The U.S. presidential election is just 45 days away, and for antiwar voters, the policy differences between the two leading candidates are vanishingly thin. As the Biden-Harris administration continues to supply billions of dollars in military aid to Israel, the Uncommitted National Movement, which for months has attempted to steer the Democratic Party toward a more critical stance on Israel, has announced it is not endorsing Kamala Harris. Neither does the organization recommend casting a third-party vote, citing the risk of splitting the two-party vote and ushering in a second term for Donald Trump. “We were not met in good faith with our policy demands,” says the Uncommitted National Movement’s co-founder Lexis Zeidan about its attempts to parley with the Harris campaign. Zeidan says the organization will continue to pressure Democrats from within and outside of the party. “What we’re asking is not outrageous.”
While not voting is in no way similar to a vote for. It is saying that they are comfortable with that outcome. And don’t care enough to vote to make sure that it doesn’t happen.
Or they are willing to sacrifice their convenience because US politics need to be pushed to offer a genuine no genocide option. Most of the uncommitted movement are Muslims, Latinos and Black people. They know very well that they will suffer much more under Trump. But they also understand that normalizing bipartisan genocide against brown people will be a much greater danger to their communities and their people all over the world.
You explained that well. I understand your viewpoint and where you and others are coming from. I don’t agree with what Israel is doing at all and I wish the Dems would do more to push back against Netanyahu. But I hate Trump and his ilk and see them as the greater threat.
I 100% agree. They’ve literally said that they would end democracy. Saleh calling literal democracy, a convenience? Is very irrational and suspect.
Democrats absolutely need to be better. But they’re not going to get better if we keep splitting the vote and failing. The only way to make Democrats better would be to make them us. And the only way to do that. Would be to stop splitting the vote. Instead running Democratic candidates for all levels of the party as both Democrats and green party, or Democrats and any other left leaning party. Long-term either consuming the party from the inside or somehow magically replacing it from the outside are the only two options. Eating them alive is far more doable and possible to happen. And if we lose democracy even that becomes less likely to even impossible to happen. Because then we will only have one party and it will be the worst party.
Democracy as a convenience I think is a pretty bad/shit take.
I think we absolutely should stop enabling and covering for those occupying Palestine. Especially for the DECADES long genocide. But if you think ending democracy will accomplish that. I hate to break it to you. But it won’t. And if you think a Republican win doesn’t mean at least significant erosion of democracy if not an end. You haven’t been paying attention.
I am not talking about democracy. I am talking about the relative convenience of a middle class life in the US under a Dem administration compared to under a Trump administration.
In regards to Trump win = End of democracy i am skeptical. If the Democracy is that frail, it means the institutions are deeply rotten and weakened already. Trump could deal the finishing blow, but it could also be dealt by someone else. When it comes to making crucial reforms to strengthen Democracy it seems both Reps and Dems are not interested in that, because it would weaken their power base. So we are back to square one that the US Democracy cannot be safed through just voting for one of these two parties.
With that i’d like to stress that things are not just done with going to the ballot. It requires much more effort, in particular demonstrations and disruptions, which often are equally beaten down by the cops under Rep and Dem state governments.
Republicans have en mass sought to defund or end democratic rights and institutions constantly. Both within the United States and without. For the last 50 to 100 years and you are skeptical? Trump held a coup in 2020 and should not have been allowed back on the ballot and you’re skeptical? Our Supreme Court has gone out of its way to give him total immunity and you’re skeptical? He said he’d be a dictator on day one and you’re skeptical? The people who were in his administration and that he still surrounds himself with are the ones responsible for the fascist project 2025 whose goal is to overthrow the United States and you’re skeptical? You’re having problems with definitions. That’s not skeptical. That’s willfully naive or ignorant. Not skeptical. Listen to what they’re telling you.
Yes! The institutions have been heavily rotted over the last 25 years at minimum. If not 50 to 100. Yes trump could deliver the finishing blow. He’s only said he would. Many many times. And thank you for that straw man argument. Because absolutely voting is one of the least things. One of the easiest things anyone could do. And yet so many are seeming to fail so hard by not understanding the basics of how it works. Or what’s actually at stake.
Let me clarify. I am skeptical that the picture presented “Trump wins = Democracy ends vs. Harris wins = Democracy prevails” is accurate.
We were told voting Biden would solve things in 2020. It did not.
Democrats had 4 years, or rather 8 years including Trumps first presidency to acknowledge the threat to democracy and prepare to counter it. However what we saw under Biden and to a lesser extent Harris, was to go for business as usual and choose paddling to neoliberal donors over making fundamental policy changes to “progressive” economic, social and foreign policies. “progressive” because what would be revolutionary by US standards is conservative by the standards of most other developed nations, e.g. access to healthcare, workers rights, prevention of child labour…
And we need to understand that Biden stepped down under heavy pressure and Harris was set to continue, because she is the defacto continuation of his administration. There is nothing past some rhetorical differences that truly puts her apart. she became VP because she was a reliable technocrat, not because she had particular popularity among the people like for instance Bernie Sanders had.
So there is no indication that the Democrats have any motivation and plans to address the issues threatening American democracy. Meanwhile they have shown to crack down on peoples initiatives to address these issues. Be it Occupy Wall Street, Black Lives Matter or now the protests on US campuses against the genocide in Gaza.
The way i see it, the US is headed for another civil war, and it will come regardless of Democrats or Republicans being in power at the time. Also what we saw is the Democrats becoming increasingly authoritarian in the way they conducted themselves in the election process so far. The discussion about Bidens mental health was shunned and it was doubled down on him as the candidate, until it was impossible to hold. Harris was declared successor, without opening up to properly discuss where the party should head and who would be the best candidate.
They’ve shown that with lower turnout, conservatives have a better chance of winning, just based on the way the parties work. Voter apathy is higher in progressives, as their need to feel okay about the entirety of a candidate means they suffer a lot more ennui with an imperfect candidate.
So Not voting is aiding one party a little more than the other.
While not voting is in no way similar to a vote for. It is saying that they are comfortable with that outcome. And don’t care enough to vote to make sure that it doesn’t happen.
Or they are willing to sacrifice their convenience because US politics need to be pushed to offer a genuine no genocide option. Most of the uncommitted movement are Muslims, Latinos and Black people. They know very well that they will suffer much more under Trump. But they also understand that normalizing bipartisan genocide against brown people will be a much greater danger to their communities and their people all over the world.
You explained that well. I understand your viewpoint and where you and others are coming from. I don’t agree with what Israel is doing at all and I wish the Dems would do more to push back against Netanyahu. But I hate Trump and his ilk and see them as the greater threat.
I 100% agree. They’ve literally said that they would end democracy. Saleh calling literal democracy, a convenience? Is very irrational and suspect.
Democrats absolutely need to be better. But they’re not going to get better if we keep splitting the vote and failing. The only way to make Democrats better would be to make them us. And the only way to do that. Would be to stop splitting the vote. Instead running Democratic candidates for all levels of the party as both Democrats and green party, or Democrats and any other left leaning party. Long-term either consuming the party from the inside or somehow magically replacing it from the outside are the only two options. Eating them alive is far more doable and possible to happen. And if we lose democracy even that becomes less likely to even impossible to happen. Because then we will only have one party and it will be the worst party.
Democracy as a convenience I think is a pretty bad/shit take.
I think we absolutely should stop enabling and covering for those occupying Palestine. Especially for the DECADES long genocide. But if you think ending democracy will accomplish that. I hate to break it to you. But it won’t. And if you think a Republican win doesn’t mean at least significant erosion of democracy if not an end. You haven’t been paying attention.
I am not talking about democracy. I am talking about the relative convenience of a middle class life in the US under a Dem administration compared to under a Trump administration.
In regards to Trump win = End of democracy i am skeptical. If the Democracy is that frail, it means the institutions are deeply rotten and weakened already. Trump could deal the finishing blow, but it could also be dealt by someone else. When it comes to making crucial reforms to strengthen Democracy it seems both Reps and Dems are not interested in that, because it would weaken their power base. So we are back to square one that the US Democracy cannot be safed through just voting for one of these two parties.
With that i’d like to stress that things are not just done with going to the ballot. It requires much more effort, in particular demonstrations and disruptions, which often are equally beaten down by the cops under Rep and Dem state governments.
Republicans have en mass sought to defund or end democratic rights and institutions constantly. Both within the United States and without. For the last 50 to 100 years and you are skeptical? Trump held a coup in 2020 and should not have been allowed back on the ballot and you’re skeptical? Our Supreme Court has gone out of its way to give him total immunity and you’re skeptical? He said he’d be a dictator on day one and you’re skeptical? The people who were in his administration and that he still surrounds himself with are the ones responsible for the fascist project 2025 whose goal is to overthrow the United States and you’re skeptical? You’re having problems with definitions. That’s not skeptical. That’s willfully naive or ignorant. Not skeptical. Listen to what they’re telling you.
Yes! The institutions have been heavily rotted over the last 25 years at minimum. If not 50 to 100. Yes trump could deliver the finishing blow. He’s only said he would. Many many times. And thank you for that straw man argument. Because absolutely voting is one of the least things. One of the easiest things anyone could do. And yet so many are seeming to fail so hard by not understanding the basics of how it works. Or what’s actually at stake.
Let me clarify. I am skeptical that the picture presented “Trump wins = Democracy ends vs. Harris wins = Democracy prevails” is accurate.
We were told voting Biden would solve things in 2020. It did not.
Democrats had 4 years, or rather 8 years including Trumps first presidency to acknowledge the threat to democracy and prepare to counter it. However what we saw under Biden and to a lesser extent Harris, was to go for business as usual and choose paddling to neoliberal donors over making fundamental policy changes to “progressive” economic, social and foreign policies. “progressive” because what would be revolutionary by US standards is conservative by the standards of most other developed nations, e.g. access to healthcare, workers rights, prevention of child labour…
And we need to understand that Biden stepped down under heavy pressure and Harris was set to continue, because she is the defacto continuation of his administration. There is nothing past some rhetorical differences that truly puts her apart. she became VP because she was a reliable technocrat, not because she had particular popularity among the people like for instance Bernie Sanders had.
So there is no indication that the Democrats have any motivation and plans to address the issues threatening American democracy. Meanwhile they have shown to crack down on peoples initiatives to address these issues. Be it Occupy Wall Street, Black Lives Matter or now the protests on US campuses against the genocide in Gaza.
The way i see it, the US is headed for another civil war, and it will come regardless of Democrats or Republicans being in power at the time. Also what we saw is the Democrats becoming increasingly authoritarian in the way they conducted themselves in the election process so far. The discussion about Bidens mental health was shunned and it was doubled down on him as the candidate, until it was impossible to hold. Harris was declared successor, without opening up to properly discuss where the party should head and who would be the best candidate.
Exactly. Voting is the lowest-effort participation in democracy
They’ve shown that with lower turnout, conservatives have a better chance of winning, just based on the way the parties work. Voter apathy is higher in progressives, as their need to feel okay about the entirety of a candidate means they suffer a lot more ennui with an imperfect candidate.
So Not voting is aiding one party a little more than the other.
I’m not comfortable with either outcome 🤷