• LovableSidekick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    63
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    21 hours ago

    The fantasy world the zero-tolerance high-ground morality angels live in is as dangerous as the one MAGA lives in, and ironically has the same victims. They proudly polish their halos nice and shiny while they let the world burn.

    • Dragon "Rider"(drag)@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      46
      arrow-down
      24
      ·
      21 hours ago

      Don’t support genocide, it’s as simple as that!

      By the way: Voting isn’t actually support. The American system is not set up in a way where votes actually add to the power of the Presidential office. On the other hand, making a deliberate choice not to act does mean supporting whatever happens without your action, which could be genocide. This means YOU HAVE TO VOTE HARRIS IN ORDER TO NOT SUPPORT GENOCIDE. The socialism angels are hypocrites.

      • Seasm0ke@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 minutes ago

        "Vote for the candidate who will continue to fund a genocide to show you dont support genocide "

        Man yall will do anything to avoid a socialist movement.

      • pyre@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        33
        arrow-down
        15
        ·
        edit-2
        20 hours ago

        there are two facts about this election

        1. there are only two outcomes—0.0% chance for a third party win
        2. both candidates have a bad stance on the genocide

        so neither outcome will help with the genocide. acting like voting third party helps in any way shape or form is disingenuous at best. so what should you do?

        my argument is that you should vote for the person you can hope to convince on this issue. phone calls, protests, social media, whatever means you have… which of these candidates is more likely to respond to any kind of public pressure about this?

        Harris might be responsive, and let’s be honest, she might not be. but you know for a fact that it’s definitely not the fucking orange turd. Natenyahu wants him to win. how can you ignore that?

        • kava@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          24
          ·
          18 hours ago

          which of these candidates is more likely to respond to any kind of public pressure about this?

          neither. 0.0% chance for either candidate.

          i only voted for kamala because she’s a woman and even though she’s an awful candidate at least we can get it out of our collective system, show little girls they can be president, and the neoliberal status quo is probably still better than Trump

          i’m not entirely sure on that because I think Kamala is more likely to lead us into a war with Russia… but Trump is more volatile in general I think

          • lurklurk@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            11 hours ago

            Amazing that you at least did the overwhelming obvious right thing even though your reasons are awful

            • kava@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              11 hours ago

              i think breaking the barrier of sex in terms of male/female president is a powerful thing. there’s been so many women throughout history that could have been judith pulgars, politically speaking, and ended up getting pushed into more subservient positions

              that’s the main reason. i dont think that’s an awful reason

              as for the russian war thing, i rather like living in a pre-nuclear-war society.

              • sorval_the_eeter@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                5 hours ago

                i think breaking the barrier of sex in terms of male/female president is a powerful thing.

                I agree with that, and its long overdue, but if she fumbles badly she may set everything backward.

              • lurklurk@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                9 hours ago

                It just implies that looking at the candidates the biggest and most important difference you see is that one is a woman.

                Like, it’s great that you did vote for that woman as she also happens to be in favour of women having rights, lgbtq+ people having rights, doesn’t want mass deportions, still wants there to be elections in the future and a painfully long list of stark differences like that. It’s just impressive that none of that mattered to you, or that you are unaware of it

                • kava@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  5 hours ago

                  i’m more cynical about her. it’s not that i don’t think gay rights and women rights aren’t important. they are. but to me, the primary issues i care about, in order of importance

                  a) probability of war

                  b) attitude towards immigrants

                  c) economic position

                  d) foreign policy in general

                  so for example I think Kamala is probably more likely to get us into war than Trump is. That gives points to Trump.

                  on the immigration front, I don’t have any illusions about where the national conversation is going. I was brought here to this country illegally as a small child. I grew up here illegal and it wasn’t until my early 20s that I managed to naturalize

                  so i’ve been embedded in immigrant communities, with a lot of illegals sprinkled in, and have been paying attention to immigration news for virtually all of life

                  i can only think of two politicians who have done something meaningful for illegals. Reagan and Obama. Reagan of course gave amnesty to millions of illegals. Obama enacted the DACA policy, which wasn’t nearly as broad as amnesty, but it was definitely a good thing that helped hundreds of thousands of people. but “immigration reform” has been promised my whole life by DNC and never delivered. best was the half-assed DACA

                  But let’s look at rhetoric from Biden. During campaign in 2020 he advocated for a “compassionate approach” and was “pushing for immigration reform”. he promised to halt the construction of “the Wall tm”

                  What about the last couple years? He expanded construction of the wall which he timed with a photoshoot with Customs and Border Patrol at the southern border. He also went on TV and started using the word illegal - which is a term Democrats historically haven’t used. I don’t think it’s offensive or anything- but it’s telling to show how the overton window has sharply been shoved to the right

                  Now look at Biden’s successor - Kamala - the woman I voted for begrudgingly. go to her website and look at the policies and you will see zilch about compassionate approach or immigration reform. today it’s “security and strong border”

                  right now over 65% of all Americans (not just GOP) support deporting all illegal immigrants. Something absurd to say even a decade ago. Majority of Americans support a policy which would effectively have the military going around house to house in order to put over 10 million people in camps, which they would stay at for years while the government tries to figure out the complex and expensive logistical challenge of moving millions of people out of the country (Germans had this same problem back in first half of the 1900s. they came up with a controversial solution to that question, of course)

                  so i’m not saying kamala is equal or worse than trump on this. trump is partly at fault for the rise in this change. but i think long term it won’t make a difference who wins in this field. either way immigrants are screwed, so it doesn’t really matter to me in this election

                  economic position, i think not gonna matter much. the whole “tax breaks for first time homeowners” from Kamala is yet another bailout to the banks at the expense of regular people. Trump put in sanctions on China, raising prices for Americans… Biden kept them in place and put some more. I don’t think this is much different. the reductionist “tax the rich” is a nice slogan but without meaning. as long as the government has a money tap funneling public money to leeches, no amount of taxes will ever filter down to help the working class

                  foreign policy in general. again, i don’t see much of a difference. china from above is a good example. iran is another. Obama actually came up with a revolutionary deal- bringing the Iranians back into the fold. Trump torpedoed that deal in spectacular fashion and then moved the American embassy to Jerusalem. Biden maintained the “get fucked” attitude towards Iran and went to Tel Aviv in Oct of last year to bend the knee to Netanyahu.

                  so to summarize

                  for the issues i mentioned, which are the ones that matter to me, i think long term the choice of candidate isn’t going to influence anything significantly either way. the zietgiest is headed in a certain direction and i don’t think either candidate has the capacity or willingness to meaningfully change the course of things

                  so then we get to why did i vote for kamala. because I think it’ll be inspiring to girls and women across the country. it’ll implicitly let them know they are equal and are able to accomplish anything, even the highest office in the country

                  i think that alone is worth voting for her. and of course Trump is a bit of a wild card and I prefer stability.

          • forrcaho@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            15 hours ago

            neither. 0.0% chance for either candidate.

            This level of cynicism is unwarranted. Sure it might be low, but for Harris it’s at least 0.1%.

            • kava@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              14 hours ago

              with the current stranglehold the pro-Israeli lobby has on American politics (includes both GOP and DNC) even 0.1% is a stretch

              AIPAC even brags about it: https://aipacorg.app.box.com/s/t8vvqt7evxvgkzn5jktpwejate6oxo0y

              98% of AIPAC endorsed candidates won their election in 2022. if you are a politician and you say something mildly critical of Israel they will go to war with you and do everything so that your opponent wins

              Israel has figured out how to hack American democracy. There is no going back at this point. We are a pro-Israel country for the foreseeable future, regardless of which candidate wins this election or the next one or the next one

        • fuckdenialists@lemmings.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          30
          ·
          edit-2
          20 hours ago

          My argument is that the only good american is that dude who set himself on fire. You are a scumbag. You are no better than a german in the 30ies smelling the grilled flesh and thinking “this is fine, it’s still better than bolchevism”

      • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Voting isn’t actually support

        On the other hand, making a deliberate choice not to act does mean supporting whatever happens without your action

        Interesting. So, by drag’s logic, a Trump voter isn’t responsible for supporting Trump, but a nonvoter is.

        It’s amusing to see the kinds of ridiculous knots y’all tie yourselves into trying to twist around language in an attempt to resolve your cognitive dissonance and punch left.

      • fuckdenialists@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        34
        ·
        edit-2
        20 hours ago

        Fuck off drag. The US dems are guilty of extermination and everybody who vote in this election are complicit. You can call them to throw foreigners under the bus for their own gain and security, since they are bullying people to vote for the genocide party just because the other side said they were gonna be worst.

        When somebody commit a crime, you punish this person, you dont give them power because some other dude talked shit.