• Sundial@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    55
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Someone running for office should not be entitled to a vote simply because the opposition is bad. Even if they’re as bad as Trump. I wish more people demanded better from their leaders, it would stop this ridiculous slide to the right the entire American political system has been going though for decades.

    • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      You fix that by pushing for ranked choice balloting, until then, it’s your job to get the least objectionable person elected, which in this case is Harris.

      • Sundial@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        25
        ·
        1 day ago

        I agree with the first part, not the second however. This situation of voting for the least objectionable person led us to this kind of election. I want more progressives to demand progress and making it conditional to their vote instead of just accepting the least shitty option because the other one is a fascist dickhead. MAGA won’t go away if Harris gets elected, even with a majority of the house and senate. Until America demands better than their politics will just continually slide to the right. Ranked choice balloting would be a major gamechanger, I just don’t see it happening at all. Not with the current political climate.

        • cassie 🐺@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          Ballots aren’t where effective political action happens. Demanding better means organizing outside of election years, maintaining strong communities, and showing up to participate in political action that isn’t just ticking one of a few allowable boxes. Demanding better sometimes means just doing better, regardless of the state’s involvement. That isn’t directly applicable to, say, genocide, but it does help build a real base of support that allows people to work outside the system to further that progress between elections.

          I’m voting for Harris because I would much rather organize under her administration than Trump’s. It’s a dead simple choice imo, because demanding better means doing the work every other day than Election Day.

          and definitely pay more attention to your local elections, those will more directly impact you and the people around you.

          • Sundial@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            Fully agree. I wish more people actually voted uncommitted in the primaries for reasons such as this. To show that American voters want a progressive, not a moderate of an extreme far right fascist.

        • kitnaht@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          “In four years, you don’t have to vote again. We’ll have it fixed so good you won’t have to vote,” he said. “Christians get out and vote just this time. You won’t have to do it anymore. Four more years, you know what, it’ll be fixed. It’ll be fine. You won’t have to vote anymore.” - Donald J. Trump.

          Literally destroys your point of view. You will not have the opportunity if he gets elected. We’re not just risking American democracy here, we’re on the precipice of history. We’re at the point everyone asks about regarding WWII – the common question is – “Why didn’t anyone do anything?”…well, we clearly have people screaming at the top of their lungs that they should do something.

          • Sundial@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            11
            ·
            1 day ago

            Literally nowhere in either of my comments did I advocate for Trump or anything of the sort. Im not sure what you’re trying to get at here.

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

              You fix that by pushing for ranked choice balloting, until then, it’s your job to get the least objectionable person elected, which in this case is Harris. - Jordanlund

              I agree with the first part, not the second however. This situation of voting for the least objectionable person led us to this kind of election. - Sundial

              You did, by basically doing the “they’re both the same!” argument.

              How in the earthly hell can you not see that they aren’t anywhere close to the same?

              MAGA won’t go away if Harris gets elected, even with a majority of the house and senate.

              Sure they won’t go away, but we can reverse their fucking DEADLY policies. They’re literally talking about rounding up their enemies and putting them in camps.

              This “both sides” argument is such trash, because both sides are clearly nowhere near the same.

              • Sundial@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                23 hours ago

                I never said they were the same. I said if the only way Harris is better than a fascist wanna-be dictator is that fact that she’s not that person, then it’s not a good argument to vote for her. Candidates aren’t and shouldn’t be entitled to vote simply because of how bad the opposition is.

                Americans have been voting for the less shitty options for decades, and all its done is a continuous slide to extreme far right and fascism. People need to demand better during elections and outside of elections. Imagine how different the Gaza situation would be if more people voted undecided in the primaries. It would have forced the Democrats to really address it and rein in the situation. That would have removed the biggest issue with Harris campaign. Michigan would not have been a state that could swing red if that were the case.

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

                  I said if the only way Harris is better than a fascist wanna-be dictator is that fact that she’s not that person

                  That’s the same thing! Nobody is voting for harris because she’s “not trump” like they did with Biden. She’s GENUINELY simply got better policies on literally everything.

                  She’s not better than him because she’s not that person, she’s better than him in thousands of other ways. And he literally represents the end of America.

                  You’re another one of them. There is literally no way you can play this game and be genuine.

                  I guarantee we won’t hear shit from your burner account after Nov 5th…

        • brygphilomena@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          That. Doesn’t. Work.

          Full stop.

          Let’s say for a moment that progressives and Democrats did that for whatever issue they personally felt strongly about.

          First, we have to acknowledge that the Republicans ARE NOT doing that. So they’re vote count doesn’t change and they win

          Second, people will disagree on the same issue. You can’t capture everyone on every issue. Refer to the first point, Republicans win.

          Third, there will be huge factions each with their own issue. A candidate cannot sway all these single issues groups. See the first point, Republicans win.

          What first past the post representative democracy means is to vote for the viable politician that MOST ALIGNS with your political position. Not the one that EXACTLY aligns. If you build the third parties at the local and representative and Senate level. Maybe you can get there, but for now, this is the political system we have to work in.

          • Sundial@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            1 day ago

            I don’t disagree with anything you just said. I’m just saying that an argument for a candidate on an issue should be a lot better than “better than Trump”. It’s a ridiculously low bar America has been forced to accept, and by extension the world.

        • GBU_28@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

          This is privilege. You are accepting that a trump second term will be “ok” for you. I know that because if it wasn’t going to be ok for you, you’d throw your vote to anyone who could possibly beat him in a few days.

          I’ve got people who won’t be ok. Minorities, LGBTQ, etc who are my friends, neighbors, or even just fellow citizens. They won’t be ok and I’ll do everything I can to help them avoid trump in this election.

          I’m not in love with harris’ platform but I’m not trying to get married, I’m just trying to keep my Muslim neighbor with a tough immigration situation, or my gay cousin out of trouble.

          • Sundial@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            I never accepted or advocated for Trump. I just said people should be demanding better. Saying the candidate you want to vote for is better than Trump is an incredibly low bar. That shouldn’t be the only argument to use to advocate for someone.

            • GBU_28@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              24 hours ago

              I’ve been consistent in saying I don’t find Harris exciting or compelling. Low bar or not, it’s the challenge at hand.

    • Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      32
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Agreed. Chasing an electorate where the loudest shout they want more hate, which is what I (perhaps incorrectly) see happening from elsewhere in the world, is not good for the political system. It just legitimises hate.

  • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    1 day ago

    hoohoooo, all the single-issue “progressives” and Bernie bros who have been screaming at me for saying the same thing have to scream at Bernie now.

    that’ll be funny.

  • SoJB@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    39
    ·
    edit-2
    22 hours ago

    Holy hell, you liberals really have gone completely off the rocker in your corner of Lemmy, huh? I mean, Jesus Christ the shit I am reading in these comments is completely insane.

    “Everyone I disagree with is a foreign agent”, say the people whose same views Israel are literally running bot farms about.

    “Trump would be worse”, say the people who have admitted that the genocide of Palestine is an acceptable means to an end, as if queer folks are supposed to believe you won’t be their next tool of convenience to be discarded.

    “Look at all these policy differences”, say the party who brag about being half Republicans and use their policies.

    Y’all are going to lose, and it’s not going to be because of the 100 US leftists on Lemmy.

    I’m sure you’ll blame us anyway though, because liberals have objectively abandoned reality.

    Look at yourselves. You’ve become MAGA, and don’t even try to deny it. This is the shit you made fun of Republicans for doing for 4 years of Trump. I thought Democracy was about winning votes, not demanding them under threats of violence? Or is this another one of PugJesus’ cronies?

    • TheObviousSolution@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      22 hours ago

      Ok gaslighter

      Yeah, the US elections have a high chance of losing, largely due to large disinformation campaigns not unlike the one your comment forms a part of.

    • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      21 hours ago

      Holy hell, you liberals really have gone completely off the rocker in your corner of Lemmy, huh? I mean, Jesus Christ the shit I am reading in these comments is completely insane.

      Nice one komrad! These stupid Americans can’t fathom how far we can move the goalposts!

      “Everyone I disagree with is a foreign agent”, say the people whose same views Israel are literally running bot farms about.

      Da! DA! Sprinkle the truth in so they can’t use it against us! This is why you make the best borscht!

      “Trump would be worse”, say the people who have admitted that the genocide of Palestine is an acceptable means to an end, as if queer folks are supposed to believe you won’t be their next tool of convenience to be discarded.

      Putin will be proud of your efforts komrad, I’m sure of it. Not only did you defend komrad Trump, but you tossed in a genocide grenade! These dumb Americans can’t see through the web of lies you weave. It’s truely an art from you. You even managed to attack the homosexuals, god bless you!

      Oh blyat! I did not realize this is a public channel!

      • fuckdenialists@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        12 hours ago

        McCartists thinking they are funny with their overused joke. The truth is accusing opponents to be part of a fifth column always had been integral part of all war propaganda. Remember when everybody who opposed the vietnam war was a moscow spy?

  • P_P@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    199
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 day ago

    Once you are under dictatorship, you can’t vote to hold anyone accountable. Vote for Trump and you won’t have a say in what happens to Gaza. Or anything else.

    • solsangraal@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      120
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 day ago

      yea, but you get to brag to all the other inmates in the political prison yard that you stood up for your principles by not voting!

      • barsquid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        They’ll be in the same political prisons as their primary enemies, the classic liberal Dems.

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

          Am I allowed physical violence to the purported leftist idiots who land us there? I’ll piss on their cracked skulls while reminding them we have the same values but I’m practical and trying to survive to fight for them.

      • Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        102
        ·
        1 day ago

        I’m not as enthused as you to vote for a system where innocent civilians have to die for political convenience, sorry. My morals say that killing is wrong, and I don’t like it.

          • Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            arrow-down
            85
            ·
            1 day ago

            If your point is “some people think that killing is wrong”, feel free to consider your point proven.

            • GoddessNoAi@lemmynsfw.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              88
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              1 day ago

              His point is that some people think killing is so wrong that they’ll actively advocate for a course of action that will kill waaaaay more people.

              You value your own moral purity over the lives of other people.

              That’s his point.

              • _bcron_@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                34
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 day ago

                It’s the trolley problem:

                You have Gaza on one set of tracks

                On the other, you have Gaza, Ukraine, and potentially a whole lot of other stuff including anyone that’s ever registered Democrat (they’ll be able to pry voter registrations and if they do make good on building big-ass detention facilities one doesn’t need to be all that creative to imagine what they might eventually use them for)

                I don’t really wanna know what’s on that other set of tracks

            • pixxelkick@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              47
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              1 day ago

              You’re choosing between “lots of people being killed” vs “LOOOOOOTTTTTSSSS of people being killed”

              Based on your own morality you have outlined, ethically you would choose to vote Kamala then, as under her far far fewer people will die.

                • CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  26
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 day ago

                  No demon at all has created it; other humans have. You aren’t the sole person responsible for responding to it, but your actions will contribute to what happens next, non-action included.

                  You can say that this kind of situation implies someone else has done something wrong, leaving you holding the bag, and you’d be right, if nobody had done something wrong, we wouldn’t have a genocide to talk about in the first place- but saying that leaving you holding the moral bag was a wrong thing to do doesn’t change the fact that you are now holding that bag, along with all the rest of us. And about half of us (referring to the people of the US as a whole), if you haven’t noticed, have every desire of causing even more harm. “Neither” is simply not an option when failing to choose the least bad thing will result in someone else choosing the worse one. It’s not fair, it’s repulsive even, but the universe does not work in such a way as to ensure only fair moral choices exist. Morality is a thing we invented, the world doesn’t care about conforming to it.

                  Getting the best outcome you have with the bad options presented you matters more than whether or not you feel your own personal hands are clean- because metaphorically clean hands will not save the people of Palestine, and likely would doom some, and others elsewhere, that could have been saved. A clean feeling conscience bought by leaving people you could have helped to die is little more than a delusion of innocence.

        • meep_launcher@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          54
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

          I’m voting so the state doesn’t kill my sister if she has complications in her pregnancy.

          • Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            34
            ·
            1 day ago

            That is good. I would also like to be able to vote so the state doesn’t send weapons to enable one country to kill innocent people in another. Some of those people dying are sisters, and their siblings feel much like you might when they are without them.

            • meep_launcher@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              6 hours ago

              I’d like to do that too, but sadly that’s not on the ballot this year.

              Only way I see our way out of these situations in the future is ranked choice vote and abolish the electoral college so 3rd party candidates are actually viable. I’ve been donating to fairvote.org and joined the forward party for that reason, but in the meantime I can only help damage control while I wait for the calvary of rcv.

          • Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            35
            ·
            1 day ago

            Thanks, as a person with a trans gender identity, this really helps me to understand that nothing will change, because fear and oppression will be utilised to force people to rationalise harmful actions as inevitable.

              • yumpsuit@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                16 hours ago

                It’s a fucky word construction, but it’s correct and in wide use. Transgender and trans are different concepts. I’m reading “A Short History of Trans Misogyny” by Jules Gill-Peterson which opens with this paragraph:

                •••

                Preface

                “Trans misogyny” refers to the targeted devaluation of both trans femininity and people perceived to be trans feminine, regardless of how they understand them-selves. While it can manifest as a system of beliefs, trans misogyny also structures the material world through disparate life outcomes and a suite of characteristically punitive regimes. As an exercise of interpersonal or state violence, trans misogyny operates through the logic of the preemptive strike. It trans-feminizes its targets without their assent, usually by sexualizing their presumptive femininity as if it were an expression of male aggression. This process of misrecognition and projection construes its targets as inherently threatening. The threat label, in turn, justifies aggression or punishment rationalized after the fact as a legitimate response to having been victimized— a self-interested playbook if there ever was one. Whoever pursues trans misogyny enjoys the rare privilege of being at once the victim and the judge, jury, and executioner. The transgression prompting this full-court press can be as mundane as walking down the street, or a moral panic as overinflated as the putative end of Western civilization. Regardless, the passive presence of a trans-feminized person is almost always the solipsistic pretense for striking first. Trans misogyny attacks the very existence of trans femininity in attacking real people.

                •••

              • Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                9
                arrow-down
                25
                ·
                edit-2
                24 hours ago

                Hey, I’m autistic, queer, and an immigrant. You can hate me if you want, plenty of people do.

                My gender identity is trans. I’m also ethnically Ukrainian. Feel free to assume I’m Russian because I’m different to you. That’s what human society does, create ougroups and scapegoat them. I try to avoid doing it, which makes me an enemy of those who do, because I say impossible things like “can we not kill innocent people?” For practical purposes, that will not happen, and asking for it is naive.

                I know that. But, although impractical and naive, that does not stop it from being the morally correct outcome. My autism shows itself in a very strong sense of justice, and I find justice to be more important than practicality.

                • spidermanchild@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  14
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  18 hours ago

                  How exactly does not voting/3rd party voting create any justice in your opinion? Opting out of our limited and imperfect democracy doesn’t magically create justice, it silences your own voice. Nobody here hates you, and broadly speaking the Democrats don’t hate you either. I can’t say the same for the cult of Trump. If you truly have a strong sense of justice, wouldn’t you want to at a bare minimum try to prevent am actual criminal from gaining power?

            • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              12
              arrow-down
              10
              ·
              24 hours ago

              as a person with a trans gender identity

              I’m gonna go ahead and stop you right there chief. Transgender people don’t write “transgender” as two words. Big “as a black man” energy here, cishet loser.

              • Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                20
                ·
                edit-2
                24 hours ago

                As a non-binary person who is under the trans gender umbrella, without being transgender in the sense of having transitioned across genders, I am careful with my language. I am not transgender in the way people typically understand.

                Feel free to participate in non-binary erasure, I’m used to it. Humans love creating outgroups so they can bully each other, that is why I find myself not labelling myself as human. I think gender is stupid, and I think humans are rude.

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

                Our posting buddy’s fucky word construction is correct and in wide use. I’m reading “A Short History of Trans Misogyny” by Jules Gill-Peterson which opens with this paragraph:

                •••

                Preface

                “Trans misogyny” refers to the targeted devaluation of both trans femininity and people perceived to be trans feminine, regardless of how they understand them-selves. While it can manifest as a system of beliefs, trans misogyny also structures the material world through disparate life outcomes and a suite of characteristically punitive regimes. As an exercise of interpersonal or state violence, trans misogyny operates through the logic of the preemptive strike. It trans-feminizes its targets without their assent, usually by sexualizing their presumptive femininity as if it were an expression of male aggression. This process of misrecognition and projection construes its targets as inherently threatening. The threat label, in turn, justifies aggression or punishment rationalized after the fact as a legitimate response to having been victimized— a self-interested playbook if there ever was one. Whoever pursues trans misogyny enjoys the rare privilege of being at once the victim and the judge, jury, and executioner. The transgression prompting this full-court press can be as mundane as walking down the street, or a moral panic as overinflated as the putative end of Western civilization. Regardless, the passive presence of a trans-feminized person is almost always the solipsistic pretense for striking first. Trans misogyny attacks the very existence of trans femininity in attacking real people.

                •••

                Also, if you’re still reading, please also add to your lexicon the absolute gift that is “cissie.”

        • poke@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          48
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

          Not voting is a choice as well. A choice that will make it so that your voice will not have an impact on whether the candidate that kills more will win, or the candidate that kills less. Choosing to abstain is an announcement that you don’t care about those whose lives are being threatened, the opposite of what you seem to think it is.

          • Pika@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            Honestly my ideology on it is the same as my parents and my grandparents, and even my great grandparents ideology.

            I don’t care who you vote for, what you vote for, or your reasoning’s for doing do.

            But if you refuse to vote, regardless of reason, you lose any say in complaining about what happens as a result, as you actively did nothing to help prevent it, meaning you have no right to bitch about the outcome.

          • dhork@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            30
            ·
            1 day ago

            A great Canadian philosopher once said “If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice!”

          • AntiOutsideAktion@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            11 hours ago

            the candidate that kills more will win, or the candidate that kills less

            The most infuriating thing about you nazi motherfuckers is you still have the fucking gall to believe you’re better than the other side

          • Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            47
            ·
            1 day ago

            Not voting is a choice as well.

            Yes, but I don’t have any other choice, myself.

            Choosing to abstain is an announcement that you don’t care

            No, it’s an announcement that I care so much about innocent people dying that I am morally conflicted about being asked to be part of a political system which condones it.

            • GoddessNoAi@lemmynsfw.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              43
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 day ago

              asked to be part of a political system

              But, you’re not being asked. You already are. You don’t get to pretend you’re not, just because you didn’t give your permission. This isn’t an opt-in situation.

              And I get that maybe you feel that isn’t fair, and I agree it isn’t. Just like none of us asked to be born, none of us asked to be part of society either. But we are, and we have to deal with that now.

              • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                30
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 day ago

                They don’t have a choice, because Samvega is not an American citizen. They are a troll and they only thing they do is say the same exact comments in every post. Don’t bother engaging with them.

                • CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  Even a non American citizen has a choice in this. If they aren’t American, they can’t vote, but people that can vote can be influenced by the words of others (otherwise, such trolls wouldn’t exist, after all, they’d have no point), and someone outside the country can still choose what to say.

                  I’m not really convinced that foreign operations are terribly active on a platform this small, or that these people truly are such an operation, but if for the sake of argument they are, and the user in question happens to be one, I’m not sure that non-engagement actually helps. “Don’t feed the trolls” is standard advice for dealing with traditional trolls, that are just out to make people mad and will move on if ignored. But a person being paid to shape the narrative isn’t going to just get bored and quit, they’re going to keep doing what they’re paid to do, and people are at some level influenced to align with ideas that they think are popular among the people around them, so letting them make a bunch of uncontested arguments still lets them shape a narrative through volume.

                  On a platform like this, that doesn’t have engagement algorithms that will boost the words of someone you interact with, I feel that it makes more sense to drown out trolls of the foreign kind, so that others who see them get the impression that what they say is not popular. One just has to keep in mind, if one truly believes that one is arguing with such a person, that your goal in arguing is no longer either to refine your ideas or convince the other person of yours, but to convince other people who see the argument of them.

        • KillerTofu@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          So you’re voting for fascism or just going to sit it out in a political statement? Or being bold and voting third party?

          • Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            16
            ·
            1 day ago

            So you’re voting for fascism or just going to sit it out in a political statement? Or being bold and voting third party?

            I cannot cast a vote in this election.

        • GiantChickDicks@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          23 hours ago

          It doesn’t take enthusiasm to make an active move toward harm reduction if and when you see the opportunity, especially when the consequences are this serious. I would love to see ranked choice voting and a diverse and motivated number of parties to challenge the dichotomy we have now, but I live in the reality of the viable options in front of me in this moment.

          This isn’t about an acceptance or endorsement of the system we have now. Unfortunately for all of us, however, this is the system we currently live in. If my choices are between bad and catastrophic, I’m going with bad. Doubly so in cases like these. The choice is either the people who are suffering may or will continue to do so, versus these same people suffering even worse while making multiple new groups of people suffer, too.

          If Trump wins and things get as bad, or worse, than the scenarios that have been proposed on record, more people will continue to lose their homes, autonomy, and lives in the United States. Many people who are suffering from atrocities actively going on in places other than the Middle East will likely also be worse off under these policies.

          I hope those people who feel as if they own the moral high ground will remember they had an opportunity to stop it and chose to do nothing if we suddenly all find ourselves living in that world.

          • Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            14
            ·
            edit-2
            23 hours ago

            I hope those people who feel as if they own the moral high ground will remember they had an opportunity to stop it

            How many people died in Gaza today? I wish I had an opportunity to stop that.

            but I live in the reality of the viable options

            Yes, and I am unhappy that the options all involve ‘innocent people are dying right now’. This bothers me.

            If it’s the moral high ground to say that killing is wrong, then it is also the moral high ground for you to say “The choice is either the people who are suffering may or will continue to do so, versus these same people suffering even worse”. You’re saying that hurting innocent people is bad, yes?

            Having to choose to hurt some or more innocent people is not a choice I am enthused about, no matter what the practical reality is. It would be churlish to criticise someone without food for complaining about their practical choice between going hungry and starving, I feel.

            Practical concerns do not replace morality. Someone might have no choice but to abandon their children because they cannot afford them: this does not stop them from being harmed by the moral weight of what, in all practicality, they had to do.

            • GiantChickDicks@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              14
              ·
              23 hours ago

              My underlying point was the nuance of this entire situation, and you provided another obtuse black-and-white response. If you can’t radically accept the world and your life, it’s going to make it awfully hard to see it well enough to make changes.

            • spidermanchild@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              10
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              19 hours ago

              Who told you that your vote has to be based on morals and not practicality? It’s just a vote, you’re not swearing allegiance to them or agreeing with their every stance. It’s really not that complicated.

              If you want to bring morals in, is it moral that women are literally dying because SCOTUS allowed states to deny women healthcare? Is deporting 11 million people moral? Seems like you get a lot of immorality when you let fundamentally immoral people have power.

            • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              20 hours ago

              There are no palatable choices in this election. You can vote for the guy who has said Israel should hurry up and finish the job or the woman who has asked for a cease fire. There are other choices, but they tend to support the first guy. It would be awesome to have a choice that results in the genocide absolutely stopping, and I feel it’s entirely appropriate to be angry that isn’t an option, but it isn’t the choice we have. Perhaps you believe standing aside and doing nothing when the moral choice isn’t available is the correct thing to do. I vehemently do not, but that is also an option American voters have, whether through protest voting or abstaining from voting altogether. Unfortunately, my world hasn’t been that black and white for a long time.

          • Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            18
            ·
            1 day ago

            I’m acting like someone who is saying that they do not accept killing innocent people as a viable part of a political process that will make the human world better.

        • morphballganon@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

          So you want more death, got it. Abstaining from voting for the lesser evil is a choice, and you’ve made it. Blocked.

    • Boddhisatva@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Exactly.

      “In four years, you don’t have to vote again. We’ll have it fixed so good, you’re not gonna have to vote.” - Trump

  • SkyNTP@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    129
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    1 day ago

    Protest voting doesn’t work when the candidate you are protesting is the least worst option. Democrats that will not vote out of principle have been conned as badly as MAGA republicans. End of story.

    • Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      42
      ·
      24 hours ago

      I think you might be on to something. Maybe the system is set up to limit the power of protest voting? I mean, it does deliver two right-of-centre parties to power, over and over again.

      Where the wheels are coming off is that one of them - and some people say both - are moving further rightwards, and this is destabilising society in America.

      • OptimalHyena@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        21 hours ago

        Some people say… Dems are generally shit but they have definitely moved left over the last decade. A lot of new people have run and while it isn’t a sure thing by any stretch, people have been able to and have the chance to continue to move the party and also just straight up infiltrate it to push it left. Whereas the repubs have been in full sprint to the right.

      • EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        23 hours ago

        Maybe the system is set up to limit the power of protest voting?

        It absolutely is set up that way. This may or may not have been the intent of our election system, but it is the outcome.

      • EatATaco@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        23 hours ago

        Maybe the system is set up to limit the power of protest voting?

        Not everything is some conspiracy to keep you down. The people who wrote the constitution just weren’t perfect and had to make political compromises, which resulted in an imperfect system.

        • 8uurg@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          23 hours ago

          Also, the game theory that gives us insight into voting systems, telling us the current system leads to a 2 party system, did not exist when the US constitution was written.

          • Tinidril@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            18 hours ago

            The dynamic was understood, it just wasn’t formalized in game theory terms. Alternative voting systems weren’t in use though, and probably wouldn’t even have been practical without automation.

      • Cornelius_Wangenheim@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        13 hours ago

        Pretend you’re a politician. You have two groups of people that want opposite things. One of them is reliable, donates and volunteers to help your campaign. The other is feckless and seems to always find an excuse to oppose you. Which would you try to please?

      • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        23 hours ago

        Young people don’t get involved in the system and don’t vote, nothing special about the US on that level, so it’s not surprising their priorities aren’t the priorities of the political options.

  • MyTurtleSwimsUpsideDown@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    108
    ·
    1 day ago

    “Gaza is not the only issue” should not be the takeaway here:

    “Even on this issue [Gaza], Donald Trump and his right-wing friends are worse,” Sanders said in the six-minute video, which he posted to X. He noted that Republicans have fought to block humanitarian aid to Gaza and that Trump — who has praised Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — has suggested Gaza would be a great site for beachfront development.

    • blazeknave@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Yeah, when framed that way, it’s a reminder we’ve had to vote for compromise all along… And it’s fucking fine and we have a mostly functioning society.

  • Bobmighty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    101
    arrow-down
    22
    ·
    1 day ago

    If you want to engage those bad faith accounts, don’t respond to the Gaza thing; that’s a trap. Instead, ask about other issues like climate issues, housing issues, food insecurity problems, etc. ask them what their third party candidate has planned for that and ask for evidence of these plans. They’ll move goalposts and attempt to get back on Gaza. Keep them coming back to those other issues that affect Americans daily. Many of those accounts are here to derail conversation. Derail them in turn and force the conversation back on track.

    Or do what I do and downvote then block, then post the occasional reminder that most of those accounts are bad faith at best.

    • billwashere@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      I know. I mean I’m not a huge fan of Harris’ Gaza stance. Honestly I’m not sure why it’s political at all to call what Israel is doing wrong. But come on, Trump will be 100 times worse. And that’s just on the Israel/Gaza thing. I’m not sure how you can look at these two and decide that Harris is wrong enough about the Gaza thing that you come to the conclusion that either a third party or Trump vote is warranted. Which makes me believe is not genuine and likely foreign agent spreading chaos and misinformation.

      • lennybird@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 day ago

        It’s because there is a large, internally-polled segment of the Pennsylvania electorate who are Jewish and sympathetic to Israel.

        Harris can’t afford to not court them.

        I have no doubt she vehemently dislikes Bibi and would wish to cut aid.

        • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          22 hours ago

          Not only that, but AIPAC is a serious force that has demonstrated their willingness to aggressively smear every candidate who speaks out against Israel; they’ve already done this for a number of races.

          Harris is basically trapped here. The best thing she can do is stay vague until after the election, when she might actually have the power to do something about it. No one on Palestine’s side has anything to gain from her losing votes over it.

          • billwashere@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            21 hours ago

            Yeah this is basically my thoughts as well. Stuck between Iraq and a hard place (I had to do the Hot Shots joke here… too fitting).

            But seriously, AIPAC has way too much power in American politics. And your comment about Palestine is spot on. She is walking a very thin line, but this is the nature of politics and nuance. That orange fucker has no clue about any of this.

        • Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          24 hours ago

          It’s because there is a large, internally-polled segment of the Pennsylvania electorate who are Jewish and sympathetic to Israel.

          Harris can’t afford to not court them.

          I have no doubt she vehemently dislikes Bibi and would wish to cut aid.

          I hope you are right. But, without evidence (if there is any, please share it), this might be wishful thinking. You might just be a more moral person than Harris. I might be being extremely unfair, but it doesn’t seem impossible for an elected official to be willing to sacrifice the lives of innocent people in a country without American voters to gain power.

          • lennybird@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            18
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            24 hours ago

            I think there have been some “leaked” info to reputable journalists how both Biden and Harris pretty much despise Bibi at this point. I think if you look at it in the aggregate in how they pushed for the ceasefire (as opposed to Trump speaking with Bibi to actively undermine it), in her comments after meeting with Bibi shortly after becoming the presumed nominee following Biden stepping down — there is a clear tonal change from, say, 6-months-ago even. So yeah, I think her hands are pretty well tied.

            Either way, the reality any sane person can understand is that there are much better odds we see movement from Harris than we do from Trump.

            • Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              10
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              23 hours ago

              Either way, the reality any sane person can understand is that there are much better odds we see movement from Harris than we do from Trump.

              I completely agree with that. I admit to being impatient for change now, because innocent people are dying now. It is sad that elections (and electorates) get in the way of such important moral principles.

            • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              18 hours ago

              And everyone conveniently forgets that Biden did try to stop aid to Israel earlier this year. Congress blocked it. Is he trying hard enough? No probably not (I don’t claim to be an expert in middle east geopolitics, it is possible that the situation is an even more thoroughly fucked Gordian knot than it appears), but he did try. And the alternative this November thinks what he is trying is “too tough” on Bibi.

    • AntiOutsideAktion@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Somehow ‘tankie’ now means not wanting to send tanks to commit a genocide

      Way to get out in front of them by casting moral consistency as a bad thing though. Devastating.

      • banshee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Tankie means anyone promoting actions that would have a devastating impact on America as a whole (e.g. Trump returning to office).

  • BigBenis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    59
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    18 hours ago

    I was a Bernie-or-Bust-er in 2016 because I was confident Hilary was going to win with or without my vote. I deeply regret taking that stance and feel like I let down every woman who’s lost rights to their bodily autonomy, every family who was separated at the border, everybody whose life was lost or ruined due to the Trump administration’s incompetent response to the COVID-19 outbreak, and everybody else who has been harmed by the Trump administration.

    Don’t be like me. It sucks having to vote for the lesser of two evils but that’s how our system works and not voting or voting third-party isn’t going to change that but it does run the risk of things getting a lot worse.

      • BigBenis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        TX at the time. Generally regarded as solidly red. However, looking at the numbers in '16 and '20, I wouldn’t be surprised if everybody in the state who had either voted third-party or not at all because of the belief that their vote wouldn’t make a difference would have indeed been enough to potentially flip the state.

    • GBU_28@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      I’ve been foolishly arguing with people for months on this topic.

      • Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        24 hours ago

        On my instance, the UI doesn’t even give a downvote option. There’s probably a way around that, though, not that I am interested.

        Getting rid of downvotes is, I think, a good thing.

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

          Getting rid of downvotes is, I think, a good thing

          says the person who gets downvoted for all the asinine shit they say

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 day ago

      It’s a fundamentally uncomfortable position. The people of Gaza matter, and we can be pretty sure that Harris will continue current Biden Admin policies on it. You can’t argue for the hundred other policies at stake without knowingly allowing genocide to happen with US approval.

      But here’s the thing: there are two very prominent Jewish people who don’t believe for a second that both sides are the same. One of them is Bernie Sanders. The other is Benjamin Netanyahu.

      • Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        24 hours ago

        It’s a fundamentally uncomfortable position. The people of Gaza matter

        Thank you for saying this.

        If I were American, I would surely vote for Harris. But I would want to have been able to do more to keep people safe from state terrorism.

  • LovableSidekick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    13 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
      41
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      13 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.

      • pyre@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        28
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        12 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
          18
          ·
          11 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
            4
            ·
            3 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
              ·
              3 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.

              • lurklurk@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 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

          • forrcaho@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            7 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
              4
              ·
              6 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
          27
          ·
          edit-2
          12 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”

          • D1G17AL@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            13
            ·
            12 hours ago

            If you aren’t even American then shut the fuck up. You don’t really grasp how complex the politics actually are.

            • fuckdenialists@lemmings.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              11
              ·
              12 hours ago

              Nobody cares about your internal politics. Your external politics is always the same and seeing all of you idiots saying “BOTH SIDE ARE FOR GENOCIDE” leads to the conclusion you people have zero ethical consideration at all. You know, since you are overtly voting for extermination… again.

                • fuckdenialists@lemmings.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  6
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  12 hours ago

                  If there’s anybody this election cycle shows us, it’s that americans do not care about foreigners life at all. They would gladly throw entire countries under the bus if it means that they get to keep living their comfortable life putting their little ballot like cowards instead of actually fighting fascism.

      • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 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.

  • Asidonhopo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    22 hours ago

    Not voting for a candidate is not the only, nor the most effective way to push a party to change positions on an issue you care about.

  • Nougat@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    43
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 day ago

    Hey look, someone finally posted an article about this so the mods don’t remove it!

  • acargitz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 hours ago

    That’s a bad headline. Watch his video, he makes a much more nuanced argument.

  • VinnyDaCat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    Bernie is such a good guy. The Dems have done him dirty so many times, they are currently continuing to support many harmful policies but he understands what’s at stake and he puts all of that aside to do the best he can.

    He doesn’t have to do this. He’s 83 years old and while his cognitive health is outstanding for his age, someone his age doesn’t need to be on this grind for us. He probably won’t stop until he’s forced to due to his health. I love the guy and it’s a shame we weren’t given the chance to see him take the presidency.

    • He is a leader.

      I remember that old footage of him in Burlington in the 70’s, talking to random kids in the mall, asking them what was important to them–drug policy, free speech, good schools–and just talking to them about how they could make a difference. From the bully pulpit, he would have been transformative.