this post was submitted on 23 Feb 2026
296 points (95.4% liked)

politics

28516 readers
2794 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

You need to do the work to undo the Fascism you enabled. Simple as. Make it clear in this next election cycle that no oro ice, pro genocide candidates get your vote. And it's not because you individually won't vote for them. You need to make it clear that if the candidate doesn't move to your more moral policy positions, they don't get to have your vote.

Your individual vote doesn't matter. Neither does mine. What matters is the 6% left on the table by Harris being pro genocide. We've got to to get them back which means you have to do the work of cleaning out the cynicism you injected into the system by insisting people vote or genocide.

You have work to do.

[–] HalfSalesman@lemmy.world 0 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

Voting for Harris wasn't voting for genocide, because it ultimately did not matter if the GOP won or if the Dems won in terms of what happened to the Palestinians.

In fact, letting Trump win probably made it worse for the Palestinians.

I voted to save immigrants from what's happening now to them. I voted to protect the poor from the GOP's austerity. I voted to prevent an even more conservative SCOTUS. I voted for the tiny hope of fixing women's bodily autonomy and healthcare in this country. I voted to prevent the death cult evangelicals and white supremacists from gaining more power in our government.

My co-worker has family in Mexico that shes terrified for because this admin's moronic and destructive actions of killing El Mencho have put them directly in danger and will do zero to help with drug related deaths.

I know trans people who literally want to flee this country and can't because of the gender on their fucking passport.

My mom is worried about being able to vote because she did not change her fucking last name back to her maiden name when she divorced my piece of shit republican father and now there is legislation meant to suppress her vote.

I voted to try and prevent all of this. FUCK YOU, YOU STUPID PIECE OF SHIT. YOU'RE A FUCKING WORTHLESS IMBECILE. You are not my ally or an ally of the innocent people this has hurt. You enabled this misery, and I hate you for it. I despise you at the very core of my being.

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Voting for Harris, when Harris couldn't get elected on her policies, wasn't a vote to stop this. That's what you need to get through your head. Harris handed back 6% of Democratic voters to the couch. That's just self evident. She lost the election.

If you weren't advocating that she move her policy positions to more popular positions within the base, you weren't doing the thing you want to imagine yourself as having been doing.

History isn't going to remember you as the good guy if you were telling people to suck it up and vote Harris: because no amount to telling people to suck it up and vote Harris was going to get her elected. There was precisely one path to get her elected: get her to change her position on Gaza.

She was objectively pro Israel and in her own Democrat way, pro genocide. She would not win the election with that position (again, self evident). If you were not advocating that she changed her position, and making it clear that she would lose the election if she didn't, in that critical time period from August till November, you weren't doing what you want to write yourself into history as having had done.

[–] HalfSalesman@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Go far enough, there wont be historians.

What you need to get through your head is that the group of people actively advocating for the abstaining of voting is why 6% did not vote for the lesser evil. At the same level of blame that the DNC lick's Israel's boots. And the 6% itself deserves this outcome, because we have FIRST PAST THE POST.

We did not have a primary. We should have. That's a failure of the DNC and Biden as well.

So, given that I understand that the DNC as villains. That Israel are villains. MAGA are obviously all villains. Where does this leave left leaning independents and potential dem voters?

Each potential voter had a simple moral calculus in front of them:

  1. Progressives: Vote for the lesser evil and hope we build off of that to make things better. Minimize risk that a fascist wins.
  2. Abstain from voting, let the fascist get an edge in terms of their chance of winning.

Potential dem voters who did #1 are not the bad guys. #2 made an explicit choice and are scum, just like MAGA. Just like the DNC. Just like Biden.

This isn't to say the every person who fits into category #1 is blameless: if they advocated for centrists or were pro-israel, yeah, they fit into the same as the DNC category. But the vast majority of the people who fit into category #1 did not do that. You suggesting such is incredible delusion.

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 59 minutes ago)

the group of people actively advocating for the abstaining of voting is why 6% did not vote for the lesser evil.

Schrödingers anti-genocide caucus. Simultaneously capable of with-holding their vote and changing the entire course of an election and yet also not a meaningful enough of a group of voters to be worth changing your policy positions for. If this caucus was sooo important, why didn't the campaign change their positions?

You are demonstrating a fundamental misunderstanding how elections work, how they function. Effectively, you are subject in the same kind of propaganda that the petroleum industry used to convince consumers that individual actions, specifically recycling, plastics was going to save the world. This is a bad faith approach because it shifts the responsibility for the outcomes or consequences of elections from those who actually have power in the system, like parties, political campaigns, and candidates, to those who effectively have the least power in the system: voters. That perspective you hold, is the result of a long effort on the parties to dismiss the responsibility they hold for actually appealing to voters and their demands.

The reality was that voters were extremely dissatisfied with the Biden administration. This is something mainstream media told people not to believe their lying eyes about throughout 2023 and 2024, about how good the Biden economy was. About how people were just imagining the struggles they were experiencing, those were just things they were imagining. This is couple with the fact that the Democratic administration continued to support a genocide throughout. When asked what Harris would do differently, she said "nothing would fundamentally change*. No one spoke for her in those words. She said this.

What you are doing, by blaming voters for the failure of a political campaign to meet the moment: Its precisely what allowed the campaign to fail. Your advocacy that its "on the voters" to vote for the 'lessor evil', it creates the permission structure that allowed the campaign to maintain positions that would result in them losing the election. And I want to be clear, in the build up to the election, your perspective, that voters needed to just vote for the lessor evil instead of the campaign change is what prevented the campaign from the course corrections they needed to make to win.

And we have the receipts. Telling voters they'll just need to vote for the lessor evil won't work. You won't win an election that way. The idea that you can blame or shame voters into doing what you want doesn't work. That is now established fact. We've run the experiment, multiple times now, and we've got the results. Creating the permission structure such that campaigns know they don't need to respond to voters: this is what allows campaigns to maintain un-electable positions.