I did my duty, i held my nose and voted for the lesser of two evils.
But there's no sensible reason to blame genocide opposing progressives instead of the genocide supporting DNC who stubbornly refused to advance policies their own base wanted.
The DNC decided to risk democracy in order to save a genocide - possibly the single most irresponsible decision in the 21st century. Blame them, they deserve it.
Multiple groups can be blamed. The DNC deserves more blame than anyone who refused to vote, but all the people saying "if you vote for Kamala, you love genocide" deserve some blame too, because anyone with a brain knew that a lot more people were going to get hurt under Trump.
Wonder who they'll run in 2028. If there's an election in 2028.
It's the Zionists and their money. Conspiracy theorists were right all along unfortunately, with Israel doing everything possible to validate them.
But in an election once the candidates are locked between
"We'll give money to the Israelis and they'll kill Palestinians"
and
"We'll give money to the Israelis and they'll kill Palestinians, but also we want to get rid of Latinos and LGBTQ people, also poor people should lose the little healthcare they do have and hey there's probably more bullshit we're gonna pull, but some of it's so stupid we haven't even thought of it yet"
I can't see how anyone with a brain would not vote against #2.
Donald Trump won completely legitimately and in addition to the 77.3 million Trump voters, there are about 90 million other eligible voters to blame for the kidnapping of Maduro, the war in Iran, the stupid ass tariffs, and so many other things. That's what they all were willing to accept.
I can't see how anyone with a brain would not vote against #2.
Because you've been around long enough to have been in this situation before. Voting #1 is at best a stop-gap measure. Option #1 doesn't do anything to fix the underlying problem, and in fact, the next time around, #2 is way worse. (As is #1.) And this pattern keeps repeating. It doesn't matter which you choose, you'll end up with #2, just a bit later. (We've reached the stage at which genocide support is the lesser evil, fer chrissakes.)
As an analogy, the situation we have with the two parties is like a choice faced by person with Type 2 diabetes: Fall into a hypoglycemic coma right now and maybe die, or consume sugar by the spoonful. The second option is the correct choice, obviously. But next time around, it's the same choice, and again after that. This person can choose the lesser evil every time, but it still leads to death.
So, painful and unlikely at it may be, some voters are thinking beyond the immediate moment and want to at least try to avoid the death of democracy.
So, no matter what, we are just inevitably fucked regardless of what we do, so letâs just hammer on the gas harder to let fascism win and destroy everything and get it over with? Do you not see how that is just authoritarian absolutism?
What kind of rollover defeatist cuck shit is this? Your stance is theologically conservative accelerationism, point blank.
Parties are coalitions that change over time. The neoliberal wing of the Democratic party has been ascendant since the Clinton years. But they are declining now. And the sole reason is that their brand is proving incapable of actually winning elections. If a party keeps winning, the people running the party maintain credibility and business as usual just keeps trucking along. Parties can only undergo fundamental change after losing a few cycles. It took the 3 losses of the Reagan and Bush Sr. years before something like Clinton's triangulation strategy had any hope of winning support among the Democratic party.
You still supported the extermination of a whole population that are currently getting exterminated. Despite the oppression of the groups you are mentioning none are facing eminent extermination with mass murder and starvation and the destruction of the majority . No wonder the rest of the non western world hate you american scums
Anyone with a brain knew the Dems were gonna lose supporting genocide. Even Trump met with the Palestinian imams the Harris campaign snubbed. Even Trump said there had to be a ceasefire. Sure, he was lying, but Biden & Harris wouldnât even do that?
It would have been a lot cooler if she hadnât thrown the election in a highly predictable manner.
So, youâre mad the dems had a level of transparency on their politics and didnât lie straight to iur faces saying they wouldnât do something they were obviously going to do?
Thatâs fucking stupid, you see that, right? If youâre going to dight that fight, at least do it better, is all Iâm asking, because youâre being a dumbass about it. Youâre hitting yourself.
No, you're missing the fucking point. You JUST SAID that the Dems couldn't take those positions because they would lose BUT THE REPUBS TOOK THOSE POSITIONS AND FUCKING WON SO YOU'RE FUCKING WRONG
The elections are not a one time event. Yes, more people may suffer for 4 years, but if it builds momentum for an actually good 3rd party or at least reforming the DNC, it could have been worth it. But stupidly painting anyone who wants something better then just a Democrat win as an enemy that supports Trump ensures it can't happen. It's not that there are no rails to the third track. It's that people like the author of the meme actively rips them out with the "voting 3rd party is a waste of vote" bullshit. If you ask me, voting for more politically correct genocide is a waste of vote. If you are choosing for the lesser of two genocides, you are alredy fucked either way.
if it builds momentum for an actually good 3rd party or at least reforming the DNC, it could have been worth it.
Tell that to all the families of kids that died because of the DOGE cuts.
We're going to hear people saying "it was a good strategy though - shame it didn't work out" while they're on voter lines being patrolled by armed guard, just like in Russia. Even if elections are for show, "both sides" people will not admit they were wrong.
Voting for a 3rd party is a waste of a vote until that 3rd party has representatives in lower forms of government. The only bipartisan support we'll see during a 3rd party term is when both parties work together to undermine the 3rd party President. It's magical thinking to believe a 3rd party President will get anything accomplished without lower representation.
Take your strawman argument somewhere else. I never said or implied I was talking only about the presidential elections. You can vote for 3rd party president, sentaor, and congressman in the same election. Also for state and local 3rd party candidates.
And of course the DOGE fearmongering. Oh no, we can't vote for change because of DOGE cuts! Sure, countless poeple are dying because of lack of healthcare, pollution, homlessness, ... But we can't try to do anything about that, because we will die of DOGE cuts! /s
Be upset that I'm reminding you of the failures brought on by protest and 3rd party voters. The vast majority do nothing between elections except post online about it.
DOGE and Iran wouldn't have happened if Kamala was elected. Think of that every time you're at the pump looking at those higher prices, if you're old enough to drive.
Be upset that Iâm reminding you of the failures brought on by protest and 3rd party voters.
The democrats lost because they ran a dogshit candidate and refused to change course from any of their many unpopular fantasies, yet you freaks insist they're absolved of all guilt. The party cannot fail, it can only be failed.
People have been electing democrats on and off for over a century. Yet it changed nothing. But sure, 3rd party voting is the thing that can't succeed. Doing the same thing again and again hoping for a different outcome is clearly the smarter thing to do.
But sure, if we just accept genocide and vote for it, at least the gas will be cheaper. Sure. Why not.
Under the Biden/Harris leadership, Israel bombed every single school and hospital in Gaza and put in action the most brutal phase of the genocide, while whitewashing it all at the same time with their help. Tell us about it dipshit, how would less people get hurt under Harris? I would love to hear it.
You're actually wrong about that. Obama deported way more than trump. 3 million over 8 years, where trump deported 1.2 million over 4. Thomas Homan at ICE created the policy to separate children from their parents at the border. He was an Obama appointee and Obama gave him an award for distinguished service. He gave that award after Homan proposed family separations.
Biden deported 4.5 million. Trump has deported 675k in his first year. He'll have a hard time catching up to Obama or Biden.
I'm not defending republicans here, they are awful. But pretending things would be better under this cabal of democratic party leadership is just complete BS that you like to pretend its true. Its not true. Thats part of why Dem voters are mad at the dem leaders.
While we're on the subject, Dems killed more Palestinians than Republicans did.
You're making an extremely dishonest comparison by lumping all deportation together.
Border deportations are mostly a function of arrivals. Someone comes in, and gets denied. When they're walking back across the border, that's a deportation. You can make a LOT of laws, but you're not likely to influence that much.
Interior deportation is what people are bothered by. Obama shifted to deporting illegals with criminal records. Trump is just grabbing people off the street, regardless of what they did, and often regardless of status.
Then there's the fact that Trump has made it intentionally hard to track data. Under Obama and Biden the data was clear and available, and for trump's 2nd run, everything is being covered up and no data is available anymore. So it's mostly guesswork.
This is cope. The current dem leadership is totally on board with the war in Iran, and if the current administration hadn't started it, Israel would almost certainly have dragged a hypothetical Harris administration into one anyway.
The several decade of American sanctions are killing more then the bombs during this war. Iran is going to get stronger once the evil american empire surrender
Well then you don't understand how American politics works. It's the entirety of the US government. It's laws put in place by Democrats that Trump is using. And it's not like the Ds aren't crossing the aisle every other week to vote with Rs on some heinous shit. And it's not like the Ds ever pulled back on military expansion, or expansion of ICE and DHS, or domestic surveillance.
The GOP largely controls the messaging, due to owning the majority of media, as well as being more likely to have degrees in communications and sales, while Democratic candidates tend to have degrees in hard sciences.
The very moment the DNC did anything to hinder the genocide, every news stations would have a picture of local and national Democratic candidates with photoshopped Hitler mustaches.
The ones wanting a different track better vote in the primaries then, instead of just complaining about the party as a whole after the ticket is settled.
Lots of states won't let you vote in primaries unless you declare a party. We should start the messaging there. Declare a party, if only temporary, to vote for who you think is best during the first go around. Treat it as first past the post.
LOL. Lucy already pulled that football TWICE. The first time they rat fucked Bernie. The second time they didn't even have primaries. You have got to be fucking insane to be saying "voting in primaries is our chance for change". Are you fucking daft?
Almost like the presidential primary isn't the only primary. The rise of the DSA is showing what primaries can do. And listen I'm not saying they're perfect and will fix everything, but their a whole hell of a lot better than the options we've had.
Also don't misunderstand you are right about Bernie and well the whole not having a presidential primary, but there's no reason you can't try to use the tools available within the system to marginally improve the circumstances of the working class AND pursue more radical action. You can do both
Yeah, you can. But you can also just focus on the thing that has always worked and will always work which is interest convergence. We must make politicians suffer for going the wrong way and benefit from going the right way. Civil Rights was passed by a bi-partisan coalition because they knew if they didn't things would get much much worse for them, not at the ballot box, on the street. Women got suffrage without voting. Labor had to fight literal paramilitary combat to get us weekends. That's how it works. Sure, vote. But don't waste so much time on it and certainly don't waste time trying to convince people to vote or convince people that "blue no matter who" is moral or that "sign up to be a Democrat, add your name to their roster and then vote in their convoluted and rat fucked primary system". Let people vote their conscience and focus on raising their consciousness.
Voting takes like an hour every 2 years, it's really not that hard. And yes on election day some areas have very long lines, but everywhere has some form of mail ballot and/or early voting.
It's so easy there's no reason not to go do it. I've spent more time switching a license at the DMV than voting has ever taken.
Also not a single one of those movements existed in a political vacuum. The threat of violence did exist, but so did the threat of politicians losing their positions. Honestly outside of the labor movements/skirmishes everything else you listed existed well within election politics. The movements were absolutely necessary to effect change, but not an either/or situation by any measure. Both was necessary
Oh my God we need ranked choice voting, it should be a top priority but I never hear it even mentioned. It fixes so many issues and obliterates the 2 party system. But we just canât have nice things.
Alaska has ranked choice voting. But the viable independent is in Nebraska and the dsa candidates are in new York, Colorado, and Michigan. Minnesota has had farmer-labor candidates since ever, but if you don't live in Minnesotta, we just call them democrats.
We do need ranked choice voting. But it will not destroy the two party system.
I love how Americans live in this world where not supporting the ongoing Israeli genocide against the Palestinian civilian population is somehow a radical fantasy.
Reminder, the D guy has that guy tied to the tracks because apparently thatâs where he thinks he should be. There has been plenty of time to get him out of the way, but the party is like ânah, leave him there. Itâs better that wayâ.
No, it's a philosophical dilemma used to talk about ethics. It's completely terrible as a tool for what you're proposing, since all it does is create a strawman like the one OP has made.
Growing up on the Mexican side of the border, that Mexican flag should be the other way. The âfriendly democratsâ would often say things to me like:
âIf we donât let Mexicans in, whoâs going to pick the fruit / clean the house / make good breakfast burritosâ gee thanks
My general experience has been that the average centrist Democrat sees immigrants as âgood cheap laborâ, not people.
While it is true that centrist democrats don't really see other ethnicites as people speaking broadly, they'll still view an individual immigrant as a person.
When I go over to a democrats home they can be ignorant about what's happening with migrants, but there no doubt in mind I'll get to leave safely.
I celebrated thanksgiving with one of my friend's family that is conservative, and there was a part of me that wondered if I would get to leave alive. It's as if they were trying to rage bait me by saying the most heinous shit while brandishing guns and holding their holster when I turned to speak. Another time, I was with my partner's family and her brother who's a manager of a grocery store was complaining that he wished he could ban all non English speakers from coming into the store.
Both are not the best, but I can speak freely with democrats whereas a conservative may blow my head off if I say something they disagree with.
Oh yeah, thereâs a huge gulf between the two. Both are pretty shitty, but one is cartoon villain shitty.
It frustrates me that the US doesnât have an off ramp out of this. They really need that third option (or fourth or fifth), but thereâs no realistic way to get to it electorally in a timeframe that matters.
Maybe something like "the top one only ties one arm across the tracks"? Like, you're getting fucked, but not quite as badly?
It frustrates me that the US doesnât have an off ramp out of this. They really need that third option (or fourth or fifth)
They really need an electoral system that makes a third or fourth or fifth option viable, like proportional representation or ranked choice of some kind. But..
thereâs no realistic way to get to it electorally in a timeframe that matters.
I suspect that timeframe may be decades. You'd have to educate enough people who aren't yet dug into " this is how we've always done it" about the problems of the system, convince them of a better alternative and, macabre as it may sound, wait for the old and stubborn "I don't want to learn anything new" to die off.
A ton of Dems are actively throwing trans people under the bus, joining Republicans in voting for Apartheid toilet bills and shit
Dems have also wholeheartedly supported the War on Terror that killed and displaced millions of people and have barred muslims from conventions even last year simply for being muslims
Obama had more deportations than any other presidents and this was touted as a dunk on Trump. Obama also introduced the cages. For children.
Their 'support' for BLM was also completely performative. When it came to actual action, BLM protests were violently crushed, organizers criminalized or killed, police budgets skyrocketed and nothing fundamentally changed
Remember the ratchet system. Republicans make things worse. Dems make sure they never get better.
Y'all got an extremely shitty choice to make. Republicans need to be ousted. And expect better from these motherfuckers that call themselves Democrats too.
This is the way. As a voter it often feels like your vote doesnt matter. But the thing is focus on local elections. Vote in every election your allowed. Especially those off season elections have low turnout, and your vote matters much more. This is how you get demsoc candidates into positions of influence who can work their way up.
The republican party is full on fasc. No matter where you are dont vote for them. Make the red states have to cheat so obviously that the courts have to get involved. Swing states vote blue, but if you were voting in the local elections, and primaries theres a good chance your blue candidate isnt a centrist. If your in a solid blue state vote for the third party to show the centrist dems that you dont want a centrist, and that their hold is precarious. If youre lucky to have a leftist candidate on the ballot in a blue state vote for them.
This is the best way to tell the party how to win. They will ignore you, and they will fight you. But if their base votes hard left consistently they have to listen, or they lose to leftists.
Holy shit, the number of people ITT where the message went right over their fucking head. Yes, OP, you got your smug lecture, as you prophesied. It's insane how it doesn't fit into people's heads that you can work on getting better candidates/better positions/more sense into the DNC without indirectly supporting a full on fascist in the meantime.
What? Are you telling me it's not just us vs. them? There's nuance? Maybe even spectrums instead of binary choices? Get out of here with that nonsense. /s
We can try to do 2 things at once, but you can't deny that all those people that chose not to vote "in protest" during the last presidential election didn't seem to do a THING towards supporting a 3rd party or setting up ranked choice voting.
They protested by staying in, we got the worse option of the 2, more people are hurt than would have been under "the other guy", and we have nothing good to show for it.
People who don't want to vote didn't even show up to the polls to write in a common name. Disappointing.
if thatâs so then representing this as the troley problem is EXTRA poiniant.
the troley problem is a problem, because itâs answer is debated. with the whole argument being either utilitarian, or deontology.
you just validated everyone who didnât vote, good jorb there.
and as a utilitarian myself, i have to give you guys props on that self own. because you altered the trolly problem, the only valid options are deontology, or building the track away from the D. amazing jorb
No, you're totally right. Biden didn't author the Crime Bill and Clinton didn't pass it resulting in a huge increase in black incarceration. Obama and Biden didn't set records for deportations or destroy the most prosperous country in Africa. Obama didn't expand extrajudicial killings and drone strikes of civilians.
Y'all are gonna keep getting duped by the Good Cop / Bad Cop routine and keep getting mad when we point out that the Good Cop and the Bad Cop work for the same precinct and get the same pay checks and have the same goals but different methods for achieving it and that they work together to drive us toward the same outcomes.
Yeah, I mean, I don't think it'll be faster under either party. They are collaborating to stop you from correcting the system. You're literally doing the thing I said you shouldn't do. Don't trust the Good Cop. They aren't actually making your life easier, they aren't actually interest in your liberation. They are your enemy every bit as much as the Bad Cop is your enemy. They behave differently, and I don't disagree on that, but the behavioral difference is designed to make your tired and stressed brain latch on to them as a viable option. And you are falling for it.
The only option is dismantling the system. Both parties will be dissolved, and not in succession, because they literally depend on each other to exist. Why do you think they took over elections from the League of Women Voters with a bi-partisan non-profit? It's not because they were going to be an open and democratic operation. It's because they agreed to maintain the system together. And it's not like they hide it. Democrats cross the aisle and vote with Republicans CONSTANTLY. They dance with each other in various state houses. They done together. Their kids go to the same schools, they share accountants and baby sitters and chauffeurs and sex slave vendors and doctors. They are literally collaborative colleagues with a shared purpose and shared constituency.
Yes, do the bare minimum and vote. But stop wasting your time on it electoralism. Stop canvassing for candidates. Stop fund raising for them. Stop fighting with people who are not fooled by the Good Cop / Bad Cop routine. And for fucks sake stop falling for it.
LOL. If that's a precondition, it's doing exactly what's intended. If it's not a precondition, then focus on the dismantling and watch the Dems try to stop you just as hard as the Repubs.
No. You are confused. The US government is killing people in the streets right now. Every year the US government kills people in the streets in the hundreds. And the US government arms white supremacists and fails to prosecute them when they kill people. The entire media apparatus is equally complicit. Both parties run the government. Obama appointed the same guy to deport 3M people as Trump appointed in both terms. Biden chose to do literally nothing about de Joy running the USPS and openly declaring his intentions when he could have, but it wasn't politically easy especially because de Joy had bipartisan support.
You don't get it. The Republicans are LITERALLY in the public relations position to act the way they act and the Democrats are in the public relations position to act the way they act because psycho-socially it covers the largest range of the bell curve of public sentiment. They divide the work of public relations and then literally collaborate and support each other in managing the affairs of the state in a continuous process.
That's why Obama carried out the wars planned by Bush, and why Trump used the DHS and ICE powers created by Obama and why Obama bailed out the banks after they crashed the economy using the openings created by Clinton and why both parties have been steadfast in killing babies and pregnant mothers via sanctions and why both parties have zero interest in restoring the 350+ broken treaties with the indigenous of this land and why both parties continually increase military spending and continually preside over increasing white supremacist gun violence and police violence (but I repeat myself) and why both parties condemn anything that Bernie and AOC say that are mildly left.
I understand that the Republican PR strategy creates more of this violence than the Democrat PR strategy but the Democrats have never done anything about it because they understand their role in the collaborative system and it's not to defeat the Republicans.
Voting for the "lesser" evil has gotten you to a position where genocide isn't even on the ballot. Nor is climate change, queer rights, womens rights, rights for marginalised groups, less deportations, anti-war, less funding for police, less surveillance, less spending on military, or so many other things, on the ballot. It didn't use to be like this.
edit: oh wait you're serious. What a wild thing to say. Its not on the ballot, as I detailed in the comment before, both parties have taken them away already, and will not give them back. Voting for either gets you nothing.
The easy (legal, 2-step) way:
Step 1; Vote Democrat in such overwhelming numbers that the Republicans cease to exist.
Step 2; Vote to Left-leaning democrats in such numbers that the Fascist Zionist movement ceases to exist.
This will actually work. People need to register as democrats (gross, I know) and vote for progressives in the primaries. Make the democrats the party you want.
You don't shape the party, the party shapes you. All the "radical" DSA entryists that have won (AOC being the biggest example with her woke 1 comment) are slowly but surely moving rightwards.
You are right that there will be a reversion to the median for individual politicians, but parties definitely change. The republicans have been drifting right since Truman; the democrats can shift left. It will take sustained effort, but every progressive who wins a primary shifts the needle a little.
One caveat - we need to get corporate money out of politics. Like, completely. Corporations aren't people and their donations aren't free speech. There should also be an iron-clad cap on individual donations (no Musk-Rats dumping hundreds of millions on one party). Some countries have publicly-funded elections - a powerful bulwark against corruption.
Yes, it seems almost all politicians begin to "rot" once elected, but that's why they need regular pruning. New blood, new ideas, and energy for every cycle. It is exhausting but necessary.
I hate to tell you this, but Democrats are the palatable Nazis. It was a Democrat that started NATO with Nazi officers. It was a Democrat that saved 10k from Nuremberg. It was a Democrat that decided to kill a million Koreans, a million Vietnamese, to make Laos the most bombed country in the world, to destroy Libya (the most prosperous country in Africa). Democrats are Nazis with the mask on. Republicans are Nazis with the mask off. You think Pelosi doesn't know the Republicans are Nazis? But she's still gonna say we need a strong Republican party? You think Biden didn't know the Republicans are Nazis, but he didn't do anything to stop them or even slow them down? He had the fucking full Epstein Files. He chose to sit on them.
They're all fucking Nazis and they have been Nazis since the founding from Thomas Jefferson and George Washington to James Madison to FDR and Truman to Bush and Clinton to Biden and Trump. All Nazis, all genocidaires, all mass murderers, all racists, all responsible for millions dead.
If someone said "Hey, buddy! That guy has a knife and he's coming for you, jack! Ask me for help and I'll help you!" And then you ask him for help and he goes, "Well, that guy is just gonna on the outside of the park while I'm here" and you say "uh. But he still has a knife and he still wants to attack me and he'll come back as soon as you leave unless you use your power to stop him" an he goes "nah. He can keep the knife. I'll keep you safe while I'm here. After that, he can do whatever he wants as far as I'm concerned" would you consider that person a protector or an enabler? Because that's literally what Biden did. In fact. It's worse than that because Biden and Obama gave Trump the fucking knife in the first place. They expanded DHS and ICE. They created the policies that allowed mass deportations and domestic deployment of ICE in US cities. They fucking appointed Homan ffs.
Passage of legislation by milquetoast liberals, as in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that yielded resounding progress?
How about Liberal-appointed justices paving the way for Same Sex Marriage?
If Liberal governments crafting diplomatic agreements like JCPOA to avoid war, or joining international pacts to try to address climate change like the Paris Climate Agreement?
If both sides same why historically has only one side paved the way of progress, even if slowly?
To others reading this: just remember anyone asserting both sides are the same are Trump supporters, whether they realize it or not. It's no different than the 1 nazi at a table thing.
Civil rights legislation was passed because of riots in the streets, not voting. Black people had a maximum of 25% voter turnout and in most states it was 10% or less. And civil rights were advanced under both a Democrat and Republican administration. And when the Nixon administration came up with the idea of disenfranchising black people by criminalizing drug use and making it a felony, the Democrats are the ones who wrote and passed the laws. And they never stopped over criminalizing black folks. They were doing it right up to the Clinton administration. Overtly racist policing and incarceration. Because voting in Ds isn't actually what changed anything - forcing the issue in the streets is what changed it.
The Obama administration crafting the JCPOA was the equivalent of a stalling tactic. Obama had to focus on the drone wars, on Libya, and on the pivot to Asia. While the bipartisan consensus was to destroy Iran after Libya (as set in the strategy under Bush2), there wasn't an opportunity because China's rise created a pacing challenge that the US needed to meet and Obama had to send almost 70% of our naval assets into the Pacific.
No, liberal justices didn't pave the way for same-sex marriage. Rioters did. Nothing happened until Stonewall. Democrats were happy to throw queer folk under the bus, same as they do today, and watch them get murdered in the street. But when they actually fought back in NYC, that's when the pressure built and the establishment needed to react.
It's always been this way. Improvements happen when the oppressed fight back, outside the ballot box. The labor movement had to do it, women's Suffrage had to do it, civil rights had to do it, gay rights had to do it, Haiti had to do it, Russia had to do it, China had to do it, Cuba had to do it. It's the only thing the power structure responds to.
And that's been proven by research from Princeton by the way. Popular opinion has literally no statistical influence on legislation across 30 years of study, which spans both parties in multiple configurations.
Again all that is beside the point. You're noting the broader coalition pushed for this -- and yet -- the actual people for whom the broader coalition voted into power in Congress and successfully passed the legislation were, in fact milquetoast liberals who pulled the lever for the Civil Rights Act of 1964. If it was won in the streets, then why did the conservatives NOT vote for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 but the Liberals did... ? How curious.
Anything that stalls war and murder is good.
Yes, liberals definitely paved the way. The justices liberals appointed factually voted in support of same-sex marriage. All who supported Obergefell v. Hodges except Anthony Kennedy were appointed by Liberal Democrats, fun fact
Naturally, civics is important and expressing your 1A rights are very important! Movements are dynamic, no dispute there. But at the end of the day, all these movements in the USA had one thing in common that led to these milestones: They voted for the Liberal, who reformed the law.
I have my major grievances with the Democratic party, but they are irrefutably better and throughout history (when acting as the liberal coalition and not conservatives pre-Southern Strategy), have been the bringers of progress, slow though it may be.
That's why I am proudly voting Democrat all the way down my ballot for these midterm elections for Congressional control that are the very first chance to put brakes on the fascist Trump regime. In doing so, in this user's words, we can "stall" and slow down and give people a chance to respond!
Also, everyone check your upcoming No King's Protests!
"milquetoast liberals" who literally immediately set about working on how to undo the impact of civil rights legislation by launching the drug war, establishing the southern strategy and then triangulation, and then drove head first into racial mass incarceration?
Like, listen to what we're saying. You think it was voting in liberals that got the legislation passed. I think liberals happened to be in charge when the rioting strategy got strong enough to demand a response. My evidence? A D president and an R president both had to capitulate, and an R president and a D legislature both worked to build the next structure of criminalizing blackness together after passing civil rights legislation.
To me, that says the party doesn't matter at all because both parties operated in both sides of power system, giving concessions and setting up the next disenfranchisement fight because, fundamentally, they were collaborating the whole way and continue to do so.
The person you're replying to thinks that America should continue funding Israel's Iron Dome because children might get hurt there, just an FYI. He's a peak liberal.
I mean, they could've immediately set out to undo it by not voting, but clearly they did not?
There were Republicans in Congress. They didn't vote for it. What you're telling me is that when liberals are in Congress and in charge, they listen to protesters. Tell me, why hasn't Trump listened to protesters yet over a range of issues even though the No King's protests are larger than anything during Civil Rights?
Liberals > Conservatives. Just a fact.
NOVEMBER MIDTERMS ACTION STATIONS:
Vote Democrat all the way down ballot for these midterm elections for Congressional control that are the very first chance to put brakes on the fascist Trump regime. In doing so, in this user's words, we can "stall" and slow down and give people a chance to respond! In this user's words, they will actually be in power and listen to these protesters, unlike Republicans!
Check when and where your local No King's Protests will be!
Yes, I do. I care greatly about the 70+ year history of the US arming, training, and organizing terrorists around the world from NATO's Operation Gladio to the School of the Americas to the Mujahideen, to Al-Jolani, to Tibet and the ETIM. The US is the largest progenitor of major structural injustice in the world, having inherited the maintenance of the super majority of global structural injustices from the fading European colonial powers. Lest you forget, Vietnam was a French colony and the US got involved because the French were losing against the freedom fighters there.
I love that people think it's a genocide denial to say that there is literally no evidence of genocide in Xinjiang. The UN has never classified it as a genocide. The population is increasing. The average household income is increasing. Muslim observers from a dozen countries have been approved the situation.
Do you deny the genocide in Leeds is an actual genocide?
they went on to do a genocide denial below. Wonder how that happened.
They went on to explain their position, which is one of "all available evidence points there not being an ongoing genocide, and all accusations come from sources that have shown themselves to be untrustworthy and riddled with errors."
Should we take it seriously if I accuse you of being a dog-fucker? My sources are 6 anonymous people I say are close to you IRL, who say they've seen you be very happy to pet dogs.
Here's three writeups for you to ignore based on an Ad Hominem 123 I would also recommend you actually read the report as well as the, much more extensive, response to it. I would furthermore encourage you to look into who the main proponent of the accusations is - a german theologian named Adrian Zenz, who claims he is "on a mission from god" to "crush communism". I would look into his methodology.
Hey Godric, how come you don't try telling dems to actually be worth voting for instead of being an insufferable votescolding dickhead effectively telling strangers online that they should just put up with a marginally slower implementation of fascism? I mean, how did that work out for you last time?
This clown is a serial poster of shitty memes like this calling out leftists. His only excuse is usually âWell, well, weâll, tis the season for LeFtIsTs to tell people not to vote!!â
This guy has no real convictions other than leftists bad. Heâs a liberal dickrider through and through.
Your position is literally one of "dont be mad at the guy tying people to the tracks! Don't yell at him! And you have to support him!!!" yet you dare talk about others doing wrong.
Me, when the worst possible thing a politician can do is be fat, have a shitty haircut and wear a spraytan. At least, that's what it has to be, since there are no other distinct differences.
Regardless of strategic validity, I think "accept genocide X to postpone genocide Y" is just not a very hopeful message, and thus is not likely to encourage voter turnout or any political action
More importantly, when someone proves that they're willing to trade human lives for the sake of power, why wouldn't you assume they will make the same trade for yours? When someone tells you they're a snake, believe them.
Every politician does this because every cycle uses utilitarian choice. They try to support the greater good, and that will disenfranchise people/entire groups of people.
We're inching towards climate wars because of how we treat our planet. It'll only get worse unless we stop this.
Persuading people to vote 3rd party is just one piece of the puzzle. Some will vote 3rd, others stay home and some morons can be convinced to vote for the pedophile party. It adds up.
3rd parties are also convenient in sewing doubt in the D candidate. If you show people there's an obscure party that will offer world peace and free healthcare, D voters will be disappointed in their candidate, but the R voters don't even hear the message.
The US election system is complete garbage, but you have to play with the D or R rules.
The US election system is complete garbage, but you have to play with the D or R rules.
You don't have to at all. And the line of reasoning that makes someone vote for democrats despite their many many many issues, is a line of reasoning that logically concludes at voting third party.
Truly the fashos are the same as the entire establishment. Feel free to keep enabling the nazis while patting yourself on the back. The political system in the US practically does not allow for third parties, and even if you manage to replace one party with something better that doesn't solve the fundamental long term issue. Pushing for electoral reform one way or another does not mean you can't at least put in a meaningful vote against the fashos.
Why did the democratic party leadership tie the palestinians to the upper set of tracks? Sure seems like they have chosen not to do that? But since they knew they'd get a pass from voters like OP, and thought they could still win while taking those aipac bribes, they decided to cash those aipac checks, right? And they are STILL doing it, isnt that right?
People like u/godric (OP) like to pretend this trolley problem just arose out of nowhere, but it didnt did it. It was contrived to be this choice. Kind of like a hostage situation with the party's own voters-- voters who overwhelmingly do not support war crimes.
Not to mention all of those flags are also on the track of the democratic party. People like OP just don't care when it's their team doing it - Probably because it gets less play in the media.
Oh look another one posted by none other than GodricâŚ. What a sad excuse of a person. At least have some real stance other than âleftists bad and they are telling us not to vote!â
Oh, so you guys are just gonna start acting like the Democratic party isn't bigoted and evil? Is that really necessary to make the argument that the Republican party can't be in power? You're talking about the only real federal parties in the United States, the most destructive imperialist entity in human history.
When I see narratives like, "the Democratic party isn't going to kill queer people," I wonder if any of you even think of victims of US imperialism as people. Even within the metropole's borders, how many women have died because the Democratic Party used abortion as a vote hostage? How many disabled people have died because they refused to guarantee healthcare (social programs aren't the same, and do not establish the requirement of their own existence)?
These people are all imperialists, they're evil, and the system they benefit from has to end for any of us to be safe. You can just say "the Republican Party is too successful with overt bigotry go be legitimized," or, "we don't need voting to be moral for it to be an exercise of our power." You don't have to fucking say that a genocidal, capitalist, imperialist institution is somehow only bad to one group of people (which makes it evil anyway).
The Climate Accords were a pointless do-nothing treaty with nothing to make any country uphold its' obligations. Signing it or not meant nothing and means nothing. While being signatories the US under the democrats never even approached upholding the accords. After Biden got elected he handed out fracking contracts like nobodys' business, so it pretty clearly did not matter to him or the party. There is so far only one country slated to reach the goals set by the accords and you're going to cry foul at what country that is.
edit: You can downvote the comment all you want, it does not make it less true. The Climate Accords has no provisions to make signatories follow it, the US has never come close to begin to approaching the goals set by the accord, Biden did hand out a bunch of new fracking contracts, and there is only one country so far that is expected to hit the goals set by the accords. Have you actually read the Paris Agreement?
It also presumes the democrats automatically lose if people here don't vote for them, in which case... Shouldnt the democrats listen to the people here, if they wanted to win?
The democrats are also running over most of those others as well promising to outflank the republicans on cruelty to immigrants and imperialism and currently throwing trans people off the bus never mind you can of course derail the trolley.
You can't switch a car to inbuilt tracks. It must be built before it can be picked.
You have to act in the reality that exists, not wish for the reality you desire.
You keep building towards the good tracks when no car is coming, but when the car approaches you have a choice. You don't get to not make a choice. Deciding to not pull is a choice. Deciding to pull in a direction with no tracks is effectively the same choice.
People want the 3rd track for President only. I'm not seeing many 3rd tracks being built for any other government position. This argument gets brought up every 2 years and then disappears because it's easier to complain than to actually fix things. Right next to gerrymandering: the argument only exists right before elections, then it disappears.
"Don't vote, they're both the same! Vote for the obscure third party candidate, they pinky promised to fix everything just like you want it!"
Meanwhile, the US has a REPUBLICAN pedophile president whose worst act so far was to start a completely pointless war throwing the world into an economic crisis. He also dismantled the efforts of the previous DEMOCRAT president to advance green technology in the US. We still haven't seen the full implications of it all. But yeah, both are the same, corporations control everything, no point in voting yadda yadda.
It might be doing the Democrats a disservice, then, given that they may or may not have shifted towards opposing the genocide. (I couldn't find a conclusive result by searching for the answer)
A probably stupid idea I thought of is vote swapping (e.g. someone in a deep red state who wants their blue vote to matter and someone in a swing/blue state who wants to vote green without splitting their state's vote swapping who they vote for and both benefitting)
Instead of not voting, spoil your ballot. Reject this shit. Show that you want to vote and that none of the options presented are worth voting for.
Many of our fellow lemms just can't be bothered to do that. Can't vote our way crew has some points, but the fact they aren't willing to vote in primaries or spoil even means they are also not credible for higher level protests.
Can I get a smug lecture on how youâre choosing the third, disconnected track?
Can I get a smug lecture on how I have to vote for genocidal geriatrics in favor of a police state, fracking, migrant deportations, throwing queer people under the bus and siccing cops on peaceful protesters?
Don't worry im also not voting for republicans, and I'm not voting for republicans 10 times while I'm only not voting for democrats 5 times, so really im giving Democrats 5 whole votes! Youre welcome.
We can stop trying to convince vocal non-voters. They are 100% either trolls trying to eat productive time or completely irrational, pig headed imbeciles and attention whores, and lecturing at them - or otherwise engaging with them in any way - is a complete waste of time. Let them smug themselves in isolation.
We either save civilization going AROUND their obstructions, or it's not savable.
Interesting that the graphic includes trans folks, the demographic the very same Democrats that abandoned Palestinians are now rushing to throw under the bus. It turns out "lesser of two evils" is shit logic based on a myopic pretense that the current election is the only one that matters.
Here's the simple truth of it. No Democrat that will vote for genocide is going to protect any minority groups the moment it becomes politically inconvenient. No Democrat that will vote for genocide will actually save democracy either, as that requires passing a lot of unpopular laws.
The Democrats destroyed the last 3 primaries, or don't you remember? They didn't have a primary last season and they rat fucked Bernie before that. You're a fool if you think the Ds are going to let the masses of voters decide what happens via the primary system.
The only real political power small minority groups can wield is as a spoiler. You can never win elections on your own, but you can make it clear that if someone hurts your group badly enough, you'll vote so hard against them that your small numbers can make the difference in a close election. Look at how the Jewish community or the South Florida Cuban community have wielded their power so effectively. Or look at the Zionist lobby. They don't say, "blue no matter who" and support Democrats regardless of their stance on Israeli issues. They pick and choose who they support and give money to, and they pull it away from those that go against their will.
Primaries are no panacea. Consider the spreading terf infection within the Democratic party. A lot of centrist Dems have now moved on from supporting Palestinian genocide to getting on the "liquefy trans people" bandwagon. Your advice to trans people would be to vote for these transphobes in the general election and to then fight against them in the next primary.
But here's what that actually looks like. The first primary tells you nothing; snakes hide their colors. They wait to fly the terf flag until after the primary is over. You tell trans people, "blue no matter who, vote for the transphobic Democrat to keep the Republican from winning."
So they get elected. Then the next primary comes around. Now, however, the message changes. Now instead of "wait for the primary," the refrain becomes, "this primary challenge is irresponsible.! We shouldn't risk an incumbent seat in a purple district just for the sake of trans people!" In the meantime, the terf infection has spread and become more normalized.
In practice, there is simply never a "correct" time to challenge these people.
In practice, there is simply never a âcorrectâ time to challenge these people.
Judging by the people who talk about protest voting: it's right before the election, and then radio silence on the issue until right before the next election.
They'll spend more time opening a GoFundMe for themselves than trying to change the political landscape in any way that will work.
You're right, if I vote for the party running on the "We will deport more people than Trump! We have given out SO many fracking contracts! We LOVE BOMBING BROWN PEOPLE! WE LOVE GIVING MONEY TO COPS!!"-platform, then I'm sure they'll start turning left any day now. After all it's what I've been doing since Carter and it hasn't worked so far, so it has to be close!
It's not like me normalising this hellscape by constantly voting for insane fascists could actually be harmful in any way. Oh well, there's literally nothing else to do, I can't vote for a third party, I can't organise outside of getting people to vote for fascists, I can't wipe my own ass, it's really too bad.
I mean, I tried voting for Bernie in the primaries, but they fucked him over, so that didn't work. I tried doing some political volunteering for a local progressive, but the DNC decided to throw a bunch of funding behind some insane TERF freak, who then went on to lose the election. Pretty weird, honestly. I tried to organize within my union, but Joe Biden broke it up. I tried striking, but he broke that up too. I tried protesting and then the cops showed up and beat the shit out of me. Well, I guess I better vote for the democrats again.
You are using the logic the Bolsheviks used to overthrow their Tsar to liberal democracy. The less resolute Bolsheviks didnât have a choice to make policy change using less aggressive methods. On top of that you are assuming with the new methods of suppression/surveillance/weapons that a forceful revolution is even possible. And while making the point that it is unethical to support a genocide letting fascists take control in the hopes of ML revolution and the gays/trans/immigrants that die along the way are a necessary evil.
Itâs the first things you learn about ML: Dialectical Materialism activism & strife is defined by the material conditions of the populace, if you forget to alter your assumptions by what differ between Anton in 1903 and Jo in Arkansas 2026 then youâre still playing with history books.
Antonâs only method to participate in a democratic process was to join a union.
In many cases, there are the same exact things on the top track too, because the consultants told the democrats that if they tie them too to the tracks, people will pull the lever for them. For every Californian not pulling the lever, there will be 4-5 hillbillies from the deep south doing so.
𤣠Writing in the GOP candidate's name is the same as filling in their box. I guess when you write it in you get to act like you're better than everyone else though and that's what really matters. I love how all your comments are about how good you think your farts smell lol
i love how all your comments are calling people you disagree with russian, between the xenophobia and reading issues you have more in common with republicans than you care to admit
Oh man. Trans people, gay people, Mexicans, women, black people, and Pakistanis(???) are all getting murdered by the hundreds of thousands and their children are getting their limbs blown off by the military? Fuck me.
It's insanely fucking embarrassing how you portray the Palestinian struggle on the same level as what queer people are experiencing. No wonder you're a Democrat. When did you stop supporting Graham Platner?
You heard it here! Queer people's problems DO NOT matter because Palestinians have it worse. This 12 day old .ml account supports the GOP. That's a fact
The problem is if someone is willing to support genocide, it's not actually possible to perform a fair "lesser of two evils" analysis. There's literally nothing worse than genocide. If you're willing to support that for power, there's nothing you won't support, no promise you won't go back on, no group of constituents you won't betray. How many trans people voted for AIPAC democrats on the "lesser of two evils" approach, just to watch those same assholes turn around and start talking about "keeping men out of women's sports" the moment it became politically popular?
In order to judge the lesser evil, you need to actually be able to judge the beliefs of a candidate. But these people don't actually believe in anything. They don't really support anything. They're just chasing polls and donor dollars to win power. You can't perform a lesser of evils analysis against a shapeshifter.
Good thing you can vote on this. You can vote for anyone who does not support the genocide, of which there are several parties.
I would do the primary thing, if it weren't for the fact anyone who is mildly leftist gets fucked over by the DNC, almost like there is some sort of class collaboration going on.
By the way, do you maybe think that by letting democrats get away with genocide, they'll expand their genocide? Kind of seems like that's what's happening since, by letting them get away with everything else, they've expanded all the horros.
The same AIPAC Democrats are now turning in droves against trans people. It's almost like if you're willing to throw one group of your supporters under the bus, then you'll be willing to it again.
"How could the betrayer have betrayed me?! He promised me he would only betray the other people!"
"weird how when October draws nigh i will see many more pumpkins than I usually do! This must be the work of those dastardly russians!"
You're talking more about politics, so youre getting more of those responses. Politics is in the zeitgeist, so its what most people are talking more than usually about. Weird!!
Did the lgbt+ and Latinos got most of their home destroyed, are they experienced human made famine by destroying most of their agricultural fields , do they get them kids shots and bombed? Do they get literally raped by the American army? They are facing injustice and discrimination but don't dare act like they are getting genocide like Palestinians.
Yes I've seen this newly established talking point. Doesn't actually work or mean anything. Allowing Donald Trump to increase the suffering of many peoples was factually a bad thing to have done. Trying to distract from it won't work at all.
Facts are not talking points. If you think bullshit terms like talking point would shut down discussion you are dead wrong. It the same type of bullshit terms as the term work republicans use . You are ok with the extermination of Palestinians while you pretending that LGBTIQ and Latinos are getting exterminated. Your lesser of evil bullshit is the reason you got trump
Yes and whatever other lies that don't make sense you can come up with. All the bullshit. It's all my religion. I believe all the evil things. Now, let's not talk about the fact that people like you put trump in power and hurt Gazans more than any Democrat ever could.
I am thankful not to be a tankie. I often wish I wasn't American, but it's not because I have an indefensible ideology that awards itself undeserved moral purity. I know my country is fucked up. You don't know you are.
I clicked your profile and here is what I see: 250 comments, all made very recently. Every comment I read was anti Democrat. Your account was made on January 6 of this year.
Yeah it is just total bullshit that you are a purpose-driven propagandist. What a winner. /s How much does the Kremlin pay for this? Cannot be much so you must really be devoid of skills to take this job.
My recent comments defended progressive Democrats and hassan piker who support them, that's so anti democrats of me. My profile is full of anti genocide comments unlike scums like you who is ok when tour cult does it.
I have comments that are anti Russia too. I oppose all genocides and all wars of agressions while you are ok when your cult does it.
You are a scum with zero morality. Just fuck off with your bullshit
I'm sure they didn't pay you different to create "evidence" that you're a "real person writing real opinions". This sudden explosion of anti-democrat activity cannot be whitewashed though, sorry.
You are a scum with zero morality. Just fuck off with your bullshit
You use Gazans as a prop and could not care less about them. You're using them to try to keep Republicans in power. What a fuckin hero /s
You try to distract from this obvious fact by calling me a genocide supporter but it doesn't work. You are campaigning for extra Palestinian suffering at the hands of Republicans while I don't engage on that topic because I don't have to allow you to control what I say or think about. I don't have to address a weird lie that doesn't make sense. You think you don't have to address the obvious facts about your account activity because you can just distract from it. But your every action speaks volumes.
I constantly condemn attacks on ukranians and Gazans, I constantly condemn trump actions. You can't talk about any victims except when I defend your stupid cult. The only person weaponizing people suffering is you scum. Go lick your kamala pussy
No, I think youre snarking me and you sound like an idiot. There is no way I can take you seriously and youre only hurting what ever cause your pretending to fight for so I hope you rot in hell for it.
322 Comments
Hegar@fedia.io · 129 pts · 2d
I did my duty, i held my nose and voted for the lesser of two evils.
But there's no sensible reason to blame genocide opposing progressives instead of the genocide supporting DNC who stubbornly refused to advance policies their own base wanted.
The DNC decided to risk democracy in order to save a genocide - possibly the single most irresponsible decision in the 21st century. Blame them, they deserve it.
boonhet@sopuli.xyz · 64 pts · 2d
Multiple groups can be blamed. The DNC deserves more blame than anyone who refused to vote, but all the people saying "if you vote for Kamala, you love genocide" deserve some blame too, because anyone with a brain knew that a lot more people were going to get hurt under Trump.
Wonder who they'll run in 2028. If there's an election in 2028.
itsjustachairmary@lemmy.world · 24 pts · 2d
I wake up every day not supporting a genocide. I wonder what's so hard about it for the DNC. Boy do they love killing.
boonhet@sopuli.xyz · 34 pts · 2d
It's the Zionists and their money. Conspiracy theorists were right all along unfortunately, with Israel doing everything possible to validate them.
But in an election once the candidates are locked between
"We'll give money to the Israelis and they'll kill Palestinians"
and
"We'll give money to the Israelis and they'll kill Palestinians, but also we want to get rid of Latinos and LGBTQ people, also poor people should lose the little healthcare they do have and hey there's probably more bullshit we're gonna pull, but some of it's so stupid we haven't even thought of it yet"
I can't see how anyone with a brain would not vote against #2.
Donald Trump won completely legitimately and in addition to the 77.3 million Trump voters, there are about 90 million other eligible voters to blame for the kidnapping of Maduro, the war in Iran, the stupid ass tariffs, and so many other things. That's what they all were willing to accept.
BassTurd@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 2d
I love reading all of the replies to your comment that illustrate this sentence so clearly.
dreamy@lemmy.ml · -1 pts · 2d
đ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GoCUdL8vLPo
SwingingTheLamp@piefed.zip · -7 pts · 2d
Because you've been around long enough to have been in this situation before. Voting #1 is at best a stop-gap measure. Option #1 doesn't do anything to fix the underlying problem, and in fact, the next time around, #2 is way worse. (As is #1.) And this pattern keeps repeating. It doesn't matter which you choose, you'll end up with #2, just a bit later. (We've reached the stage at which genocide support is the lesser evil, fer chrissakes.)
As an analogy, the situation we have with the two parties is like a choice faced by person with Type 2 diabetes: Fall into a hypoglycemic coma right now and maybe die, or consume sugar by the spoonful. The second option is the correct choice, obviously. But next time around, it's the same choice, and again after that. This person can choose the lesser evil every time, but it still leads to death.
So, painful and unlikely at it may be, some voters are thinking beyond the immediate moment and want to at least try to avoid the death of democracy.
NotASharkInAManSuit@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 2d
So, no matter what, we are just inevitably fucked regardless of what we do, so letâs just hammer on the gas harder to let fascism win and destroy everything and get it over with? Do you not see how that is just authoritarian absolutism?
What kind of rollover defeatist cuck shit is this? Your stance is theologically conservative accelerationism, point blank.
isleepinahammock@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 3 pts · 2d
That's a bad faith interpretation.
Parties are coalitions that change over time. The neoliberal wing of the Democratic party has been ascendant since the Clinton years. But they are declining now. And the sole reason is that their brand is proving incapable of actually winning elections. If a party keeps winning, the people running the party maintain credibility and business as usual just keeps trucking along. Parties can only undergo fundamental change after losing a few cycles. It took the 3 losses of the Reagan and Bush Sr. years before something like Clinton's triangulation strategy had any hope of winning support among the Democratic party.
NotASharkInAManSuit@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 2d
Iâm still struggling to not read that as accelerationism. How is that not accelerationism?
baines@lemmy.cafe · 7 pts · 2d
at this point iâd take stop-gap
this all gas no brakes into collapse is so much worse than milquetoast corpo democrat
SwingingTheLamp@piefed.zip · -2 pts · 2d
Indeed, but there's never a good time for collapse. It wouldn't be any more enjoyable in 2030, if it were happening then instead.
NotASharkInAManSuit@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 2d
Youâre literally just vomiting accelerationist rhetoric.
baines@lemmy.cafe · 0 pts · 2d
i mean it can happen in 2080
rumimevlevi@sh.itjust.works · -9 pts · 2d
You still supported the extermination of a whole population that are currently getting exterminated. Despite the oppression of the groups you are mentioning none are facing eminent extermination with mass murder and starvation and the destruction of the majority . No wonder the rest of the non western world hate you american scums
kestrel7_7@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 2d
Anyone with a brain knew the Dems were gonna lose supporting genocide. Even Trump met with the Palestinian imams the Harris campaign snubbed. Even Trump said there had to be a ceasefire. Sure, he was lying, but Biden & Harris wouldnât even do that?
It would have been a lot cooler if she hadnât thrown the election in a highly predictable manner.
NotASharkInAManSuit@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2d
So, youâre mad the dems had a level of transparency on their politics and didnât lie straight to iur faces saying they wouldnât do something they were obviously going to do?
Thatâs fucking stupid, you see that, right? If youâre going to dight that fight, at least do it better, is all Iâm asking, because youâre being a dumbass about it. Youâre hitting yourself.
frisbird@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 2d
No, you're missing the fucking point. You JUST SAID that the Dems couldn't take those positions because they would lose BUT THE REPUBS TOOK THOSE POSITIONS AND FUCKING WON SO YOU'RE FUCKING WRONG
NotASharkInAManSuit@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 1d
Getting emotional is usually a good seen you feel confident in what youâre saying. I believe you. Youâre so right.
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 5 pts · 1d
Ad hominem + wowww youre so cool not getting emotional about genocide, really cool guy, wowwww, I'm going to vote for democrats and buy a Tesla now.
DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 1d
The elections are not a one time event. Yes, more people may suffer for 4 years, but if it builds momentum for an actually good 3rd party or at least reforming the DNC, it could have been worth it. But stupidly painting anyone who wants something better then just a Democrat win as an enemy that supports Trump ensures it can't happen. It's not that there are no rails to the third track. It's that people like the author of the meme actively rips them out with the "voting 3rd party is a waste of vote" bullshit. If you ask me, voting for more politically correct genocide is a waste of vote. If you are choosing for the lesser of two genocides, you are alredy fucked either way.
No excuse for people who don't vote at all tho.
forkDestroyer@infosec.pub · 0 pts · 1d
Tell that to all the families of kids that died because of the DOGE cuts.
We're going to hear people saying "it was a good strategy though - shame it didn't work out" while they're on voter lines being patrolled by armed guard, just like in Russia. Even if elections are for show, "both sides" people will not admit they were wrong.
Voting for a 3rd party is a waste of a vote until that 3rd party has representatives in lower forms of government. The only bipartisan support we'll see during a 3rd party term is when both parties work together to undermine the 3rd party President. It's magical thinking to believe a 3rd party President will get anything accomplished without lower representation.
DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 1d
Take your strawman argument somewhere else. I never said or implied I was talking only about the presidential elections. You can vote for 3rd party president, sentaor, and congressman in the same election. Also for state and local 3rd party candidates.
And of course the DOGE fearmongering. Oh no, we can't vote for change because of DOGE cuts! Sure, countless poeple are dying because of lack of healthcare, pollution, homlessness, ... But we can't try to do anything about that, because we will die of DOGE cuts! /s
forkDestroyer@infosec.pub · -2 pts · 1d
Be upset that I'm reminding you of the failures brought on by protest and 3rd party voters. The vast majority do nothing between elections except post online about it.
DOGE and Iran wouldn't have happened if Kamala was elected. Think of that every time you're at the pump looking at those higher prices, if you're old enough to drive.
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 5 pts · 1d
The democrats lost because they ran a dogshit candidate and refused to change course from any of their many unpopular fantasies, yet you freaks insist they're absolved of all guilt. The party cannot fail, it can only be failed.
DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 1d
People have been electing democrats on and off for over a century. Yet it changed nothing. But sure, 3rd party voting is the thing that can't succeed. Doing the same thing again and again hoping for a different outcome is clearly the smarter thing to do.
But sure, if we just accept genocide and vote for it, at least the gas will be cheaper. Sure. Why not.
forkDestroyer@infosec.pub · 0 pts · 1d
Wrong, and there's literally decades of legislation that you can review to see for yourself.
Go vote for 3rd party local government officials. If you want a 3rd party to be viable, this is the way.
dreamy@lemmy.ml · -19 pts · 2d
Under the Biden/Harris leadership, Israel bombed every single school and hospital in Gaza and put in action the most brutal phase of the genocide, while whitewashing it all at the same time with their help. Tell us about it dipshit, how would less people get hurt under Harris? I would love to hear it.
OwOarchist@pawb.social · 20 pts · 2d
A lot of people in Iran wouldn't get hurt.
Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works · 20 pts · 2d
And fewer people would be brutalized by ICE
kreskin@lemmy.world · -11 pts · 2d
You're actually wrong about that. Obama deported way more than trump. 3 million over 8 years, where trump deported 1.2 million over 4. Thomas Homan at ICE created the policy to separate children from their parents at the border. He was an Obama appointee and Obama gave him an award for distinguished service. He gave that award after Homan proposed family separations.
Biden deported 4.5 million. Trump has deported 675k in his first year. He'll have a hard time catching up to Obama or Biden.
I'm not defending republicans here, they are awful. But pretending things would be better under this cabal of democratic party leadership is just complete BS that you like to pretend its true. Its not true. Thats part of why Dem voters are mad at the dem leaders.
While we're on the subject, Dems killed more Palestinians than Republicans did.
Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works · 8 pts · 2d
You're making an extremely dishonest comparison by lumping all deportation together.
Border deportations are mostly a function of arrivals. Someone comes in, and gets denied. When they're walking back across the border, that's a deportation. You can make a LOT of laws, but you're not likely to influence that much.
Interior deportation is what people are bothered by. Obama shifted to deporting illegals with criminal records. Trump is just grabbing people off the street, regardless of what they did, and often regardless of status.
Then there's the fact that Trump has made it intentionally hard to track data. Under Obama and Biden the data was clear and available, and for trump's 2nd run, everything is being covered up and no data is available anymore. So it's mostly guesswork.
Walk_blesseD@lemmy.blahaj.zone · -1 pts · 2d
This is cope. The current dem leadership is totally on board with the war in Iran, and if the current administration hadn't started it, Israel would almost certainly have dragged a hypothetical Harris administration into one anyway.
OwOarchist@pawb.social · 3 pts · 2d
Maybe, maybe not. We can never know whether she would have done that.
arrow74@lemmy.zip · 4 pts · 2d
I highly doubt Harris would have got involved in a prolonged war. Maybe a strike to satisfy Israel, but honestly I find that hard to believe too.
Oh well in a few months we all will be hurting from the oil shortages regardless
Walk_blesseD@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 3 pts · 2d
Well, that's exactly what you did when you stated it as fact that she wouldn't've hurt as many people in Iran đ¤ˇââď¸
rumimevlevi@sh.itjust.works · -4 pts · 2d
The several decade of American sanctions are killing more then the bombs during this war. Iran is going to get stronger once the evil american empire surrender
OwOarchist@pawb.social · 1 pts · 2d
So ... you're saying going to war against Iran is a good thing?
rumimevlevi@sh.itjust.works · -2 pts · 2d
There was a third option do not go to war with Iran and lift all sanctions on them
catsarebadpeople@sh.itjust.works · 6 pts · 2d
12 day old .ml account rooting for Republicans to win. So unoriginal
dreamy@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 1d
Still waiting for a response... đ
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 1d
Ad hominem, so unoriginal
fluffykittycat@slrpnk.net · 32 pts · 2d
Their job was to defend the white empire's intrests. Democracy was never a value of theirs
Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -3 pts · 2d
Thus the trolly
Tolookah@discuss.tchncs.de · 2 pts · 2d
I'd say it's the party in power is actually doing it.
frisbird@lemmy.ml · -1 pts · 2d
Well then you don't understand how American politics works. It's the entirety of the US government. It's laws put in place by Democrats that Trump is using. And it's not like the Ds aren't crossing the aisle every other week to vote with Rs on some heinous shit. And it's not like the Ds ever pulled back on military expansion, or expansion of ICE and DHS, or domestic surveillance.
impairedimperator@lemmy.zip · 0 pts · 2d
Add some realpolitik:
The GOP largely controls the messaging, due to owning the majority of media, as well as being more likely to have degrees in communications and sales, while Democratic candidates tend to have degrees in hard sciences.
The very moment the DNC did anything to hinder the genocide, every news stations would have a picture of local and national Democratic candidates with photoshopped Hitler mustaches.
neidu4@piefed.social · 46 pts · 2d
The ones wanting a different track better vote in the primaries then, instead of just complaining about the party as a whole after the ticket is settled.
13igTyme@piefed.social · 14 pts · 2d
Way too many people in the fediverse don't even know what the primaries are.
Sirius006@sh.itjust.works · 12 pts · 2d
It's red, yellow, and blue. We all learned it at school.
isleepinahammock@lemmy.blahaj.zone · -1 pts · 2d
Most people saying "just vote in the primaries!" don't know what primaries are.
forkDestroyer@infosec.pub · 1 pts · 1d
Lots of states won't let you vote in primaries unless you declare a party. We should start the messaging there. Declare a party, if only temporary, to vote for who you think is best during the first go around. Treat it as first past the post.
frisbird@lemmy.ml · -2 pts · 2d
LOL. Lucy already pulled that football TWICE. The first time they rat fucked Bernie. The second time they didn't even have primaries. You have got to be fucking insane to be saying "voting in primaries is our chance for change". Are you fucking daft?
arrow74@lemmy.zip · 9 pts · 2d
Almost like the presidential primary isn't the only primary. The rise of the DSA is showing what primaries can do. And listen I'm not saying they're perfect and will fix everything, but their a whole hell of a lot better than the options we've had.
Also don't misunderstand you are right about Bernie and well the whole not having a presidential primary, but there's no reason you can't try to use the tools available within the system to marginally improve the circumstances of the working class AND pursue more radical action. You can do both
frisbird@lemmy.ml · -1 pts · 2d
Yeah, you can. But you can also just focus on the thing that has always worked and will always work which is interest convergence. We must make politicians suffer for going the wrong way and benefit from going the right way. Civil Rights was passed by a bi-partisan coalition because they knew if they didn't things would get much much worse for them, not at the ballot box, on the street. Women got suffrage without voting. Labor had to fight literal paramilitary combat to get us weekends. That's how it works. Sure, vote. But don't waste so much time on it and certainly don't waste time trying to convince people to vote or convince people that "blue no matter who" is moral or that "sign up to be a Democrat, add your name to their roster and then vote in their convoluted and rat fucked primary system". Let people vote their conscience and focus on raising their consciousness.
arrow74@lemmy.zip · 4 pts · 2d
Voting takes like an hour every 2 years, it's really not that hard. And yes on election day some areas have very long lines, but everywhere has some form of mail ballot and/or early voting.
It's so easy there's no reason not to go do it. I've spent more time switching a license at the DMV than voting has ever taken.
Also not a single one of those movements existed in a political vacuum. The threat of violence did exist, but so did the threat of politicians losing their positions. Honestly outside of the labor movements/skirmishes everything else you listed existed well within election politics. The movements were absolutely necessary to effect change, but not an either/or situation by any measure. Both was necessary
masta_chief@sh.itjust.works · 45 pts · 1d
Oh my God we need ranked choice voting, it should be a top priority but I never hear it even mentioned. It fixes so many issues and obliterates the 2 party system. But we just canât have nice things.
Triasha@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 1d
Alaska has ranked choice voting. But the viable independent is in Nebraska and the dsa candidates are in new York, Colorado, and Michigan. Minnesota has had farmer-labor candidates since ever, but if you don't live in Minnesotta, we just call them democrats.
We do need ranked choice voting. But it will not destroy the two party system.
yakko@feddit.uk · 6 pts · 1d
STAR voting might, or an approval vote. I used to stan AV, but I think STAR is better.
diaphragmwp@discuss.tchncs.de · 10 pts · 1d
The current two parties in your amazing country don't want it, therefore it will never happen
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 3 pts · 1d
https://fairvote.org/our-reforms/ranked-choice-voting/endorsers/
What % of them do you think are Republicans? I think they put one the only ones right there at the top to make it seem more bipartisan than it is.
The reality is that one party is far more united and steadfast against ranked choice, and it's the party that would lose power because of it.
sad_detective_man@sopuli.xyz · 4 pts · 1d
Keep pushing on that, bub and we'll just get rid of voting đ
vzqq@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 33 pts · 2d
I love how Americans live in this world where not supporting the ongoing Israeli genocide against the Palestinian civilian population is somehow a radical fantasy.
Reminder, the D guy has that guy tied to the tracks because apparently thatâs where he thinks he should be. There has been plenty of time to get him out of the way, but the party is like ânah, leave him there. Itâs better that wayâ.
Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -7 pts · 2d
Its a logic test. Not a creative problem solving tool.
Aqarius@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 2d
The trolley problem is, emphatically, not a logic test.
Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -3 pts · 2d
Its a thought experiment meant to elucidate or test an argument or theory
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 0 pts · 1d
No, it's a philosophical dilemma used to talk about ethics. It's completely terrible as a tool for what you're proposing, since all it does is create a strawman like the one OP has made.
Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -1 pts · 1d
... its defined as a thought experiment and I was the one saying it wasnt a tool.
W/e youre protesting too much.
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 1d
You were the one saying it was a logic test. You then went on to call it
Which would make it a rhetorical tool, wether you want to call it that or not.
Which is why I pointed out you're wrong.
I think I'm gonna have to use this one whenever someone disagrees with me. What a copout.
Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -1 pts · 1d
schrodinger's cat, thats a rhetorical tool?
Youre not even disagreeing with me youre just protesting.
terminatortwo@piefed.social · 28 pts · 2d
Growing up on the Mexican side of the border, that Mexican flag should be the other way. The âfriendly democratsâ would often say things to me like: âIf we donât let Mexicans in, whoâs going to pick the fruit / clean the house / make good breakfast burritosâ gee thanks
My general experience has been that the average centrist Democrat sees immigrants as âgood cheap laborâ, not people.
unimalion@sh.itjust.works · 15 pts · 2d
While it is true that centrist democrats don't really see other ethnicites as people speaking broadly, they'll still view an individual immigrant as a person.
When I go over to a democrats home they can be ignorant about what's happening with migrants, but there no doubt in mind I'll get to leave safely.
I celebrated thanksgiving with one of my friend's family that is conservative, and there was a part of me that wondered if I would get to leave alive. It's as if they were trying to rage bait me by saying the most heinous shit while brandishing guns and holding their holster when I turned to speak. Another time, I was with my partner's family and her brother who's a manager of a grocery store was complaining that he wished he could ban all non English speakers from coming into the store.
Both are not the best, but I can speak freely with democrats whereas a conservative may blow my head off if I say something they disagree with.
terminatortwo@piefed.social · 4 pts · 1d
Oh yeah, thereâs a huge gulf between the two. Both are pretty shitty, but one is cartoon villain shitty.
It frustrates me that the US doesnât have an off ramp out of this. They really need that third option (or fourth or fifth), but thereâs no realistic way to get to it electorally in a timeframe that matters.
luciferofastora@feddit.org · 1 pts · 1d
Maybe something like "the top one only ties one arm across the tracks"? Like, you're getting fucked, but not quite as badly?
They really need an electoral system that makes a third or fourth or fifth option viable, like proportional representation or ranked choice of some kind. But..
I suspect that timeframe may be decades. You'd have to educate enough people who aren't yet dug into " this is how we've always done it" about the problems of the system, convince them of a better alternative and, macabre as it may sound, wait for the old and stubborn "I don't want to learn anything new" to die off.
itsjustachairmary@lemmy.world · 21 pts · 2d
Dems have supported ICE for decades and still do
A ton of Dems are actively throwing trans people under the bus, joining Republicans in voting for Apartheid toilet bills and shit
Dems have also wholeheartedly supported the War on Terror that killed and displaced millions of people and have barred muslims from conventions even last year simply for being muslims
Obama had more deportations than any other presidents and this was touted as a dunk on Trump. Obama also introduced the cages. For children.
Their 'support' for BLM was also completely performative. When it came to actual action, BLM protests were violently crushed, organizers criminalized or killed, police budgets skyrocketed and nothing fundamentally changed
Remember the ratchet system. Republicans make things worse. Dems make sure they never get better.
Y'all got an extremely shitty choice to make. Republicans need to be ousted. And expect better from these motherfuckers that call themselves Democrats too.
fluffykittycat@slrpnk.net · 10 pts · 2d
I prefer to call it the War of Terror, since it's basically Americans enacting revenge for 9/11 on random Muslims
TheOctonaut@piefed.zip · 1 pts · 1d
Oh OK, easy choice then?
gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 21 pts · 1d
The truth of the matter, as it's often the way, it's there's nuances
subverted_per@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 5 pts · 1d
This is the way. As a voter it often feels like your vote doesnt matter. But the thing is focus on local elections. Vote in every election your allowed. Especially those off season elections have low turnout, and your vote matters much more. This is how you get demsoc candidates into positions of influence who can work their way up.
The republican party is full on fasc. No matter where you are dont vote for them. Make the red states have to cheat so obviously that the courts have to get involved. Swing states vote blue, but if you were voting in the local elections, and primaries theres a good chance your blue candidate isnt a centrist. If your in a solid blue state vote for the third party to show the centrist dems that you dont want a centrist, and that their hold is precarious. If youre lucky to have a leftist candidate on the ballot in a blue state vote for them.
This is the best way to tell the party how to win. They will ignore you, and they will fight you. But if their base votes hard left consistently they have to listen, or they lose to leftists.
unknownuserunknownlocation@kbin.earth · 21 pts · 2d
Holy shit, the number of people ITT where the message went right over their fucking head. Yes, OP, you got your smug lecture, as you prophesied. It's insane how it doesn't fit into people's heads that you can work on getting better candidates/better positions/more sense into the DNC without indirectly supporting a full on fascist in the meantime.
uberfreeza@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 2d
What? Are you telling me it's not just us vs. them? There's nuance? Maybe even spectrums instead of binary choices? Get out of here with that nonsense. /s
kolmaskommentoija@sopuli.xyz · 20 pts · 1d
There is always the secret option!
bhamlin@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 1d
DEJA VU
WraithGear@lemmy.world · 20 pts · 1d
seems to me that actively sabotaging any effort into making a connection to the third track so that no one has to die is a REAL ass hole move.
forkDestroyer@infosec.pub · 8 pts · 1d
We can try to do 2 things at once, but you can't deny that all those people that chose not to vote "in protest" during the last presidential election didn't seem to do a THING towards supporting a 3rd party or setting up ranked choice voting.
They protested by staying in, we got the worse option of the 2, more people are hurt than would have been under "the other guy", and we have nothing good to show for it.
People who don't want to vote didn't even show up to the polls to write in a common name. Disappointing.
Simon_Shitewood@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 1d
Maybe if you used you political system as intended instead of just telling people they've got to vote they'd engage more.
WraithGear@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 1d
if thatâs so then representing this as the troley problem is EXTRA poiniant.
the troley problem is a problem, because itâs answer is debated. with the whole argument being either utilitarian, or deontology.
you just validated everyone who didnât vote, good jorb there.
and as a utilitarian myself, i have to give you guys props on that self own. because you altered the trolly problem, the only valid options are deontology, or building the track away from the D. amazing jorb
gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 4 pts · 1d
Cool, but we live in reality, I love your ideas, but this is the real world
WraithGear@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 1d
the REAL world has the election far enough out that preemptive adoption of a genocide is an unnecessary evil.
the REAL world has the D also with the same heads on the rail as R.
the REAL world has idiots posting this as a trolley problem, thus validating everyone who didnât vote.
the REAL world has people using propaganda like this, whoâs REAL goal is the continuation of genocide.
gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone · -9 pts · 1d
Sounds like you're a conspiracy nutter to me
frisbird@lemmy.ml · 19 pts · 2d
No, you're totally right. Biden didn't author the Crime Bill and Clinton didn't pass it resulting in a huge increase in black incarceration. Obama and Biden didn't set records for deportations or destroy the most prosperous country in Africa. Obama didn't expand extrajudicial killings and drone strikes of civilians.
Y'all are gonna keep getting duped by the Good Cop / Bad Cop routine and keep getting mad when we point out that the Good Cop and the Bad Cop work for the same precinct and get the same pay checks and have the same goals but different methods for achieving it and that they work together to drive us toward the same outcomes.
nexguy@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 2d
You are saying they are the same "same precinct"/"same pay checks"
They are not the same.
frisbird@lemmy.ml · 8 pts · 2d
Yeah, I mean, I don't think it'll be faster under either party. They are collaborating to stop you from correcting the system. You're literally doing the thing I said you shouldn't do. Don't trust the Good Cop. They aren't actually making your life easier, they aren't actually interest in your liberation. They are your enemy every bit as much as the Bad Cop is your enemy. They behave differently, and I don't disagree on that, but the behavioral difference is designed to make your tired and stressed brain latch on to them as a viable option. And you are falling for it.
The only option is dismantling the system. Both parties will be dissolved, and not in succession, because they literally depend on each other to exist. Why do you think they took over elections from the League of Women Voters with a bi-partisan non-profit? It's not because they were going to be an open and democratic operation. It's because they agreed to maintain the system together. And it's not like they hide it. Democrats cross the aisle and vote with Republicans CONSTANTLY. They dance with each other in various state houses. They done together. Their kids go to the same schools, they share accountants and baby sitters and chauffeurs and sex slave vendors and doctors. They are literally collaborative colleagues with a shared purpose and shared constituency.
Yes, do the bare minimum and vote. But stop wasting your time on it electoralism. Stop canvassing for candidates. Stop fund raising for them. Stop fighting with people who are not fooled by the Good Cop / Bad Cop routine. And for fucks sake stop falling for it.
nexguy@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 2d
Yes, dismantle the system....but dismantle it with dems in charge.
frisbird@lemmy.ml · 7 pts · 2d
LOL. If that's a precondition, it's doing exactly what's intended. If it's not a precondition, then focus on the dismantling and watch the Dems try to stop you just as hard as the Repubs.
nexguy@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 2d
So vote for republicans if that's the better of the two options? The cannot be EXACTLY the same. One is killing people in the streets right now.
frisbird@lemmy.ml · 6 pts · 2d
No. You are confused. The US government is killing people in the streets right now. Every year the US government kills people in the streets in the hundreds. And the US government arms white supremacists and fails to prosecute them when they kill people. The entire media apparatus is equally complicit. Both parties run the government. Obama appointed the same guy to deport 3M people as Trump appointed in both terms. Biden chose to do literally nothing about de Joy running the USPS and openly declaring his intentions when he could have, but it wasn't politically easy especially because de Joy had bipartisan support.
You don't get it. The Republicans are LITERALLY in the public relations position to act the way they act and the Democrats are in the public relations position to act the way they act because psycho-socially it covers the largest range of the bell curve of public sentiment. They divide the work of public relations and then literally collaborate and support each other in managing the affairs of the state in a continuous process.
That's why Obama carried out the wars planned by Bush, and why Trump used the DHS and ICE powers created by Obama and why Obama bailed out the banks after they crashed the economy using the openings created by Clinton and why both parties have been steadfast in killing babies and pregnant mothers via sanctions and why both parties have zero interest in restoring the 350+ broken treaties with the indigenous of this land and why both parties continually increase military spending and continually preside over increasing white supremacist gun violence and police violence (but I repeat myself) and why both parties condemn anything that Bernie and AOC say that are mildly left.
I understand that the Republican PR strategy creates more of this violence than the Democrat PR strategy but the Democrats have never done anything about it because they understand their role in the collaborative system and it's not to defeat the Republicans.
nexguy@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 2d
So they are EXACTLY the same?
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · -1 pts · 1d
The other was killing people in the streets.
fluffykittycat@slrpnk.net · 6 pts · 2d
They aren't the same. One play offence, the other plays defense. They're both on the same team
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 1d
Voting for the "lesser" evil has gotten you to a position where genocide isn't even on the ballot. Nor is climate change, queer rights, womens rights, rights for marginalised groups, less deportations, anti-war, less funding for police, less surveillance, less spending on military, or so many other things, on the ballot. It didn't use to be like this.
nexguy@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1d
Don't forget basic human rights and democracy are now on the ballot.
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 1d
Primo bit
edit: oh wait you're serious. What a wild thing to say. Its not on the ballot, as I detailed in the comment before, both parties have taken them away already, and will not give them back. Voting for either gets you nothing.
FreshParsnip@lemmy.ca · 7 pts · 2d
What's the solution?
Salvo@aussie.zone · 26 pts · 2d
The easy (legal, 2-step) way: Step 1; Vote Democrat in such overwhelming numbers that the Republicans cease to exist. Step 2; Vote to Left-leaning democrats in such numbers that the Fascist Zionist movement ceases to exist.
The other way: Eat the rich.
lemmy_outta_here@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 2d
This will actually work. People need to register as democrats (gross, I know) and vote for progressives in the primaries. Make the democrats the party you want.
The other way will also work.
dreamy@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 2d
You don't shape the party, the party shapes you. All the "radical" DSA entryists that have won (AOC being the biggest example with her woke 1 comment) are slowly but surely moving rightwards.
lemmy_outta_here@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1d
You are right that there will be a reversion to the median for individual politicians, but parties definitely change. The republicans have been drifting right since Truman; the democrats can shift left. It will take sustained effort, but every progressive who wins a primary shifts the needle a little.
One caveat - we need to get corporate money out of politics. Like, completely. Corporations aren't people and their donations aren't free speech. There should also be an iron-clad cap on individual donations (no Musk-Rats dumping hundreds of millions on one party). Some countries have publicly-funded elections - a powerful bulwark against corruption.
mrbeano@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 2d
Yes, it seems almost all politicians begin to "rot" once elected, but that's why they need regular pruning. New blood, new ideas, and energy for every cycle. It is exhausting but necessary.
frisbird@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 2d
I am definitely going to kick that football this time
dreamy@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 2d
I've never seen this happen with the leftist parties elected in my country. Feels more like a Democratic Party issue.
AmyAye@nord.pub · 2 pts · 2d
Yes but I want an instant solution yesterday so I will instead not vote so that Nazis can take over
Now what?
/s
frisbird@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 2d
I hate to tell you this, but Democrats are the palatable Nazis. It was a Democrat that started NATO with Nazi officers. It was a Democrat that saved 10k from Nuremberg. It was a Democrat that decided to kill a million Koreans, a million Vietnamese, to make Laos the most bombed country in the world, to destroy Libya (the most prosperous country in Africa). Democrats are Nazis with the mask on. Republicans are Nazis with the mask off. You think Pelosi doesn't know the Republicans are Nazis? But she's still gonna say we need a strong Republican party? You think Biden didn't know the Republicans are Nazis, but he didn't do anything to stop them or even slow them down? He had the fucking full Epstein Files. He chose to sit on them.
They're all fucking Nazis and they have been Nazis since the founding from Thomas Jefferson and George Washington to James Madison to FDR and Truman to Bush and Clinton to Biden and Trump. All Nazis, all genocidaires, all mass murderers, all racists, all responsible for millions dead.
frisbird@lemmy.ml · 8 pts · 2d
How has any major structural injustice in any society ever get solved?
Denjin@feddit.uk · 14 pts · 2d
Complaining on the Internet?
frisbird@lemmy.ml · 6 pts · 2d
Incorrect
Denjin@feddit.uk · 7 pts · 2d
I disagree
catsarebadpeople@sh.itjust.works · -1 pts · 2d
Is it supporting Republicans and then continuing to blame Democrats for what Republicans are doing? Cuz that's your strategy!
frisbird@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 2d
If someone said "Hey, buddy! That guy has a knife and he's coming for you, jack! Ask me for help and I'll help you!" And then you ask him for help and he goes, "Well, that guy is just gonna on the outside of the park while I'm here" and you say "uh. But he still has a knife and he still wants to attack me and he'll come back as soon as you leave unless you use your power to stop him" an he goes "nah. He can keep the knife. I'll keep you safe while I'm here. After that, he can do whatever he wants as far as I'm concerned" would you consider that person a protector or an enabler? Because that's literally what Biden did. In fact. It's worse than that because Biden and Obama gave Trump the fucking knife in the first place. They expanded DHS and ICE. They created the policies that allowed mass deportations and domestic deployment of ICE in US cities. They fucking appointed Homan ffs.
lennybird@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 2d
Passage of legislation by milquetoast liberals, as in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that yielded resounding progress?
How about Liberal-appointed justices paving the way for Same Sex Marriage?
If Liberal governments crafting diplomatic agreements like JCPOA to avoid war, or joining international pacts to try to address climate change like the Paris Climate Agreement?
If both sides same why historically has only one side paved the way of progress, even if slowly?
To others reading this: just remember anyone asserting both sides are the same are Trump supporters, whether they realize it or not. It's no different than the 1 nazi at a table thing.
frisbird@lemmy.ml · 9 pts · 2d
Civil rights legislation was passed because of riots in the streets, not voting. Black people had a maximum of 25% voter turnout and in most states it was 10% or less. And civil rights were advanced under both a Democrat and Republican administration. And when the Nixon administration came up with the idea of disenfranchising black people by criminalizing drug use and making it a felony, the Democrats are the ones who wrote and passed the laws. And they never stopped over criminalizing black folks. They were doing it right up to the Clinton administration. Overtly racist policing and incarceration. Because voting in Ds isn't actually what changed anything - forcing the issue in the streets is what changed it.
The Obama administration crafting the JCPOA was the equivalent of a stalling tactic. Obama had to focus on the drone wars, on Libya, and on the pivot to Asia. While the bipartisan consensus was to destroy Iran after Libya (as set in the strategy under Bush2), there wasn't an opportunity because China's rise created a pacing challenge that the US needed to meet and Obama had to send almost 70% of our naval assets into the Pacific.
No, liberal justices didn't pave the way for same-sex marriage. Rioters did. Nothing happened until Stonewall. Democrats were happy to throw queer folk under the bus, same as they do today, and watch them get murdered in the street. But when they actually fought back in NYC, that's when the pressure built and the establishment needed to react.
It's always been this way. Improvements happen when the oppressed fight back, outside the ballot box. The labor movement had to do it, women's Suffrage had to do it, civil rights had to do it, gay rights had to do it, Haiti had to do it, Russia had to do it, China had to do it, Cuba had to do it. It's the only thing the power structure responds to.
And that's been proven by research from Princeton by the way. Popular opinion has literally no statistical influence on legislation across 30 years of study, which spans both parties in multiple configurations.
lennybird@lemmy.world · -3 pts · 2d
Again all that is beside the point. You're noting the broader coalition pushed for this -- and yet -- the actual people for whom the broader coalition voted into power in Congress and successfully passed the legislation were, in fact milquetoast liberals who pulled the lever for the Civil Rights Act of 1964. If it was won in the streets, then why did the conservatives NOT vote for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 but the Liberals did... ? How curious.
Anything that stalls war and murder is good.
Yes, liberals definitely paved the way. The justices liberals appointed factually voted in support of same-sex marriage. All who supported Obergefell v. Hodges except Anthony Kennedy were appointed by Liberal Democrats, fun fact
Naturally, civics is important and expressing your 1A rights are very important! Movements are dynamic, no dispute there. But at the end of the day, all these movements in the USA had one thing in common that led to these milestones: They voted for the Liberal, who reformed the law.
I have my major grievances with the Democratic party, but they are irrefutably better and throughout history (when acting as the liberal coalition and not conservatives pre-Southern Strategy), have been the bringers of progress, slow though it may be.
That's why I am proudly voting Democrat all the way down my ballot for these midterm elections for Congressional control that are the very first chance to put brakes on the fascist Trump regime. In doing so, in this user's words, we can "stall" and slow down and give people a chance to respond!
Also, everyone check your upcoming No King's Protests!
frisbird@lemmy.ml · 8 pts · 2d
"milquetoast liberals" who literally immediately set about working on how to undo the impact of civil rights legislation by launching the drug war, establishing the southern strategy and then triangulation, and then drove head first into racial mass incarceration?
Like, listen to what we're saying. You think it was voting in liberals that got the legislation passed. I think liberals happened to be in charge when the rioting strategy got strong enough to demand a response. My evidence? A D president and an R president both had to capitulate, and an R president and a D legislature both worked to build the next structure of criminalizing blackness together after passing civil rights legislation.
To me, that says the party doesn't matter at all because both parties operated in both sides of power system, giving concessions and setting up the next disenfranchisement fight because, fundamentally, they were collaborating the whole way and continue to do so.
dreamy@lemmy.ml · 6 pts · 2d
The person you're replying to thinks that America should continue funding Israel's Iron Dome because children might get hurt there, just an FYI. He's a peak liberal.
lennybird@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 2d
I mean, they could've immediately set out to undo it by not voting, but clearly they did not?
There were Republicans in Congress. They didn't vote for it. What you're telling me is that when liberals are in Congress and in charge, they listen to protesters. Tell me, why hasn't Trump listened to protesters yet over a range of issues even though the No King's protests are larger than anything during Civil Rights?
Liberals > Conservatives. Just a fact.
NOVEMBER MIDTERMS ACTION STATIONS:
Vote Democrat all the way down ballot for these midterm elections for Congressional control that are the very first chance to put brakes on the fascist Trump regime. In doing so, in this user's words, we can "stall" and slow down and give people a chance to respond! In this user's words, they will actually be in power and listen to these protesters, unlike Republicans!
Check when and where your local No King's Protests will be!
TheTechnician27@lemmy.world · -4 pts · 2d
And clearly you particularly care about major structural injustice.
frisbird@lemmy.ml · 6 pts · 2d
Yes, I do. I care greatly about the 70+ year history of the US arming, training, and organizing terrorists around the world from NATO's Operation Gladio to the School of the Americas to the Mujahideen, to Al-Jolani, to Tibet and the ETIM. The US is the largest progenitor of major structural injustice in the world, having inherited the maintenance of the super majority of global structural injustices from the fading European colonial powers. Lest you forget, Vietnam was a French colony and the US got involved because the French were losing against the freedom fighters there.
TheTechnician27@lemmy.world · -4 pts · 2d
That's a lot for what amounts to "I want to sweep China's systematic abuse of the Uyghurs under the rug."
Edit: Oops, they went on to do a genocide denial below. Wonder how that happened.
frisbird@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 2d
frisbird@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 2d
I love that people think it's a genocide denial to say that there is literally no evidence of genocide in Xinjiang. The UN has never classified it as a genocide. The population is increasing. The average household income is increasing. Muslim observers from a dozen countries have been approved the situation.
Do you deny the genocide in Leeds is an actual genocide?
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 1d
They went on to explain their position, which is one of "all available evidence points there not being an ongoing genocide, and all accusations come from sources that have shown themselves to be untrustworthy and riddled with errors."
Should we take it seriously if I accuse you of being a dog-fucker? My sources are 6 anonymous people I say are close to you IRL, who say they've seen you be very happy to pet dogs.
Here's three writeups for you to ignore based on an Ad Hominem 1 2 3 I would also recommend you actually read the report as well as the, much more extensive, response to it. I would furthermore encourage you to look into who the main proponent of the accusations is - a german theologian named Adrian Zenz, who claims he is "on a mission from god" to "crush communism". I would look into his methodology.
JeSuisUnHombre@lemmy.zip · 18 pts · 2d
How do you make this and not realize how dehumanizing it is to Palestinians?
rumimevlevi@sh.itjust.works · 11 pts · 2d
They are aware they simply don't care about palestnians getting exterminated
fluffykittycat@slrpnk.net · 9 pts · 2d
Or trans people, or everyone else tied to both tracks
frisbird@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 2d
Or black people or immigrants or Libyans or Haitians, or ffs Iranians
Walk_blesseD@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 15 pts · 2d
Hey Godric, how come you don't try telling dems to actually be worth voting for instead of being an insufferable votescolding dickhead effectively telling strangers online that they should just put up with a marginally slower implementation of fascism? I mean, how did that work out for you last time?
Space_Cowboy92@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 2d
This clown is a serial poster of shitty memes like this calling out leftists. His only excuse is usually âWell, well, weâll, tis the season for LeFtIsTs to tell people not to vote!!â
This guy has no real convictions other than leftists bad. Heâs a liberal dickrider through and through.
dreamy@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 2d
"L-lesser evil đĽş"
hobovision@lemmy.zip · 0 pts · 1d
"the guy tying innocents to the track didn't listen to me, but I yelled from my safe track about it so I can pretend I'm not in the trolley problem"
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 1d
Your position is literally one of "dont be mad at the guy tying people to the tracks! Don't yell at him! And you have to support him!!!" yet you dare talk about others doing wrong.
TrickDacy@lemmy.world · -5 pts · 2d
You wouldn't have written this if you weren't planning to vote against the far lesser evil. Good info to have.
Walk_blesseD@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 5 pts · 2d
No, actually, I'm not planning to vote for them, because I don't live in the US. Fuck.
forkDestroyer@infosec.pub · -3 pts · 1d
Hope you're voting for the right candidates in your country, then. This isn't just a US program.
Which country are you in, out of curiosity?
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 1d
Youre literally on an instance called "infosec" and youre still dumb enough to ask people for personal information? Alright.
frisbird@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 2d
Another scold
TrickDacy@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 1d
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 6 pts · 1d
TIL: Tankie is when you oppose genocide
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 1d
Me, when the worst possible thing a politician can do is be fat, have a shitty haircut and wear a spraytan. At least, that's what it has to be, since there are no other distinct differences.
TrickDacy@lemmy.world · -3 pts · 1d
Aggressively lying doesn't change anything. Blocking you does.
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 1d
Yet you choose to do both. Dont let me stop you from censoring yourself.
bequirtle@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 2d
Regardless of strategic validity, I think "accept genocide X to postpone genocide Y" is just not a very hopeful message, and thus is not likely to encourage voter turnout or any political action
isleepinahammock@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 10 pts · 2d
More importantly, when someone proves that they're willing to trade human lives for the sake of power, why wouldn't you assume they will make the same trade for yours? When someone tells you they're a snake, believe them.
forkDestroyer@infosec.pub · 0 pts · 1d
Every politician does this because every cycle uses utilitarian choice. They try to support the greater good, and that will disenfranchise people/entire groups of people.
We're inching towards climate wars because of how we treat our planet. It'll only get worse unless we stop this.
StinkySocialist@lemmy.ml · 14 pts · 2d
There weren't even enough third party votes in total that could have swayed the election for Kamala.
Why are you wasting energy punching left?
Grow up
tyo_ukko@sopuli.xyz · 10 pts · 1d
Persuading people to vote 3rd party is just one piece of the puzzle. Some will vote 3rd, others stay home and some morons can be convinced to vote for the pedophile party. It adds up.
3rd parties are also convenient in sewing doubt in the D candidate. If you show people there's an obscure party that will offer world peace and free healthcare, D voters will be disappointed in their candidate, but the R voters don't even hear the message.
The US election system is complete garbage, but you have to play with the D or R rules.
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 1d
You don't have to at all. And the line of reasoning that makes someone vote for democrats despite their many many many issues, is a line of reasoning that logically concludes at voting third party.
tyo_ukko@sopuli.xyz · 6 pts · 1d
All right, a third Trump term it is!
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · -5 pts · 1d
It would be functionally similar to a democrat, so yes, in essence your line of reasoning leads to a third trump term no matter what.
LwL@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 1d
Truly the fashos are the same as the entire establishment. Feel free to keep enabling the nazis while patting yourself on the back. The political system in the US practically does not allow for third parties, and even if you manage to replace one party with something better that doesn't solve the fundamental long term issue. Pushing for electoral reform one way or another does not mean you can't at least put in a meaningful vote against the fashos.
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · -3 pts · 1d
Sorry, I just said I won't vote for democrats
tyo_ukko@sopuli.xyz · 4 pts · 1d
So you'll get either your 3rd party candidate (you won't), or Trump's third. Hard to see why you'd want that, but I guess we all have our reasons.
kreskin@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 2d
Why did the democratic party leadership tie the palestinians to the upper set of tracks? Sure seems like they have chosen not to do that? But since they knew they'd get a pass from voters like OP, and thought they could still win while taking those aipac bribes, they decided to cash those aipac checks, right? And they are STILL doing it, isnt that right?
People like u/godric (OP) like to pretend this trolley problem just arose out of nowhere, but it didnt did it. It was contrived to be this choice. Kind of like a hostage situation with the party's own voters-- voters who overwhelmingly do not support war crimes.
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 5 pts · 1d
Not to mention all of those flags are also on the track of the democratic party. People like OP just don't care when it's their team doing it - Probably because it gets less play in the media.
Space_Cowboy92@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 2d
Oh look another one posted by none other than GodricâŚ. What a sad excuse of a person. At least have some real stance other than âleftists bad and they are telling us not to vote!â
Which we arenât saying btw.
Mrkawfee@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 1d
The Progressive Except Palestine line.
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 14 pts · 1d
And deportations, police state, climate, womens' rights, queer rights, militarism, warmongering, and so on...
orioler25@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 1d
Oh, so you guys are just gonna start acting like the Democratic party isn't bigoted and evil? Is that really necessary to make the argument that the Republican party can't be in power? You're talking about the only real federal parties in the United States, the most destructive imperialist entity in human history.
When I see narratives like, "the Democratic party isn't going to kill queer people," I wonder if any of you even think of victims of US imperialism as people. Even within the metropole's borders, how many women have died because the Democratic Party used abortion as a vote hostage? How many disabled people have died because they refused to guarantee healthcare (social programs aren't the same, and do not establish the requirement of their own existence)?
These people are all imperialists, they're evil, and the system they benefit from has to end for any of us to be safe. You can just say "the Republican Party is too successful with overt bigotry go be legitimized," or, "we don't need voting to be moral for it to be an exercise of our power." You don't have to fucking say that a genocidal, capitalist, imperialist institution is somehow only bad to one group of people (which makes it evil anyway).
baltakatei@sopuli.xyz · 10 pts · 2d
Farther up the tracks, long ago already crossed, lie the remains of every single flag tied to the Paris Climate Accords.
Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 2d
And a voter who didnt pull a lever.
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · -1 pts · 1d
The Climate Accords were a pointless do-nothing treaty with nothing to make any country uphold its' obligations. Signing it or not meant nothing and means nothing. While being signatories the US under the democrats never even approached upholding the accords. After Biden got elected he handed out fracking contracts like nobodys' business, so it pretty clearly did not matter to him or the party. There is so far only one country slated to reach the goals set by the accords and you're going to cry foul at what country that is.
edit: You can downvote the comment all you want, it does not make it less true. The Climate Accords has no provisions to make signatories follow it, the US has never come close to begin to approaching the goals set by the accord, Biden did hand out a bunch of new fracking contracts, and there is only one country so far that is expected to hit the goals set by the accords. Have you actually read the Paris Agreement?
Aqarius@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 2d
I repeat myself: none if you morons bringing up the trolley problem understand what the trolley problem is.
sad_detective_man@sopuli.xyz · 8 pts · 2d
But it's the only framework where I'm a hero and nothing is my fault. We can't just move on!
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 7 pts · 1d
It also presumes the democrats automatically lose if people here don't vote for them, in which case... Shouldnt the democrats listen to the people here, if they wanted to win?
forkDestroyer@infosec.pub · 3 pts · 1d
You only said that once though. Checkmate.
agentant@lemmy.ml · 9 pts · 2d
Yall know there are other means of political action that resigning yourself to picking which criminal the aristocracy lets you to vote for right?
OwOarchist@pawb.social · 18 pts · 2d
Voting doesn't impede your ability to do those other means of action.
hobovision@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 1d
Do both.
fluffykittycat@slrpnk.net · 9 pts · 2d
There's too few groups tied to the Democrat's track, this meme is inaccurate
theuniqueone@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 8 pts · 2d
The democrats are also running over most of those others as well promising to outflank the republicans on cruelty to immigrants and imperialism and currently throwing trans people off the bus never mind you can of course derail the trolley.
Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 2d
If people don't choose the third track, it will never be finished getting built. And clearly having only 2 tracks isn't working.
Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 9 pts · 2d
Build the track....
hobovision@lemmy.zip · 2 pts · 1d
You can't switch a car to inbuilt tracks. It must be built before it can be picked.
You have to act in the reality that exists, not wish for the reality you desire.
You keep building towards the good tracks when no car is coming, but when the car approaches you have a choice. You don't get to not make a choice. Deciding to not pull is a choice. Deciding to pull in a direction with no tracks is effectively the same choice.
forkDestroyer@infosec.pub · -2 pts · 1d
People want the 3rd track for President only. I'm not seeing many 3rd tracks being built for any other government position. This argument gets brought up every 2 years and then disappears because it's easier to complain than to actually fix things. Right next to gerrymandering: the argument only exists right before elections, then it disappears.
pachrist@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 1d
What do you call a Nazi collaborator?
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 1d
Quisling is the typical term, i would argue for "democrat" but they're Nazis too, so not so much collaborator about them.
MousePotatoDoesStuff@piefed.social · 7 pts · 2d
So, the primaries didn't go well? Or hopefully you're just reusing the meme from last time?
Godric@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2d
This is a 2 year old meme, yep! It's funny how the same pattern of "both sides" peddled bullshit pops up right before an election.
tyo_ukko@sopuli.xyz · 8 pts · 1d
"Don't vote, they're both the same! Vote for the obscure third party candidate, they pinky promised to fix everything just like you want it!"
Meanwhile, the US has a REPUBLICAN pedophile president whose worst act so far was to start a completely pointless war throwing the world into an economic crisis. He also dismantled the efforts of the previous DEMOCRAT president to advance green technology in the US. We still haven't seen the full implications of it all. But yeah, both are the same, corporations control everything, no point in voting yadda yadda.
MousePotatoDoesStuff@piefed.social · 2 pts · 1d
It might be doing the Democrats a disservice, then, given that they may or may not have shifted towards opposing the genocide. (I couldn't find a conclusive result by searching for the answer)
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 6 pts · 1d
The only thing Democrats did was conclude they had to get more racist, as they do after every election wether they win or lose
Diva@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 1d
They did not
njm1314@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 2d
Yeah you can very easily add a few more of them bottom row victim to that top row too. Don't be lying now.
HerbGrower@slrpnk.net · 6 pts · 2d
If there isn't a party I can tolerate in the next UK election I will draw a giant knob on the ballot paper in disrespect of the shit options.
Instead of not voting, spoil your ballot. Reject this shit. Show that you want to vote and that none of the options presented are worth voting for.
MousePotatoDoesStuff@piefed.social · 3 pts · 2d
Or vote third party? Is that an option? (Likely unviable, yes, but if they're wasting their votes already, might as well compost them)
HerbGrower@slrpnk.net · 2 pts · 1d
That is what I normally do but they don't always run everywhere
MousePotatoDoesStuff@piefed.social · 2 pts · 1d
A probably stupid idea I thought of is vote swapping (e.g. someone in a deep red state who wants their blue vote to matter and someone in a swing/blue state who wants to vote green without splitting their state's vote swapping who they vote for and both benefitting)
InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 2d
Many of our fellow lemms just can't be bothered to do that. Can't vote our way crew has some points, but the fact they aren't willing to vote in primaries or spoil even means they are also not credible for higher level protests.
rumimevlevi@sh.itjust.works · 6 pts · 2d
You are in the trolley supporting genocide the mother of all crimes
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 5 pts · 1d
Can I get a smug lecture on how I have to vote for genocidal geriatrics in favor of a police state, fracking, migrant deportations, throwing queer people under the bus and siccing cops on peaceful protesters?
Don't worry im also not voting for republicans, and I'm not voting for republicans 10 times while I'm only not voting for democrats 5 times, so really im giving Democrats 5 whole votes! Youre welcome.
mycodesucks@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 2d
We can stop trying to convince vocal non-voters. They are 100% either trolls trying to eat productive time or completely irrational, pig headed imbeciles and attention whores, and lecturing at them - or otherwise engaging with them in any way - is a complete waste of time. Let them smug themselves in isolation.
We either save civilization going AROUND their obstructions, or it's not savable.
InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 2d
Its not about them. Its about lurkers who are reading and might accept their faulty logic.
isleepinahammock@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 8 pts · 2d
Interesting that the graphic includes trans folks, the demographic the very same Democrats that abandoned Palestinians are now rushing to throw under the bus. It turns out "lesser of two evils" is shit logic based on a myopic pretense that the current election is the only one that matters.
Here's the simple truth of it. No Democrat that will vote for genocide is going to protect any minority groups the moment it becomes politically inconvenient. No Democrat that will vote for genocide will actually save democracy either, as that requires passing a lot of unpopular laws.
InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2d
Abstaining isn't going to help either. We need to vote in primaries. Blue no matter who is a last resort.
frisbird@lemmy.ml · 6 pts · 2d
The Democrats destroyed the last 3 primaries, or don't you remember? They didn't have a primary last season and they rat fucked Bernie before that. You're a fool if you think the Ds are going to let the masses of voters decide what happens via the primary system.
InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 1d
Ohh no there's going to be opposition?!?!
/s
isleepinahammock@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 6 pts · 2d
The only real political power small minority groups can wield is as a spoiler. You can never win elections on your own, but you can make it clear that if someone hurts your group badly enough, you'll vote so hard against them that your small numbers can make the difference in a close election. Look at how the Jewish community or the South Florida Cuban community have wielded their power so effectively. Or look at the Zionist lobby. They don't say, "blue no matter who" and support Democrats regardless of their stance on Israeli issues. They pick and choose who they support and give money to, and they pull it away from those that go against their will.
Primaries are no panacea. Consider the spreading terf infection within the Democratic party. A lot of centrist Dems have now moved on from supporting Palestinian genocide to getting on the "liquefy trans people" bandwagon. Your advice to trans people would be to vote for these transphobes in the general election and to then fight against them in the next primary.
But here's what that actually looks like. The first primary tells you nothing; snakes hide their colors. They wait to fly the terf flag until after the primary is over. You tell trans people, "blue no matter who, vote for the transphobic Democrat to keep the Republican from winning."
So they get elected. Then the next primary comes around. Now, however, the message changes. Now instead of "wait for the primary," the refrain becomes, "this primary challenge is irresponsible.! We shouldn't risk an incumbent seat in a purple district just for the sake of trans people!" In the meantime, the terf infection has spread and become more normalized.
In practice, there is simply never a "correct" time to challenge these people.
forkDestroyer@infosec.pub · -1 pts · 1d
Judging by the people who talk about protest voting: it's right before the election, and then radio silence on the issue until right before the next election.
They'll spend more time opening a GoFundMe for themselves than trying to change the political landscape in any way that will work.
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 1d
If a tree fell in the forest, but you weren't paying attention, did it still fall?
This is weirdly specific. Do you have a cool leftist ex?
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 5 pts · 1d
You're right, if I vote for the party running on the "We will deport more people than Trump! We have given out SO many fracking contracts! We LOVE BOMBING BROWN PEOPLE! WE LOVE GIVING MONEY TO COPS!!"-platform, then I'm sure they'll start turning left any day now. After all it's what I've been doing since Carter and it hasn't worked so far, so it has to be close!
It's not like me normalising this hellscape by constantly voting for insane fascists could actually be harmful in any way. Oh well, there's literally nothing else to do, I can't vote for a third party, I can't organise outside of getting people to vote for fascists, I can't wipe my own ass, it's really too bad.
I mean, I tried voting for Bernie in the primaries, but they fucked him over, so that didn't work. I tried doing some political volunteering for a local progressive, but the DNC decided to throw a bunch of funding behind some insane TERF freak, who then went on to lose the election. Pretty weird, honestly. I tried to organize within my union, but Joe Biden broke it up. I tried striking, but he broke that up too. I tried protesting and then the cops showed up and beat the shit out of me. Well, I guess I better vote for the democrats again.
InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1d
You should at least do that.
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 1d
Oh wow now the woketariat is coming for my ass??? Woke 1 is crazyyy
frisbird@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 2d
The only chance any of us have of saving civilization is dismantling the USA.
DegradationDenial@feddit.nl · -3 pts · 1d
You are using the logic the Bolsheviks used to overthrow their Tsar to liberal democracy. The less resolute Bolsheviks didnât have a choice to make policy change using less aggressive methods. On top of that you are assuming with the new methods of suppression/surveillance/weapons that a forceful revolution is even possible. And while making the point that it is unethical to support a genocide letting fascists take control in the hopes of ML revolution and the gays/trans/immigrants that die along the way are a necessary evil.
Itâs the first things you learn about ML: Dialectical Materialism activism & strife is defined by the material conditions of the populace, if you forget to alter your assumptions by what differ between Anton in 1903 and Jo in Arkansas 2026 then youâre still playing with history books.
Antonâs only method to participate in a democratic process was to join a union.
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 1d
How many Wikipedia articles did you skim in order to spit out this absolute half-assed drivel?
DegradationDenial@feddit.nl · -2 pts · 1d
How many Yandex Tokens did GazProm spend to generate that?
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 1d
What?
zbyte64@awful.systems · 3 pts · 2d
I would try, but it wouldn't be as smug as this meme.
ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1d
Issue is the following:
In many cases, there are the same exact things on the top track too, because the consultants told the democrats that if they tie them too to the tracks, people will pull the lever for them. For every Californian not pulling the lever, there will be 4-5 hillbillies from the deep south doing so.
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 1d
In actuality the only difference would be the color on the tracks.
Screamium@lemmy.world · -4 pts · 1d
Completely false bad faith take. Hello Russian troll
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 8 pts · 1d
Everyone Who Disagrees With Me Is A Foreigner and other racist conspiracies for the liberal mind
Diva@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 2d
it actually rules not voting for zionists. im writing in someone else for my rep as well as all the unopposed races
catsarebadpeople@sh.itjust.works · -6 pts · 2d
𤣠Writing in the GOP candidate's name is the same as filling in their box. I guess when you write it in you get to act like you're better than everyone else though and that's what really matters. I love how all your comments are about how good you think your farts smell lol
Diva@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 1d
i love how all your comments are calling people you disagree with russian, between the xenophobia and reading issues you have more in common with republicans than you care to admit
Walk_blesseD@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 3 pts · 2d
"rep" means "representative," not "Republican," you troglodyte.
catsarebadpeople@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 1d
Woosh
cinoreus@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2d
CombatWombat@feddit.online · 1 pts · 2d
LittleBorat3@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 1d
Yes but if all the people I don't like also get overrun then I am happier!
Hooray let's all go the KZ together All the libs fault of course hihi
LittleBorat3@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 1d
Plus "we're not stupid, you just don't get it lol"
deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz · 0 pts · 2d
Corporate wants you to find the difference between these two tracks.
They're the same track.
dreamy@lemmy.ml · -2 pts · 2d
Oh man. Trans people, gay people, Mexicans, women, black people, and Pakistanis(???) are all getting murdered by the hundreds of thousands and their children are getting their limbs blown off by the military? Fuck me.
It's insanely fucking embarrassing how you portray the Palestinian struggle on the same level as what queer people are experiencing. No wonder you're a Democrat. When did you stop supporting Graham Platner?
catsarebadpeople@sh.itjust.works · -1 pts · 2d
You heard it here! Queer people's problems DO NOT matter because Palestinians have it worse. This 12 day old .ml account supports the GOP. That's a fact
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 1d
"Genocide is okay as long as it's not happening to meeee" - You
dreamy@lemmy.ml · 0 pts · 1d
Good thing I didn't say anything like that.
rumimevlevi@sh.itjust.works · -4 pts · 2d
thank you for proving you don't mind the extermination of Palestinians
chiliedogg@lemmy.world · 23 pts · 2d
If an issue isn't on the ballot you can't vote on it.
Vote for your perfect ideals in the primaries. Vote for the better of the 2 options in the general.
isleepinahammock@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 4 pts · 2d
The problem is if someone is willing to support genocide, it's not actually possible to perform a fair "lesser of two evils" analysis. There's literally nothing worse than genocide. If you're willing to support that for power, there's nothing you won't support, no promise you won't go back on, no group of constituents you won't betray. How many trans people voted for AIPAC democrats on the "lesser of two evils" approach, just to watch those same assholes turn around and start talking about "keeping men out of women's sports" the moment it became politically popular?
In order to judge the lesser evil, you need to actually be able to judge the beliefs of a candidate. But these people don't actually believe in anything. They don't really support anything. They're just chasing polls and donor dollars to win power. You can't perform a lesser of evils analysis against a shapeshifter.
TrickDacy@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 1d
So why are you okay with it happening rather than trying to actually lessen it?
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 1d
Good thing you can vote on this. You can vote for anyone who does not support the genocide, of which there are several parties.
I would do the primary thing, if it weren't for the fact anyone who is mildly leftist gets fucked over by the DNC, almost like there is some sort of class collaboration going on.
By the way, do you maybe think that by letting democrats get away with genocide, they'll expand their genocide? Kind of seems like that's what's happening since, by letting them get away with everything else, they've expanded all the horros.
rumimevlevi@sh.itjust.works · -4 pts · 2d
It is one thing to vote for imperfect candidate it is another to support literal genocidal terroristic candidates . Never vote for war criminals never
TrickDacy@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 2d
Thank you for admitting you don't mind the extermination of every single vulnerable people
isleepinahammock@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 4 pts · 2d
The same AIPAC Democrats are now turning in droves against trans people. It's almost like if you're willing to throw one group of your supporters under the bus, then you'll be willing to it again.
"How could the betrayer have betrayed me?! He promised me he would only betray the other people!"
TrickDacy@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 1d
"weird" how the election draws neigh and suddenly instead of one or two pro trump trolls harassing me there's several
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 1d
"weird how when October draws nigh i will see many more pumpkins than I usually do! This must be the work of those dastardly russians!"
You're talking more about politics, so youre getting more of those responses. Politics is in the zeitgeist, so its what most people are talking more than usually about. Weird!!
rumimevlevi@sh.itjust.works · -2 pts · 2d
Did the lgbt+ and Latinos got most of their home destroyed, are they experienced human made famine by destroying most of their agricultural fields , do they get them kids shots and bombed? Do they get literally raped by the American army? They are facing injustice and discrimination but don't dare act like they are getting genocide like Palestinians.
TrickDacy@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 2d
Yes I've seen this newly established talking point. Doesn't actually work or mean anything. Allowing Donald Trump to increase the suffering of many peoples was factually a bad thing to have done. Trying to distract from it won't work at all.
rumimevlevi@sh.itjust.works · -2 pts · 2d
Facts are not talking points. If you think bullshit terms like talking point would shut down discussion you are dead wrong. It the same type of bullshit terms as the term work republicans use . You are ok with the extermination of Palestinians while you pretending that LGBTIQ and Latinos are getting exterminated. Your lesser of evil bullshit is the reason you got trump
TrickDacy@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 2d
Yes and whatever other lies that don't make sense you can come up with. All the bullshit. It's all my religion. I believe all the evil things. Now, let's not talk about the fact that people like you put trump in power and hurt Gazans more than any Democrat ever could.
rumimevlevi@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 2d
I am thankful for not being an American. You Americans are idiots who vote for terrorists since the start of your shitty country
TrickDacy@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 2d
I am thankful not to be a tankie. I often wish I wasn't American, but it's not because I have an indefensible ideology that awards itself undeserved moral purity. I know my country is fucked up. You don't know you are.
13igTyme@piefed.social · 1 pts · 2d
WTF?
rumimevlevi@sh.itjust.works · -3 pts · 2d
TrickDacy@lemmy.world · -6 pts · 1d
I clicked your profile and here is what I see: 250 comments, all made very recently. Every comment I read was anti Democrat. Your account was made on January 6 of this year.
Yeah it is just total bullshit that you are a purpose-driven propagandist. What a winner. /s How much does the Kremlin pay for this? Cannot be much so you must really be devoid of skills to take this job.
rumimevlevi@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 1d
My recent comments defended progressive Democrats and hassan piker who support them, that's so anti democrats of me. My profile is full of anti genocide comments unlike scums like you who is ok when tour cult does it.
I have comments that are anti Russia too. I oppose all genocides and all wars of agressions while you are ok when your cult does it.
You are a scum with zero morality. Just fuck off with your bullshit
rumimevlevi@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 1d
Can you guess how much Kremlin paid me to ask them to fuck off from Ukraine?
TrickDacy@lemmy.world · -3 pts · 1d
I'm sure they didn't pay you different to create "evidence" that you're a "real person writing real opinions". This sudden explosion of anti-democrat activity cannot be whitewashed though, sorry.
rumimevlevi@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 1d
Are you a bot? You seems so quick to reply?
TrickDacy@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 1d
Lol projection
TrickDacy@lemmy.world · -5 pts · 1d
You use Gazans as a prop and could not care less about them. You're using them to try to keep Republicans in power. What a fuckin hero /s
You try to distract from this obvious fact by calling me a genocide supporter but it doesn't work. You are campaigning for extra Palestinian suffering at the hands of Republicans while I don't engage on that topic because I don't have to allow you to control what I say or think about. I don't have to address a weird lie that doesn't make sense. You think you don't have to address the obvious facts about your account activity because you can just distract from it. But your every action speaks volumes.
rumimevlevi@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 1d
I constantly condemn attacks on ukranians and Gazans, I constantly condemn trump actions. You can't talk about any victims except when I defend your stupid cult. The only person weaponizing people suffering is you scum. Go lick your kamala pussy
TrickDacy@lemmy.world · -4 pts · 1d
Yeah unfortunately I won't be made to go away so easily. Pro trump trolls always come and go.
rumimevlevi@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 1d
My history show that I am anti trump more than you will ever me. Fuck off dirty cultist
TrickDacy@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 1d
Keep the insults coming buddy
Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -6 pts · 2d
Don't even try, lefties dont believe in harm reduction.
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 7 pts · 1d
Harm reduction as in "do genocide" or as in "deport more people than Trump" or what did you have in mind?
Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -4 pts · 1d
Snark snark snark.
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 8 pts · 1d
If you think "genocide" is snark, then you're a psycho
Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -3 pts · 1d
No, I think youre snarking me and you sound like an idiot. There is no way I can take you seriously and youre only hurting what ever cause your pretending to fight for so I hope you rot in hell for it.
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 1d
lmao, what a normal response
Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 0 pts · 1d
Lmao what a disingenuous asshole
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 1d
What goes around comes around