93
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 28 May 2024
93 points (100.0% liked)
Politics
10179 readers
73 users here now
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
- Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
- Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
- Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
- Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
- Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Funny how the usual suspects aren't in here complaining about this. Meanwhile, Joe Biden doesn't kowtow their every policy wish and he's the devil.
Nope, they'd rather scream about "not voting for the lesser of two evils" full well knowing that if they don't that the likelihood of Trump becoming president and having MUCH worse policies for the Palestinians becomes much greater.
But hey, why care about the realities of a situation when you can scream about principles or something?
Oh you mean Donald "Let's try to move our embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem because appearing neutral in the Israel/Palestine mess is hurting my chances of re-election" Trump? That guy? People actually think he's going to be better for Palestinians? Really?
It is not more of the same when one side clearly wants to instill a Christian Theocratic takeover. Trans rights, minority rights, reproductive rights, environmental protections, and so much more are also on the line. Both are bad candidates, but one is not calling for Christian Sharia law. You're throwing the baby out with the bath water when it comes to fallout of what will happen to those less fortunate.
I'm sorry that you think actually-murdered Gazans versus hypothetical future murders aren't "realities" to be considered, just principles, or that you think choosing between 2 people who both profess backing policies that will result in said murders, is a normal choice to be making as an electorate.
Trump should already be in prison, for any number of crimes. So should Biden. That neither are, is an indicator of how "well" our system is working.
There is a fine line between "working from within a system to change it" and "validating and reifying the system, by being a willing participant". If you are finding that your participation is not having the impact you intend, perhaps you should consider what side of that line you're actually on?
Also I guess losing the majority on SCOTUS and losing abortion rights was just a "hypothetical scenario" when people like you refused to vote for Hillary in 2016?
When will you people learn that, yes, elections have consequences.
Trying to pretend like they might not and Trump might somehow not be worse is being deliberately obtuse and sticking your head in the sand. Wake up and smell the reality.
Please tell me about your hypothetical future where you don't vote for Biden. Please explain to me what your best case scenario and outcome look like in that situation? Please tell me, what are you working towards?
Best case, a third party wins and starts to dismantle an empire. Realistic case is Biden or Trump win and my vote had nothing to do with it. Biden and Trump are both bad leaders. Deporting or silencing dissenters is bad leadership. I'm still not voting for Biden. Nice try though.
I've lost track how many times I've had to share this link, at this specific timestamp
TL;DR: I'm not voting for Biden. I will be a spoiler if that's what you call it. The police response to protests is an example of policies Biden wants to keep funding. Biden and Trump can both be bad leaders.
Aside: Voting is entertaining, but work on your cardio. Build some communities. Life is going to get harder for working folk.
I understand the spoiler effect in first-past-the-post voting. Avoiding a voting system subject to the spoiler effect requires a rated voting system. Major reform is required to remove the spoiler effect from the voting system in the USA.
There are other logical problems with the spoiler effect in the USA however.
First, the popular vote is divorced from the Electoral College vote. Thereby, even if Tiger gets 15% of the vote the Electoral College representatives for that portion of the population may vote for Leopard.
Second, there is an assumption Tiger voters would vote for Leopard or Gorilla if Tiger was not an option. Voter turnout in 2020 was 66.8%. That means roughly a third of people chose not to vote. There is an argument to be made that this is also a spoiler, but combined that block could shift the outcome in Tiger's favor.
Third, "I'm not the other guy" is not a political platform. Biden pays lip service to protecting American Democracy which seems to be a conservative stance to maintain a voting system favoring the wealthy. Codifying Roe v. Wade is great, but could have been done at any time in the past. Separation of powers requires a Legislative branch that would work on such issues. Funding the police does not solve policing which leads to responses to protest like the George Floyd marches or recent campus violence.
I am sure there are other reasons to vote for Biden. The FTC fighting corruption under Lina Khan is one. Corporate bailouts opposing the neoliberal order, like CHIPS and Infrastructure, could be another.
I am unable to vote for mass murder. I am unable to vote for corporate bailouts. I am voting for Tiger.
I'm sorry, but this reply reeks of privilege. My reproductive freedom is on the ballot this year after already losing so much after SCOTUS was able to be stacked with conservative judges. If Trump wins, SCOTUS will forever be this way in my lifetime and my rights will erode even more as a woman. After the overturning of Roe, a 10 year old rape victim from Ohio and those who assisted her were harassed all due to providing her an abortion. States are disbanding maternal mortality boards or putting extremists over them. For the love of God, we are headed into a Handmaid's Tale if Trump is elected!
"Well the democrats should have encoded it." I literally don't care. That was then, this is now. Women are suffering now and the alternative will make it worse. When the Republican party wants to codify Christian sharia level law, that's an immediate danger to me and other women. We can't continue to protest the atrocities of Israel if we are forced into reproductive servitude. There are way to many Republicans advocating against anti child marriage laws in an age where they can be raped without a means to terminate.
I am equally frustrated about Biden's handling of Palestine, but setting my own rights on fire removes all energy and possibility to advocate for them! This attempt to accelerate us into punishing the democrats for giving us bad choices is only going to hurt those who lack the funds and privilege to easily escape a Fascist takeover.
These people care more about their "principles" and lack of fundamental understanding of the realities of a first past the post system, than the very real reality of people like us losing our rights.
Everyone who thinks voting 3rd party or staying home is an option is rooted in privilege.
I currently live in a very red state with an anti abortion law that took affect the moment Roe was overturned. There are no exceptions and we even had our own case of a young girl being forced to give birth from a rape because her mother could not afford the hours long trip to the next closest abortion clinic. That young girl's life is forever hindered by giving birth too young; now multiply that by 1000s should a nation wide ban be placed. Or the radicals who want to remove no-fault divorce and keep abused women in dangerous relationships. I have the means to escape, but that's a very much a "fuck you, I got mine" mindset when I recognize the abject poverty that exists for the majority here.
We've already been through this 8 years ago after Hillary lost the election. Democrats didn't "wakeup" and over a million people died in the US from a botched pandemic response. Accelerationism is a privileged view when you have nothing to lose, but those less fortunate are hurt by its repercussions.
Our current system is broken and no means perfect, but burning it all down isn't how we change it. It is far more likely that an authoritarian takeover will occur instead of the rose-tinted glasses utopia that these non-voters think will happen. All the death, pain, and destruction won't magically shock people into changing it because they'll be too focused on just trying to survive the hellscape wrought on them.
Nice assumption.
Where did I do that, exactly? Please be precise.
Please show me where I expressed who I was or wasn't going to vote for?
When you actually have a good-faith question about what I believe is the path forward, or what needs to happen, and are done shouting at an imagined person that you created post-2016 to explain the absolute failure of the Democratic Party to stop a fascist from taking power, I'll be here.
People like you are why the Democratic party keeps forcing shit candidates down our throats. They count on obnoxious people like you to guilt others into voting for "the lesser of two evils"
No, it's because people like you don't vote in primaries. I vote in every primary for better candidates meanwhile people like you scream how the candidates are awful while staying home during the primaries.
The candidates won't get better until we grass roots organize and start actually making good candidates popular.
You know there's elections before the primaries right? The Democratic party has shown that it will resort to all means of corruption to give you the "establishment" candidate. And people like you keep voting for the lesser of two evils. Let the Democrats lose more elections they shouldn't lose, eventually they learn they need to uphold the values of democracy to win an election.
If the Democratic party wasn't corrupt to the core, it would have been Bernie. After that it would have been Andrew Yang. You keep voting these Republicans in Democrat clothing, nothing ever gets solved. Every democrat in history since I was born has promised to do something about immigration, nothing ever gets done. Why? Because it serves their interests to have a variable workforce that they can underpay and demean.
Hillary won the democratic nomination because older voters turned out more to vote in her favor. While young voters primaries for Bernie, the overwhelming majority of those voting in the primaries were older.
Source
If more youth turned out to vote in the Primaries in an equal or stronger force than older voters, Bernie would have had the nomination.
Regarding Democrats not doing anything to support immigrants, DREAM Act and DACA were ushered in with greater force and an expansion was attempted due to Obama despite Republicans consistently fighting it or Republican Governors suing against it. The expansion was stalled by our conservative Supreme Court, but would have been successful if we had more left leaning judges. General overview. It's not that democrats are not attempting these things, but more so we lack the majorities in Congress and on SCOTUS. There is the potential of more justices retiring in the next presidential cycle and whoever wins has the ability to make the court more right or left leaning which will have an impact on this.
You're missing a lot of context. You're examining the contents of the effect, without looking at the cause.
The DNC rigged the primaries before any ballots were cast. They conspired against Bernie Sanders to have Hillary as the nominee and worked to sabotage Bernie's run for presidency. Talking about exit poll statistics doesn't really mean much. The corruption was already well underway.
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/02/clinton-brazile-hacks-2016-215774/
It's mind-boggling to hear people cry foul about Bernie Sanders when the man himself has endorsed Biden and is actively helping him campaign.
What's mind boggling about it? Bernie Sanders wasn't a prophet. He ran on a platform and we believed in his candidacy. Just because he bent over for Hillary doesn't mean that suddenly now she's a great candidate. If he had to bite down on the rag, I don't fault him for that. But asking people to get on board "just this once" every election is just a carrot on the stick. It's always "but this one is SUPER important, set yourself aside and pick the lesser evil, eventually we can get what we want." There is no "eventually" and there never will be as long as you and others like you show that you're willing to throw your ideals away because of this season's boogieman
I voted for Bernie twice, in the 2016 primaries and again in the 2020 primaries. I donated a few hundred bucks as well. After he lost, I voted for the candidate he endorsed, because in my view, the candidate he endorsed would get us closer to the ideals he espoused, and certainly not the GOP. That is why it's mind-boggling.
Sexist and uncalled for. Do better.
Holy shit.
Even the then-head of the DNC knew she was going to lose. It was too late to do anything at that point, but people are over here blaming Bernie and young voters for 2016, when Donna Brazile knew Hillary was going to lose the election, and Hillary had completely controlled the DNC to shut Bernie out.
Yup. The corruption is blatant, and the worst part is, they don't even hide it... the threat of impending doom keeps the voters subservient. Instead of pointing out the corruption, we equivocate. I'm not a nihilist or a pessimist and most certainly do not want Trump to win. But refusing to acknowledge the blatant corruption puts us right where we started.
Props to you for actually reading the article. If anyone else who replied to the comment had done the same, there wouldn't be as many "what-about-isms"
The democratic/republican parties will shove shit candidates down your throat weather you vote for them or not.
There is no thirst anywhere that there is means to change it, to change it.
By refusing to vote, all you are doing is are refusing to limit damage.
Damage limitation is the best you can reasonably hope for
If you think you're going to change anything by not voting or voting third party then I have a bridge I'd love to sell you and decades of American history I'd like you to read.
Please explain to me what action you're going to take and how that's going to lead to positive change?
Man, there are a lot of assumptions from y'all, mostly seemingly based on your inability to accept the fact that you can't shame the electorate at large into voting a certain way. I voted for Hillary in 2016, but I was screaming to the rafters that she was going to lose because she was a bad candidate, and should never have been put up in the first place. This is shaping up to be a repeat.
It doesn't matter what arguments you make about people voting for Biden, because you and I have no real reach; this is why it's critical to select good candidates. If you keep putting up "hold your nose" candidates, they're going to lose sometimes, no matter how much arguing and shaming and cajoling you do. When you do it multiple times in a row, it just compounds that effect.
Y'all are the ones living in the fantasy world where you can change millions of disaffected voters via web forums. Also, you're stooges for the Democratic Party's scapegoating for never listening to their base, and losing elections because of it.
I love how you don't highlight the Israelis murdered in the rocket attacks and other activities that kicked this latest round of conflict off. Almost like the usual suspects don't care if Israelis die. The whole, "we don't believe in mass murder" is complete bullshit. You just want one side to win and you don't give a shit how.
Why do you assume that pro-Palestinian people = pro-Hamas? How many dead Israeli people is enough to justify genocide? Nobody is saying that Hamas are the good guys, but they do often say they understand the material realities that created them (Israeli state actions). Everyone I know that is saying don't commit genocide also say it is not OK for Hamas to kill civilians, often in the same breath.
Edit: Some data for context
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/11/12/israel-hamas-war-data-shows-human-cost-of-conflict-through-the-years.html
Because they don't complain when Hamas kills people. Simple.
But they do? Both the people you are responding to in this thread literally said it is not OK for Hamas to kill civilians. You also didn't answer the second part:
How many dead Israeli people is enough to justify genocide?
Latest round, meaning October 7, or Rafah? Because according to the IDF, the recent rocket attacks out of Rafah didn't injure anyone.
And if you're treating an occupying force as being the same as the occupied population that is resisting them, you're starting from a false premise of innocence.
Is it alright for Hamas to kill civilians? Of course not. Is it okay for them to attack Israel with the means they have available to them, when they are being regularly attacked by Israel? Of course. They're both evil, but one is much more understandably so, assuming you don't for instance think Nat Turner was wrong for fighting his oppressors?