• Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 month ago

    Politicians will always disappoint you. There will always be things left undone, done poorly, or done in a way you disagree with. Everybody needs to get used to this and learn we vote for the least bad, not the most good.

    • ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Politicians will always disappoint you. There will always be things left undone, done poorly, or done in a way you disagree with. Everybody needs to get used to this

      Why?

      Why does everyone have to get used to and just blindly accept that the system is shit and doesn’t serve them or make their lives any better?

      Why are you so comfortable settling for so little?

      Why don’t you want better for yourself, and worse, think you get to demand the same of others?

      (I don’t need your answers, these are all for you and those who agree with you to ask yourselves)

      • PugJesus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        30
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month ago
        1. This is an imperfect world.

        2. Democracy is necessarily the function of creating coalitions of compromise between literal millions of people, all with different interests and concerns.

        3. Politicians, as a career, self-select for ambition and ego, and that comes with certain implications in even the best of them.

        4. Jesus fucking Christ, is it really so little to not want to die or see my friends and family horribly oppressed?

          • PugJesus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            16
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 month ago

            No intermediate steps allowed, no development of material conditions, no war of maneuver. Hole in one or don’t play.

            • Big_Boss_77@lemmynsfw.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              12
              ·
              1 month ago

              This is my strategy for anything artistic… drawing, music, painting, anything like that.

              If I’m not getting offers from the Louvre 30 minutes in… is there really any point at all?

              • How_do_I_computah@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 month ago

                Is this an argument for voting third party or against? Because third party might not be the Louvre calling this time…

                • Big_Boss_77@lemmynsfw.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  Just saying I suck at art…😉

                  Change is effected not overnight, but by continuous small wins peppered with numerous setbacks

            • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 month ago

              yeah i too just free hand an entire bridge in one go, no mathematical checking, or double checking anything, i don’t even get someone else to overlook it, i just wing that shit one handed!

          • VerbFlow@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 month ago

            I’m not looking for the People’s Democratic Equitocracy, I’m looking to save the United States from its own folly. It’s just one nation. All the U.S. has to do is stop the arms shipments.

          • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            then don’t

            literally, just don’t. You don’t need to care, nobody is asking you to care. It may seem brash, but sit down and think about it for a bit.

            • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 month ago

              Tons of people are asking me to care. They say that I’m not a good citizen if I don’t pay attention to the news, even if it upsets me.

              “If you’re not angry you haven’t been paying attention.”

              • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 month ago

                ask them why they care if you care.

                Ask yourself why you care if they care.

                unless the problem is directly related to you, there is simply very little that can immediately be done about the problem, and if there is very little that can be done about it, do the minimal amount of effort needed to accomplish something and move on, or simply don’t worry about it.

                Not everybody in society has to care about the same problems. Find something that you can make a difference in, and make a difference in that thing. You’ll be doing your part for society.

                Be mad about things that you can be productive on, not things that you can’t be, otherwise you can’t be productive.

        • VerbFlow@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          Look, I will tick the Kamala box. I do indeed believe that Trump is a bad candidate and will oppress many people. But I don’t want people to feel like this shit is normal. Back in the late 1970’s to the 1990’s, nobody would have thought that both parties would end up supporting the same genocide, with one being a little less pumped. Or maybe even the 2000’s, when the War on Terror was thought to be conducted humanely. We have lived in an imperfect world before, along with millions of people, and politicians self-selecting for ambition and ego, and there was nobody calling to wipe an ethnicity off the face of the Earth. I’m not surprised at the Dem party, I’m surprised that there are fascists in the White House and I’m supposed to just accept it as a normal part of democracy. Well, I won’t! Both parties in the United States supporting a genocide requires voting to solve, but it’s purely abnormal! I’m not wanting a world any better than a world we used to have, one where the United States did not conduct ethnic cleansing!

          We live in a nation with the Internet, fast food wherever you go, products that arrive at your door when ordered, touchscreens, full 3D videogames, V-Tubers, the Moon Landing, nuclear reactors, and the White House lighting up in rainbow colors to support LGBT+ rights–yet when asked to stop a genocide, it’s suddenly too much to ask. I would give up so much of these fleeting pleasures to protect human lives. Should I just become a lotus-eater, and neglect the outside world to “act humane”?

          • PugJesus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            1 month ago

            Back in the late 1970’s to the 1990’s, nobody would have thought that both parties would end up supporting the same genocide, with one being a little less pumped.

            Man, I can absolutely cite examples of both parties supporting genocides in that time period.

            Well, I won’t! Both parties in the United States supporting a genocide requires voting to solve, but it’s purely abnormal! I’m not wanting a world any better than a world we used to have, one where the United States did not conduct ethnic cleansing!

            I… would count myself as an American patriot, but I’m pretty sure the US not committing ethnic cleansing is an extremely recent phenomenon.

            We live in a nation with the Internet, fast food wherever you go, products that arrive at your door when ordered, touchscreens, full 3D videogames, V-Tubers, the Moon Landing, nuclear reactors, and the White House lighting up in rainbow colors to support LGBT+ rights–yet when asked to stop a genocide, it’s suddenly too much to ask. I would give up so much of these fleeting pleasures to protect human lives. Should I just become a lotus-eater, and neglect the outside world to “act humane”?

            Man, if you want to pour all your time and energy into this cause, unironically, go for it. But part of understanding just how vast and fucked the world is also requires one to accept and understand that we can’t fight every battle simultaneously. Hell, most battles aren’t even our’s to fight. And no amount of martyrdom from an individual can change either of those things. I’ve been calling the Israeli genocide for what it is for years now. I’m not exactly sitting here telling you to shut up about it. But we have to be realistic both about what we can achieve and about what we will sacrifice to achieve it.

            You could sacrifice every waking moment of your life, every meal above the level of gruel, every social connection and personal property unrelated to the cause, all for the sake of a .0001% contribution to ending another country’s genocide, but the onus shouldn’t be on you to kill yourself to correct every sin in the world. At some point, it’s not on you or me as individuals.

        • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          is it really so little to not want to die or see my friends and family horribly oppressed?

          well i mean it depends on what you mean by this, you will inevitably die, so, idk how you plan on getting around that one. Oppression is an incredibly broad and complex topic, or the simplest of them with no indirect explanation. The answer is the same though, do shit to change public sentiment.

      • papertowels@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        In what world will a politician never disappoint you?

        I’m generally in full control of myself and even I disappoint myself - fringe third party candidates are not the political messiah some people think they are.

        • How_do_I_computah@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          I don’t understand how this is the argument against third party. Why does the candidate need to be the Messiah to be better than Kamala?

          • papertowels@lemmy.one
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            The question was why do we need to accept that politicians will disappoint you, implying that they had something they believed would not disappoint them.

            I thought it was a third party candidate.

            Apparently it was anarchism.

            Rookie Lemmy mistake.

        • ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          In a world where “politician” isn’t a career, or even a thing that exists, and instead people make decisions communally and horizontally. It’s called anarchism.

          You not knowing or being able to imagine alternatives, doesn’t mean none exist.

          • papertowels@lemmy.one
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            11
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            Being able to imagine alternatives doesn’t mean they’re realistic.

            How realistic do you think this is?

            • snooggums@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 month ago

              They won’t be able to provide any larger than a few hundred people because those systems are extremely vulnerable to malicious actors.

              Communism and anarchy work for small groups where people know and trust each other and are able to compromise.

              • LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 month ago

                I think it’s more that people are profoundly emotionally uneducated which leaves them open to social exploitation.

                In the US, children are legally their parents’ property and are a type of slave class. If you are groomed to be a slave your entire formative years, don’t you think this will make you accept controlling fascists? Probably if we worked on communicating what abuse is and worked on community itself, bad faith actors would have a harder time. We know this because the US dissolving their communities for capital has made the country weak and uneducated.

                You asked if there are real life examples of community - it’s so silly because it’s everywhere. Humans are naturally social. It’s capitalism that is new and rare, looking at human history. Please remember that capitalism isn’t a synonym for trade or economy.

                There’s a reason capitalism favors psychopaths and abusive people. Anyone who’s lived with such people knows that’s not sustainable. Living with people who are emotionally mature is much better and more sustainable, and less likely to receive reactive violence.

                • snooggums@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 month ago

                  Even educated people are vulnerable to misinformation on topics for which they are not experts, and propaganda is a numbers game. Socialism is a better scaling economic system because it basically creates a lot of small communities (workers who own the company). Democracy scales better than anarchy because it creates a system for the decision making of anarchy that wouldn’t be possible for more than a few hundred people. Both also have downsides, but handle scaling issues better than the other options.

          • LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            Yes exactly. The only politician who will believe as you do 100% is yourself. You must run for office if this is your goal. Anything else is actually kinda fascist/controlling. In a better world, we’d have a direct democracy and everyone would get a voice.

      • njm1314@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 month ago

        Cuz it’s democracy. If you wanted someone to be in office who would get everything done with no obstacles no roadblocks and no delays then you wouldn’t be looking at democracy you’d want a dictator. You can want that if you want but just be honest about it.

        • ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          14
          ·
          1 month ago

          Lmfao, except you don’t have democracy. You have oligarchy and kleptocracy and plutocracy. You also don’t have a government that is “getting everything done without obstacles”, but pretty much the literal fucking opposite. The fact that the only alternative you can imagine to the current (non democratic, slipping in to fascism) state of affairs is a dictatorship is a problem with your lack of imagination and narrow view of the world (though granted, you were heavily indoctrinated that way), not a reflection of reality, nor the array of other ways that society can not only exist, but thrive.

          There was good reason I told you people to ask yourselves these questions - you are the ones standing in your own way with your insistence of living according to a full blown fallacy because you’re just comfortable enough with the way things are, and are too scared of change, specifically no longer holding the privileges the current system grants you in exchange for your compliance, and the idea that you might not have anyone to feel superior to.

          Until you’re willing and able to face that within yourself, I can’t help you, nor am Interested in hearing the mental gymnastics you do to justify your actively maintaining the status quo. ¯\(ツ)

          • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 month ago

            You have oligarchy and kleptocracy and plutocracy.

            none of these are accurate, except for maybe plutocracy.

            Gerontocracy would be more accurate.

            It’s fundamentally not an oligarchy, that’s just not true. Trump didn’t do fuck all during his term for this exact reason. It’s obviously not a kleptocracy, unless you have like, actual proof of this. Trump being a good one, but that’s not a historical precedent.

            • How_do_I_computah@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 month ago

              If Trump did nothing then why are people so scared of him winning the election?

              How do you figure we don’t have an Oligarchy? There is more than just the executive branch of our government by the way. There’s also the Legislative, Judicial, and Black Rock.

              • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 month ago

                If Trump did nothing then why are people so scared of him winning the election?

                because a leader that does nothing is an ineffectual leader. You want a leader that does something not nothing.

                this also ignores the part where he tried to like, overthrow democracy, and ruin the government, but nobody likes to talk about that part.

                How do you figure we don’t have an Oligarchy?

                an oligarchy would be something like russia, The US as you said has multiple branches, the executive being the most front facing. You’ve got the judicial and legislative branches as well. The legislative branch (congress) is literally made up of hundreds of people. People that WE vote in.

                black rock is also not a branch of the government, they’re a private investment firm.

                • LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  With citizens united, don’t you think it’s relevant that campaigns can accept large amounts of money? Like voters can see endless ads of one candidate if they have enough money. Campaigns can hire PIs to dig up dirt and air it. Money in a capitalist country confers power.

      • LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Because people in office are individuals and morality is relatively subjective. The only politician who will do everything you want and believe everything you believe is yourself. Run for office.

        • ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          Right, as if the system isn’t very deliberately designed to withstand reform and will not hesitate to weaponize every tool it has at its disposal (from the courts to the media to the police and the other alphabet agencies) to assure no leftist ever actually makes it in to a position of real power (not that we would want to, since we believe the state should be abolished, not joined, for precisely the reason stated above).

          For the however many’th time, you die hard liberals can tell yourselves as many fairy tales you want to make yourself feel better, it won’t change the reality - the system is not designed to serve you, but to keep you placated with nothing but an illusion of choice. Those with power and money wrote the rules, what on earth, and at this point in time with history unfolding right in front of our eyes as it is, again, makes you think that following those rules will ever work in your favour?

          • LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            First, I’m not a liberal by any definition. A democratic socialist isn’t a liberal and if you think so, you’re uneducated or just ad hominem attacking. Either way, null.

            There are options, it’s just difficult to implement them. The Black Panthers were doing it. The first step is having community as its base.

            I live in a place with a lot of “undesirable” folks. I don’t want to see my community here get hurt because I didn’t do anything. And ofc I don’t want to be hurt either.

            Voting does grant power. If it did nothing, then they’d allow felons to vote. They wouldn’t engage in voter suppression. If leftist organizing didn’t work, they wouldn’t have imprisoned people like The Black Panthers. We actually know it indeed does and will work BECAUSE the state responds violently. Even in Russia, where the votes don’t matter, someone like Navalny is a threat.

            Don’t be a coward. Vote. You can still organize for other stuff too while voting.

    • LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      The only politician who won’t disappoint you on every issue is yourself. Run for office. No joke. Use your rights. Vote. Speak. Run for office.

      Not using those rights is functionally the same as not having them.

      • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        I doubt that. My dad got elected to a town council and was pretty disappointed about what the system let him accomplish.

          • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 month ago

            One really good example is the stroad that’s preventing good bike infrastructure. The roads that are managed by the township have bike lanes - even if they’re not separated - but the stroad is a state route, so we have no bike lanes on the main connection between these lanes, and limited pedestrian infrastructure.

            This is why we have kids getting bussed to the school that’s across the road from their house.

            • LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              So how is that situation an argument against people running for office? Like jobs are meant to be challenging and work, it’s not like being elected then grants you a magic wand to seamlessly solve issues.

    • How_do_I_computah@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      1 month ago

      Voters will always disappoint you. There will always be things left undone, done poorly, or done in a way you disagree with. Everybody needs to get used to this and learn we vote for the least bad, not the most good.

        • How_do_I_computah@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          Haha. That’s pretty good. The point I was trying to make is that it doesn’t make sense to me to hold voters to a higher standard of conduct than the politicians that they vote for.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        The difference is campaigns spend over a billion dollars these days and don’t even try to convince voters.

        They do anything for donations to spend on fundraisers for more donations, and they just go round and round. Every revolution everyone involved skims a little.

        If it costs over a billion dollars to beat trump in an election, maybe we should worry less about donations and more about votes.

      • Nytefyre@kbin.melroy.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        In a perfect world, we should be voting for the person with the most solutions that would improve the world as well as country.

        We shouldn’t be voting on those who’s likely going to be half-assed.

        • banner80@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          We don’t live in a perfect world. Someone is going to be president for the next 4 years, and at this stage of the game we have 2 distinct choices.

          Also, what you called half-assed someone else might call the democracy process. Just because YOU want something doesn’t mean I want the same thing. Your vision for how to solve Palestine or Ukraine or improve wealth equality might be vastly different from mine. Just because you don’t get exactly what you want doesn’t mean the system is useless or not worth participating in. If you were to get exactly what you want, then I’d be getting walked over. If I get exactly what I want, then you’d say you are not being heard.

          The only fair system is to elect a big-tent party and then work through dialog on trying to reach either consensus or fair compromise on the various topics. But we won’t have that option if we let the fascists get control and do their Project 2025 thing while ignoring us.

          • GoofSchmoofer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 month ago

            It boils down to good politics is boring and full of compromise.

            Lot’s of talking and compromise doesn’t make for good headlines or scare motivate voters to the polls. There is room to add the large media companies to the blame of ‘perfection’ since they are always looking for the imperfect to talk about. And then they bash that imperfect-ness into the ground.

        • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 month ago

          we should be voting for the person with the most solutions that would improve the world as well as country.

          well, i would remove the whole world portion, because that’s an extremely broad brush and can cause problems. It’s better to just focus on having the best and most productive leadership possible, the more advancement you can do the better.

  • jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    47
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    A more nuanced version of this is, if you live in a state that has 0% chance of swinging, feel free to do a protest vote. Voting for Jill Stein or write in Bernie Sanders in California or Wyoming will not change anything, on the other hand if you do funny votes in Pennsylvania or Georgia you are worse than MAGA people.

    • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      37
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 month ago

      Even if you are in a Blue State, the US needs to overwhelmingly reject Trump both in electoral and popular vote.

      Otherwise a Trump replacement will pop up in 4 years.

    • Rentlar@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Yes, with electoral college that strategy is acceptable… buuuuuut…

      DON’T sleep for a second on the downballot races, for House Rep., Senator, Governor, state positions, ballot measures (including on a woman’s right to an abortion), and everything else applicable to you on Election Day. DON’T stay home even if you don’t like your choice of President/VP or that your state won’t affect who will reside in the Oval Office.

      Any of these other races can be close. Each has a piece of a government that has big effects on many of the issues you care about.

  • Xanis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 month ago

    Pretty typical of left leaning voters. Lots of issues, lots of arguing, very little in the way of coming together. Give the Right one thing: They will come together to fuck you over.

  • VerbFlow@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    1 month ago

    I’m still going to tick the Kamala box, but I’m ashamed of how little she’s trying to be a good candidate. After Nov4, I’ll get going with direct action.

    • 4lan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 month ago

      Exactly, her winning is not the end. We need to apply a massive amount of pressure since she is a neoliberal.

      • VerbFlow@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        Who the fuck is disliking? This is it. We need to apply the pressure after Drumpf is taken care of.

      • rothaine@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Medicare for All. The insurance pyramid scheme is getting more and more insane

        • Barbarian@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 month ago

          She was a big champion of Medicare for all in 2020. It is indeed a shame she isn’t talking about it now like she did last election. Judging from her 2020 rhetoric though, it is definitely something she would be open to doing if given a cooperative government, I think.

          • rothaine@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            “open to” it is good, sure, but I want her to champion it. Bully pulpit and all that

      • nyctre@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 month ago

        Main issue for most people is the fact that she’s not trying harder to stop Israel from killing Palestinians.

        • Barbarian@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 month ago

          Well, there’s not much she can do atm as vice-president. It’s very well-known that Biden is very pro-Israeli.

          Her rhetoric on the topic as a candidate has been very mixed. She’s been improving since she had that meeting with Uncommitted leaders. Hopefully she can have a better plan than “ask nicely for a ceasefire” to present to voters before the election.

          • nyctre@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            13
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 month ago

            Harris said that as president, she would maintain the US alliance with Israel and “ensure Israel has the ability to defend itself.”

            To most people that sounds like she’ll keep sending weapons which will then be used to murder Palestinians.

        • dubious@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          people need to get over the israel/palestine thing. they’re going to kill each other. there’s nothing you can do about it. your precious conscience is not the most important thing in the world. if you get bogged down on one issue, you will miss the bigger issue.

          • LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            Well, Israel offers the US a lot strategically, which is why we financially support them. Those finances could go to M4All. But we might be in a worse economic position if Israel loses, so we can’t fund stuff then either. That’s why Israel is hotly debated, outside of the humanity aspect (which no one cares about anyway or we’d be in other wars too).

        • InternetUser2012@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          1 month ago

          Man you must really be angry at the rest of world too right? I mean at least her team is working for a cease fire, that’s more than the rest of the world is doing. Or are you pushing some form of narrative?

          Oh and I’m sure your response will have something to say about dems not doing anything, need to cut funding, ect. I’ll say there’s a 10 year weapons contract that was signed in 2016. Then you’ll bring up the Leahy Law, then I’ll bring up without Israel Iran will run roughshot over the middle east killing loads of people.

          Then we can go back and forth, I’ll ask two questions, you’ll answer one of them with some bullshit.

          So, you can save it, I’ll leave it as it is and I’ll continue to be disgusted with Israel and the world by not stepping up and stopping the genocide. You can keep posting bullshit about it being the dems fault.

          • nyctre@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 month ago

            I was just answering a question with information I have gathered reading comments around here. Even the way I phrased it didn’t really include myself. Not sure why you inferred that I was so angry. If anything, your response is angry.

            • Barbarian@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              1 month ago

              You’re ok dude. It sounds like this guy/gal has had similar conversations and was frustrated by them. Understandable on both sides.

              • InternetUser2012@lemmy.today
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 month ago

                That is true, there’s a lot of bad actors here that you can’t mention what they really are or you’ll catch a ban. He/she looked liked one. If you ask these actors more than one question they consistently will use quotes and only answer one question, then spew their bullshit, It’s the “tell”. My frustration is with the mods that see this shit, see the reports, and do nothing.

          • VerbFlow@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 month ago

            …without Israel Iran will run roughshot over the middle east killing loads of people.

            Israel is, as of 2024, running roughshot over the middle east, killing 40,000 people.

            Then we can go back and forth, I’ll ask two questions, you’ll answer one of them with some bullshit.

            This sounds oddly like the debate surrounding Vietnam during the war, and comprises a lot of debate on the United States of America being the “world police”. As for me, the United States has failed to be any sort of world police. There is incredible polarization in its political parties, several territories that are governed yet cannot vote, the last two presidents both lying and suffering from old age, and a well-known problem of candidates being paid off. If the U.S. cannot be run well internally, it has no business meddling with foreign affairs, which includes giving weapons and troops to Israel. Despite the cruelty of Israel, there remains a bigger problem to solve–that being an incompetent nation having an excessively high military and an interventionist outlook.

          • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            So, you can save it, I’ll leave it as it is and I’ll continue to be disgusted with Israel and the world by not stepping up and stopping the genocide. You can keep posting bullshit about it being the dems fault.

            Bullshit?

            Harris has not indicated that she would waver in weapons sales to Israel and has not shown breaks with Biden’s handling of the war, aside from slight changes in rhetoric when addressing the human suffering in Gaza.

            https://thehill.com/policy/international/4862241-harris-palestinian-activists-israel-gaza/

            Also:

            https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/23/briefing/kamala-harris-convention-speech.html

            https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4852729-harris-issues-center-shifted/

            I’m voting for her because she’s not Trump, with the full knowledge and expectation that she’s not going to do shit on Gaza, Police Reform, UBI, M4A, Gun Violence, or anything else that might ruffle the feathers of the “center.”

            Is it OK with you for me to be vocally upset about it, in exchange for giving her my vote?

  • banner80@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 month ago

    Here is another take. You vote for both:

    1. The group that most closely resembles what you want AND
    2. The group that most likely will listen to your requests during the administration

    If there are things you want changed, Nov 5 is not the last day but the beginning. The next president will make decisions for 4 years, and every decision is influenced by people and our voices.

    Ask yourself, between Harris and Trump, which administration is most likely to want the things I want, and which is most likely to listen and be influenced by my side of political views and the people I support?

    For me, the answer is a hard NO on Trump, and a pretty solid Yes on Harris.

    Like the other thread abut guns. Sure, the Dems talk about wanting gun reform and it never gets done because they don’t have a super majority in Congress. But the GOP is 100% against it and will never contribute. Which side is more likely to do anything to help the reform I want to see? 4 years of Dems is a good amount of time to press for issues and seek some improvements. If I let the GOP have 4 more years, we are not even going to talk about change until the next election.

    Those that are willing to sit out an election because the Dems are not perfect, are inflicting the worst candidate on all of us and themselves. Don’t you dare later complain about school shootings, wealth inequality, tax cuts for the rich, abuse of queer folks, women’s rights, international inhumane policy. Don’t inflict Trump on us and then pretend to care about our issues or be on our side. If you sit out, you’ve picked a side.

    • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      I’d just like to clarify that presidential elections are not the only time to vote if you want to see any actual change. There are elections every year. Keep up to date on what’s going on in your state, in your county, in your city or town, and actually put the work in.

      Most of the people in power got there by being elected to other positions years ago.

  • Foni@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 month ago

    No American here. I ask myself, does a third candidate have any real chance of getting enough votes to gain visibility in the media and elsewhere? Even if it is for future elections?

    I don’t know the answer, but if it’s no and you know it and still decide to vote for a third candidate, you’re an idiot. Work to make this a reality within four years, for the next four years, if you don’t do it and just complain you’re an asshole.

    • Phil_in_here@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      The trouble with never voting for a 3rd party is that you enable the 2 party system, which fundamentally promotes tribalism, division, and corruption.

      Whats worse is that it snowballs and is completely out of control. There was a time when I would say that it’s worth voting for a candidate that will never get elected to sway future policy, but although it’s always felt like the other guy I’d going to ruin everything, it’s truer now than it has ever been. And it won’t stop at Trump. Trump could be dead, some equally craven ghoul would take his place. That ship will never turn, it will only pull away from the Democrats. Nothing can ever progress. There is only the fight.

      America is a cautionary tale.

      If your country is lucky enough to have 3 or more major political forces, keep that alive.

      • Foni@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 month ago

        There is an option if you really care enough about this. It works to promote a third party during the four years between presidential elections. local, state and federal elections in the middle of the electoral cycle are much more influential than is often believed and if enough people work on it, it would not be so unimaginable for a third candidate to have the proper impact. Watch the tea party and follow their example in the opposite direction.

        If you don’t care enough to work on it for four years, well, maybe you don’t care enough

    • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 month ago

      I don’t understand how you can get this so easily but people in our own damn country are literally not capable

      • PugJesus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        Many of them are perfectly capable, but simply don’t care if Trump wins, despite their claims. They’re fine with fascism, as long as they don’t have to feel bad.

    • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 month ago

      if they do they won’t drop out, and they won’t be a green party candidate.

      It’s that simple, if a third party drops out it’s because they think they’re going to harm the chances of one side winning the vote.

      The likelihood of a third party winning is very low. Especially if they’re an independent.

    • RinseDrizzle@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 month ago

      I once heard politics likened to public transit. No, it’s not a door to door service that gets you exactly where you want to go. However, it can get you in the general direction you’re headed, and it’s obviously better to get closer to your destination than going opposite damn direction.

      We’re moving a bunch of people around, not everyone can have a perfect route.

  • RinseDrizzle@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 month ago

    Until she is elected, I will be a solid supporter. As soon as she’s elected, I’ll go back to being a critic. But lordy, I’d vote for a literal clown before a Trump.

  • ohellidk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    No, she isn’t. What needs to be said is that she presents far less danger for our country than Trump does. It really sucks having two candidates you don’t like, but for the sake of integrity, you have to always choose what you believe is the lesser of two evils.

    • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Douche and Turd Sandwich, every last time. Does get a little old.

      Hoping to be pleasantly surprised by Harris once she doesn’t have to pander to the “center” - and I say “center” because anyone considering voting for Trump in the first place is not in the “center” and if they are, we’re worse off than I realized.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Hoping to be pleasantly surprised by Harris once she doesn’t have to pander to the “center”

        Nothing I’ve seen while she’s been in office suggests she’s going to be anything but a Mitt Romney tier corporate hack.

        She’s got a rich and eager pool of progressive voters to court - voters she was happy to pander to back in 2020 - who she has spurned since she became VP. She’s taken an outright reactionary stance on immigration. She’s abandoned any support of a public health insurance option. She’s all in on genocide in Gaza. She’s taking enormous amounts of money from Crypto banks and gig economy CEOs. She got an endorsement from Dick fucking Cheney, so you can guess where she stands on fossil fuels.

        But she’s not Trump, so…

  • bdonvr@thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    1 month ago

    We can change the Dems and push them towards actually being good by just uncritically voting for them every election I see no flaw in this plan.

    • PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      Not to mention showing up for the primaries too.

      It fucking mystifies me that people will condemn the dems for never voting for progressives in primaries, and then just never turn out to the primaries themselves.

      Primary turnout is consistently pathetic and an abject condemnation of the wannabe revolutionaries who speak with fire then act with all the likewise energy of cosmic background radiation.

      • bdonvr@thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Let me check who I could’ve voted for Dem presidential candidate this year in the primaries. Here’s the list:

        Oh I should’ve voted in 2020? I could’ve chose between:

        1. Biden (no)
        2. Bernie “Israel has every right to defend itself” Sanders
        3. Bloomberg (lmao)
        • PugJesus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          “Bernie Sanders isn’t pure enough for me” Jesus fucking Christ.

          Like, how left do you think the electorate in this country is, exactly?

            • PugJesus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 month ago

              He’s one of the leftmost politicians in the entire country. And the electorate itself is not exactly ready to sing the Internationale. So you’re here bitching for what?

              “Voting for the more left of the two parties won’t move them left!”

              “Okay, vote for the leftmost candidate in the primaries.”

              “None of them were pure enough for me.”

              “Bernie is one of the leftmost figures in the entire country.”

              “Well, I did vote for him.”

              ???

              Did you vote for him expecting a Sanders victory wouldn’t move the party left? Were you just having fun filling out your ballot?

              Fuck’s sake.

              • bdonvr@thelemmy.club
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 month ago

                I don’t think electoralism is enough to overturn the system no. I’ll participate in it insofar as filling out a bubble takes almost no effort. Don’t expect me to be enthusiastic about it.

                • PugJesus@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  Moving the system left is not the same as overturning it. A leaning structure is easier to topple in a direction than an upright one.

                  Moving the system left and accepting that the system isn’t going to be simply voted into oblivion are not mutually exclusive.

        • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          Biden (no)

          why not biden? His admin has been pretty productive in the term they’ve had thus far, pushing through multiple legislative accomplishments, only heeded by the worst of the worst (the border)

          • bdonvr@thelemmy.club
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            1 month ago

            Could it be, among other things, unwavering support for a genocidal nation with b/millions in arms shipments to help them get it done?

        • TexMexBazooka@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          Alright, so, being a single issue voter is bad, very bad, and if that’s your approach to political thought you should feel bad

          and that includes if your single issue is Palestine

    • Rolder@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 month ago

      Best to wait until the opposition isn’t someone who will straight up take away your ability to vote in the first place.