More like:

Will solve conflict in the Middle East by letting Israel kill whoever they want, and take any land they want, with full support from the US

vs.

Will solve conflict in the Middle East by letting Israel kill whoever they want, and take any land they want, with full support from the US

https://www.genocidewatch.com/single-post/chinese-genocide-of-uyghurs-in-xinjiang-continues

According to Adrian Zenz,

https://thediplomat.com/2024/04/erasing-memories-concealing-evidence-chinas-efforts-to-obscure-the-uyghur-genocide/

provided to UHRP by scholar Adrian Zenz

Whoopsie! That's already two. It was easy to find those because they were already pointed out to you (along with several other of your sources) in the thread that you're complaining about.

Here's a tip - when you post a source on this subject, press "Ctrl+F" then type "Zenz," and if anything comes up, don't post it. Obviously, I can't expect anyone to actually read their sources before posting them, but is 6 keystrokes really too much to ask?

I have a rule that anytime anyone says something happened on the fediverse without providing a link, they are lying or mischaracterizing it literally 100% of the time, and that rule has proven itself yet again.

He's 7 points down in Pennsylvania according to this poll, what a headline to run with.

That's a complicated question without a clear answer. It's hard to establish the motivations of an individual person, but much harder when you're talking about the entire country. Generally, people were united in the war effort, but for a variety of reasons. The NYT downplayed the Holocaust and specifically tried to avoid focusing on antisemitism, in part because they were worried that people wouldn't like the idea of fighting a war to protect Jewish people, as racism and antisemitism were very much present. On the other hand, you had people like folk singer Woody Guthrie who explicitly connected the war to anti-fascism in his songs. But there were also plenty of people and media who had been praising Hitler, before he started invading everywhere.

Basically there were lots of reasons for lots of people to dislike the Nazis, so it's kind of hard to detangle who was motivated by what and to what degree. Generally though, if they had kept to their own borders, it's unlikely that any other country would have invaded them just for being fascists, and many countries went through great lengths not to go to war with them, because nobody wanted to recreate the devastation of WWI. Even then the US wasn't willing to get directly involved until it was directly attacked.

Of course, it's never the party's or the candidate's fault, only ever blame the voters.

The vast majority of Americans both already know how they feel about Trump and Biden and live in a solidly red or blue state. If you do want to focus on Biden, volunteer with phone banking or canvassing so that your efforts are directed to where they'll actually matter and be organized in line with their messaging. Personally, I'd say you're better off focusing on local races where you have more of an opportunity to come at it from a different angle and cut through people's fortified positions. And as another user said, focus on mobilization, it's easier to get someone who already agrees with you to register and make a plan than to convince someone to change their whole worldview.

There are also strategies outside of electoralism, such as protests and counter-protests. You can join an organization and form tactics and strategies to subvert the right's actions, and engage with direct action to build trust and community that could be important in the future. Form strategies while being realistic about your goals and capabilities and coordinate with others.

the American people do not get a vote on whether or not to elect a senile President this cycle

I feel like I've somehow become trapped in some kind of simulation or thought experiment where the purpose of it is to make lesser evilism seem as ridiculous as conceivably possible, and every time I think it's peaked with just comical levels of absurdity, it somehow manages to escalate.

Fulgencio. The dictator who was in power before the Cuban revolution, with connections to organized crime, under whom Cuba's economy was mostly casinos, drugs, and brothels while the people were poor and illiterate. Plundered the country bad enough to spark the revolution that drove him out and brought literacy and education and economic development.

Slurp slurp slurp 👢😛

This is a bizarre take, even by PugJesus standards.

It would be like saying, "Oh, you claim to hate Nazism, yet you like West (or East) Germany which is still recovering from the effects of Nazism. Curious."

Russia isn't socialist to anyone who has developed object permanence. There's no hypocrisy in someone hating socialism and liking Russia, because Russia isn't socialist.

The only reason I can think why anyone would call Russia socialist is if their worldview still revolves around Cold War anti-communism and they haven't figured out how to adjust or adapt their mental frameworks or rhetorical points since then. Which seems to include a fair number of confused liberals, apparently.

Saying everyone who agrees with this comic loves genocide and munches popcorn while protestors are being beaten bloody is certainly a take.

An objectively correct one, yes.