• Maggoty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    54 minutes ago

    America voting for the lesser evil since 1792.

    It’s not the time to stop now. But I better see all of you on the streets with signs on November 6th.

  • Clbull@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Anybody voting against Harris over Gaza is a moron. Trump may be even more pro Israel…

    • sorval_the_eeter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      46 minutes ago

      We know that Harris will let the zionists do whatever they want, whenever they want, however they want, no matter what it costs the US. Your saying theres much difference between that and whatever Trump plans is dumb. Is Trump going to double kill people and double steal their land?

      Anybody voting against Harris over Gaza is a moron

      I think war crimes surrogates are worse than morons.

  • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    6 hours ago

    Gaza is hardly even an issue on the ballot, you’re picking between slow genocide and fast genocide.

  • VinnyDaCat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    9 hours ago

    Bernie is such a good guy. The Dems have done him dirty so many times, they are currently continuing to support many harmful policies but he understands what’s at stake and he puts all of that aside to do the best he can.

    He doesn’t have to do this. He’s 83 years old and while his cognitive health is outstanding for his age, someone his age doesn’t need to be on this grind for us. He probably won’t stop until he’s forced to due to his health. I love the guy and it’s a shame we weren’t given the chance to see him take the presidency.

    • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 hours ago

      He is a leader.

      I remember that old footage of him in Burlington in the 70’s, talking to random kids in the mall, asking them what was important to them–drug policy, free speech, good schools–and just talking to them about how they could make a difference. From the bully pulpit, he would have been transformative.

  • acargitz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    14 hours ago

    That’s a bad headline. Watch his video, he makes a much more nuanced argument.

  • LovableSidekick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    59
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    edit-2
    16 hours ago

    The fantasy world the zero-tolerance high-ground morality angels live in is as dangerous as the one MAGA lives in, and ironically has the same victims. They proudly polish their halos nice and shiny while they let the world burn.

    • Dragon "Rider"(drag)@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      42
      arrow-down
      23
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Don’t support genocide, it’s as simple as that!

      By the way: Voting isn’t actually support. The American system is not set up in a way where votes actually add to the power of the Presidential office. On the other hand, making a deliberate choice not to act does mean supporting whatever happens without your action, which could be genocide. This means YOU HAVE TO VOTE HARRIS IN ORDER TO NOT SUPPORT GENOCIDE. The socialism angels are hypocrites.

      • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Voting isn’t actually support

        On the other hand, making a deliberate choice not to act does mean supporting whatever happens without your action

        Interesting. So, by drag’s logic, a Trump voter isn’t responsible for supporting Trump, but a nonvoter is.

        It’s amusing to see the kinds of ridiculous knots y’all tie yourselves into trying to twist around language in an attempt to resolve your cognitive dissonance and punch left.

      • pyre@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        edit-2
        15 hours ago

        there are two facts about this election

        1. there are only two outcomes—0.0% chance for a third party win
        2. both candidates have a bad stance on the genocide

        so neither outcome will help with the genocide. acting like voting third party helps in any way shape or form is disingenuous at best. so what should you do?

        my argument is that you should vote for the person you can hope to convince on this issue. phone calls, protests, social media, whatever means you have… which of these candidates is more likely to respond to any kind of public pressure about this?

        Harris might be responsive, and let’s be honest, she might not be. but you know for a fact that it’s definitely not the fucking orange turd. Natenyahu wants him to win. how can you ignore that?

        • kava@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          19
          ·
          13 hours ago

          which of these candidates is more likely to respond to any kind of public pressure about this?

          neither. 0.0% chance for either candidate.

          i only voted for kamala because she’s a woman and even though she’s an awful candidate at least we can get it out of our collective system, show little girls they can be president, and the neoliberal status quo is probably still better than Trump

          i’m not entirely sure on that because I think Kamala is more likely to lead us into a war with Russia… but Trump is more volatile in general I think

          • lurklurk@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            6 hours ago

            Amazing that you at least did the overwhelming obvious right thing even though your reasons are awful

            • kava@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 hours ago

              i think breaking the barrier of sex in terms of male/female president is a powerful thing. there’s been so many women throughout history that could have been judith pulgars, politically speaking, and ended up getting pushed into more subservient positions

              that’s the main reason. i dont think that’s an awful reason

              as for the russian war thing, i rather like living in a pre-nuclear-war society.

              • lurklurk@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 hours ago

                It just implies that looking at the candidates the biggest and most important difference you see is that one is a woman.

                Like, it’s great that you did vote for that woman as she also happens to be in favour of women having rights, lgbtq+ people having rights, doesn’t want mass deportions, still wants there to be elections in the future and a painfully long list of stark differences like that. It’s just impressive that none of that mattered to you, or that you are unaware of it

          • forrcaho@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            10 hours ago

            neither. 0.0% chance for either candidate.

            This level of cynicism is unwarranted. Sure it might be low, but for Harris it’s at least 0.1%.

            • kava@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              9 hours ago

              with the current stranglehold the pro-Israeli lobby has on American politics (includes both GOP and DNC) even 0.1% is a stretch

              AIPAC even brags about it: https://aipacorg.app.box.com/s/t8vvqt7evxvgkzn5jktpwejate6oxo0y

              98% of AIPAC endorsed candidates won their election in 2022. if you are a politician and you say something mildly critical of Israel they will go to war with you and do everything so that your opponent wins

              Israel has figured out how to hack American democracy. There is no going back at this point. We are a pro-Israel country for the foreseeable future, regardless of which candidate wins this election or the next one or the next one

        • fuckdenialists@lemmings.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          27
          ·
          edit-2
          15 hours ago

          My argument is that the only good american is that dude who set himself on fire. You are a scumbag. You are no better than a german in the 30ies smelling the grilled flesh and thinking “this is fine, it’s still better than bolchevism”

          • D1G17AL@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            13
            ·
            15 hours ago

            If you aren’t even American then shut the fuck up. You don’t really grasp how complex the politics actually are.

            • fuckdenialists@lemmings.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              11
              ·
              15 hours ago

              Nobody cares about your internal politics. Your external politics is always the same and seeing all of you idiots saying “BOTH SIDE ARE FOR GENOCIDE” leads to the conclusion you people have zero ethical consideration at all. You know, since you are overtly voting for extermination… again.

                • fuckdenialists@lemmings.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  6
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  14 hours ago

                  If there’s anybody this election cycle shows us, it’s that americans do not care about foreigners life at all. They would gladly throw entire countries under the bus if it means that they get to keep living their comfortable life putting their little ballot like cowards instead of actually fighting fascism.

      • fuckdenialists@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        30
        ·
        edit-2
        15 hours ago

        Fuck off drag. The US dems are guilty of extermination and everybody who vote in this election are complicit. You can call them to throw foreigners under the bus for their own gain and security, since they are bullying people to vote for the genocide party just because the other side said they were gonna be worst.

        When somebody commit a crime, you punish this person, you dont give them power because some other dude talked shit.

  • AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    6 hours ago

    The problem of the US is that you might lose more voters by dumping Israel than you’d gain by supporting Palestine.

    • actual_pillow@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 hours ago

      No one actually votes with Gaza or Isreal as a core issue outside of NYC, and the state is eternally blue no matter what.

      For better or worse the majority of America doesn’t even acknowledge(or even care) the conflict as an issue outside of the terminally online.

      • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        There are some polls that show roughly 35 to 60 percent of US voters backing the sale of arms to Israel, depending on demographics, but there is a very clear divide between Republican and Democrat support so it’s disingenuous to say a candidate will lose more support than they gain because that depends on which candidate.

        A lot of these polls also use loaded questions like “who is responsible for this conflict” with the two choices being Hamas and Israel, which doesn’t really capture any of the nuance of the situation or represent the beliefs of the person answering the question.

        • Womdat10@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          I dont have them on hand, but I’ve seen a few polls in swing states where 5 or so percent more undecided voters would be more likely to vote for Harris if she promised an arms embargo, as opposed to less likely.

  • sozesoze@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    13 hours ago

    First of all, at this point people in the US should vote against Trump for their safety, and that means in the current political system they have to vote for Harris. That’s the reality they have to face. The Trump party has made fascist announcements that are real and people should expect them to be made into real actions.

    The problem is that the Democrats frankly have abysmal messaging and are drifting to the right further and further while using Trump as a threat to their voters. They adopt anti-immigrant policies and are distancing themselves from pro-LGBT stances, saying it’s the states decision. Both these issues as well as demands for a ceasefire poll exceptionally well, but the Harris campaign seemingly don’t want the edge. With all this they are signaling that right wing worries about immigrants and trans people are valid, although that’s absolutely not the case, and leave people to decide for example “do I want anti-immigrant light or extra harsh anti-immigrant?” when everybody says immigrants are an issue. This is unacceptably stupid and risking the vote. And that’s ignoring the elephant in the room that progressive policy like health care is exceptionally popular and using that as counter messaging would win her voters.

    We’ve seen how popular the Democrats got after Harris took over and Walz got nominated. It signaled change. Now all the Democrats say that it’s gonna be the same old as usual treading on and the same bad argument vote us or you’ll get a dictatorship. I’m not denying Biden dropping out had nothing to do with the surge of popularity, but back then we also had comments like here, basically declaring any dissent from supporting a decrepit old man as the candidate as heresy. Now there are again, only Yes men here saying if you criticize Harris you’re a bot or a Trump ass eater. What is wrong with you?

    Finally, I have the creeping suspicion that Democratic establishment people don’t fear a fascist Trump administration themselves personally as much as the population has to. Trump announces he will go after his enemies, Latinos and trans people (probably all queer people actually). He has anti women’s health and rights messaging all over his campaign. But that doesn’t seem to be a risk for people higher up in the party. I suspect that when you’re rich you don’t have to worry about abortion bans or HRT access. And if Trump threatens them with violence they always have money they can throw at him. It’s much more comfortable to run a risky neo liberal and right wing platform against a fascist if you can jump ship later on.

  • BigBenis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    59
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    21 hours ago

    I was a Bernie-or-Bust-er in 2016 because I was confident Hilary was going to win with or without my vote. I deeply regret taking that stance and feel like I let down every woman who’s lost rights to their bodily autonomy, every family who was separated at the border, everybody whose life was lost or ruined due to the Trump administration’s incompetent response to the COVID-19 outbreak, and everybody else who has been harmed by the Trump administration.

    Don’t be like me. It sucks having to vote for the lesser of two evils but that’s how our system works and not voting or voting third-party isn’t going to change that but it does run the risk of things getting a lot worse.

      • BigBenis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        5 hours ago

        TX at the time. Generally regarded as solidly red. However, looking at the numbers in '16 and '20, I wouldn’t be surprised if everybody in the state who had either voted third-party or not at all because of the belief that their vote wouldn’t make a difference would have indeed been enough to potentially flip the state.

    • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      6 hours ago

      He can’t be using the word “Genocide” specifically, because the international court and UN as well as many very old documents allow 3rd party intervention to stop a genocide, meaning by saying that exact word he would be advocating the invasion of an allied nation which is grounds for expulsion from the senate. I’m sure the 49 Republicans and a couple Dems would love to throw his ass out if a vote came up.

      Anybody who wants Bernie to use the word Genocide just wants a Republican Senate Majority, doesn’t care about Gaza, stop faking asshole.

      • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        word he would be advocating the invasion of an allied nation which is grounds for expulsion from the senate

        Citation needed. AFAIK, the Senate is allowed to discuss whether a nation should be considered an ally, and whether or not to invade a sovereign nation.

        Or did you mean he would be “recalled” (by his constituents) rather than “expelled” (by his fellow senators)?

        • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          There is no real law or regulation for when the house or senate expels one of their own, though 17 people have been expelled historically, but there was recent talks of expelling Tlaib for using the word Genocide in May. Or did you want a citation for Genocide being acceptable cause to invade as it relates to the United Nations and International Law?

          • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 hour ago

            Tlaib wasn’t censured for using the word “genocide” to describe Israel’s actions toward Palestinians. She was censured for repeating the slogan “from the river to the sea”, which has been described as “nothing else but the call for the destruction of Israel and murder of Jews”.

            She was only censured because a sufficient number of Democrats agreed with Republicans to issue a censure. None of those Democrats would support a Republican call for her expulsion.

            My point is that Bernie is free to call it a genocide if he wants to. He’s free to call for American military intervention against Israel if he wants to.

            There is a huge constitutional issue with the expulsion of a legislator for making a statement that is well within the scope of their constitutional duties.

            I don’t need evidence of genocide being considered justification to intervene. I readily concede that point. My concern here is the constitutional issue that would arise if a legislator is effectively prohibited from representing their constituency, including a constituency that thinks Israel is engaged in Genocide.

            • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 hour ago

              You’re out of touch with reality if you think Bernie will get nothing more than a stern talking to for asking for a foreign force to invade Israel. I get it, dude, I really do: I think the USA should depose Netanyahu and take control of the situation themselves, honestly, but support for Palestine is not universal and is in short supply in the US Congress.

              • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 hour ago

                He certainly will face severe consequences: from his constituents. They could recall him, or replace him in the next election. He faces consequences from the Democratic party: they can refuse to support his re-election.

                He faces serious consequences from the people he represents, but not from the Senate or the federal government.

                Censure is nothing. It carries no penalty. Democratic support for Tlaib’s censure was easy to give because it carried no actual cost. There is no way that Democratic support for censure would translate to support for her expulsion. A legislator who isn’t facing censure just isn’t trying hard enough.

                Bernie is free to call it a genocide if he wants. The fact that he isn’t (ostensibly) tells us that his constituency doesn’t want him to do that.

        • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 hours ago

          The pure irony of shaming the people working the hardest to stop genocide by calling them complicit in genocide.

          • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            Your link says she was censured not for using the term “genocide”, but for repeating the slogan “from the river to the sea”. Your article quotes Representative Brad Schneider (D, Illinois) as describing as “nothing else but the call for the destruction of Israel and murder of Jews”.

            • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              3 hours ago

              If you watch the video they cite he clearly does call for a ceasefire, and furthermore says, as is practically his catchphrase since a year ago, that "Israel has a right to defend itself and go after hamas but it does not have the right to go to war against the entire Palestinian people."

              I don’t know how you could misconstrue that as defending genocide in any way, shape, or form but if you are against his explicit stance in this case then you want war to continue and more civilians to die, so fuck you I guess.

              For a year now he has been the biggest voice in “not sending Netanyahu another penny” unless proof that Palestinian human rights are upheld and aid is brought into the nation, which sadly has not been the policy stance of the majority of congress.

  • SkyNTP@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    130
    arrow-down
    20
    ·
    1 day ago

    Protest voting doesn’t work when the candidate you are protesting is the least worst option. Democrats that will not vote out of principle have been conned as badly as MAGA republicans. End of story.

    • Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      42
      ·
      1 day ago

      I think you might be on to something. Maybe the system is set up to limit the power of protest voting? I mean, it does deliver two right-of-centre parties to power, over and over again.

      Where the wheels are coming off is that one of them - and some people say both - are moving further rightwards, and this is destabilising society in America.

      • Cornelius_Wangenheim@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        16 hours ago

        Pretend you’re a politician. You have two groups of people that want opposite things. One of them is reliable, donates and volunteers to help your campaign. The other is feckless and seems to always find an excuse to oppose you. Which would you try to please?

      • OptimalHyena@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        24
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        1 day ago

        Some people say… Dems are generally shit but they have definitely moved left over the last decade. A lot of new people have run and while it isn’t a sure thing by any stretch, people have been able to and have the chance to continue to move the party and also just straight up infiltrate it to push it left. Whereas the repubs have been in full sprint to the right.

      • EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Maybe the system is set up to limit the power of protest voting?

        It absolutely is set up that way. This may or may not have been the intent of our election system, but it is the outcome.

      • EatATaco@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 day ago

        Maybe the system is set up to limit the power of protest voting?

        Not everything is some conspiracy to keep you down. The people who wrote the constitution just weren’t perfect and had to make political compromises, which resulted in an imperfect system.

        • 8uurg@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Also, the game theory that gives us insight into voting systems, telling us the current system leads to a 2 party system, did not exist when the US constitution was written.

          • Tinidril@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            20 hours ago

            The dynamic was understood, it just wasn’t formalized in game theory terms. Alternative voting systems weren’t in use though, and probably wouldn’t even have been practical without automation.

      • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        1 day ago

        Young people don’t get involved in the system and don’t vote, nothing special about the US on that level, so it’s not surprising their priorities aren’t the priorities of the political options.

  • psycho_driver@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    21 hours ago

    Unfortunately Gaza is a non issue. The situation would only be handled worse under the other candidate. Along with just about every other conceivable thing.

  • HorseRabbit@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Your vote only actually matters if you’re in a wing state. If you aren’t you should be voting PSL or greens.

  • Asidonhopo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 day ago

    Not voting for a candidate is not the only, nor the most effective way to push a party to change positions on an issue you care about.