The irony of literally anyone (eligible) not voting for Biden specifically because of his handling of the Gaza situation, and thereby doing their part to help Donald "Gotta Finish the Problem" Trump win, makes my bones hurt. I hate this timeline and I don't want to live on this planet anymore.
Not voting for Biden in the primaries is perfectly fine.
Agreed and I did the same yesterday. Will vote for Biden in the end, but I registered my complaint. As best I can tell, his tone shifted after Michigan so we'll see if there is more change on the horizon.
I'm usually skeptical of protest votes, but these primary protest votes are actually effective for the same reason voting is effective. Politicians aren't as static as we want to believe- their number one priority is reelection. When you vote, you are telling the candidates that you are politically useful and they will begin to pay attention to your needs. When you vote for all levels of government, you are giving deeper detail into what your needs are.
If a significant portion of a district votes for a Democrat as president, and then a Republican for state representative, the democratic administration will likely make more conservative decisions if they see that portion of the electorate as critical to reelection.
This naturally reveals a big problem with the electoral college, as there are maybe 5 states with critical demographics needed to win reelection. The people in Ohio, Nevada, Arizona, Georgia, and Michigan are more influential to the type of administration a Republican or Democrat would run.
If the Gaza protest vote happened in Washington State or California, I doubt Biden would have reacted as much as he did for Michigan. That said, this problem politicians face goes from the President of the US down to the president of your HOA. So I'll acknowledge that the power of voting fluctuates depending on the specific outcome you are measuring, but there are so many variables. In political science you need to learn to live with paradoxes, and this may be one.
Either way, I believe we should keep voting; they are paying attention.
There are primaries for Dems? I thought Biden was automatically the candidate as current POTUS.
There is still a primary, but the incumbent has only lost his party's nomination 4 times, only Democrat Franklin Pierce in 1856 was elected the other 3 ascended from Vice President. It has never happened since the modern primary system was created in the 1970s.
If any American ever has any questions about the Weimar Republic and why Germans didn't stop Hitler when they still had a chance to do so, just point them to the run up to the 2024 presidential election. People who secretly want fascist leaders will always have an excuse, if one goes away, they already have another excuse waiting.
Everyone knows the Weimar Republic was funding a genocide before they elected Hitler. It’s in the history books, page 420. /s
and did that genocide get worse under Hitler, or ridiculously worse under Hitler? Page 69 will shock you.
Yes and these people become excessively angry with you when you point it out. Their goal isn't really to find a solution, it is to express discontent. They are divorced enough from reality that when you mention that Trump would be worse, they tend to lash out at you instead.
Ha I was debating (?) some gradbears with the argument that not voting against Donnie would result in more suffering but their replies can be summed up as "not my problem, I'd feel worse if I did"
The irony of literally anyone (eligible) not voting for Biden specifically because of his handling of the Gaza situation
I left my primary ballot blank. There was nobody on the ticket who wasn't going to continue the genocide (with perhaps Marianna Williamson as an exception, but I'm not indulging her vanity campaign). Come November, I suspect I'll be in the same spot. Two candidates who are endorsing genocide, with the caveat that one is waving an Israeli sports pennant while the other repeatedly insists he feels really bad about it.
I hate this timeline and I don’t want to live on this planet anymore.
Swing by Gaza. We'll sell the Israelis the next round of ammo used to wipe you off the face of the Earth.
It's a good thing that the only responsibility of a US president is deciding what to do about Israel.
If they were the only person able to veto something like a national abortion ban, or legislation criminalizing trans people, it would really mess with your calculus.
Hey don't blame them they just learned about Kony sorry Palestine and now it's the make or break thing for them
It’s a good thing that the only responsibility of a US president is deciding what to do about Israel.
Hey now, that's not true. He's also responsible for getting his Too Woke judicial nominees filibustered, appointing a bunch of corporate flacks to the Federal Reserve, doing photo ops at the US-Mexico border while wearing tacti-cool kit and frowning through a pair of binoculars, and fucking up the handling of the next environmental / weather disaster. And who can forget the most important job of any President? Fundraising!
If they were the only person able to veto something like a national abortion ban
Then we're already fucked, because that would imply all this hemming and hawing about abortion being a losing issue for Republicans failed to pan out and now a bunch of sadistic right-wing fucks are crowding into the House and Senate.
If 2024 was the last election ever, then your logic makes complete sense, and I get to liberals every election is the last election ever, despite us seeing Trump's desperate and flawed attempts at seizing power. He didn't get more intelligent in the last 4 years or learn from his mistakes.
Imagine a crazy, crazy world, where Trump wins in 2024 and there's a 2028 election. I know this is hard for some moderate libs to fathom, but you should recognize it as a real possibility.
If it's incredibly clear that Biden lost because he's Genocide Joe, then the next Democratic candidate might be someone younger who is ready to end the genocide (which the U.S is perfectly capable of single-handedly doing).
I've met people online that absolutely refuse to even acknowledge this is a possible world. They think Genocide Joe is the absolute best, pro-Gaza leader the Democratic party could ever put forth, and that losing elections due to issues like supporting genocide could never change the rhetoric and actions of future candidates in the party.
It's fucking mind-numbing how little thought people put into this. Like I'm happy to agree that in a world where Trump wins, the years 2024-2028 are going to be worse in about every conceivable way, but then as we get into 2028 and beyond, there are scenarios that play out better for leftists in that world (e.g we get an anti-genocide, socialist leftist instead of some moderate Republican who is a reincarnation of Biden except on some social issues). The fact that moderate libs REFUSE to acknowledge this possibility is fucking exhausting.
And I'm not saying that it's guaranteed to be better 2028 and beyond, it's absolutely not, nobody can make guarantees about the future, but there is undeniable potential value in having Biden lose this election when you look beyond the next 4 years.
Politicians cater to the people who vote. If Democrats lose this November and there is an election 2028 they are going to look at the people who voted in 2024 and 2026 and try to get those people's votes. If progressives don't vote in the general election this year Democrats won't waste time on them and will instead focus on conservative voters. Not voting will drive the Democratic party further to the right.
Withholding our votes doesn't lead to better election outcomes. Voting should be a simple mechanical choice to pick the lesser evil. If people want better candidates then they need to do the work between elections. Refusing to vote and trying to lower voter turnout sets us back. Losing in 2024 will mean America becomes a fascist dictatorship. There is no value in letting the Republicans win.
I didn't say withhold your vote, go vote for Jill Stein.
It's sad that you have to resort to a strawman to make a coherent argument against me. This is the only response to me that's coherent, I just wish it was a coherent point against an actual position of mine, instead of a made-up position you fabricated.
If 8% of the vote goes to someone who has been openly anti-Israel and pro-Palestine, while crowds are chanting against genocide Joe, it'll send a pretty clear signal to Democrats what they need to do.
Hoping you'll apologize for the unnecessary strawman honestly, it's needlessly exhausting to have to deal with all the inane shit everyone is throwing my way, only to then have to deal with a coherent comment put together against a point I didn't even make.
I didn’t say withhold your vote, go vote for Jill Stein.
Jill Stein has no chance of winning. She is a spoiler for Joe Biden and so voting for her is, for the purpose of counting the difference in votes between Trump and Biden, the same as not voting. We have a two party, first-past-the-post, political system where Republicans benefit from low voter turnout. So Trump benefits from anyone not voting for Biden.
It’s sad that you have to resort to a strawman to make a coherent argument against me.
A strawman is an argument that argues against a different, usually weaker, position rather than the other argument's actual position. However if the two positions are in fact equivalent, such as not voting and voting for third party spoiler candidates, then the argument is not a strawman.
If 8% of the vote goes to someone who has been openly anti-Israel and pro-Palestine, while crowds are chanting against genocide Joe, it’ll send a pretty clear signal to Democrats what they need to do.
100,000 people already voted uncommitted in the Michigan Democrat primary, with more in other Democrat primaries undoubtedly on the way. The point has been made and no new information will be gained from any third party voter turnout in November. There is no reason why the Democrats cannot change course on Palestine and Israel right now. This would be much more beneficial, to the Palestinians, than waiting through a Trump presidency to finally get help to them in 2028.
Hoping you’ll apologize for the unnecessary strawman honestly,
My argument is that letting Trump win is not only unacceptable, but is counterproductive to the progressive causes your argument claims will benefit from such a scenario. The Democrats will respond to low voter turnout from progressives by shifting to the right to capture more conservative voters. This is a refutation of you argument's central point.
it’s needlessly exhausting to have to deal with all the inane shit everyone is throwing my way
There were nothing but solid replies to your comment. I implore you to reconsider.
there were nothing but solid replies to your comments
A comment I received with 9 upvotes: "You may actually have brain damage".
Most of the other comments were honestly less coherent than this, but this is concise enough and not even relevant to the conversation, so I am really excited to hear how this is a "solid reply" in your book.
A comment I received with 9 upvotes: “You may actually have brain damage”.
In this thread? I'm searching on the words in the quote and I'm not seeing it. Maybe a Mod removed it. I'm not referring to any comment that resorts to ad hominem attacks.
The information gained would be we're refusing to vote for genocide supporters. Some people, like yourself will vote for someone in support of genocide as long as they're on the ticket as a Democrat.
If everyone behaves that way, the democratic party doesn't have to change. They can keep pushing moderate fiscal conservatives like Biden, over and over again, and Democrats will permanently retain power.
If they lose the general election by less than the third party vote, they know there are voters to the left that are voting that they could focus on capturing instead of catering to cultish fascists. Your entire original point was predicated on the idea that the Democrats would have to move right, but in a world where:
Republican: 46%
Democrat: 45%
Green: 8%
Other: 1%
There's a very clear strategy for future Democrats to move left to win the election. It's either purposeful ignorance or genuine stupidity to say the above is EXACTLY THE SAME as:
Republican: 55%
Democrat: 45%
This is why the idea of a "spoiler vote" is insanely dumb, especially when you're advocating for voting for an actual genocide supporter.
The information gained would be we’re refusing to vote for genocide supporters.
The Uncommitted Movement is effectively doing this in the primaries, hopefully without the downside of Biden losing in November. Trump winning would still be catastrophic for the Palestinians, even if there is an election 2028. Trump will green light Israel's genocide and millions of people will be killed or displaced in that region of the world alone. The Republican party will kill any hope of a Palestinian state happening, as they will undoubtedly support the settler movement. Biden has at least put sanctions on at least 30 Israeli settlers. There is at least of chance of Democrats working to stop the settlers and supporting a Palestinian state.
If everyone behaves that way, the democratic party doesn’t have to change. They can keep pushing moderate fiscal conservatives like Biden, over and over again, and Democrats will permanently retain power.
MAGA supporters are going to keep voting for Trump or an equivalent as long as that is an option. They are driving the Republican Party further right, by consistently voting that way. We could do the same with the Democratic Party to drive it to the left. We need to collectively do the work to support potential progressive candidates for future elections, but Biden is the most progressive option we have right now for this election who has any chance to win.
If they lose the general election by less than the third party vote, they know there are voters to the left that are voting that they could focus on capturing instead of catering to cultish fascists.
Exit polling data can break down the ideological differences between Democratic voters. The Democrats will be able to figure out what kind of voters voted for them, without needing progressives to vote third party.
There’s a very clear strategy for future Democrats to move left to win the election. It’s either purposeful ignorance or genuine stupidity to say the above is EXACTLY THE SAME as:
I'm saying it's the same as:
Republican: 50%
Democrat: 48.91%
Other: 1.09%
Where progressives simply do not vote. Since in both cases Republicans win the presidency. The Democrats are only going to cater to people who vote for them in general elections. edit: capitalization
exit polling data can break down ideological differences
You have an extremely naive view of the world, thinking that exit polling signals the same thing that voting far left does. Constituents aren't the only interest group politicians listen to, we actually have hard data that for the purposes of at least law making they entirely ignore us, and we have very little influence even beyond that.
The miniscule amount of influence we do have is the ability to remove one party from power. Exit polls come absolutely no where near this in terms of influence. When other interest groups want to continue the Palestinian genocide, and you have exit polls signaling that Democrats are against this (as exit polls have suggested for the last 50 years) then Democrats happily ignore this, as they have been.
We're in a unique situation where the genocide is ramping up, and for some reason the American left has latched onto this issue (rightfully so, but still surprising). If we actually funnel this clearly into a signal that we will essentially sacrifice our wellbeing (e.g put Trump in power) just to draw the line that genocide support is unacceptable, we might actually see an anti-genocide Democrat for once.
Exit polls are entirely different. They're fine in a world where there is no institutionalized interest in perpetuating some harm, and the Democratic party is split on some issue, they can look to constituent preferences. But as Joe Biden said best, if Israel did not exist in the middle east, the U.S would have to invent an Israel to protect American interests abroad. Preferences will be ignored without consequences for those in power, and if you think otherwise, again, you're being naive.
thinking that exit polling signals the same thing that voting far left does
Exit polling does signal the same thing. We have the technology to identify progressive voters who vote Democrat. This is a nonissue.
Constituents aren’t the only interest group politicians listen to, we actually have hard data that for the purposes of at least law making they entirely ignore us, and we have very little influence even beyond that.
This is not relevant to the discussion for the purposes of voting. We need to get corporate and billionaire money out of politics. We have a better chance of doing that with Democrats than Republicans.
The miniscule amount of influence we do have is the ability to remove one party from power. Exit polls come absolutely no where near this in terms of influence.
We also have the ability to put a party, the Republicans or Democrats, in power by voting for them. This has a much greater impact and influence than not voting.
If we actually funnel this clearly into a signal that we will essentially sacrifice our wellbeing (e.g put Trump in power) just to draw the line that genocide support is unacceptable, we might actually see an anti-genocide Democrat for once.
We are not simply sacrificing our well being by allowing Trump to win but our lives. Trump has already promised to ethnically cleanse immigrants starting on day 1. He wants to round them up in camps and deport them. It seems unlikely to me that there will be no causalities from such an endeavor. The Supreme Court is going to hear a case that could determine if homeless people can be fined and/or arrested for being homeless. They may also find themselves in camps.
Trans people are being erased from public life, which is a nice way of saying trans people will be homeless, which may soon be a nice way of saying trans people will be put in camps.
American fascists want the government to commit genocide here in the United States. They want to jail Democratic politicians. It's going to be harder to run a progressive candidate in 2028 if Trump wins in 2024 because progressive voters will be dead and/or in camps. Republicans are going to do everything in their power to entrench themselves in power, even if they do hold an election in 2028. Republicans are already trying to remove Democrats from the voter rolls, with little success, in order to disenfranchise Democratic voters now. Republicans will be much more successful if they are in power.
But as Joe Biden said best, if Israel did not exist in the middle east, the U.S would have to invent an Israel to protect American interests abroad.
A two state solution is possible. There is no reason why a state of Palestine and a state of Israel cannot coexist. The current State of Israel will need to fundamentally change to no longer be an apartheid state. Also, Biden's views on Palestine and Israel are severely outdated and do not represent the rest of the Democratic Party. Biden seems to be shifting his stance on Palestine and Israel. Trump is doubling down.
Preferences will be ignored without consequences for those in power, and if you think otherwise, again, you’re being naive.
If progressives vote for Democrats in 2024, Democrats will notice and move to the left to capture these voters in future elections. Biden may personally learn a lesson from a loss in 2024 but it is unlikely he will be able to act on it from a prison cell in 2028. The Democratic Party however will not learn the lesson. They will look at who voted in the election for the two parties that have a chance at winning and determine that the Overton window has again shifted to the right.
Exit polling does not signal the same thing, again you're just repeating your incredibly naive point. As you admit, money is in politics, and you hand wave away that fact even though it's a massive point.
With corporate interests in play, constituent preferences have had literally 0 impact on policy in Gaza. I'm not questioning the ability to gather the data, but you're conflating the ability to gather data with the want to listen to preferences. Again, naive. This isn't how the world works. Democrats don't just listen to their constituents, they actually rarely do.
I'm going to keep this comment short because you keep hand waving or ignoring 80% of my point with non sequiturs, so I'm going to take this way slower so you can hopefully keep up.
Exit polling does not signal the same thing, again you’re just repeating your incredibly naive point.
If progressives vote for another party, the additional message that the Democratic party hears is, we will never be able to win these people's votes. This is the same message they hear when progressives do not vote at all.
As you admit, money is in politics, and you hand wave away that fact even though it’s a massive point.
It has no bearing on this discussion. How much impact we have relative to corporations does not change the fact we have impact. Not to mention corporations wouldn't be trying to get rid of our impact if we didn't have any.
I’m going to keep this comment short because you keep hand waving or ignoring 80% of my point with non sequiturs, so I’m going to take this way slower so you can hopefully keep up.
These are not substantive points nor, I would assume, a core part of your argument, so I did not spend significant time in my argument addressing them. However they were there, so I wrote a response in my argument.
With corporate interests in play, constituent preferences have had literally 0 impact on policy in Gaza. I’m not questioning the ability to gather the data, but you’re conflating the ability to gather data with the want to listen to preferences. Again, naive. This isn’t how the world works. Democrats don’t just listen to their constituents, they actually rarely do.
Cynicism isn't an argument. Biden has delivered on numerous policies people want. The Build Back Better bill is one such achievement. However this sentiment in your argument flies in the face of the fact that policies are determined by what voters want. There is no doubt that corporations have an outside influence in our elections since Regan's presidency. That trend is directly responsible for the rise of fascism today. However, pretending we have little to no impact when we do is exactly what corporations want and it would be inherently self defeating to disempower ourselves for no reason.
This gets us back to the topic at hand, whether or not progressives would be better off allowing Trump to win. This is what we are discussing and what your argument in your last comment attempts to distract from. We are decidedly worse off in 2028 if we choose to silence ourselves now out of fear that Biden is an inadequate candidate for delivering a progressive agenda. By making ourselves heard, in a meaningful and impactful way, by voting Democrat, we are acting in the most optimal way to advance progressive causes.
In order to have more progressive candidates in 2028 we must drive the Democrat Party to the left. To drive the Democrat Party to the left, we must demonstrate that a substantive voter block exists on that end of the political spectrum. By not voting, Democrats will determine Biden was too progressive. They will respond with a more conservative candidate. This feedback loop will continue until Democrats win an election and believe they have reached the American Overton window.
As an example, after two terms of Regan and a term of Bush Senior, Bill Clinton and the Democrats decided to stop fighting Republicans on economic issues. They decided to embrace neoliberalism because they believed it was within the American Overton window. If we want to counteract this, the Democratic Party needs to see that there is a path to victory by courting progressive voters. In other words, if we want a more progressive Democratic candidate in 2028, we must vote for the most progressive Democratic candidate we have now in 2024. edit: typo
the additional message that the Democratic party hears is, we will never be able to win these people's votes
The message Democrats hear from someone who voted Democrat in 2020 and Green in 2024 is that that person will never vote Democrat?
Your position is becoming incoherent and exhausting. Stop arguing in bad faith. Your entire fucking comment is just endless shit like this, so I'm going to take it even slower and walk you through all this shit. Address the above paragraph, then we'll move on to the next point, and hopefully after we're through 3 or 4 of your nonsense points you'll reconsider your position without me handholding you through it.
If you want to help me, just say "yes I understand I was wrong on that point", then I can easily jump into the next point without addressing some new incoherent shit you throw at me.
The message Democrats hear from someone who voted Democrat in 2020 and Green in 2024 is that that person will never vote Democrat?
If progressives refuse to vote for the most progressive president we have ever had then the Democratic Party will conclude that they will not be able to win progressive votes in future elections. They will shift to the right in an attempt to capture more conservative voters.
Your position is becoming incoherent and exhausting. Stop arguing in bad faith. Your entire fucking comment is just endless shit like this, so I’m going to take it even slower and walk you through all this shit. Address the above paragraph, then we’ll move on to the next point, and hopefully after we’re through 3 or 4 of your nonsense points you’ll reconsider your position without me handholding you through it.
My argument has a consistent position. Trump winning in 2024 would be disastrous for progressive causes. My argument refuted your argument's central point. Now all that is left in your argument is ad hominem attacks. edit: typo
If we actually funnel this clearly into a signal that we will essentially sacrifice our wellbeing (e.g put Trump in power) just to draw the line that genocide support is unacceptable, we might actually see an anti-genocide Democrat for once.
Just have to endure those 4 years of supergenocide and removal of voting rights and then we, no sorry the primary voters can get a pacifist candidate
If Trump wins in 2024 there won’t be a 2028 election, or at least a not a real one.
In your scenario there would be no Gaza to save in 2028.
False premise.
You're speaking in certainties when you cannot. The genocide has been perpetuated, on and off, for 75 years. This is the most killing we've seen in the region in a short span of time, but we have seen figures close to this in the past 75 years.
Of course there's a world where Trump is elected, and successfully aids Israel in the extermination of the Palestinians. But you have to admit that that world isn't a certainty, even if Trump is elected.
There's also a world where Biden is reelected, his campaign keeps greenlighting the genocide with periodic rhetorical criticism, and then some other fascist Republican or moderate fiscal conservative Democrat comes in in 2028 and finishes the job (the Democrats now emboldened to further ignore the genocide because it costs them nothing).
It's easier online to speak in certainty about the future, I understand that, but please if you're going to bother engaging please don't do it in bad-faith and actually admit where your knowledge ends. You're not clairvoyant.
Of course there’s a world where Trump is elected, and successfully aids Israel in the extermination of the Palestinians. But you have to admit that that world isn’t a certainty, even if Trump is elected.
You just need to read the headline to this post, not even the article, to see where this argument is a non starter.
I don't believe Trump's campaign promises are unwavering truisms that come to fruition 100% of the time. I'm glad you have so much faith in the promises he makes though, so much so that you'd literally call them a certainty and disregard any other possible reality just simply on the basis that Trump said it.
I've met a good number of Trump supporters that don't even have this kind of faith, only his most devout followers take his promises as premonitions of the future.
Don't you think Egypt will let in refugees when Trump greenlights a Supergenocide?
Look up Project 2025. There will not be a 2028 election if Trump wins 2024. One Day Dictator Donnie won't stop at one day.
He already tried to seize the capital through force. He has failed, he was the president for 4 fucking years and couldn't figure out how to dismantle the government. He's incredibly incompetent, I don't know why every liberal in the world is clutching their pearls like he's some kind of mastermind who grew and learned how to overthrow the country.
Trump is a figurehead. The man himself is nothing. If her gets elected, the smart people behind him who actually DO learn from past mistakes will have four years to reshape the government, and last time, things moved FAST.
Not voting does not send the message you think it does. It sends the message that you're fine with the status quo and content to sit home and let things play out. "Protest" voting in the final election within a 2 party system is the same as not voting. It's winner take all, and nothing else matters to these people.
I've responded to this exact sentiment in at least 4 comments and it's getting exhausting. Either find my response to this or don't engage, I don't really give a fuck. It can't possibly be my responsibility to educate every genocide-agnostic moderate-lib on the material reality of elections.
Ibid
It's not like he's the one coming up with the plan. Project 2025 was written by much more cunning schemers. There are people who saw him fail to take the capital by force, and now seek to enable his success next time.
Lol he already got the supreme court running interference for his attempted coup. Do you think the country is safe?
Project 2025. Downvote me. Shit on my very existence. But read what is planned.
"I don't want to live on this planet anymore..." oh please, just stop. How horrible is your life? You sound like a whiny liberal. People are dying all over the world, being murdered for religious beliefs, sexual preference, politics...etc...and you don't want to live because "that big bad republican might become President.." Please...
The irony of literally anyone (eligible) not voting for Biden specifically because of his handling of the Gaza situation, and thereby doing their part to help Donald "Gotta Finish the Problem" Trump win, makes my bones hurt. I hate this timeline and I don't want to live on this planet anymore.
Not voting for Biden in the primaries is perfectly fine.
Agreed and I did the same yesterday. Will vote for Biden in the end, but I registered my complaint. As best I can tell, his tone shifted after Michigan so we'll see if there is more change on the horizon.
I'm usually skeptical of protest votes, but these primary protest votes are actually effective for the same reason voting is effective. Politicians aren't as static as we want to believe- their number one priority is reelection. When you vote, you are telling the candidates that you are politically useful and they will begin to pay attention to your needs. When you vote for all levels of government, you are giving deeper detail into what your needs are.
If a significant portion of a district votes for a Democrat as president, and then a Republican for state representative, the democratic administration will likely make more conservative decisions if they see that portion of the electorate as critical to reelection.
This naturally reveals a big problem with the electoral college, as there are maybe 5 states with critical demographics needed to win reelection. The people in Ohio, Nevada, Arizona, Georgia, and Michigan are more influential to the type of administration a Republican or Democrat would run.
If the Gaza protest vote happened in Washington State or California, I doubt Biden would have reacted as much as he did for Michigan. That said, this problem politicians face goes from the President of the US down to the president of your HOA. So I'll acknowledge that the power of voting fluctuates depending on the specific outcome you are measuring, but there are so many variables. In political science you need to learn to live with paradoxes, and this may be one.
Either way, I believe we should keep voting; they are paying attention.
There are primaries for Dems? I thought Biden was automatically the candidate as current POTUS.
There is a whole calendar
https://ballotpedia.org/Changes_to_the_2024_Democratic_presidential_primary_calendar
There is still a primary, but the incumbent has only lost his party's nomination 4 times, only Democrat Franklin Pierce in 1856 was elected the other 3 ascended from Vice President. It has never happened since the modern primary system was created in the 1970s.
If any American ever has any questions about the Weimar Republic and why Germans didn't stop Hitler when they still had a chance to do so, just point them to the run up to the 2024 presidential election. People who secretly want fascist leaders will always have an excuse, if one goes away, they already have another excuse waiting.
Everyone knows the Weimar Republic was funding a genocide before they elected Hitler. It’s in the history books, page 420. /s
and did that genocide get worse under Hitler, or ridiculously worse under Hitler? Page 69 will shock you.
Yes and these people become excessively angry with you when you point it out. Their goal isn't really to find a solution, it is to express discontent. They are divorced enough from reality that when you mention that Trump would be worse, they tend to lash out at you instead.
Ha I was debating (?) some gradbears with the argument that not voting against Donnie would result in more suffering but their replies can be summed up as "not my problem, I'd feel worse if I did"
I left my primary ballot blank. There was nobody on the ticket who wasn't going to continue the genocide (with perhaps Marianna Williamson as an exception, but I'm not indulging her vanity campaign). Come November, I suspect I'll be in the same spot. Two candidates who are endorsing genocide, with the caveat that one is waving an Israeli sports pennant while the other repeatedly insists he feels really bad about it.
Swing by Gaza. We'll sell the Israelis the next round of ammo used to wipe you off the face of the Earth.
It's a good thing that the only responsibility of a US president is deciding what to do about Israel.
If they were the only person able to veto something like a national abortion ban, or legislation criminalizing trans people, it would really mess with your calculus.
Hey don't blame them they just learned about Kony sorry Palestine and now it's the make or break thing for them
Hey now, that's not true. He's also responsible for getting his Too Woke judicial nominees filibustered, appointing a bunch of corporate flacks to the Federal Reserve, doing photo ops at the US-Mexico border while wearing tacti-cool kit and frowning through a pair of binoculars, and fucking up the handling of the next environmental / weather disaster. And who can forget the most important job of any President? Fundraising!
Then we're already fucked, because that would imply all this hemming and hawing about abortion being a losing issue for Republicans failed to pan out and now a bunch of sadistic right-wing fucks are crowding into the House and Senate.
If 2024 was the last election ever, then your logic makes complete sense, and I get to liberals every election is the last election ever, despite us seeing Trump's desperate and flawed attempts at seizing power. He didn't get more intelligent in the last 4 years or learn from his mistakes.
Imagine a crazy, crazy world, where Trump wins in 2024 and there's a 2028 election. I know this is hard for some moderate libs to fathom, but you should recognize it as a real possibility.
If it's incredibly clear that Biden lost because he's Genocide Joe, then the next Democratic candidate might be someone younger who is ready to end the genocide (which the U.S is perfectly capable of single-handedly doing).
I've met people online that absolutely refuse to even acknowledge this is a possible world. They think Genocide Joe is the absolute best, pro-Gaza leader the Democratic party could ever put forth, and that losing elections due to issues like supporting genocide could never change the rhetoric and actions of future candidates in the party.
It's fucking mind-numbing how little thought people put into this. Like I'm happy to agree that in a world where Trump wins, the years 2024-2028 are going to be worse in about every conceivable way, but then as we get into 2028 and beyond, there are scenarios that play out better for leftists in that world (e.g we get an anti-genocide, socialist leftist instead of some moderate Republican who is a reincarnation of Biden except on some social issues). The fact that moderate libs REFUSE to acknowledge this possibility is fucking exhausting.
And I'm not saying that it's guaranteed to be better 2028 and beyond, it's absolutely not, nobody can make guarantees about the future, but there is undeniable potential value in having Biden lose this election when you look beyond the next 4 years.
Politicians cater to the people who vote. If Democrats lose this November and there is an election 2028 they are going to look at the people who voted in 2024 and 2026 and try to get those people's votes. If progressives don't vote in the general election this year Democrats won't waste time on them and will instead focus on conservative voters. Not voting will drive the Democratic party further to the right.
Withholding our votes doesn't lead to better election outcomes. Voting should be a simple mechanical choice to pick the lesser evil. If people want better candidates then they need to do the work between elections. Refusing to vote and trying to lower voter turnout sets us back. Losing in 2024 will mean America becomes a fascist dictatorship. There is no value in letting the Republicans win.
I didn't say withhold your vote, go vote for Jill Stein.
It's sad that you have to resort to a strawman to make a coherent argument against me. This is the only response to me that's coherent, I just wish it was a coherent point against an actual position of mine, instead of a made-up position you fabricated.
If 8% of the vote goes to someone who has been openly anti-Israel and pro-Palestine, while crowds are chanting against genocide Joe, it'll send a pretty clear signal to Democrats what they need to do.
Hoping you'll apologize for the unnecessary strawman honestly, it's needlessly exhausting to have to deal with all the inane shit everyone is throwing my way, only to then have to deal with a coherent comment put together against a point I didn't even make.
Jill Stein has no chance of winning. She is a spoiler for Joe Biden and so voting for her is, for the purpose of counting the difference in votes between Trump and Biden, the same as not voting. We have a two party, first-past-the-post, political system where Republicans benefit from low voter turnout. So Trump benefits from anyone not voting for Biden.
A strawman is an argument that argues against a different, usually weaker, position rather than the other argument's actual position. However if the two positions are in fact equivalent, such as not voting and voting for third party spoiler candidates, then the argument is not a strawman.
100,000 people already voted uncommitted in the Michigan Democrat primary, with more in other Democrat primaries undoubtedly on the way. The point has been made and no new information will be gained from any third party voter turnout in November. There is no reason why the Democrats cannot change course on Palestine and Israel right now. This would be much more beneficial, to the Palestinians, than waiting through a Trump presidency to finally get help to them in 2028.
My argument is that letting Trump win is not only unacceptable, but is counterproductive to the progressive causes your argument claims will benefit from such a scenario. The Democrats will respond to low voter turnout from progressives by shifting to the right to capture more conservative voters. This is a refutation of you argument's central point.
There were nothing but solid replies to your comment. I implore you to reconsider.
A comment I received with 9 upvotes: "You may actually have brain damage".
Most of the other comments were honestly less coherent than this, but this is concise enough and not even relevant to the conversation, so I am really excited to hear how this is a "solid reply" in your book.
In this thread? I'm searching on the words in the quote and I'm not seeing it. Maybe a Mod removed it. I'm not referring to any comment that resorts to ad hominem attacks.
The information gained would be we're refusing to vote for genocide supporters. Some people, like yourself will vote for someone in support of genocide as long as they're on the ticket as a Democrat.
If everyone behaves that way, the democratic party doesn't have to change. They can keep pushing moderate fiscal conservatives like Biden, over and over again, and Democrats will permanently retain power.
If they lose the general election by less than the third party vote, they know there are voters to the left that are voting that they could focus on capturing instead of catering to cultish fascists. Your entire original point was predicated on the idea that the Democrats would have to move right, but in a world where:
Republican: 46%
Democrat: 45%
Green: 8%
Other: 1%
There's a very clear strategy for future Democrats to move left to win the election. It's either purposeful ignorance or genuine stupidity to say the above is EXACTLY THE SAME as:
Republican: 55%
Democrat: 45%
This is why the idea of a "spoiler vote" is insanely dumb, especially when you're advocating for voting for an actual genocide supporter.
The Uncommitted Movement is effectively doing this in the primaries, hopefully without the downside of Biden losing in November. Trump winning would still be catastrophic for the Palestinians, even if there is an election 2028. Trump will green light Israel's genocide and millions of people will be killed or displaced in that region of the world alone. The Republican party will kill any hope of a Palestinian state happening, as they will undoubtedly support the settler movement. Biden has at least put sanctions on at least 30 Israeli settlers. There is at least of chance of Democrats working to stop the settlers and supporting a Palestinian state.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/mar/04/israel-settler-violence-sanctions
MAGA supporters are going to keep voting for Trump or an equivalent as long as that is an option. They are driving the Republican Party further right, by consistently voting that way. We could do the same with the Democratic Party to drive it to the left. We need to collectively do the work to support potential progressive candidates for future elections, but Biden is the most progressive option we have right now for this election who has any chance to win.
Exit polling data can break down the ideological differences between Democratic voters. The Democrats will be able to figure out what kind of voters voted for them, without needing progressives to vote third party.
I'm saying it's the same as:
Republican: 50%
Democrat: 48.91%
Other: 1.09%
Where progressives simply do not vote. Since in both cases Republicans win the presidency. The Democrats are only going to cater to people who vote for them in general elections. edit: capitalization
You have an extremely naive view of the world, thinking that exit polling signals the same thing that voting far left does. Constituents aren't the only interest group politicians listen to, we actually have hard data that for the purposes of at least law making they entirely ignore us, and we have very little influence even beyond that.
The miniscule amount of influence we do have is the ability to remove one party from power. Exit polls come absolutely no where near this in terms of influence. When other interest groups want to continue the Palestinian genocide, and you have exit polls signaling that Democrats are against this (as exit polls have suggested for the last 50 years) then Democrats happily ignore this, as they have been.
We're in a unique situation where the genocide is ramping up, and for some reason the American left has latched onto this issue (rightfully so, but still surprising). If we actually funnel this clearly into a signal that we will essentially sacrifice our wellbeing (e.g put Trump in power) just to draw the line that genocide support is unacceptable, we might actually see an anti-genocide Democrat for once.
Exit polls are entirely different. They're fine in a world where there is no institutionalized interest in perpetuating some harm, and the Democratic party is split on some issue, they can look to constituent preferences. But as Joe Biden said best, if Israel did not exist in the middle east, the U.S would have to invent an Israel to protect American interests abroad. Preferences will be ignored without consequences for those in power, and if you think otherwise, again, you're being naive.
Exit polling does signal the same thing. We have the technology to identify progressive voters who vote Democrat. This is a nonissue.
This is not relevant to the discussion for the purposes of voting. We need to get corporate and billionaire money out of politics. We have a better chance of doing that with Democrats than Republicans.
We also have the ability to put a party, the Republicans or Democrats, in power by voting for them. This has a much greater impact and influence than not voting.
We are not simply sacrificing our well being by allowing Trump to win but our lives. Trump has already promised to ethnically cleanse immigrants starting on day 1. He wants to round them up in camps and deport them. It seems unlikely to me that there will be no causalities from such an endeavor. The Supreme Court is going to hear a case that could determine if homeless people can be fined and/or arrested for being homeless. They may also find themselves in camps.
https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/city-of-grants-pass-oregon-v-johnson/
Trans people are being erased from public life, which is a nice way of saying trans people will be homeless, which may soon be a nice way of saying trans people will be put in camps.
American fascists want the government to commit genocide here in the United States. They want to jail Democratic politicians. It's going to be harder to run a progressive candidate in 2028 if Trump wins in 2024 because progressive voters will be dead and/or in camps. Republicans are going to do everything in their power to entrench themselves in power, even if they do hold an election in 2028. Republicans are already trying to remove Democrats from the voter rolls, with little success, in order to disenfranchise Democratic voters now. Republicans will be much more successful if they are in power.
https://www.rawstory.com/trump-voter-rolls/
A two state solution is possible. There is no reason why a state of Palestine and a state of Israel cannot coexist. The current State of Israel will need to fundamentally change to no longer be an apartheid state. Also, Biden's views on Palestine and Israel are severely outdated and do not represent the rest of the Democratic Party. Biden seems to be shifting his stance on Palestine and Israel. Trump is doubling down.
If progressives vote for Democrats in 2024, Democrats will notice and move to the left to capture these voters in future elections. Biden may personally learn a lesson from a loss in 2024 but it is unlikely he will be able to act on it from a prison cell in 2028. The Democratic Party however will not learn the lesson. They will look at who voted in the election for the two parties that have a chance at winning and determine that the Overton window has again shifted to the right.
Exit polling does not signal the same thing, again you're just repeating your incredibly naive point. As you admit, money is in politics, and you hand wave away that fact even though it's a massive point.
With corporate interests in play, constituent preferences have had literally 0 impact on policy in Gaza. I'm not questioning the ability to gather the data, but you're conflating the ability to gather data with the want to listen to preferences. Again, naive. This isn't how the world works. Democrats don't just listen to their constituents, they actually rarely do.
I'm going to keep this comment short because you keep hand waving or ignoring 80% of my point with non sequiturs, so I'm going to take this way slower so you can hopefully keep up.
If progressives vote for another party, the additional message that the Democratic party hears is, we will never be able to win these people's votes. This is the same message they hear when progressives do not vote at all.
It has no bearing on this discussion. How much impact we have relative to corporations does not change the fact we have impact. Not to mention corporations wouldn't be trying to get rid of our impact if we didn't have any.
These are not substantive points nor, I would assume, a core part of your argument, so I did not spend significant time in my argument addressing them. However they were there, so I wrote a response in my argument.
Cynicism isn't an argument. Biden has delivered on numerous policies people want. The Build Back Better bill is one such achievement. However this sentiment in your argument flies in the face of the fact that policies are determined by what voters want. There is no doubt that corporations have an outside influence in our elections since Regan's presidency. That trend is directly responsible for the rise of fascism today. However, pretending we have little to no impact when we do is exactly what corporations want and it would be inherently self defeating to disempower ourselves for no reason.
This gets us back to the topic at hand, whether or not progressives would be better off allowing Trump to win. This is what we are discussing and what your argument in your last comment attempts to distract from. We are decidedly worse off in 2028 if we choose to silence ourselves now out of fear that Biden is an inadequate candidate for delivering a progressive agenda. By making ourselves heard, in a meaningful and impactful way, by voting Democrat, we are acting in the most optimal way to advance progressive causes.
In order to have more progressive candidates in 2028 we must drive the Democrat Party to the left. To drive the Democrat Party to the left, we must demonstrate that a substantive voter block exists on that end of the political spectrum. By not voting, Democrats will determine Biden was too progressive. They will respond with a more conservative candidate. This feedback loop will continue until Democrats win an election and believe they have reached the American Overton window.
As an example, after two terms of Regan and a term of Bush Senior, Bill Clinton and the Democrats decided to stop fighting Republicans on economic issues. They decided to embrace neoliberalism because they believed it was within the American Overton window. If we want to counteract this, the Democratic Party needs to see that there is a path to victory by courting progressive voters. In other words, if we want a more progressive Democratic candidate in 2028, we must vote for the most progressive Democratic candidate we have now in 2024. edit: typo
The message Democrats hear from someone who voted Democrat in 2020 and Green in 2024 is that that person will never vote Democrat?
Your position is becoming incoherent and exhausting. Stop arguing in bad faith. Your entire fucking comment is just endless shit like this, so I'm going to take it even slower and walk you through all this shit. Address the above paragraph, then we'll move on to the next point, and hopefully after we're through 3 or 4 of your nonsense points you'll reconsider your position without me handholding you through it.
If you want to help me, just say "yes I understand I was wrong on that point", then I can easily jump into the next point without addressing some new incoherent shit you throw at me.
If progressives refuse to vote for the most progressive president we have ever had then the Democratic Party will conclude that they will not be able to win progressive votes in future elections. They will shift to the right in an attempt to capture more conservative voters.
My argument has a consistent position. Trump winning in 2024 would be disastrous for progressive causes. My argument refuted your argument's central point. Now all that is left in your argument is ad hominem attacks. edit: typo
Just have to endure those 4 years of supergenocide and removal of voting rights and then we, no sorry the primary voters can get a pacifist candidate
If Trump wins in 2024 there won’t be a 2028 election, or at least a not a real one.
In your scenario there would be no Gaza to save in 2028.
False premise.
You're speaking in certainties when you cannot. The genocide has been perpetuated, on and off, for 75 years. This is the most killing we've seen in the region in a short span of time, but we have seen figures close to this in the past 75 years.
Of course there's a world where Trump is elected, and successfully aids Israel in the extermination of the Palestinians. But you have to admit that that world isn't a certainty, even if Trump is elected.
There's also a world where Biden is reelected, his campaign keeps greenlighting the genocide with periodic rhetorical criticism, and then some other fascist Republican or moderate fiscal conservative Democrat comes in in 2028 and finishes the job (the Democrats now emboldened to further ignore the genocide because it costs them nothing).
It's easier online to speak in certainty about the future, I understand that, but please if you're going to bother engaging please don't do it in bad-faith and actually admit where your knowledge ends. You're not clairvoyant.
You just need to read the headline to this post, not even the article, to see where this argument is a non starter.
I don't believe Trump's campaign promises are unwavering truisms that come to fruition 100% of the time. I'm glad you have so much faith in the promises he makes though, so much so that you'd literally call them a certainty and disregard any other possible reality just simply on the basis that Trump said it.
I've met a good number of Trump supporters that don't even have this kind of faith, only his most devout followers take his promises as premonitions of the future.
Don't you think Egypt will let in refugees when Trump greenlights a Supergenocide?
Look up Project 2025. There will not be a 2028 election if Trump wins 2024. One Day Dictator Donnie won't stop at one day.
He already tried to seize the capital through force. He has failed, he was the president for 4 fucking years and couldn't figure out how to dismantle the government. He's incredibly incompetent, I don't know why every liberal in the world is clutching their pearls like he's some kind of mastermind who grew and learned how to overthrow the country.
Trump is a figurehead. The man himself is nothing. If her gets elected, the smart people behind him who actually DO learn from past mistakes will have four years to reshape the government, and last time, things moved FAST.
Not voting does not send the message you think it does. It sends the message that you're fine with the status quo and content to sit home and let things play out. "Protest" voting in the final election within a 2 party system is the same as not voting. It's winner take all, and nothing else matters to these people.
I've responded to this exact sentiment in at least 4 comments and it's getting exhausting. Either find my response to this or don't engage, I don't really give a fuck. It can't possibly be my responsibility to educate every genocide-agnostic moderate-lib on the material reality of elections.
Ibid
It's not like he's the one coming up with the plan. Project 2025 was written by much more cunning schemers. There are people who saw him fail to take the capital by force, and now seek to enable his success next time.
Lol he already got the supreme court running interference for his attempted coup. Do you think the country is safe?
Project 2025. Downvote me. Shit on my very existence. But read what is planned.
"I don't want to live on this planet anymore..." oh please, just stop. How horrible is your life? You sound like a whiny liberal. People are dying all over the world, being murdered for religious beliefs, sexual preference, politics...etc...and you don't want to live because "that big bad republican might become President.." Please...