-69
Muslim Americans moving to Jill Stein in potential blow to Kamala Harris
(www.reuters.com)
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 19 Sep 2024
-69 points (10.3% liked)
politics
19072 readers
1863 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
They should withhold their vote for the person contributing to getting their family members killed. When Democrats lose again it will be their own doing, again.
The cult of personality to the point of being willing to overlook genocide is insane
I think there are two key points to remember here:
The GOP guy would endorse much worse policies for these folks than Harris.
While Harris is too far off, pressure can also be exerted by voting for the right Senators, House Reps, and local/state officials. Unlike the GOP guy, we have a better chance of making Harris listen, if the right folks are below her.
Ultimately, I respect everyone's choice in voting and won't pass judgement on doing so. But either way, I believe that the key remains building up the grassroots, as AOC and Ralph Nader have both stated recently.
This sounds like some of that push him left after the election bullshit we heard from liberals in 2020. The entire US government only responds to the donor class, there is no pushing anyone any direction without money.
Nader, you mean? Perhaps.
Yeah, was a problem even before Citizens United in 2010 - but that made it a gazillion times worse.
Uh, what? Citation needed?
I remember a lot of BS after but it was from the GOP candidate - something about his winning the election and it getting stolen.
That would not be a good play if it results in the person who will get more of their family members killed gaining office.
I think it’s kind of presumptuous to assume that every Muslim has family in Gaza, as well.
I have no family in Gaza, but I know that the moral conscious thing to do is to prevent the people that are currently killing them, continue killing them. And if they keep getting rewarded for bad behavior, that bad behavior is going to continue to get worse. That's how Democrats have gone from the party of people like Carter to the party of genocide denial, people like Biden and Harris.
Yes, the morally conscious thing to do, is to hand the reins to someone who has vowed to help the killing go faster. /s
Oy, prepare for your downvotes. Because if you aren't voting for Harris, the people here will have it out for you! lol
Because that’s a vote for Trump in a swing state, not because “they’re angry you’re not a democrat”
Then your party better get to earning my vote.
Punish all the vulnerable people of the world, that'll show em!!!
I know you prefer a slow agonizing death for everyone while those of us out here are fighting for no pain for anyone.
Did you just say you want all vulnerable people to die quickly under trump? And that you want to be the cause of that ..?
Everyone with any moral conscience knows liberals, at their core, do not give a fuck about the marginalized any more than Republicans. Their primary concern is protecting their status in society at the expense of the marginalized. They talk about BLM while voting for the people that caused the need for BLM to exist. They talk defund the police while supporting the people building 100 cop cities across the country being trained by the IDF. They shed crocodile tears about kids in cages under Trump while ignoring who built them and that there are STILL kids in cages in facilities with no or minimal AC in Texas and Arizona summers.
And now they are overlooking genocide because the other guy might do it too.
Everyone with any moral conscience knows tankies, at their core, actively want people to suffer, even more than Republicans. Their primary concern is feeling morally superior according to their half-baked philosophy at the expense of the marginalized. They talk about revolution while voting in ways that lead to death, suffering, and destruction of groups that they do not belong to. They talk about political violence from their parents' basements, which of course others are supposed to lead the way on. They shed crocodile tears about kids in Palestine, blaming any Democrat, while ignoring that their actions will set in motion a much worse path for Palestine and many other groups around the world.
And now they are actively supporting genocide because they need to ignore reality to continue feeling morally superior.
That whole thing reads like 'i know you are but what am I?'
Because it was more illustrative of the truth to write it out rather than just tell you're projecting, which you absolutely are.
Amen!
I disagree. I've seen the hatred here.
They dont understand how election math works, a vote for Harris is taking a vote away from a third party candidate and is giving it to Trump.
That's not how any of that works. The only reason people consider 3rd party votes throw aways is because 3rd party absolutely with 100% confidence will not win the federal election right now. America isn't primed to allow that to happen at this stage and level. They need to take local elections first and build up the movement getting enough backing to make the federal level even close to possible.
And whether voting for 3rd party is throwing a vote to one of the other two parties comes down to which one the voter would have voted for had a 3rd party not been an option. If they would've voted for the democratic candidate, but instead chose to vote for a 3rd party that has 0% chance of winning, then yeah, it hurts the democratic platforms chances. If they would have voted republican, but chose to vote for a 3rd party with 0% chance of winning the it hurts the repiblican platforms chance. Therefore green party votes are considered mostly detrimental to democratic platforms because their voters are more left leaning in nature. Few would vote republican when no 3rd party option presented itself.
The idea that voting democratic or republican is throwing away a vote from green to their competitor isn't functional since the party has zero chance of winning, even if the fence sitters joined them. If they were competitive on federal level you would have a point though.
Why is that not how it works, it seems to be the preferred method when the candidates are rearranged? The whole Stein vote gives it to Trump bullshit.
Thank you so much for this. Perfect comeback. I am totally gonna start using this!