• TORFdot0@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    2 days ago

    “I’m not going to vote because democrats aren’t communist which makes them basically republicans” - average Lemmy.ml user

    Jk it’s actually something more like “I’m not going to vote because I’m European”

    • Soup@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 hours ago

      it’s actually something more like “I’m not going to vote because I’m European”

      That or they’re not of legal age.

    • hexabs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Eastern European specifically.

      Even more specific?

      As east as you can get in Europe :)

    • WanderingVentra@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Do you not think genocide is a good reason to not vote for someone else? As far as red lines go, that’s a pretty good one.

      • iAvicenna@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        it is more like genocide vs genocide + whole bunch of other human rights violations.

        if you are not planning to overthrow the government by revolution then there is no way to go from these two options to an “ideologically perfect” (whatever that means) government in just one election cycle, needs to be done in smaller steps.

        • WanderingVentra@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          1 day ago

          Withholding your vote until genocide is taken off the table pressures her to give in to their demands, though. There’s no universal constant saying we need to have a genocide. Either she loves genocide, or she’s supporting it because she’s worried she won’t get the votes without it. If it’s the second one, and I hope it is, then the Uncommitted movement is simply doing the same thing to establish their own power, and for a better reason: to save the lives of their friends, family, aid workers, doctors, and journalists.

          • iAvicenna@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            15 hours ago

            so late into the elections it will only increase chances of Trump winning and will not convince her to change stance.

            the risk of this is that you move even further away from your goals, practically to a place where it is impossible to do anything about genocide (since core supporters of Trump wont give a shit about and Trump himself for sure will be where money and strongest lobbies are).

            this plan only makes sense if your perspective is “by diverting votes we let Trump win, everything goes to hell and then there is some sort of reform/revolution after he fucks up everything”. But given that maybe %30 of the country is still big time Trump supporters, we are likely looking at a civil war in that case.

            • WanderingVentra@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 hours ago

              You’re never going to be able to convince a lot of people to accept a genocide of their own people. It’s just not possible for some and I don’t blame them. A lot of Americans have never been attacked at home so they don’t understand. It’s a gamble the Administration is doing to keep up their rabid cheerleading of the Nazi-like side. Hopefully it doesn’t blow back on them.

              • iAvicenna@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                10 hours ago

                what if realistically speaking the only current choice is between even a worse situation in middle east vs maybe slightly better than the status quo? I know it sucks but without changing how the elections in US works, you are not going to go from democrats vs republicans to a progressive major party in one election. In one election your only chance is to get slightly closer to it or quite further away.

                • WanderingVentra@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 hours ago

                  It doesn’t have to be a progressive party. Not doing a genocide isn’t progressive. Lots of extremely conservative people over the world manage to do that. Right now, the resistance in the Middle East has fucking Iran in it and Turkey put out a heartfelt video about the long-term ramifications of not doing anything when the moment calls for it. These aren’t bastions of poly blue haired progressives.

                  How do you guys think we live in a democracy when you are so scared to demand even the most base human morals from your politicians? People are frozen in fear to even ask their politicians to not enable an ethnic cleansing, in case it makes them seem like Trump supporter, and so they offer up the lives of even innocent fellow Americans as sacrifice, exactly like a Trump supporter. It’s ridiculous, and yet you all shrug and accept it, because you’ve been trained into complacency as the country slowly keeps ceding more and more territory to save a democracy that doesn’t even let its citizens vote on whether to eliminate an ethnic group or not, only whether to do it gleefully or with a frown face. This is all very… Weimar Republic.

                  Here’s a question. When Trump is gone, will we not be able to fight because of Project 2028? Or 2032? We’ll have to defend ourselves from the fascist overtones of of Presidential Candidate Ron De Santis, so we’re going to have to round up the trans people and kill off the Jews in the hopes of getting more Republican voters to our side, to save our republic again? And again? And we’ll have to shut up about that, too? If the line isn’t drawn at genocide, then there is no line. Unless it’s just at white people, which is starting to feel like the case…

      • Soup@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 hours ago

        • Democrats are VERY reluctantly adhering to a trade agreement and trying to negotiate and end to their hostilities.

        • Trump said they need to “finish the job.”

        bOtH siDeS!

      • prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 day ago

        So you’re gonna do nothing about it. Cool.

        Both sides support Israel, one side has advocated and has vocal members who advocate against the genocide. The other side is for the genocide and thinks they should go further.

        But you’re right, both sides, etc etc, Sit out.

        • wpb@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 day ago

          Who says I’m doing nothing about it? All you know about it is that I refuse to vote in favor of genocidal regimes. Besides, refusing to vote for someone who’s actively committing a genocide is doing something. It’s exercising your right to vote in a meaningful way by showing that there are lines you do not cross. I wouldn’t vote for Hitler when that was an option, and I won’t vote for Harris (or Trump) now.

          • theparadox@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            Make sure to pat yourself on the back for doing something when the christofascists take over, applaud Israels “tough” stance on “terrorism”, and kill or chase out every Palestinian that doesn’t lick IDF boots and ask for seconds.

            • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              15 hours ago

              And you are so sure thats not happening now? How exactly could trump accelerate any of that. Israel literally does what it wants. It doesnt give two shits.

              At least bring up the right ally we would be screwing over which is Ukraine, but oh look the democrats are fucking them over too. Interesting that.

              • theparadox@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                13 hours ago

                While it may be said that Trump is not necessarily the most Israel friendly president, he is undoubtedly the most Netanyahu friendly president (the leader of the Israeli regime perpetuating the genocide in Gaza and the West Bank).

                Trump brags he gave Israel the Golan Heights, part of Syria that Israel has been occupying for decades, by formally recognizing Israeli sovereignty over it.

                https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_recognition_of_the_Golan_Heights_as_part_of_Israel

                Trump recognized Jerusalem as the capital is Israel and moved its embassy there from Tel Aviv. The status of Jerusalem is considered a key part of Israel-Palestine negotiations.

                https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_recognition_of_Jerusalem_as_capital_of_Israel

                Trump’s son in law, Jared Kushner, mentions that Israel should remove the civilian population in Gaza and clean it up, stating it would be valuable waterfront property.

                https://apnews.com/article/jared-kushner-trump-israel-waterfront-property-901895eeafee867e69d0c4582a4deb47

                Trump killed the “Iran Nuclear Deal”, which was vehemently opposed by Netanyahu. When Netanyahu spoke in front of congress opposing the deal in 2015 he was invited by a Republican and Democrats walked out of his speech in protest.

                https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_withdrawal_from_the_Joint_Comprehensive_Plan_of_Action

                Politicians that criticise Israel, or even want conditions on their “military aid”, risk being targeted by the pro-Israel groups. Jamal Bowman had his position more or less publically butchered to set an example and warn others not to oppose Israel. While some others survived massive spending against them by the pro-Israel lobby, AIPAC and other groups are effective in making sure most politicians avoid thr topic of Israel, at least publicly.

                https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/20/nyregion/aipac-bowman-latimer.html

                Netanyahu was clearly displeased with his meeting with Harris. His repeated escalation of violence is increasing tensions in the Middle East and angering a large subset of the US Democratic base. More and more people are under the impression that he is trying to harm the Democratic ticket and/or lock the US in conflict so that, of Democrats still win the presidency, they will have no choice but to continue to back Israel and Netanyahu’s regime.

                • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  2 hours ago

                  All of these things are happening or heading towards happening now, under Democrat leadership.

                  Explain to me how either the republicans would make it worse, or the democrats would make it better.

                  • theparadox@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    ·
                    9 hours ago

                    I am well aware. I just want to make sure that someone is countering their argument so that their bad faith argument has less of a chance to impact an observer.