. And then multiply that by 50. Nobody said the democrats are good. Just that the republicans are 10 times worse, that’s all.

      • pcalau12i@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        When Democrats win next election they will spend the whole election carrying on Trump’s policies and therefore normalizing them. Republicans go farther right, people like you say that’s proof they’re worse and we should back the Democrats, Democrats win and do all the same policies and therefore normalize it, which then allows Republicans to go farther right.

    • DarkFuture@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      while defending a party carrying out a modern day holocaust

      Oof. You should really think twice before posting a comment this dumb. There’s a delete option. Do yourself a favor and use it.