I just don’t get how people are looking at Harris’ stance as being pro-genocide. Biden is the President and historically, foreign policy during the tenure of the President by the Vice President doesn’t veer too far off from the President. That said, Harris has absolutely called for investigation into the suffering of civilians in the conflict.
Congress sets the budgetary amount of aid to direct to Israel and the President distributes the money via their diplomatic channels. There are very few options for the President to just suspend funding, which Biden has done twice for weapons under the rules established within 10 USC § 362 (a)(1)
Of the amounts made available to the Department of Defense, none may be used for any training, equipment, or other assistance for a unit of a foreign security force if the Secretary of Defense has credible information that the unit has committed a gross violation of human rights.
But outside that, there’s very little the President can do once Congress approves funding and that funding has been signed into law. This is why an independent channel investigation is required and is exactly what Harris has called for. This would allow the the US Government to establish their own inquiry into the human abuses. This would give the required evidence to cancel funding under Title XII authority. But none of that can happen overnight. It’s not an easy path to override the will of Congress.
On the opposite side, Trump has indicated that he will absolutely turn a blind eye to the whole thing and allow Israel to determine solely the “best” course of action for their current conflict. Trump has literally stated in his rallies:
From the start, Harris has worked to tie Israel’s hand behind its back, demanding an immediate cease-fire, always demanding cease-fire
Trump would not see a cease-fire as a required condition for the on-going conflict.
Harris and Democrats historically have called for a two-state solution. Trump’s plan which has been broadly adopted by the Republican party in general would:
- Give Palestinians only about 15% of their original territory
- Jerusalem would become Israel’s undivided capitol, meaning all claims by the Palestinians to the eastern half of the city would be tossed out.
- Allow Palestinians to “achieve an independent state” via a means that is not clearly defined in the plan but indicated that Israel would have a final say in that process.
- “No Palestinians or Israelis will be uprooted from their homes” indicating that the territory that Israel has already colonized from their current conflict would become Israel’s.
- Would put Israel and Jordan on equal footing for the administration of al-Haram al-Sharif, which will absolutely ignite a conflict.
- Any territory allocated to Palestinians would have to undergo a four year “wait” period, but there’s no protections from Israel obtaining that territory if done so during conflict. So Israel could provoke someone to fight them and that would give them justification to take the land during this “four year wait period”.
Trump has all but given up completely on a two-state solution. Which means, he’s for a one state solution. And people are fooling themselves if they believe that Trump would seek a “peaceful” one state solution. He has told Netanyahu directly, “Just get it done quickly”. Now we can play a game as what manner is used to “get it done quickly” means, but only idiots are the one’s thinking that doesn’t give a tacit nod to ethic cleansing.
I just have no idea what these people who think Harris is a bad idea for Palestinians are actually thinking. And really, I don’t think they are thinking at all. You have one solution that is long, stupid, and required because we are a nation of laws. And you have the other solution that is “fuck it, firebomb them all and call it done”. It is difficult to imagine that there are truly people this blind and ignorant to this reality. But yet, here we are.
The notion that we might get a 3rd party into office like twenty years from now if we start today, helps nobody if the people we’re trying to help are all eradicated over the next four years. Going down this “third road” only ensures an outcome where we are fifteen years too late to help.
It makes no sense, but have you considered the possibility that most people pushing that narrative are Russian assets trying to get Trump elected?
deleted by creator
I just have no idea what these people who think Harris is a bad idea for Palestinians are actually thinking. And really, I don’t think they are thinking at all.
They live in cloud cuckoo land where Biden/Harris can just tell Netanyahu “Fuck off and shove a grenade up your arse, you genocidal maniac” and that would actually work.
They believe in Schrodinger’s Jew: that Jews simultaneously control US politics and that US Presidents control Israel.
Removed by mod
Must be awesome to live such a privileged life that that’s the only thing you have to care about in this election cycle.
Women’s healthcare issues? LGBTQ rights? Interracial marriages? The US economy? The environment? Kids’ lives? Nah, you only care about Palestinian people. Well done you! Golf claps for you.
Most of Israel’s weapons come from the US. It’s very well possible for the US congress/government to say “no more weapons if you use them for agression”.
Biden tried just slowing weapon shipments earlier on and Rs and some Ds rammed a bill through saying nope, no slowdowns on these shipments allowed.
The Joe Biden administration also stated that Israel would receive “whatever it needs”. Which is pretty much what has happened so far.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_support_for_Israel_in_the_Israel–Hamas_war
wow you just ignore that biden wanted to give them the weapons anyways. you see its a little thing called providing cover. Biden didn’t fight against it because he wanted to give isreal the weapons.
That bill went through with a veto-proof majority of all Rs and enough Dems.
Biden is a zionist, however, he’s also a politician who understands that the genocide was not and is not super favorable domestically. It’s also not a good look for the ceasefire negotiations to be as unsuccessful as they’ve been. If the opposition wasnt the orange turd this election could have easily gone R just like Reagan v Carter with Iranian hostage crisis.
oh wow! a veto proof majority! its too bad biden controls the military and can just know you. not ship them. invoke leahy. etc.
biden has no one to blame but himself for gaza. go read the article of the israel/gaza timelines. there was no need for whats happening to happen. biden just had to… not ship weapons. he had all the legal cover he could have possibly wanted if his goal was to end the genocide.
It’s also not a good look for the ceasefire negotiations to be as unsuccessful as they’ve been
lol. they have not even happened. bibi has 0 interest in a ceasefire. the biden admin knows this. if they don’t then we definitely need to get rid of them all.
Nooooo!!! Anything other than perfect support at all times for everything Netanyahu does is Trump support from Russia! Every lemmy genocide supporter says so!
In really it’s probably a mix that totals to around 90% of the people making these pronouncements are either bots, paid trolls from enemy nations, nihilists, or the equivalent. The remaining 10% probably have a genuine belief that voting for Harris makes them complicit in the genocide the Israeli government and its military are committing. They’re incorrect, on many levels, but that is probably their genuine belief.
We must always vote for the lesser evil because that’s what the real world is, from the most negative point of view: reducing evil and suffering. We know some of the things we’re doing today will be seen as evil by our progeny. We don’t know others.
A Harris administration will be the most likely to reduce the suffering of Palestinians, the most likely to force the Israeli government and military to end the genocide, and the most likely to make real strides toward middle east peace.
You come off as someone who had the protocols of the elders of Zion read to you in your sleep every night without your knowledge
In really it’s probably a mix that totals to around 90% of the people making these pronouncements are either bots, paid trolls from enemy nations, nihilists, or the equivalent.
All you’re missing is that one magic word
Your world view is pretty self defeating dont you think?
Whereas, and forgive me if I’m mistakenly assuming you’re advocating not voting for Harris, your worldview is just defeating. Every candidate but Harris will ensure that Palestinian suffering increases. Not voting will deny Harris a vote, therefore necessarily increase the odds of someone else winning and Palestinian suffering increasing. Palestinians are saying to vote for Harris. Votjng for a third party (all choices there, by the way, either actively endorse Trump (RFK Jr.) or are funded by Russia (Stein) so supports the genocide of Ukrainians) remove a vote for Harris and increase the odds of Palestinian suffering increasing. There is no scenario where if you’re an American citizen you can be a neutral bystander.
At this point, if you don’t vote for Harris, you’re voting for ethnic cleansing and genocide, quite possibly at home as well as abroad.
All I’m advocating is for people to vote for whoever fits their values best, whether thats third party, democrat, republican, or not voting at all if there really isnt any valid ones.
The problem is people who have the perspective that you vote against the worst candidate rather than for the best one, in my opinion.
The problem is people who have the perspective that you vote against the worst candidate rather than for the best one, in my opinion.
Have you somehow not heard of “first past the post”? The people who have that perspective, with regard to the US presidential race, have the correct perspective.
Third party votes don’t matter in FPTP. Until that changes, a vote for third party works in the Republican candidates favor, thanks to FPTP, plus the electoral college.
Sort of, its a self fulfilling perspective to believe the two party system is about picking the least worst of the two.
If the majority of people would vote for their best party/candidate then things would change from getting worse to getting better.
Im of the opinion peoples perspectives need to change before policy or regulation will, but I wouldnt say not to try and change it through election reform.
Every candidate but Harris will ensure that Palestinian suffering increases.
Harris has not said anything concrete about holding Israel back. Or stopping shipments.
Trump has affirmatively said he will ensure Israel is able to do whatever it wants.
Except she absolutely has.
She’s called for the investigations needed to legally stop the funding.
Because there’s a full legal process that needs to happen to overrule Congress on allocated funding.
Trump was impeached over fucking with funds allocated by Congress to a foreign government.
A Harris win means a push for a cease fire. Especially if Democrats win the House and Senate.
A Trump win on the other hand… Well. He’s actually on record as pro-genocide.
A Harris win means a push for a cease fire.
Biden has used none of the levers they have available to get Israel to the ceasfire table. When asked, Harris defaults to the Hasbara answer playbook, starting her answer with Israel “defending itself” from the Oct 7 attacks.
We need the weapons shipments stopped. They are already a clear violation of US law. They are a crime. Harris has been asked point blank if she would stop the shipments and she said no. So you are just parroting empty marketing and lies. Other presidents have gone further than merely stopping weapons shipments and stopped this same exact pattern of violence with a simple phone call. We arent even asking for that phone call.
I’m torn on how to approach this, i’m left with a couple of options:
A) so Trump would somehow be even less self defeating?
B) are you suggesting we should all spontaneously rise up and overthrow the military industrial complex?
C) if you think this world view is self defeating then:
C.1) you owe some clarifying thoughts as to how you see a measured response to the existing democratic systems as self defeating
C.2) you appear to be making yourself out as someone who idealizes violence and oppression
C.3) you appear to be using contrarian language with the explicit purpose of dragging down the mood of the conversation. Quit that shit
D) Good ol’ not feeding the trolls.
Tell me more about myself please.
I’m trying to understand how this system works and came across this article from Al Jazeera which, if I’m reading it correctly, is saying that the US did determine gross human rights violations but the Biden administration is refusing to apply the Leahy Law. Doesn’t this mean that Biden does have the authority to stop sending military aid but isn’t, or am I misunderstanding something? Also, aside from Leahy Law why can’t he veto the military aid?
Oh man, this is a doozy. You aren’t wrong but I’ve got to get some sleep. To explain this is A LOT.
The thing is the Leahy Law doesn’t put the power directly in the President’s hands. It grants the vetting process to the Secretary of State. Which is a member of the cabinet of the President. Which I don’t know how familiar you are with how the Executive Office works or not. But Secretary of State Antony Blinken is the one who wields the power to deny Israel’s aid.
There’s Executive Orders (EO) that the President can give but there’s the whole “what if” Blinken quits given an EO and then we have to get the Senate involved which is currently 50-50 on Republicans and Democrats. Which that turns it even more complex and Senators can delay confirmation until after the election or if they’re really bitter, until next year. Which means that everything that requires a Secretary of State would get put on pause.
I get that everyone thinks the President gets to have the final say, but the President orders people around on EOs, which the various Secretaries can just quit if they don’t want to follow them, and then that kicks everything to the Senate. That’s kind of a built in protection in our system of Government to prevent a President becoming a dictator. If a President wants XYZ done and the Secretary thinks that’s bad, they quit and the Senate becomes involved potentially delaying the President forever.
There’s way more background on why Blinken has only stopped two aids and also because of classification reasons, not every stopping of aid can be published, unless the President does so since the President has unilateral authority on classification markings (except for anything related to the name of spies and nuclear bomb designs, that is one of the few things that requires both the President and Congress to sign off on, there’s a few other exceptions as well but I won’t go into them).
But anyways, Blinken is the one who can stop aid. The President could order him, but he could also quit, which means the Senate would get involved, and I can explain why all of that would be messy if you need me to.
why can’t he veto the military aid
The President only has veto power on bills that have passed both the House and the Senate. Once something becomes law, the President “has” to carry it out. There’s a ton of background on “Executive Discretion” and any time the President wants to exercise discretion, Congress can sue, which then brings the matter into the other branch, the Judicial. Plenty of States that would sign on, to a Congressional suit (which that’s a requirement for Congress to sue the President, at least one State has to join in).
So Biden could use Discretion to delay funding, and he’s done that quite a few times, but he can’t just outright NOT pay when the law requires him to do so. That discretion comes from a kind of EO called a “Reviewing Executive Order” and it requires a department to “review” ((insert whatever the topic is)). That’s a delay, but it isn’t a halt. The President has to follow the law as well. So if we have a law that says, “we provide $xxx to Israel’s Iron Dome”, we have to send that money to them at some point.
A lot of the funds that Israel is getting, is funding they secured before the Gaza invasion. There’s been recent upping of that funding that Congress has passed, but that’s been on things called Continuing Resolutions (CR). Republicans in the House (who are the ones who control what the US Budget is) have been using CRs to get choice things enacted. That’s because Republicans in the House have passed rules on how a budget may be formed in the House that are impossible to comply with (which that’s a whole long story). So if Democrats in the House refuse to accept the CRs the Republicans offer, the Government shuts down.
Anyways, that’s been a lot already. If you need me to clear anything up, let me know. But Harris likely wouldn’t have Blinken as Secretary of State, which would fix A WHOLE LOT. But I don’t know, because if the election isn’t kind to Democrats in the Senate and Republicans have a majority in the Senate, they could block Harris’ Sec. of State unless they specifically pledged to support Israel. Now they could absolutely lie about that, but then Congress could also impeach them, but that would cut off aid to Israel for some time as that’s not an easy process to impeach a secretary of state.
This comment needs no be posted and stickied everywhere. I mean everywhere. Thank you for your detailed response and explanation of how the executive works. I’m saving this comment.
If you want to keep up with daily events in the Executive, the Federal Register (Fed. Reg. or FR) cannot be beat. It contains all of the FOIA request, every public inspection requirement, CFR proposals, Executive Orders, Presidential Proclamations, and so forth.
If you want something more specific to rule making, you can find that here. Rule making makes a bit more sense when you think about it. Say Congress passes a law that says “build me a road between Texas and South Dakota”. The law will usually say who (department) is in charge of that and then that department will take the money and begin rule making. Rule making is basically laying out the path the road will take, what kind of materials will be used, what companies are allowed to bid, environmental guidelines, etc, etc ,etc… Once those rules have been made the who is going to do it is determined. Like Highways in this case, the Federal Government provides the money and the States are the ones who select the labor and make minor course corrections to the highway (like if it’s about to pass through a cemetery or something).
Rule making is also sometimes called regulation. Because the agency put in charge is regulating the action being done to ensure compliance with what they think the law is asking for, because Congress is very NOT detail oriented until they really want to be. Also with rule making, Congress can “ask” a department to come in and meet with them if Congress thinks some of the rules don’t mesh with what they were thinking.
There’s also override laws, which Congress passes like a normal law. These laws, remember the Constitution requires laws to be applied equally if they involve the public so these override laws are written as such so that they only apply to a executive department, specifically smack the department over the head and “corrects” where the rule making went wrong. These don’t happen often, but we did have one back in Trump days over the FCC. The FCC had made a new rule that required ISPs to get permission to sell customer data, and Congress plus then President Trump overrode the FCC, explicitly banning them from ever creating such a rule. It’s still open if the FTC could make such a rule. But that’s an example of an override of regulation.
Oh also my whole comment didn’t even touch on the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998, which is what would happen if a Secretary quits. Very, very, very long story short. The Deputy Secretary automatically gets to become the “acting” Secretary BUT they cannot do any “exclusive actions”, which that Leahy rule is indeed an exclusive action. The “acting” Secretary can only maintain “status quo” until the Senate Confirms that the acting secretary is indeed the actual secretary. But an “acting” position can only last for 210 days, after which the office is then considered “vacant”, but none of that matters anymore because Congress uses “pro forma” sessions to prevent recessed appointments. But typically, if a position is “vacant” and Congress is not in Session, the President can make a recess appointment.
If you ask me, what we really need is an Amendment to the Constitution that provides the President a way to declare Congress as absent and if some threshold of Congress doesn’t become present, then the President can then call Congress not in Session. The whole “pro forma” sessions of Congress really needs to stop, like in a really bad way. Sort of like how Filibuster should return to requiring a person physically speak for the entire duration of the filibuster and must remain on topic.
Congress has gotten really soft on everything and that’s allowed them to permit a lot of bad faith actions in Congress to happen. It used to be that it was “gentleman’s agreement” that Congress would behave and act in good faith, but boy have we really fallen down on that since the 1980s.
Anyway, I’m rambling.
Dude. This is awesome. We need to make this into YouTube shorts or tik tok. Anything to get civic education out. We are extremely in need…
Not the person you replied to, but just wanted to say thank you for taking the time to write up such an informative answer. I learned quite a few things from it.
Hey, professor, where do I sign up for the next civics lecture?
I’ve been needing some better gov’t education since long before high school.
it’d be a poor course it empirically incorrect on a number of counts.
I just don’t get how people are looking at Harris’ stance as being pro-genocide.
Blinken stated here:
In speaking with him the other day after he made his decision about not seeking re-election, what he’s intensely focused on is the work that remains over these next six months to continue the efforts, the work that we’ve been doing, particularly trying to bring peace to the Middle East, ending the war in Gaza, putting that region on a better trajectory
However, as you said earlier:
Secretary of State Antony Blinken is the one who wields the power to deny Israel’s aid.
Regarding:
There’s way more background on why Blinken has only stopped two aids and also because of classification reasons, not every stopping of aid can be published
I would like to hear more on this.
A lot of the funds that Israel is getting, is funding they secured before the Gaza invasion.
I did come across this where apparently Israel secured funding through a deal with the Obama administration.
I’m not sure what other reasons there may be that Blinken isn’t stopping the military aid which I would like to hear, but it seems to me like both the Obama and Biden administrations are the ones that pulled us into the genocide and that Blinken is playing the “we are working toward a ceasefire” card while not stopping the genocide, and figures like Harris are also playing the same card while pushing the same anti-protest rhetoric as Zionists. This article does suggest that Harris isn’t going to have Blinken as Secretary of State and that her new pick might be more critical of Israel so it seems like there’s at least some chance she might deviate from what Biden is currently doing; however, the article also suggests that she will have a similar approach to foreign policy as Biden. Aside from that, with the track record of Democrats historically supporting Israel and siding with donors against the interests of people along with their recently having dropped multiple progressive issues, I don’t think people are convinced that Harris (and many Democrats in general) is going to stop the genocide (not saying that Trump who openly supports Israel is going to be any better).
lol. entire wall of text predicated on a position that is easily filled without congressional confirmed. someone didn’t pay attention to trumps presidency at all.
but lets hit on the misconceptions you’re spouting.
Once something becomes law, the President “has” to carry it out
incorrect. Presidents have refused to enforce/carry out laws repeatedly throughout history. that’s one of the powers of the executive branch. its not explicit but there is no enforcement mechanism. Your assertion that congress can sue is 100% true. what you’re missing is that during that time the president can just not due what the law says and these things can take years. Secondly even if a judge blocks an EO the president can still do it the judge has no enforcement mechanism. You may have learned about this little system in grade school: The honor system. which is entirely useless. There are historical instance of this such as worcester v georgia. abraham lincoln did it w/ habeus corpus and more recently Franklin D. Roosevelt.
But Harris likely wouldn’t have Blinken as Secretary of State, which would fix A WHOLE LOT.
biden can easily deal with blinken, its called firing and assigning a temporary individual to the role. not like he has a lot of time left there’d be no time to confirm a new individual anyways. Blinken simply isn’t the issue, biden was until we got rid of him by not supporting him. Now Harris is, she’s the one who has committed to genocide at this point thats causing the issue not blinken.
You’re entire ‘civics’ lesson ignores the historical realities of the presidency and EOs. especially in light of the recent SCOTUS ruling on presidential powers which expanded this ability by conferring it judicial backing.
Ugh. This is why I hate summary because there’s always someone who is like “you didn’t explain EvErYtHiNg so you’re wrong!” While you’re trying to flesh things out you always miss a ton of things too that neither one of us touched on, and I didn’t because it increases what needs to be talked about when what I originally said was correct.
entire wall of text
I hate this term because it shows that people are trying to oversimplify something that is in itself complex. Additionally, you’re trying to point out things but you didn’t cover everything either. Which is why especially here, this annoying. You’re basically trying to make an argument of “you explain too much” and “you didn’t explain enough”. It’s a damned if you do and damned if you don’t argument that you’re trying to make. I’m calling you out on it because you are attempting a no correct way to answer line of questioning. I’ll give you this reply, but you keep going on this thread like this, I’ll just block you. I don’t have the time for childish game. If you have a point make it, if you don’t stop beating around the bush. That’s all there is to it.
a position that is easily filled without congressional confirmed
That’s not correct. I’ll point to the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998 5 USC § 3345. You seem smart enough, you can figure out why Sec. of State quitting and the deputy becoming acting would trigger such a response.
someone didn’t pay attention to trumps presidency at all
Again, I’ll point to the many failures on exclusive authority during that term. Namely you can see the multiple failures along the regulation of coal that failed exclusive authority. Acting has only nonexclusive duties for the 210 day period and the extended period of 300 days on inauguration. Hence the failures on rule making.
what you’re missing is that during that time the president can just not due what the law says and these things can take years.
Yes, this is why enjoining an EO exists as a measure for the courts. Immediate relief is something the claimants can seek when bringing the issue up to the courts. That’s why you hear emergency relief often with controversial orders.
Secondly even if a judge blocks an EO the president can still do it the judge has no enforcement mechanism.
The enforcement is via Congress at that point. If a just rules something as violation of the Court order, that’s easily handled by Congress.
worcester v georgia
Just so we’re clear the Nullification scandal, Jackson indicated he was ready to march troops into South Carolina and shooting the government if need be. That was with eye to Georgia daring them the exact same thing. We’d revisit that willingness to march troops into the State and start shooting State Government members about thirty years later.
So just, so we’re clear the Worcester you cite, we got ready to have a preemptive war over the matter. I’m not sure the argument you’re providing holds a lot of water here in that “they can do what they want to do with no ramifications”. Clearly getting shot at by the Army is a ramification that at the time neither party wanted to try out. But we did give it a go a bit later.
abraham lincoln did it w/ habeus corpus
Yeah. Thing called the Civil War.
Franklin D. Roosevelt
Was kicked to Congress, like I said it would be. Was mulled and Congress decided to take a pass. But that’s not free from consequences. Additionally, Congress had indicated to FDR to wrap that shit up with the alphabet groups. You’ll note how many of them didn’t last. CCC still a thing?
biden can easily deal with blinken, its called firing and assigning a temporary individual to the role
Again see FVRA.
not like he has a lot of time left there’d be no time to confirm a new individual anyways
Again see FVRA, carry over has a lot more impact in the first 300 day period than having an acting position.
Now Harris is, she’s the one who has committed to genocide at this point thats causing the issue not blinken
That is just plainly incorrect.
You’re entire ‘civics’ lesson ignores the historical realities of the presidency and EOs
And you covered zero of them either. I’ve provided more context to the examples that you gave. But the reality is that “the historical realities of EOs” is a complex issue. But apparently you don’t like walls of text.
especially in light of the recent SCOTUS ruling on presidential powers which expanded this ability by conferring it judicial backing
I take it that you are referring to Trump v US. None of that has any bearing on the matter of what Bliken does or doesn’t do. If Biden simply just withheld funds and gave everyone the finger, he’d still be subject to Congressional review of his actions and possible impeachment. That is not being free of ramifications.
Lol, all of it comes down to enforcement as you well know and the fact is there would be none. Everything you cited are either) insanely unlikely or not a function of our branches. Getting shot at by a member of the military? Lol. Please. Not remotely relevant.
Impeachment today is essentially toothless. Particularly in biden’s case as hes done with office anyways.
So as i said: in the three months remaining of bidens term he could 1) absolutely dump blinken and replace him, not an issue. 2) can absolutely withhold weapons see leahy. 3) the history of the president defying judicial orders is well supported.
FVRA
Id give a shit if it actually meant anything. You clearly confuse words on paper with real world consequences.
I take it that you are referring to Trump v US. None of that has any bearing on the matter of what Bliken does or doesn’t do.
Correct it has bearing on what biden can do. I.e. fire him and replace at his leisure. Which is why you’re trying to place the blame on bliken because as you know biden has many options on the table for gaza he is just unwilling to use them because he is a Zionist.
You’ll note that in you 2nd wall of nonsense. Not once have you managed to identify how the judicial branch can hold a president accountable.
Yes congress might, though as we both know they almost certainly won’t and essentially has never happened. oh no impeachment, poor 2 timer trump has suffered zero consequences from it. And that was after trying to overthrow the government. Lol @ congress taking a pass not equaling consequence free. But i see your issue you think someone filing paper work is a consequence. 😂 Identify material consequences a president has suffered as a result of defying congress or a judicial order? You’ll find very few.
And it amuses me you claim harris isnt culpable for the genocide, she absolutely is and you know it which is why you won’t expand on in detail as you’re so very happy to do.
The fact biden is a Zionist is why gaza is continuing it literally has nothing to do with blinken. There are many paths biden can take to deal with him. He can fire him, countermand him, or execute him thanks to scotus.
Stop wasting everyones time by trying to argue the indefensible. You’re clearly one of the dunces who thinks rules on paper matter even though people break them constantly in the real world with zero problems.
can absolutely withhold weapons see leahy
He can’t legally, and Republicans in the House would absolutely jump at the chance to impeach Biden and have it carry over into the next session as Democrats did with Trump’s second impeachment. It would literally be the train they ride till midterms.
Gosh you are really bad at this.
You clearly confuse words on paper with real world consequences
I don’t think you’ve ever worked for the Government. You are insanely bad at this.
I’ve given you plenty of opportunity and you’re just spewing “nothing means anything anymore!!!” Gosh, it’s not like I haven’t met countless numbers of you types.
Not once have you managed to identify how the judicial branch can hold a president accountable\
Enjoined. You clearly aren’t reading anything, I’m not typing any more. Consider yourself blocked, you are a waste of time.
snicker oh no! republicans impeachment! whatever will we do. it’ll take them longer to run the impeachment trial than he has time left in office! rofl. OH NO! biden will be PUNISHED with… wait for it… removal from office. THE HORROR.
- vacancies act has no punishment clauses. its toothless.
- you’re statements about ‘failures for coal regulation’ were not punishments. they were rejections of changes in policy. fun fact: enforcing leahy would not be a change in policy. its codified law.
- presidents have been ignoring the legal law for weed for almost a decade now. why? because presidents have chosen not to enforce it.
your coal example: sigh lets talk about how they were rolled back during biden’s term. Why? because biden agreed with the courts and didn’t like the policies to begin with. but the courts most certainly didnt force trump to roll them back.
you really dont get how to wield executive power. 90% of it is doing what you want letting people challenge it and by the time it gets through the court you’ve already accomplished what you wanted. my entire point has been there is 0 negative outcome for a president to exercise flagrant violations of law. israel is a prime example of this in fact.
You’re simply dense and can’t see the facts through your rose tinged glasses of your belief in law and order. fucking gaza is a straight up example of this. Those who control enforcement control which laws are upheld and there is jack shit courts can do about this. trump abused the fuck out of this.
selective enforcement please read up on it. it applies here.
Enjoined. You clearly aren’t reading anything, I’m not typing any more. Consider yourself blocked, you are a waste of time.
is like your version of congressional impeachment? oh no… whatever will I do. only reason I was responding to you was so everyone else knows what a load of nonsense your shit was.
I just don’t get how people are looking at Harris’ stance as being pro-genocide.
Because they are, USA is currently fueling a genocide in gaza
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_support_for_Israel_in_the_Israel–Hamas_war
I just don’t get how people are looking at Harris’ stance as being pro-genocide.
“Now that you know I don’t listen to fuckall outside of my own bubble, sit down while I lecture you for several pages”
The two-state solution is a boondoggle.
There can only be a one state solution.
So make a choice: Israel or Palestine.
So make a choice: Israel or Palestine.
You say that like the choice hasn’t already been made without the input of the voters.
What should happen to Palestinians if Israel is chosen? What should happen to Israelis if Palestine is chosen?
I’m not who you replied to but I like the idea of a single new country for both Palestinians and Israelis. I think this would avoid the ethnostate issue.
Ultimately I think the only way forward is to aim for peaceful coexistence between the two groups.
Great idea! Maybe we could look to history to find the last time that Jews and Muslims lived peacefully together in a single state, and name the new country whatever that is.
Hmmm… Looks like in the 1900s there was a country called Palestine where Muslims and Jews live equally. Let’s get rid of Israel and Palestine, and replace them both with Palestine.
I think another main component of it would be religion being taken less seriously across the board.
It should be allowed to exist but it should be thought of more as superstition. Sort of like horoscopes or tarot cards.
Then it becomes pretty absurd to commit violence over it. I’m not really sure how to get to this point but there is technically room for both cultures.
This is the larger problem, in a nutshell. The fact that we have nations being led by people who believe in their own fairy tales, so much that they believe everybody else is inferior. This isn’t just a problem in Israel/Palestine, obviously, but having two of these groups so close to each other really puts a magnifying glass on the danger of non-secular governments. Israel literally believes it has the support of God itself, and its a powerful fuel to their genocide.
I think if we are to survive as a species, one of the humps we need to get over is the existence of all these fairy tales, and the division they create. The fairy tales may have been useful at one point in history, but they have long overstayed their welcome.
Judaism used to be a polytheistic religion, and Islam used to be Judaism. There is no law against polytheism in the Torah. The first commandment, “You shall have no other gods before Me”, allows for other gods who are revered less than Elohim. Judaism and Islam do not need to be violent religions. Putting violence in them was a choice that humans made.
The Nakba is not the result of Judaism. It is the result of men like Winston Churchill, who was an agnostic raised Christian. Generations of Jewish Israelis since then have allowed an outsider to define their religion, and tell them to be violent. This is not an issue of religion, it’s an issue of human politics.
I do agree however a country that is based on religious participation is fundamentally flawed. I dont think it holds up in that regard. But yes it does have a place in smaller community and in personal life, although I’d argue far less than is shown now.
There has never been a country called Palestine. What are you talking about?
There are more Arabs living in Israel than there are jews living in all the current Arab nations combined.
In other words : it’s not so simple to solve
Palestine,[i] officially the State of Palestine,[ii][e] is a country
Your comment was about 1900. Did we already move away from that? Specifics matter in the context of history and geopolitics. Or do we just not care about specifics?
Also, why don’t you address the full comment instead of snipping parts?
Isn’t the issue of a single country that the Palestinian population is much higher than the Israeli population, so if there were a single democracy, it would mean that Palestinians would basically be fully in charge?
I think this is why a federated or two state solution is often suggested. Both parties need at least some level of autonomy.
The idea is ultimately that the people mix and there is no real barrier between the two groups anyways. There should still be places to worship for everyone although I think religion needs to be taken less seriously all around as part of that. Religion creates division just like race does.
I think the state I’m envisioning is after the part you are talking about though. Its likely there will be a period of imbalance but that does not mean that the bigger group cannot be fair to the smaller one.
No, Gaza+ west bank are a little smaller than Israel in terms of population
Isn’t the issue of a single country that the Palestinian population is much higher than the Israeli population, so if there were a single democracy, it would mean that Palestinians would basically be fully in charge?
Should we segregate America just because some minorities are outnumbered?
Israel has made it clear that it wants to exterminate Palestinians, and is literally in the process of doing so right now.
Palestinians are not genocidal. They don’t want to exterminate Israelis. They just want to be able to go home and stop being killed and starved and tortured.
Israelis can assimilate into Palestine and stop trying to make a Jewish ethnostate. Palestine can be one multi-ethnic, multi-racial, multi-religious democracy.
Palestinians have entire documents and conferences on what to do with non-useful Jews. As for the useful ones, they will not be allowed to flee Palestine. Doctors and such will be prevented from emigrating.
There are no angels in this conflict. Both sides have desires for a genocide.
Certainly there are factions within Palestine that are genocidal. They’re not in charge of anything, though, and don’t represent the mainstream.
Meanwhile, the Israeli genicidiers control the government and are a mainstream cultural force.
They are not the same.
The conference was hosted by Hamas.
Hamas isn’t lead by the people it was lead by even a decade ago. Their more recent 2017 charter is pretty explicitly not genocidal, they are anti-Israeli and explicitly not anti-Jewish.
I say we find land for each of them someplace in the US, build infrastructure and housing, evacuate Jerusalem and bulldoze it.
The two-state solution is a boondoggle.
Better tell that to China, or do you know better than an AES state?
What do you think “critical support” means?
I think it’s one of those weasel words some leftists use so they can ignore their own hypocrisy while they moralize like the evangelical Christians they were raised as.
So you don’t know what it means.
Critical support means supporting AES countries against the capitalist hegemon despite still having criticisms of some of their decisions. I don’t have to think every single decision they make is perfect because I don’t moralize about my politics.
What you’re talking about is dogmatism, i.e. taking uncritical moral positions and then denouncing any deviation. Mao harshly criticized this in On Contradiction and On Practice.
No decision can ever be perfect, is my point.
taking uncritical moral positions and then denouncing any deviation
Lol I’ve been to Hexbear and old chapo chat, I have no idea how you can say this with a straight face.
Mao harshly criticized this in On Contradiction and On Practice.
Cool, was that before or after struggle sessions were implemented in China?
Okay, that’s about following the Party line and the strategy of democratic centralism. What the Party decides is what the membership must respect and uphold.
I am not a member of the Communist Party of China. They wouldn’t want me anyway lol
Removed by mod
im convinced at this point that the “don’t vote or you support genocide” thing is a russian troll campaign
Oh It 100% is.
80% Russian campaign and 20% reaction to being lectured constantly by people who will forget that progressive votes are needed to beat Republicans when it comes time to pick a new candidate.
Progressive votes are already counted out. We know there will always be smug pseudo-intellectual “leftists” that will hold their vote as a threat to democracy if the don’t get their way with [current thing]. You do this every election year.
The problem is, you think people are going to give in to your demands when there is SO much more at stake than a war in a country you people couldn’t even locate on a map a year ago.
So no, you all can keep your votes. It’s too late to reason with trolls. The rest of us will be happy enough to not have to deal with you once you all disappear November 5th.
Typical. You don’t even know the difference between a progressive and a tankie.
war in a country you people couldn’t even locate on a map a year ago.
Project much?
I would agree. Its like 80% russian disinfo or israeli settlers (I would love to see the IPs here) and like 20% people who feel icky about voting for a dem and are doing mental gymnastics.
We need to make the case that Kamala is better than Trump for Palestine, and do it without demonizing those on the fence. They need to understand that their voices will continue to be heard when the election is over, and a whole lot of the rhetoric being aimed at them says just the opposite, or at least implies it. “Let’s elect Kamala so we can continue to fight for Palestine” instead of “Palestine has to take a back seat to all these other issues.”
I will say this. Actual leftists get arrested for protests so like the real people actually fighting for people’s rights know that we’ll be sacrificing less people to stupid shit if Kamala is elected. There is no argument that can be made to armchair leftists and russian trolls though. They have no stake in the outcome because they either have enough privelege to sit it out or they are bad faith.
Been saying it for weeks. Nobody with half a brain would fall for that shit.
A vote against Harris is a vote against protecting America. That may not be true next election(fuck, I hope it’s not), but right here…right now…it’s true.
It will absolutely true next election. Democrats will keep undermining progressives and running weak and ineffective candidates until the dice fall badly and the fascists win. That’s how these cycles always go.
Every election will be more dangerous than the one before until elections stop. The next Trump will be far more capable than the rapist toddler we’re dealing with now.
yeah, we all know that. “the next trump” has been waiting in the wings since that guy got stabbed in ancient Rome. democracy requires all of us to complain and demonstrate.
Nobody with half a brain would fall for that
it’s a lot of good people on the far left side of twitter
Where we need to take America doesn’t need extremists, of any kind.
I don’t have a problem when Americans dislike abortions. I do have a problem when they try to take the option away from Americans.
I don’t have a problem with people protesting civil rights violations. I do have a problem with Americans rioting and killing each other.
Extremism of any kind is toxic and has no place in a stable future. That’s because all extremism is born out of a strong emotional desire or need from the people.
IMO the only way out of this is to stomp out the conservative extremist fires and roll back the damage they’ve done. Only this will appease the extreme left enough for them to walk back from the line.
Progress forward is a balancing act that requires a soft touch. Unfortunately we had four years of a crude daft orange ogre that destroyed that balance.
As long as we make it through the next two months, we should be fine. Extremists can’t do anything against a mind they can’t manipulate. Just don’t fall for the emotional trap.
Stay calm, stay vigilant, stay in control.
You won’t do anything, centrist, that’s the point of being a centrist.
“America in 2016 was perfect until orange man ruined it, we simply need to return to 2016 and everything will be ok”
- the politics understander
American politics in 2016 wasn’t perfect, that’s why it’s been called the “Great American Experiment”.
But the world was a whole lot quieter in 2015. Wasn’t it?
Americans got along a lot better than they do today in 2015. Didn’t they?
My point was that we need to go back to that if we have any hope of moving forward.
Unfortunately, the Russian and Chinese governments have been trying to drive a wedge between the American public, and they’re succeeding. Their actions have fractured American conservative parties into useless, “do-nothings”. Now they’re trying to do the same thing to the left. Until now they’ve been unsuccessful.
The United States of America has peered into the abyss before, similar to how we are now. I’ll quote something that someone very wise said at that time that still rings true today.
A house divided against itself, cannot stand. I believe this government cannot endure permanently half slave and half free. I do not expect the Union to be dissolved – I do not expect the house to fall – but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing or all the other.
As we stand upon the precipice, with baited breath, I hope for a future that my children can inherit.
My point was that we need to go back to that if we have any hope of moving forward.
So, Make America Great Again
This was reported, I’m not sure its rule breaking, but its weirdly aggressive.
Just like me personally
XD
I’m pretty sure this has been the scare tactic for the last 8 presidential elections of my lifetime
You don’t need much of a brain to understand that voting and supporting criminals with blood on their hands is bad. You also don’t need to be too smart to understand that your choice isn’t limited to vote between two colors.
You also don’t need to be too smart to understand that your choice isn’t limited to vote between two colors.
I mean… you said it.
But I agree, only idiots believe that third parties are viable in our broken electoral saystem
The system is so broken that only an idiot could believe in it. Third parties are the lesser evil choice.
The genocide will continue no matter who wins. The argument is dumb.
Sounds like a hell of a system.
Campaign locally to change the system - we need more places to use preferential voting like ranked choice before third parties will matter.
Until that happens, you can either work within the system that does exist or decide that your feelings matter more than the results 🤷♂️
From my perspective, I am the one that cares about results more than feelings, and “blue no matter who” voters are the opposite. The results of democrat leadership have been a horror show of ghoulish support for genocide. The current administrations policies have directly resulted in tens of thousands of deaths (at least) in Gaza. I see a lot of democrats expressing feelings about how Biden and Kamala are actually good people, and are working hard towards a ceasefire. Let me know when to expect another result.
Let me know when to expect another result.
That’s easy - when Trump is elected and he fully opens our arsenal and actually provides troops instead of maintaining current levels of support.
He has explicitly said that we aren’t doing enough and that Israel isn’t doing enoughevery single time he has spoken on the topic. Believe him.
Trump has to say things that differentiate him from democrats. He wants to look ‘tougher’. This is a fucked up result of democrats moving right on things like this and “border security”. Democrat leadership is already doing everything it can to support Israel. Can you think of anything more they could do, that Trump would say “good job, no notes”? Trump talks a lot of shit, but he hasn’t said he would send US troops (Biden already has, BTW).
Wait, so who’s arguing on feelings instead of the issues and results, again? 🤔
Yes, the system sucks, and we should do what we can to fix it.
What is also important is Order of Operations. It will be much harder (if not impossible) to effect any positive change on the systems that be if the orange orangutan wins the election, while those changes will be at least possible under the leadership of the blue candidate.
I like to think that people who are not able to figure this out are victims of republican/russian propaganda. To think otherwise would be both depressing and enraging and I have too much of my own shit going on to deal with any of that.
I don’t think you can end up anywhere good by bargaining with genocide. “Sucks” doesn’t even come close to describing such a system. The order of operations you’re talking about sounds to me like: 1- elect the more decorous monster 2- go back to ignoring all the suffering. I’ll definitely agree that it’s depressing, but it doesn’t require any foreign propaganda to be that.
Sure, but one side seems to be advocating for more of the same shittiness we’ve had for decades, and the other side for a final solution to the Palestinian problem. It’s not like the choices are equal.
I’ve got a question for you… I’m sure you are familiar with the famous, “First They Came” sermon/poem/whatever by Martin Niemöller? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_…
At what point during that poem would you consider a genocide underway? Would it be when they started murdering all of the communists? Or maybe after they eliminated all of the trade unionists?
Let’s extend that poem to include all of the categories of people that the Nazis killed:
They started with trans people, was it a genocide yet? How about after they started including homosexuals?
Maybe it becomes a genocide when they go after the mentally and physically disabled?
Or does it only become a genocide when they go after the Jews?
Obviously, the answer is all of the fucking above.
Guess what: Genocide very much can and does get worse. Much much worse. This concept that it is all or nothing is completely ahistorical and illogical.
That’s been my experience on Lemmy recently too. It feels like there is a push to disenfranchise to “teach them a lesson we dont support genocide by ensuring a somewhat more genocidal maniac gets in instead”.
I get the sentiment, but it ignores the two party system, and not voting does not fix that broken system, it ensures it. And I think the trolls know this too.
somewhat more genocidal maniac
Somewhat?
It’s the same in my Eastern European country - Russians run two troll campaigns:
-
to disenfranchise any pro-democratic voters, with slogans like “all candidates are shit and corrupt, you should hate them, politics, and the whole democratic process”
-
to boost nationalist, far-right, anti-establishment parties - there are several of them to cast a wider net over the electorate, and they can assemble together to run their always pro-Russian politics after getting in Parliament
It’s the dame playbook everywhere they care to get results and undermine their enemies.
-
Pretty strong clues that it’s organized bullshit propaganda.
- negative against democrats while never mentioning republicans
- illogical since Trump is worse on the issue
- fails to address voting system issues that make 3rd party useless
- supporters rarely engage in real discussions and just repeat insulting slogans
It’s kind of obvious
Several of my alt accounts have been banned across the fediverse for calling out such nans. I figure if my alts get banned for that, then I should block them from my main.
(if anyone takes offense to me having “several” alts, that’s because without using 3rd party apps you can’t categorize interests like reddit’s multis feature without just having multiple accounts with their own sub list.)
I’m* convinced
It’s just the left eating itself. Many such cases.
Are you aware that USA spend 10 times as much money on war and propaganda than russia does? The current government of USA is fueling a genocide in gaza and supporting the fascist israel government. There sure is russian propaganda too around but keep in mind that is in the interest of the government to cover up its wrongdoing and keep trust among the public.
I’m aware that the US government does propaganda too, yes. I have no idea what it has to do with this.
USA spend 10 times more money in war and propaganda than anyone else and they are being accused of supporting a genocide. Labeling as “russian trolls” these who are saying to not support the government or vote for criminals with blood on their hands sound more like the propaganda rather than people pointing the finger at war criminals.
We fucking know, dude.
That’s why we’re voting for Harris. And no, I’m not going to explain why for the 1000th fucking time.
That’s why we’re voting for Harris.
You are voting for them because "The current government of USA is fueling a genocide in gaza and supporting the fascist israel government. "?
Because Harris is open to ceasefire pressure and Trump want’s Israel to ‘Finish the job’.
One’s hands aren’t morally clean if you don’t vote and Trump wins. Not voting is functionally equivalent to voting for whoever wins, and if he does win with a low turnout then those who didn’t vote are responsible for whatever happens.
Thanks for this… I’m tired of typing the same shit over and over and over.
I’ve responded in detail to at least a dozen people like this saying the same stupid shit and it’s consistently a total waste of time. You just get back some idiocy like “okay U support genocide” and they don’t seem to comprehend anything at all or even read it. Kind of makes me doubt they’re serious about anything but helping Trumpy out.
Yeah… I still do it though, because it’s not necessarily for the person I’m replying to, but for anyone else who might stumble upon the thread and be bombarded with disinformation.
I get your frustration, but it is really important to keep spelling it out. I find it very frustrating to be on the receiving and of lines like
I'm tired of explaining it to you peoplewhen I am earnestly engaging in a conversation for the first time, so I think it’s best to give people the benefit of the doubt that maybe they really don’t know, especially on forums where people other than those commenting will read it also.We’ve been hearing this exact same stupid shit all year. It’s hard believing these people are serious. Getting Trump elected doesn’t help not ‘support genocide’ and they never, ever, ever address that.
Well, luckily you can tag people with most Lemmy apps, so sometimes it’s easy to know when people are acting in bad faith.
Don’t worry buddy, someone else typed it for you. You can now go back chilling while USA government aid israel fascist government in murdering kids
I’m not your buddy.
Because Harris is open to ceasefire
They are the vice president of an administration that is fueling the genocide and aiding israel fascist government with “whatever it needs”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_support_for_Israel_in_the_Israel–Hamas_war
Israel is already finishing the job with the help of USA
Not voting is functionally equivalent to voting for whoever wins
Don’t try to bend logic. Voting for criminals with blood on their hands is evil and will lead to nothing good. The responsible for what happens are the one who directly supported criminals into power not the ones who didn’t.
One of Harris and Trump is going to be the president. Sorry but that is the reality, the time for getting a better candidate has passed.
It is time to pick which one you want. If you don’t vote you don’t care so you accept either outcome.
Voting is not and should not be wholly endorsing the person, but securing the best outcome from the options. You want better options then go into politics yourself.
US government is supporting a genocide where kids are being murdered daily. It’s time to do something about it unless you are fine with your money being send to israel fascist government and being used to murder people.
Whew, got the trolls following me around today, boyeeee! Let’s go!
Or maybe people actually see what’s going on and see children get shredded with America’s permission, democratic permission, and with American bombs with American intelligence and say hey we don’t want this to happen anymore.
Maybe they see the party that is supposedly the “good” party brutally shut down protests against a genocide funded by them inside college campuses and think oh hey, that doesn’t seem like free speech.
Maybe they see a party just as bought out and in lockstep with billionaires and think oh hey, that’s not democracy.
Maybe they see a party that for two election cycles in a row has stolen the candidacy – more people wanted Bernie than Clinton in 2016 but they gave it to Hillary because why? “It was her turn”
Then when half the party was pissed and worried with Biden, did they hold a snap election? Like every other civilized developed country? Nah, they just said here you are, take kamala.
And kamala has just been like yes we will keep bombing kids.
Maybe Muslim Americans and other brown Americans are tired of for 25 years being both sides boogeyman. They just expect us to sit there and vote democrat while they spend 25 years telling everyone that they are terrorists, that they bomb places, that they hate America, that they are an other, a column that doesn’t matter. And if trump wins it will be their fault again. Not the fault of the 55% white people who somehow think that he’s okay.
Maybe you guys need to get your head out your asses and see that america is not a beacon on a hill, it’s a 300.year old empire that is crumbling into the gutter in front of you, and when empires do that, fascism follows. And you lot really need to realize that at this point, whether it’s Democrat or republican, it’s fascist. There is no choice, just the illusion of one. And again, democrats are as bought out by billionaires as the Republicans are.
It’s like going to the store and seeing 15 different varieties of the same candy but they’re all made by the same company and taste just ever so slightly different.
And Trump straight up said that Israel needs to “finish the job” and that the Gaza Strip will make his beachfront property. So yeah, be sick of what’s been going on. Most of us are. But also think of the consequences of the inactions if Trump becomes president. You’ll also have to deal with that.
What’s worse?
Kamala and Biden haven’t said finish the job, they’ve just given all the weapons and money anyway. They built a pier using billions of dollars saying it was for aid and then launched a massacre from the pier and then disabled it
They haven’t worked for a ceasefire they’ve vetoed every single one
I’m not saying vote for Trump. But the constant blackmail of oh if you don’t vote for one genocidal maniac you’ll get a worse genocidal maniac also doesn’t really seem like democracy does it?
I hold with what almost every peace keeper has said. If your uplift is rooted in another’s oppression, you are not free.
If the democrats really want to win, why not follow the will of the majority of the American people, who say they want an embargo of arms?
Why are the democrats courting Dick Cheney and a bunch of Reagan era politicians rather than listening to their voting base?
The fault isn’t going to be Muslim or black voters if kamala loses. It’s going to be the dems and the fact that they are not even a center left party at this point. They are what the Republicans used to be, and the republican party is now rabid and needs to be put down.
It’s true that the US vetoed a handful of UN ceasefire resolutions. However, public opinion seems to be swaying them. The last resolution the US proposed called for a ceasefire to protect civilians and aid relief (not far enough, but something), but was vetoed by Russia and China. All subsequent resolutions the US has voted for, but have likewise been vetoed by those 2 countries.
The Dems have no power in Congress, so any sort of embargo or can on their part is never going to pass. In fact early on there were multiple attempts at calls for a ceasefire by multiple Democrats, but it wouldn’t even make the floor thanks to conservative Democrats like Pelosi, Manchin, and Costa.
But by idly sitting by and showing protest by inaction, it’s potentially handing complete control over to the Republicans when they’re potentially at their most extreme. With Trump in command you’re now looking at mass deportation of Muslims and Latinos, active participation in Middle East conflicts like Palestine and Iran. Not to mention all of the other issues we’ll now have to contend with like states gaining the ability to limit the rights of LGBTQ, POC, and women to an extreme (Tennessee is already attempting to make it so people of “non-traditional” marriages can be denied a license based on individual ideologies of the official).
I agree that what’s going on in Palestine is horrible and I wish that the Biden administration and the rest of the old-guard Democrats weren’t so afraid of being called antisemitic just for standing up against the catastrophies of Israel, but that’s the hand we’ve been dealt.
As Cori Bush said, it’s about voting strategy over good conscience. There’s times in life where you don’t want to do something, but it’s what needs to be done. Ultimately do you feel that your want to vote against Harris is more important than the need for Trump to not be in office, because you need to understand that a non-vote is in fact a vote for Trump.
The US led ceasefire basically walked back any and all real war ending measures and was just basically a propaganda piece covering for Israel.
From the UNs own website:
The vetoed draft would have made imperative an immediate and sustained ceasefire in Gaza, with an “urgent need to expand the flow of humanitarian assistance” to all civilians and lifting “all barriers” to delivering aid Council members disagreed over elements of the draft, and some highlighted glaring exclusions despite having raised multiple concerns with the US during negotiations Ambassadors largely supported swift action to bring food and lifesaving aid at scale into Gaza, where a UN-backed report on Monday raised alarms about famine as Israel continues to block and slow walk shipments into the besieged enclave
https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/03/1147856
Even when the dems did have power in congress, they did fuck all. As you said, the democratic establishment blocked any movement.
Not voting is intrinsically not a vote for anyone. I’ve voted dem in every single election since I’ve been old enough to vote. Genocide is not something I can countenance. If this was the Trump administration doing this the dems would be shouting from the rooftops about how it’s inconscionable. They’re in control and they are doing the same thing.
Stop relying on black and brown voters to save your asses each time.
Will Putin send you to the front lines if Trump loses?
And what about the “vote for genocide or you support genocide-plus!” posts?
That’s called logic. And a firm understanding of how things work. But also, that comes from people that know Harris will do what she is able to stop it once she’s elected, but needs to play the game to have a chance for that to happen.
But you all know this already. Don’t you?
How have you concocted such a fantasy? What sign has Harris given that she will deviate one iota from the current policy towards Israel? You just wish it to be so. Even if this were somehow true, it is almost worse! “No, you see, I have to support genocide now, so I can win all the pro genocide votes, and then as soon as I’ve won, I’ll betray the people that elected me by stopping the genocide.” Smell the logic, lol.
I’ve seen many: ‘feel free to vote 3rd party, its okay to not support a genocidal candidate’ very few ‘dont vote or you support genocide’ are you sure you’re reading peoples posts correctly?
Same thing. The fact that most of these accounts, very similar to your own, are new accounts speaks volumes.
its really not. ever heard of the saying: ‘its the journey, not the destination?’ maybe you should just try putting an ounce of effort into not supporting a genocide. even if that just means lieing to a pollster about your support for harris. make her sweat a little. maybe even at the end of the day change her position.
trust me its pretty easy. I’m doing putting that ounce in right now. emailing my critters, casting my 3rd party vote, dealing with you twits who are blinding running off a cliff for fear of trump and enabling a genocide in the process. I don’t expect you to go as far I do but thats okay. I dont mind if you vote for harris. I mind that she supports genocide. I mind she doesn’t support labor. I’m willing to sacrifice some of those things to avoid trump. but I’m not willing to leave her unbloodied while she supports a genocide.
We’re not responsible for harris’ genocidal positions. she is. she chose this. she can also not chose it. we’ll welcome her back to the family when she does.
It’s the same fucking thing, oh my god
is it though? would you be in such a panic over the issue if people like me were not doing what we’re doing? no? would harris be suffering in the polls and struggling if not for us telling everyone exactly what we’re going to do and why?
Would they have bothered trotting out bernie to ‘reason with us’? you know what harris needs to do to get our votes. the question is are you so callous that you’d support a genocide instead of telling harris and the DNC to stop being shit stains? the vote are here she just needs to take them.
there isnt anything for you to fear if you reach out and embrace your arab and jewish brothers and sisters. why are you trying so had to enable a genocide when you can just… not. you can still vote for harris in the end if you really want, I dont mind. its your vote. but couldn’t you just… try? even a little bit? maybe lie to a pollster about your support, email your critters daily this week? maybe follow through and vote 3rd party or leave the president blank if you’re in a 20+ blue state.
We’re not responsible for harris’ genocidal positions. she is. she chose this. she can also not chose it. we’ll welcome her back to the family when she does.
Hey look, Bernie right on it. Again.
You think he ever gets tired of being right all the time?
He probably gets tired of so many others being more popular and more incorrect.
We need a whole senate of inter generational Bernies.
Single-issue voters are ignorant to begin with, but failing to help stop another Trump presidency isn’t the moral high ground. If you’re in that group there’s no point polishing your halo, because you are shitting on it.
It’s the equivalent of “I can’t save everyone, so I’ll doom them instead!”
I agree with Michael Moore’s theory that this was why many people voted for Trump in 2016. They felt ignored and powerless, so they said okay here, I’ll vote for this asshole, see how you like that! It was an expensive lesson that I don’t think the Democratic party has really paid attention to. Their response was to rethink their campaign strategies - many of them probably blamed their loss on trying to elect a woman for President - so they regrouped and managed to get Biden elected. But he didn’t put any bold ideas forward. All he really did was be a Democrat in the White House instead of a Republican. I don’t feel like Kamala Harris is playing that game. She really does want to move forward in a big way and not go back.
So genocide is a single issue to you, like school vouchers or fema funding? I think that says a lot about you. None of it good.
edit: and please, downvote away if you dont agree, But notice how close the election is and how many upvotes this viewpoint has. 28 up to 70 down is what I see at this point. If Harris loses it will be because she flatly ignored this ~30% of of Dem voters.
I mean its likely trump will continue the genocide for people who managed to flee to the US by revoking the legal status of refugees given he seems to think the word “palestinian” means “terrorist”
The cruel calculus is that Netanyahu wants trump to win.
Do you hold your nose and vote Harris to deny Netanyahu another victory or do you roll over entirely for Netanyahu and let him have an assistant in genocide with Trump? What is the lesser of two evils here?
Netanyahu, at least, will be thrilled to hear palestinians are not voting for Kamala because of him.
I mean its likely trump will continue the genocide for people who managed to flee to the US by revoking the legal status of refugees given he seems to think the word “palestinian” means “terrorist”
We already almost completely deny them. The US has accepted less than 600 Palestinians in the last decade. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/republicans-want-ban-palestinian-refugees-already-hard-get-in-us-rcna120892
so some 600 people will likely get persecuted if trump wins?
hostage situation huh. With both Harris and Trump saying they are about to kill people, but Trump killing more unless we give Harris our support.
That’s the dark calculus of it all. I would also point out the villain here is Netanyahu and the main reason to vote Harris here is to deny him a margin of victory. Who knows what plans Trump and Netanyahu have cooked up behind the scenes.
What part of “Trump is actively sabotaging peace talks” do you not understand?
Please, refer to this chart -
Many thousands of us dont vote for genociders of any party. “What part of that do you not understand”. Support genocide, then we dont support you, full stop.
The two party system is a broken system. You do not choose who you support. You vote against who you dislike the most. It’s a shit system, but wasting your vote is more akin to supporting Trump than voting for Harris is to supporting Harris.
My vote is one of many who think this way. When you stand alone you are unempowered yes, but when you have a lot of people behind you then you’re a movement and you have power. The anti genocide movement has power that Harris needs to win, Our votes are there for the taking, and its up to Harrsi to choose whether she’ll pick AIPAC or us. If she picks AIPAC and the destruction of our republic, then thats on her. IF the continuation of our system of government depends on bribery to do the murder of innocents, then its time to change our system of government.
Our system of government is fundamentally rotten and needs to be changed in general regardless of Harris. Not voting, resulting in putting a fascist in power isn’t how you do that.
Our system of government is fundamentally rotten and needs to be changed
Allowing yourself to be steered by maneuvered into giving away your once every 4 years bit of negotiating ability is not the way you do that.
Right, but the trolley thing is apt here. There is no option to just stop using the trolley because it’s not safe, it’s a runaway trolley with too much momentum to slow down. All you can really do is decide which track it goes down, and pick the less lethal path.
Harris could steer the trolley so it doesnt hit anyone. She’s not trapped on an out of control trolley car at all-- She is driving the effing thing and has full control.
A vote isn’t an endorsement, you are not personally responsible for the actions of the people you vote for - otherwise trump voters would be in deep shit. Even if you vote for the best politician the world has ever seen that’s still not you doing the politics and you’re not responsible for it. The forces involved are simply larger than a single person.
A vote is a tool to be deployed tactically. Its powerful enough republicans are looking for ways to prevent you from having it.
Look at it this way: Netanyahu would prefer Trump win because he might get more support and expand the genocide of palestinians to US soil. A vote for Kamala likely won’t improve Gaza but it will deny Netanyahu things he wants.
Tactically, there is efficacy in denying the butcher of gaza the things he wants even if it doesn’t go as far as anyone needs it to. Why let Netanyahu win without a fight?
A vote isn’t an endorsement, you are not personally responsible for the actions of the people you vote for
I dont agree. When soneone says they will do something terrible and you vote for them anyway, you have enabled it and have some of that outcome on your hands.
Then you commit to never voting. If you vote for Bernie people will say “oh he endorsed joe biden, he is complicit” but you don’t get to choose the battlefield only the outcome of the battle.
Fundamentally a percentage of politicians will lie, or lack resources to fulfil promises. There is simply nobody on earth that can uphold the promise of never doing something terrible, even on accident.
I reject the idea that war crimes are always the only choice we have in any election. But if thats your slant, OK, why not push for a third option-- getting Harris to stop the shipments by applying voter pressure on her. The only time politicians care about what the elctorate thinks at all is right before a close election, like right now. Why are so many dems not pushing her to take a better stand than she has had?
deleted by creator
Are you replying to LovableSidekick? The grandparent post didn’t mention genocide.
So genocide is a single issue to you, like school vouchers or fema funding?
Hey now. Vote for Kamala and you can get genocide, school privatization, and more underfunded climate disasters. You don’t have to choose.
Dems of 2024 have fully ingested the Republican platform of 2004. That’s why the Cheneys are campaigning for the Harris ticket.
Hmmm… I swear I just saw this comment word-for-word a minute ago. Almost like it was copy/pasted.
Very strange. I’ve seen it too. Must be a bug. I have no other explanation.
So genocide is a single issue to you, like school vouchers or fema funding?
Hey now. Vote for Kamala and you can get genocide, school privatization, and more underfunded climate disasters. You don’t have to choose.
Dems of 2024 have fully ingested the Republican platform of 2004. That’s why the Cheneys are campaigning for the Harris ticket.
This shit is so fucking dishonest. Go away.
Cheney is campaigning for Harris because Trump is so bad that even the Devil says “Wow, that’s fucked up”
Unfortunately, the switch is broken and everyone on that top track is getting railroaded no matter who wins.
Harris has no actual plan to protect any of the above. No more than Biden or Obama did.
Oh yes, I remember living in North Carolina and when Pat McCory’s cruelty to transpeople lead to him getting voted out, Governor Cooper just made it even worse because he thought it was funny…
No wait he actually expanded healthcare access for transpeople and repealed the bathroom laws.
Are you completely ignorant of the reality of the situation or are you intentionally trying to depress the Leftist voting block with doomer talk?
No wait he actually expanded healthcare access for transpeople and repealed the bathroom laws.
He did not. Transgender rights in NC were eroded over the governor’s veto. State officials are now exploring how to enforce the law.
And you are on here doing Netanyahu’s work of trying to get as many palestinians as possible killed by focusing your Ire on what, Kamala Harris? We all know Netanyahu wants trump to win. And we all know how trump sees even domestic US palestinians legally here. He thinks they’re terrorists. Do you think he won’t try to deport them? Or do you agree with Trump on that front?
Why are you here doing Netanyahu’s work for him? He can come on here himself and bitch about kamala, he doesn’t need you.
Human Shields rhetoric. You’re blaming the folks in the firing line for the actions of the ones pulling the trigger.
If/when Trump wins and he immediately deports all Palestinians, will you admit you were wrong? Or will you just double down (or are you just full of shit from the get-go)?
and he immediately deports all Palestinians
His biggest voting block? Doubtful.
Voting blocks? What voting blocks? It’s cute that you think we’ll continue to hold elections after Trump wins.
I wish everyone saw this buried comment showing your complete disregard and dismissal of palestinians so they cold easily see your comments are at best those of an attention hungry narcissist.
I’m accusing you of doing exactly what Netanyahu would prefer that you do, no more, no less.
I’m accusing you
“Always go on the offense and blame the other guy for dying” is the IDF strategy, yes.
you’d be the one that knows it
I knew all these single issue fake leftists were full of shit when it was revealed that Trump has been sabotaging peace talks and they weren’t immediately outraged by that revelation.
Nah, they all have a political objective, and it doesn’t involve peace in the middle east. Their objective is to use genocide as a political wedge to divide the left and get Trump elected.
I knew all these single issue fake leftists were full of shit when it was revealed that Trump has been sabotaging peace talks and they weren’t immediately outraged by that revelation.
Why would anyone even be surprised by that? We’re mad because Democrats see what’s happening between Trump and Netanyahu and are doing what Netanyahu wants anyway.
There is a lot more going on in the Middle East than any American citizen can understand. Voting for ANY candidate will not fix it. Even if we voted in a candidate that vehemently opposed Israel, nothing would change. Our military and I intelligence network there is dependent on a strong Israel.
Unfortunately there is nothing we can do about it except purge congress and get all anti Israel politicians. Good luck making that happen.
There is a lot more going on in the Middle East than any American citizen can understand.
“Oh, your feeble anti-genocide mind just can’t imagine the vastness of why we have to keep doing everything Netanyahu wants!”
Democracy is on the line. Our singleminded devotion to the right-wing government of a genocidal apartheid state is less important than preserving democracy itself. But not to Democrats.
Look we just have to work with that national socialist party just long enough to get rid of the dirty communists and get the money rolling again and then we can get rid of them.
Like what’s the worst that can happen while we give them some power?
They burn the Reichstag down? Ha.Us liberal conservatives have nothing to fear. We are the obvious choice anyways. Who else could they turn to?
Electoral politics is a fickle thing. If Harris makes a statement either way on Palestine, she will lose.
I just can’t seem to understand why nobody seems to get this.
Edit: I honestly can’t wait until November 6th when all of these bullshit, brand new accounts astroturfing for third parties and doing everything they can to get the fascist elected, mysteriously disappear.
And if they don’t, well, I guess this website isn’t for me.
We can’t change course, we obviously have to hit that iceberg and then just hope for the best afterwards. What use would turning at all do. Honestly, I think hitting the iceberg isn’t even that bad of an idea. The other crazy person we would let behind the wheel would also drive us straight into the iceberg anyways but playing music to cover the screams of horror better.
Everyone screaming about the iceberg is just over reacting anyways. The true iceberg is the one after this one and all the other ones hiding out at sea we will get to after we finish smashing into this one.Why the fuck is everyone so afraid of change or trying things different.
“This is the way”, screw that, we aren’t caricatures.
This analogy is incomprehensible.
Just like the arguments that we must simply accept that there is no options other than continuing exactly as is or exactly as is but more proudful.
There is a lot of complex issues boiled down to nothing to do about it other than huge sweeping options or nothing at all and it’s exhausting.
If Harris makes a statement either way on Palestine, she will lose.
She has already made it clear that Biden’s policy regarding Gaza is her policy. She has taken sides on the issue already. You just like the side she took.
She deserves to lose.
It’s funny how people who “hate both parties” only ever wanna criticize the Left
It’s funny how people only interested in the “logic” of harm reduction don’t realize why this is the case. Like, no shit people will get more upset over a police officer killing innocent people over the random maniac with a gun killing innocent people.
And you think it matters to a dead man the profession of his murderer?
This is about the topic of criticizing though. Are you honestly surprised the group who claim to be more moral than murderers are criticized more for murdering?
No, but discussions of morality are for those privileged enough to be entirely out of harm’s way. For the rest of us, there’s harm reduction and threat assessment to consider.
Will criticizing police brutality lead to a safer community? Yes, because the people in charge of them will respond to protests, especially as they grow in size and ferocity in response to the situation and how dire it becomes.
Will criticizing the Democrats lead to a safer community? No, because the alternative political party ensures that to be a horrid decision.
“Will criticizing the Democrats lead to a safer community? No, because the alternative political party ensures that to be a horrid decision.”
As someone who would absolutely be targeted by another trump presidency, I’m not sure if this is the case. Sure, his policies are absolutely worse for me and people like me. But at least in rhetoric, democrats (the voters) would suddenly be against the things democrats (the party) are currently doing if trump were doing it instead, which mobilizes more people toward activism and helps protect those in need actively instead of passively if at all. Should the democrats (the party) slowly adopt republican policies (which seems to be the case), wouldn’t it be better for the electorate not to be asleep at the wheel for 4 years leaving my community to die? If democrats (the voters) don’t respond well to alarm bells for genocide, what makes you think they would respond well to alarm bells for transphobic bills that aren’t veto’d, civil rights being walked back, project 2025 being implemented under Harris, and no protections even attempted to combat it? Stochastic terrorism from trump can happen even if he’s not president and insurrection can happen even if he doesn’t win. The real safety in my community comes from the community itself, not the politicians representing billionaires who give sweeping laws, but if liberals are fine with throwing Palestinians to the wolves today, it’ll be the queer community tomorrow.
The queer community has and will fight like we have in the past should we need to regardless of who becomes president, and with or without the support of the masses. Sure, a lot of us might be killed, but that’s the position the comfortable masses always put us in. The lack of criticism of the democrats right now among their base tells me a couple things: 1) the line about “sure democrats and republicans both have duds, but at least democrats hold their own accountable” is a lie and 2) shows me that throwing groups under the bus is okay so long as it maintains comfort and security- meaning we are headed for fascism whether it’s blue or red since it seems like the entirety of the electorate are willing to sacrifice others for their own benefit. Our nation was born out of genocide, so it’s no wonder how easy it is to vote for “lesser genocide” rather than protests, strikes, riots, and generally shutting down the country while helping our neighbors out materially. Either of the two main candidates winning is a testament to how hateful our country really is.
Consent has been manufactured with a false choice given to you by oligarchs and many have been fooled into thinking this is democracy. If you aren’t willing to fight for your rights and the rights of your neighbors, they’re as good as gone already regardless of who you check on the ballot.
Or when he invited Netanyahu to Mar-a-lago in july 2024.
I knew all these single issue fake leftists were full of shit when it was revealed that Trump has been sabotaging peace talks and they weren’t immediately outraged by that revelation.
Sorry, but if people aren’t free to critique their party funding genocide and aren’t free to protest genocide without " helping the enemy", then our system has already fallen to authoritarianism.
Don’t get me wrong, I am voting for Harris. But our two party system is a fucking farce. It makes a mockery of every ideal that democracy is supposed to represent. Authority is supposed to be given from the consent of the people. But most Americans agree that our two party system is broken and yet our politicians have made it impossible for us to fix or replace our broken system because they benefit from it. A system forced on us by a minority for their benefit against the will of the majority is the complete opposite of a democracy.
Calling a genocide a “single issue” is offensive as fuck. It’s not fake leftist. Liberals can continue to cry and blame everyone else but themselves when they lose.
It’s really easy. Kamala harris could change her view on israel tomorrow, but she won’t. After all, AIPAC owns both parties.
If the dems gave a flying fuck about “preventing fascism” they would do whatever it takes. They won’t.
Calling a genocide a “single issue” is offensive as fuck.
It’s literally objective reality. It is one single issue among many. If you’re unwilling to consider other issues when voting just because one of them is genocide, that makes it a single issue and it makes you a single issue voter.
I don’t give a fuck if that offends you. Get lost.
Well well well. Scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds. You sound so smug excusing away a literal fucking genocide that both candidates and their parties gleefully support. When you learn about the Holocaust, don’t you question “how could the Germans let that happen?” Now go look in the mirror, fool. You’re the problem, it’s you. You’re the 1930s German, accepting a Holocaust because it’s not that big of a deal and other things matter more to you. Hope you sleep well at night with that.
Yes, genocide and war more generally are my single issue when it comes to voting for president.
I know it’s so easy to blame leftists like myself for your pathetic loss, but go blame the democrats, who haven’t run a legitimate primary since 2008!
They didn’t have a popularly elected nominee, and shockingly lol jk they lost!
💯
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Funny, but no. ;)
'Tis a fair mod
Trump has been sabotaging peace talks
This is pure horseshit. Netanyahu has been stringing Biden along for half his career. Biden has willingly turned a blind eye to Israeli war crimes going back 30 years.
Trying to deflect decades of failed US middle east policy - policy that Biden helped construct first as Senator, then as VP, and finally as President - and blame it on a single phone call Trump made to egg Netanyahu on is dishonest to the point of denialism.
Their objective is to use genocide as a political wedge
We’re doing “Human Shields” discourse again. It’s the Palestinian American’s fault for not endorsing the genocide of their immediate friends and family.
Scratch a fucking liberal…
Trump has been sabotaging peace talks
This is pure horseshit.
-
Trump, Netanyahu speak about Gaza hostage-ceasefire deal, Axios reports
-
Trump says he told Netanyahu to end Gaza war but criticizes ceasefire call
-
Trump signals support in call with Netanyahu: ‘Do what you have to do’
It’s the Palestinian American’s fault for not endorsing the genocide of their immediate friends and family.
Voting isn’t a love letter, it’s a chess move. Biden, Harris and other establishment liberals absolutely deserve to be relentlessly mocked and criticized (and frankly indicted) for cheerleading Israel’s genocide, but aiding in the political victory of someone twice as genocidal as them, and who also intends to end democracy and target his political opponents would be a bad move.
Voting isn’t a love letter, it’s a chess move
The difference is you can win a game of chess. There is no winning with our two party oligarchy. Which candidate will give us universal healthcare? Which candidate will give us economic democracy by converting capitalist companies into worker co-ops or nationalizing critical industries? Which candidate will give us free college and the freedom to unionize without fearing for our careers? Neither of them? Cool. So either we vote for liberal corporate oligarchy or the fascist oligarchs will make us pay dearly for it. Either way we lose, but one is worse than the other. Our “democracy” is like holding a gun to someone’s head and telling them they are voting to get shot if they don’t vote to drop their pants and bend over. I’ll do it, but only because the alternative is worse.
Hey, just one human to another. That “Voting isn’t a love letter, it’s a chess move” just does absolufuckinglutely nothing and comes across as insulting/pompous on your part. You’re insulting someone’s vote as a “love letter” (great way to get someone to read and contemplate when you’re taking the meaning of the vote out of context). And your “chess move” isn’t as intelligent as you think, you’re in check and you only have one move.
Just one more fucking week to go and I can’t wait. It’s gonna be so great to see next week how Lemmy is just flooded with 3rd party initiatives, voting changes organization, donations to local and national 3rd party candidates, a heavy focus on anti-gerrymandering and securing voting rights. We’re not gonna continue to discuss how there’s no options and we can’t support other candidacies for at least 3 years…right? Everyone saying now is not the right time is gonna be super active next week with pushing to support the future parties… right?!
Hey, just one human to another. That “Voting isn’t a love letter, it’s a chess move” just does absolufuckinglutely nothing and comes across as insulting/pompous on your part.
Pretty sure that’s the intent.
Chess moves is a great analogy. There is many situations in chess where you might win a figure but move yourself in a loosing position. The best chess players are those that can think the furthest ahead.
The political culture is embracing you to never think past the next election. Dont question the set up you are given. Dont think outside the box. Dont think how not punishing the supposed moral site of politics for genocide might make genocide accepted morals in the long run.
And then if brown people can be genocided in the Middle East, why not in Central America before they flee to the US? And once we are accustomed to that, what about the brown people already living in the US? Sure they speak Spanish instead of Arabic, but there is so awful many of them these days…
That is the longterm outset we see. As climate change will push for migration and refugee seeking beyond anythinf we can fathom these days and as the supposed moral sides of politics in white supremacist countries are embracing “solutions” that used to be of the fringes of the far right, we are descending into white supreme fascism.
So you think Trump would be better than Harris? Because that’s the only thing you get to vote on: Trump or Harris. A vote for neither is a vote for whoever has more votes - and we know that statistically republicans are less likely to vote third party (or not vote), so it most likely is a vote for Trump.
So you think Trump would be better than Harris?
no, we (speaking for myself and @selah here) don’t support genocidal candidates. stop making up stories in your head and read what people are telling you.
Because that’s the only thing you get to vote on: Trump or Harris.
incorrect there were 5 candidates on my ballot. this is a false choice that exists purely in your head. There are many paths to neutralizing trump and that don’t normalize genocide.
A vote for neither is a vote for whoever has more votes
incorrect, pure fiction. i suggest you spruce up on your basic addition and ratio math skills. What you mean to say is no vote or a vote for a 3rd party doesn’t help harris, you’re preferred candidate. yes. thereby putting her candidacy at risk. maybe she should adopt some policies to fix this.
The reason harris is swinging to the right is because the right wing doesn’t care about worker rights and many are also very disgusted with trump. They require no concessions by capital to garner votes; just a general disgust with trump. If trump wasnt running this wouldn’t be possible.
Hilariously I have no problem with this as a left wing voter. Why? because if the democrats can reliably peel off the few remaining moderate republicans we can finally split this big tent party and get a party that is dedicated to working class rights.
What you mean to say is no vote or a vote for a 3rd party doesn’t help harris, you’re preferred candidate. yes. thereby putting her candidacy at risk.
so you say that a no vote or 3rd party vote is a vote for trump, then. because those are the only 2 options. either trump or harris will be the next president of the united states. so, hurting harris means helping trump. you do get that, right?
No you say that. My ballot had 5 options. Yours may have a different number depending on the state.
If you dont like this situation thats not my problem. Its yours. Go demand rcv in your state. Go demand democrats not support a genocide. I wish harris had a single policy that’d make her worth voting for. Sadly her entire platform is already shit my state has with a genocidal cherry on top.
Sucks to suck I guess. Better luck next election, i hope this one works out for you. Until then i will continue to deny harris my vote in my 20+ dem state and let my critters know they’re on thin ice if israel continues its behavior with our support.
As ive been telling everyone its perfectly okay to not vote for harris if its not in your interests. Harris’ struggles are her own doing. IF you live in a blue state think hard on your vote there are benfits to voting third party. If you live in a purple or red state Harris’ campaign may be your best option in which case no hard feelings vote for her! Totally understandable.
I just want to point out that the idea that “questioning your party helps the enemy” is an authoritarian mentality. If we aren’t free to demand that the left-of-fascism party stop supporting (funding) genocide, then perhaps the US has already fallen to authoritarianism.
The political culture is embracing you to never think past the next election.
I am absolutely thinking past the next election. I want to make sure, at any cost, that the person who has vowed to become a dictator on day one, deport millions of legal immigrants, terminate the constitution, and use the military against his political opponents does not win.
In other words, I am voting in this election to ensure that there is a next election.
Since the bad faith leftists seem adamant that genocide is genocide and that there are no shades of grey involved, then my support for either candidate hardly matters in that regard, so I’m not going to let it stand in the way of casting my vote to support other issues that I care about. Women’s right to bodily autonomy and the rule of law are two big ones in my book.
I’m sorry that innocent people are dying in Palestine in a senseless conflict, truly I am. I hope the people of Israel do their own part to hold their government responsible for these atrocities, because ultimately that’s what needs to happen. Israel could continue the war indefinitely even without U.S. support. We are not the lynchpin holding the Israel-Hamas war afloat, we’re just one cog in the machine.
lots of grace for trump and republicans on this issue from you, but little for democrats. Its known Netanyahu wants trump to win and has been trying to make the US as ugly as possible on this issue, the question is, why is Netanyahu playing you like a fiddle?
lots of grace for trump and republicans on this issue
If that’s how you’ve chosen to read it, there’s no reaching you.
Its how you wrote it. If there’s an accusation that trump and netanyahu are conspiring to make things worse you give trump and netanyahu grace here. If joe biden is attempting to make things worse you believe that accusation without proof.
We live in a world where multiple presidents have been elected while torching foreign negotiations during their campaign. Reagan notably prolonged the Iran hostage crisis AND began the Iran Contra scandal before he was ever president.
If you think that we should suppose an even worse person like trump is not negotioating on some even darker plan, you simply are simply offering him more grace than fucking reagan deserved. Reagan’s “Peace deal” killed a lot of fucking people.
Where where these people of moral conscience when Bernie had a shot?
it’s not like this shitshow sprung up overnight.
They voted for Hillary, because the party decided it was her turn and made everyone else drop out and endorse her.
That’s right. And then they conveniently forgot about the following midterms.
They most likely voted for bernie
Doubtful. They’re the kind of people who say that Bernie is a shitlib and controlled opposition.
IMHO it’s more like half of them. Bernie is a successful compromise between liberal and leftist voters.
Now Bernie is endorsing Harris, but if he was someone’s compromise, then that compromise isn’t necessarily transitive to a more centrist candidate.
I did, but most of his supporters did not follow through.
I really wouldn’t bet on it.
Hey, they were having brunch.
I guarantee you that if you polled these morons they’d know next to nothing about Israel, or Palestine, their respective histories, or the conflict, or the players, or foreign policy, or the USAs influence in the region.
These people got hooked on this conflict via tiktok, probably funded by Russian propaganda machines and are too stupid to realize it.
A truly black and white, good VS evil war is actually raging right now in Ukraine, yet these morons are silent on that one. I wonder why 🤔
A truly black and white, good VS evil war is actually raging right now in Ukraine, yet these morons are silent on that one. I wonder why 🤔
Because we’re not arming the bad guys in that one genius. Russia is also a nuclear power and most people still don’t think MAD is a good idea if you’re suggesting we should be advocating for open warfare against russia.
If you think the Israel conflict is a black and white affair then you are part of the moron group I’m talking about.
Ah, so that’s why you’re surprised some people have a hard time supporting a candidate that wants to allow the genocide to continue.
Impossible for people to have a conscience, it must be some sort of psyop.
The idea that not voting is some form of protest that has material consequences for the ruling class is ahistorical. It took centuries of struggle to attain universal suffrage. The people in power are perfectly happy to have only a small fraction of the demos exerting any political power at all; in fact this is how most civilizations have functioned for the past few thousand years.
I just need anyone who thinks about skipping voting to “Save Palestine” to refer to this graph
Btw, there’s a third choice… it’s pulling the Jill Stein lever.
The Jill Stein Lever is made of rubber and not actually connected to anything, so pulling it will accomplish two things “Jack” and “Shit”
Trump is 100x worse. Liberals might be in bed with conservatives on 90% of issues, but fascists actually want to use the military against us.
I upset people when I reject the idea that we are voting to save democracy because I believe the US’s two party system is an insult to every ideal that democracy stands for, but I am still voting for Harris. Vote to save our country from fascism. Vote to keep your friends and family from being rounded up for supporting Healthcare for all.
Look, maybe they just don’t know how this will play out. By all means let them trade their vote away for teh feelz and directly condemn an entire countries residents to death.
Trust me bro, they care a ton about Palestine, they aren’t using civilian deaths to leverage any political bullshit I swear.
Funny how the people who sit on the fence always seem to parrot the current claims right wing media is making
I don’t actually believe a lot of these people are undecided
We’re dealing with people who think the best way to send a message is to hurt more people and destroy democratic institutions.
They watched the Titanic and thought the people losing their shit and dragging everyone down with them was a good play in a crisis.
At least if the ship goes down the rich quarters will be below water too! That way they’ll learn to treat us better next time.
NBC News - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for NBC News:
Wiki: reliable - There is consensus that NBC News is generally reliable for news. See also: MSNBC
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Search topics on Ground.News
Are people really claiming Trump isn’t worse? I think it’s more that people think that Harris may be better than Trump (pretty low bar there), but still too bad to vote for. Voting for the lesser evil only goes so far. At some point the lesser evil is still too far from one’s own ideals that voting for them isn’t an option. Different people will obviously draw that line in different places and if I lived in the USA, I’d probably begrudgingly vote for Harris in the coming election.
Democrats basically slandering anyone who refuses to vote for their candidate as Trump supporters is fucking stupid and will hardly convince anyone to change their minds. Especially when it seems democrats have had nothing to offer the left other than “the other side is worse” for as far back as I can remember. If they want the left’s votes, they need to earn them.
I can’t speak for anyone else, but I don’t want people to get the wrong idea. Voting in FPTP is not the same as approval.
Exactly. If you keep playing the “vote blue no matter who” playbook, progressive change will never happen from within
“Socialists” reading this:
