121
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] shaiatan@midwest.social 42 points 3 months ago

The number of "left" voters in this community that are doing their damnedest to get Trump elected never ceases to disturb me.

[-] isaaclw@lemmy.world 20 points 3 months ago

The way Harris refuses to court her own voting base never ceases to disturb me

Ftfy.

Its not on voters. Voters will do what they will do. Its on politicians who we vote for. Also I will be voting for Harris and also protesting at every event where I can to demand this apartheid and genocide to end.

load more comments (11 replies)
[-] Freefall@lemmy.world 9 points 3 months ago

Single issue voters. They don't understand wider implications of their actions, however well intended they are.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 9 points 3 months ago

The number of pro-genocide centrists who accuse anyone who doesn't love genocide as much as they do of being trumpers will never surprise me.

[-] AHemlocksLie@lemmy.zip 15 points 3 months ago

Maybe they just have a tendency to confuse the painfully obvious consequences of not voting or voting against Harris for your actual intended goals. Trump is clearly going to be worse for Palestinians since he outright said Netanyahu should just finish the job, so if you're on a clear and obvious path to getting someone even worse elected, we can't help but wonder if you don't actually care about the Palestinians because for all the bitching and moaning about Harris's stance, you're on your way to making the situation objectively worse.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 7 points 3 months ago

I'm voting for Harris and have never, I want to stress this, absolutely fucking NEVER suggested doing otherwise.

You will of course completely ignore this because I dared to say that genocide isn't the only thing in this world that gives life meaning.

[-] AHemlocksLie@lemmy.zip 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

I'll admit I was mistaken given your comment was sandwiched between two people suggesting otherwise and given your suggestion that anyone tired of listening to those people try to discourage voting for Harris is pro-genocide. You may not be one of them, but you walk a very similar walk here, so I wouldn't be so surprised by the confusion.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago

Consider for a moment that some of the others that you've written off might not be trying to discourage people from voting for Harris but might actually be upset about genocide.

You do understand that there are people in the world who genuinely don't like genocide without ulterior motives, right? That it's actually possible to find genocide objectionable?

Because it sure fucking seems like centrists on lemmy don't want to hear anything that isn't glowing praise in the face of the news that Harris will continue supporting genocide to the same degree that Biden has.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (17 replies)
[-] Lightor@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

Saying they are "pro-genocide" is beyond hyperbolic.

These type of extreme, over the top comments hurt way more than help.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] K1nsey6@lemmy.ml 5 points 3 months ago

Sorry, but for many of us, genocide is our red line.

[-] Bakkoda@sh.itjust.works 5 points 3 months ago

Point me to the correct candidate please. Oh right, you can't because somehow it's my fault that the two party system took away literally every option you could possibly have. Maybe i should've have voted for the non genocide candidate in my primary. Oh wait my state didn't have one because i didn't need to choose a candidate. That's ok, no one else was running anyway because who the fuck can out raise the incumbents.

Seriously though, you are asking an impossible question and getting angry when you don't get the answer you want. No one wants to vote for genocide. No one wants this to be the situation.

[-] AHemlocksLie@lemmy.zip 19 points 3 months ago

We can be upset with her decisions and policies and still very easily acknowledge that one of the candidates is clearly worse. Trump has outright said Netanyahu should just finish the job. He wouldn't just not resist, he'd actively encourage it. It's like choosing between getting shot with a .22 or a .45 bullet to your leg. Both fucking suck, nobody wants to choose either, but if you're knowledgeable about all the consequences and paying attention, it's not a difficult choice.

[-] Typotyper@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 months ago

You’re right. And how people, who say they’re pay attention to the election, history and candidates, post the comments in these threads saying Harris is pro genocide and trump isn’t blows my mind. The trolls are either more subtle of stupider.

A lot of countries had the Jews living in ghettos without the same rights of other citizens. This went on for centuries in Europe. Then along came hitler. He took antisemitism to a new level.

One is the status quote (a vote for Harris) One is encouraging Netanyahu, the hardliners and the settlers. (A vote for trump)

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] Bakkoda@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

It's not even a choice imo, there's one electable candidate and one unelectable and I'm horrified that I've got justify it to a whatabout. I was simply saying that i acknowledge this whatabout is genocide. I wish i had better choices in my elections. Constantly bringing up genocide when right now at this very moment there's not a candidate who is going to win that's shown any inkling of stopping said genocide is contributing nothing to the conversation. That's a conversation about genocide that should 100% involve American politics. This needs to be a conversation about American politics that doesn't involve genocide because at this moment right now it adds zero value.

TLDR: you said it much better than i did lol

load more comments (64 replies)
this post was submitted on 30 Aug 2024
121 points (73.5% liked)

politics

19238 readers
2104 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS