Vote. Put pressure on politicians to do better. But more than anything. Vote.
If the polls say he's 100% going to win. Vote. If you're in a state that goes blue every time for the last 100 years. Vote. If you're in a state that goes red every time for the last 100 years. Vote.
Polls always matter, you just have to understand polls.
This is with third party options and show Biden up 2% which is probably close to margin of error.
It doesn't mean Biden has it in the bag, but it means his chances are improved.
But Biden risks the same dangers Hillary did in 2016.
People don't really want to vote for them, they just don't want trump. So there's a risk if Biden is polling too well (I don't think it will be an issue) people will stay home thinking they don't need to compromise their morals because trump will lose.
It's a dangerous game, and we wouldn't have to play it if we ran a candidate popular with Dem voters.
It's wild, but it raining on election day might have more an effect than anything that's happened recently.
Fuck.
I think I know who won't be discouraged by a little rain.
It can't rain everywhere all day though right?
Are you invoking The Crow?
Hah. No. but I get the reference. wasn't it "it can't rain all the time" ?
True, but since you refused to run this year we've had to make do with Joe.
So there’s a risk if Biden is polling too well (I don’t think it will be an issue) people will stay home thinking they don’t need to compromise their morals because trump will lose.
That's largely how Romney lost to Obama in 2012. Republican turnout sagged in a year when both candidates' approval ratings were underwater. Mitt lost a bunch of midwestern states that a candidate like Bush or Trump could have won, thanks to his vulture capitalist career alienating blue-collar conservatives and his weird knock-off religion alienating evangelicals.
Literally all the dems have to do is not be shitbags.
Weird that Republicans are never held to such standards.
"Republicans fall in line, Democrats fall in love" old people (Republicans) vote, always, because they are retired. Democrats work and need to go out of their way to vote, so you have to convince them.
Whoever on your account team wrote this one is funny. They're right. But I love how they wrote that Biden will poll well, when the other guy has been spending weeks saying how bad he's doing.
Consistency my guys. Get your stories straight. Especially if you're going to comment walls of text multiple times every hour every day. Don't make it so obvious.
If a group of people are intent on spreading misinformation why would more than one of them use the same account?
Each of them would have many accounts.
Have you read any of their comments? They're all over the place claiming contradicting things.
That's not an answer though?
Am answer to what, you taking something too literally? Why would I answer that.
because you're making bizarre assertions about teams of people using accounts?
I see people saying their vote doesn't matter when they're in a highly partisan district, which is most of them.
News flash: Even the dumbest politicians can look at arithmetic. If they see their margins shrinking, they'll adjust. Or go full retard and double-down. And then get a worse beating.
Also local elections can be decided by one vote and can be just as important.
Typically more important for the average citizen. Federal changes may effect you in years, decades or never. Whereas your local politicians impact your day to day life.
Definitely not the case for women and queer people this year, but generally true.
You haven't been to the circus show that is my city board of ed meetings.
After trading leads several times, Simitian and Low each finished with 30,249 votes in the original tally, which was finalized earlier this month, shortly before the recount began. Liccardo finished with 38,489 votes, well ahead of the other two candidates.
So the two runners-up were competing for who gets to lose in a run-off election?
The attacks reached a fever pitch late last month, when a local prosecutor filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission alleging that Liccardo’s campaign illegally coordinated with “a newly formed dark money Super PAC to do his CD-16 recount bidding.”
:-/ It's not the votes that count, but who counts the votes.
I see people saying their vote doesn’t matter when they’re in a highly partisan district
I see people saying it when they're in heavily gerrymandered districts and deeply disenfranchised states. Dems have been playing the "Just go out and vote!" game in Florida for a quarter century, and Repubs keep finding new ways to yank the football. Even ballot initiatives don't work, as the Florida gerrymandered legislature just reverses out whatever voting rights or decriminalization laws the public passes.
Okay, then protest. And also VOTE.
Throwing your hands up in the air saying "voting doesn't work so I'm not going to do anything" is just allowing them to dictate everything that will happen.
Okay, then protest.
Throwing your hands up in the air saying “voting doesn’t work so I’m not going to do anything”
Studying the history of the electoral system and the patterns of disenfranchisement isn't equivalent to "doing nothing". And in the end, you have to be rational rather than idealistic. When Vladimir Putin is counting the votes, you're not going to vote him out of office.
When Vladimir Putin is counting the votes, you're not going to vote him out of office.
Russians that literally live under Vladimir Putin risk their lives to protest. You have politicians that you admit want to become the next Putin but won't say anything or of fear of pepper spray.
There's an internet meme about France surrendering. French politicians try to increase the retirement age and the population takes to the streets. American politicians try to take away your democracy and American citizens just roll over to expose their belly.
It's not the French that surrender at the slightest bit of difficulty.
Russians that literally live under Vladimir Putin risk their lives to protest.
So do American college kids.
French politicians try to increase the retirement age and the population takes to the streets.
French politicians have been squeezing the pension system since at least 2006, and the street protests have come and gone without discouraging new efforts to dismantle the system.
Bully to them for trying, but without material control over industry, they're all sound and fury.
I've been voting for 24 years and have never seen this happen. They double down and that gets their voters even more fired up to vote.
Well said. People also need to take steps to ensure they have not been kicked off of voter rolls (the Republican dirty tricks just never end). I think sites like vote.org can help with that.
And VOTE DOWN BALLOT. If Democrats voted down ballot as frequently as Republicans do, the Republicans would lose House and Senate by a wide margin.
Put pressure on politicians to do better
And even if they dont do better, elect them anyway. That'll teach them.
Don't vote and help their much worse fascist opponents get elected instead, which will affect the general population, not the wealthy elites. That'll teach them!
Either way the working class gets fucked
You're correct. But they get fucked much harder one way than the other. It's all about harm reduction.
Harm reduction is a myth, people have been preaching harm reduction for decades and there's been no reduction in harm. Quite the opposite, poverty has increased. Homelessness is at a rate not seen since the Great depression, income inequality is the highest ever recorded. The most percentage of people living paycheck to paycheck is higher than any other level recorded. There has been no reduction in harm.
Wasn't homelessness during the great depression roughly at a percentage rate of 1.5% of the nation (upwards of 2 million people)? Are you sure we have a homeless rate not seen since the great depression? As for all the other stuff...yeah that's pretty bad, especially the income inequality over the decades and decades.
Harm reduction is a myth
Sincerely, the boot on your neck
You are now just blatantly lying. Poverty and homelessness has been trending down for decades.
Let's see. The government tells us that poverty is trending down for decades, yet the number of people living paycheck to paycheck has been increasing. The number of renters that cannot afford their rent has been increasing, homelessness is at the largest level ever recorded, but the claim is poverty is decreasing. Have you ever stopped to consider? Maybe they are lying?
More damn lies.
yet the number of people living paycheck to paycheck has been increasing
No it's not.
The number of renters that cannot afford their rent has been increasing
No it's not.
homelessness is at the largest level ever recorded
Not even close.
You got any sources for your bullshit, other than "my ass"?
I won't say you are lying, but ignorant of the facts.
Ah so you're doing that disingenuous bullshit where you're saying the TOTAL number of homeless has gone up while intentionally implying you meant the homelessness RATE has gone up.
Guess what? Our POPULATION has gone up over the past hundred years too.
Even just looking at pure numerical data, only last year did the number of homeless edge above the 2012 level, which is the earliest we have good data for. There's no way in hell it's beating out 2009-2011 after free great recession, much less the great depression.
As for poverty, it's currently around HALF of our earliest data from 1925. Trending down steadily.
Capitalism has its problems, but trying to paint a picture of life getting worse over time is absolutely bullshit.
This is why things are shit, people refusing to acknowledge the oligarchy is killing us.
I love how all the loudmouth dickholes shutup when presented with facts.
Are you off your fucking tits??
Sorry, I can't hear you over the Russian dick in your mouth
Solid rebuttal for a 12 year old! Does your mom know you're online talking to adults?
What??
I'm not going to vote for Biden until he stops funding a genocide. You cannot say put pressure on them and vote for them no matter what. They do not give a fuck what you think if you're going to automatically vote for them. That's why the uncommitted votes in the primaries scared them so much.
Trump thanks you for your service.
Oh no, you're only the thousandth person to tell me that. It's so persuasive. Either I vote for the guy funding a genocide or the Boogeyman gets elected1!!111!!1
Vote for the guy that's unfortunately not willing to break with decades worth of support for Israel or the guy who's said he'd send in ground troops wins.
There is actually a third option this time around, not that he's any better with bird flu on the way. But no it's never an either/or proposition. You are in fact allowed to leave that spot on the ballot blank.
Just understand that you have zero ground to stand on by not voting.
Yet another fallacy meant to coerce votes for bad candidates. I'm not politically disengaged. This is a political choice.
If you're not participating, you're not in the conversation. Simple as that.
Nobody said I wasn't participating. I said I wasn't voting for Biden.
As long as you're voting on everything else on the ballot, fair enough. Also, I'm hoping you don't live in a battleground state.
Oh yeah. It doesn't work if you don't vote at all. They have to know they left those votes behind.
Yes, that's the reality of the situation, whether you like it or not. If you don't care if that happens, fair enough. But don't try to say that not voting for Biden doesn't help Trump.
I didn't say that. I said that at this point, months into this debacle, it's obviously not persuasive to me. I am not willing to sell the lives of Palestinian children to make my life marginally more comfortable.
And what do you think Trump will do to help the Palestinian children? Please be specific.
You can't get extra dead. Here's the IPC's take on Gaza right now-
The famine threshold for household acute food insecurity has already been far exceeded and, given the latest data showing a steeply increasing trend in cases of acute malnutrition, it is highly likely that the famine threshold for acute malnutrition has also been exceeded. The upward trend in non-trauma mortality is also expected to accelerate, resulting in all famine thresholds likely to be passed imminently.
Those kids aren't going to be alive in November.
That wasn't my question. What is Trump going to do to help Palestinian children?
I freely admit he won't help them. I'm also telling you it won't matter by then because you can't be extra dead.
Helping elect the guy who wants all the Palestinians dead so his son-in-law can have beach front property, while also making everything else worse isn't the moral high ground you seen to think it is.
And no, whatever third option you're talking about isn't going to win.
It's not an either/or question. There isn't some secret vote where Trump gets points for disaffected Democrats. And the other choice is to just not. Or Biden could follow the laws of our country and stop supplying a genocide, and stop fucking with asylum. At this point he's going the wrong way for me to vote for him.
Those children will die regardless of who you vote for or if you don't vote at all. It's a horrific tragedy that is completely out of anyone who isn't in power's control. So instead of worrying about that, worry about what you CAN control - preventing fascists from gaining more power and making things even worse than they already are.
No a tragedy is a plane crash. A tragedy is a tornado directly hitting the school gym everyone sheltered in.
This is a war crime, a massacre, an act so vile that civilized countries have agreed it should not be done, ever.
And we do not have to be complicit.
Nothing you said contradicts Samus.
We can control our complicity. Politicians can be brought to heel. Saying we can't do it is just another way of excusing ourselves from worrying about what our leadership is doing.
I’d be willing to bet you couldn’t point to Palestine on a map this time last year.
I bet you don't know who I am, what I went to college for, or where I was before college. Because you're very wrong.
I’ll bet I know what you don’t know. And that’s where Palestine was on the map prior to October 7th.
And they're right. And you're wrong but don't want to listen, so here we are.
If the choice is people dying or people dying then the system is no longer legitimate.
So do you plan on doing anything about it, or just going to pout about it and feel good about not voting when those people get bombed harder?
This is just virtue signaling. If you cared about the people you'd want to reduce the harm they're facing, not try to moralize your bad choice on the Internet.
This is a two-way street though. You'd think the democratic establishment would also want to increase their electoral odds in order to reduce harm.
Like, the stakes are so high, and it's so weird to see them betting the horse on Israel. It's frankly irresponsible for Democrats to be playing politics like that at a time like this.
They're not betting the house on Israel. They're hedging. They increased aid to Palestine, they delayed arms shipments, and they've been pursuing a ceasefire deal like their lives depended on it.
You want them to bet the house on Palestine.
Increased what aid? The aid agencies are reporting the warehouses are empty. There is no aid getting in.
US sends aid, Israel or Hamas steals it. You want Biden to put American troops on the ground to ensure distribution?
Then stop sending weapons. If Israel cannot guarantee aid delivery then they should not receive weapons. Especially considering aid delivery is as simple as driving into Gaza and letting starving people grab food. If they can't keep their settlers from stopping the trucks and they can't effectively distribute aid then they aren't in control and we need a UN peacekeeping mission there right away.
And there is no credible evidence Hamas is stealing aid. Those are just more Israeli claims with no evidence backing them up.
Then stop sending weapons.
Finally, an actionable demand. I happen to agree. Stick with that. Stop with your extra lies and bullshit.
American voters have never had the power to decide US foreign policy.
You have the choice of people dying or MORE people dying though. Seems like a very obvious choice.
On top of this, you have the bigger picture. What will happen if Trump wins?
It will get harder to go to college, as Trump works to gut Pell Grants and cap Stafford Loans.
If you have gone to college, it will get harder as Trump will increase the monthly amount you have to pay and not reward you for going into lower-paying public service jobs.
Gay marriage will be put on the chopping block.
Laws stopping discrimination against Gays and Minorities will be repealed and/or not enforced.
This is just the most benign parts of Project 2025. It gets worse from there.
So, on top of more people dying, we'll suffer here at home because of idiots like Maggoty here.
Sure, but I don't even want to get into all that. They'll just pivot back to the stupid "genocide Joe" bullshit. I want to pin em down on that, because even THAT makes no goddamn sense.
Not really. You can't extra die. People are starving now. Not next January.
You think that, under Biden, literally every single Palestinian will die?
Because that's what Trump has said he wants.
First, Trump isn't any more or less capable of doing that than Biden. Both of them have the same toolset to work with.
Second, yes, if you starve the open air concentration camp you can in fact kill everyone there in a few months.
First, Trump isn’t any more or less capable of doing that than Biden. Both of them have the same toolset to work with.
Yeah but one will and one won't. Who cares about capacity, we're talking about (well documented, I should add) intentions.
Second, yes, if you starve the open air concentration camp you can in fact kill everyone there in a few months.
Trump would definitely do it faster and more thoroughly.
How would he do it faster? The last time he tried to get the military to commit crimes they straight up told him no and reminded the entire force their oaths are to the Constitution, not Trump. He can certainly deploy them, but he cannot force them to participate in crimes once there. The very first Corp level Civil Affairs officer that touches the ground will ensure Aid is processed into Gaza as fast as possible, no matter what the Israelis or Trump think about it.
So Trump would need an entirely new force which doesn't happen overnight, and oh yeah we've got to somehow get Biden to reverse course on this and lose while doing the right thing in a race against a convicted felon. Because as it stands Trump won't need to do anything. This isn't something on the timeline of years. That's what happens when the world manages to get aid into the affected region and we play whack a mole with starving people. (And there's still a ton of people dying.) In the scenario where aid is effectively stopped we don't have that effect and the death rate is going to be far higher.
I think we're down low enough that no one is at risk of being suckered in by your brain rot, so I'm just gonna quit with the charade that you're a reasonable person making arguments in good faith.
Cause letting the guy who wants to send in the us military to "wipe em all out" win is waaaaay better for those people you pretend to care about.
Hilariously that would give them more access to aid than Israel is giving them. Trump wouldn't be able to stop the US military from distributing aid as part of its normal operations mode. As usual he has no clue how the military works.
dafuq kinda nonsense is this? lesse, a president who supports wiping out Palestinians is better for Palestinians because then they get more aid?
?????
It makes sense if you're a fucking moron
Anything to get Trump elected, eh?
Oh look, another original take. You're only the (checks notes) hundredth comment attempting to gaslight me into thinking I'm a trump supporter because I'm not blindly loyal to Biden. Not even the Democrats, Just Biden. And you guys accuse Trump supporters of being a cult.
Hmm… when 99 people in a room full of a hundred people suggest something-
Maybe it’s best to not believe that one dude that disagrees with them.
Spades are sometimes just spades. Regardless if they tell you they’re not.
No. The bandwagon is not a logical argument.
It’s not a bandwagon. It’s just simply a basis of observation.
That is literally the bandwagon argument.
Threat you're unaware of your own hypocrisy here is absolutely hysterical!
K
Mathematically, either Biden or Trump will win, with 100% certainty.
As lamentable as it is for Palestinians, you drawing the line in the sand over foreign policy in Palestine & Israel will not help Palestinians. I would even go as far to say that Biden's policy on Israel is marginally better than what Trump's would be. The GOP is actively hostile against Palestine. At least with Biden we are getting (gentle) push-back on Israel.
So, if it's a given that either Biden or Trump will win, you have one of four options, depending on your political leaning:
Liberal and vote for Biden. Helps Biden.
Conservative and vote for Trump. Helps Trump.
Liberal and don't vote for Biden. Helps Trump.
Conservative and don't vote for Trump. Helps Biden.
I don't see any other option, but if someone has one - one that helps Palestine - I'd be interested to hear option 5.
If the choice is genocide or genocide then it's not a real choice and this election is not legitimate.
In spite of you saying it's not a real choice, you seem to be choosing #3 or #4.
Bold choice. We'll see how it goes.
No. That's your categorization. Not mine.
It is my categorization. But it's a logical framing.
I'd be interested to hear if there are any other logical possibilities outside the four I named.
You might be making an illogical choice, and that's ok. It is you, and you can make your own choice.
The democratic party realizes it's losing voters instead of gaining them and reverses course. And yes that requires being willing to carry out the threat of not voting for Biden in November.
You base all your facts on feels, dontcha?
I won't be responding any more to you, since you are an untrustworthy interlocutor. And I mean that!
Electoral boycotts aren't new. And our entire political philosophy is based around voters holding elected leaders responsible. Saying we have to vote for someone completely removes that accountability.
I base my facts on research and my college education in politics.
Classic Lemmy. They're quicker to blame you than they are Biden for bad policy.
A true optimist would suggest that Joe Biden could absolutely reverse course. It's like they've all given up on that possibility.
Pretty much. I'm open about the fact that I would vote for him if he reversed course. Nope, still just shouting at me and calling me a trump supporter.
Lemmy.world, shocking
Oh don't worry most of .world wishes I would just shut up and let them enjoy their sense of moral superiority over Trump's supporters.
Polls don't matter, especially this far out.
Vote. Put pressure on politicians to do better. But more than anything. Vote.
If the polls say he's 100% going to win. Vote. If you're in a state that goes blue every time for the last 100 years. Vote. If you're in a state that goes red every time for the last 100 years. Vote.
Polls always matter, you just have to understand polls.
This is with third party options and show Biden up 2% which is probably close to margin of error.
It doesn't mean Biden has it in the bag, but it means his chances are improved.
But Biden risks the same dangers Hillary did in 2016.
People don't really want to vote for them, they just don't want trump. So there's a risk if Biden is polling too well (I don't think it will be an issue) people will stay home thinking they don't need to compromise their morals because trump will lose.
It's a dangerous game, and we wouldn't have to play it if we ran a candidate popular with Dem voters.
It's wild, but it raining on election day might have more an effect than anything that's happened recently.
Fuck.
I think I know who won't be discouraged by a little rain.
It can't rain everywhere all day though right?
Are you invoking The Crow?
Hah. No. but I get the reference. wasn't it "it can't rain all the time" ?
True, but since you refused to run this year we've had to make do with Joe.
That's largely how Romney lost to Obama in 2012. Republican turnout sagged in a year when both candidates' approval ratings were underwater. Mitt lost a bunch of midwestern states that a candidate like Bush or Trump could have won, thanks to his vulture capitalist career alienating blue-collar conservatives and his weird knock-off religion alienating evangelicals.
Literally all the dems have to do is not be shitbags.
Weird that Republicans are never held to such standards.
"Republicans fall in line, Democrats fall in love" old people (Republicans) vote, always, because they are retired. Democrats work and need to go out of their way to vote, so you have to convince them.
Whoever on your account team wrote this one is funny. They're right. But I love how they wrote that Biden will poll well, when the other guy has been spending weeks saying how bad he's doing.
Consistency my guys. Get your stories straight. Especially if you're going to comment walls of text multiple times every hour every day. Don't make it so obvious.
If a group of people are intent on spreading misinformation why would more than one of them use the same account?
Each of them would have many accounts.
Have you read any of their comments? They're all over the place claiming contradicting things.
That's not an answer though?
Am answer to what, you taking something too literally? Why would I answer that.
because you're making bizarre assertions about teams of people using accounts?
🙄
I see people saying their vote doesn't matter when they're in a highly partisan district, which is most of them.
News flash: Even the dumbest politicians can look at arithmetic. If they see their margins shrinking, they'll adjust. Or go full retard and double-down. And then get a worse beating.
Also local elections can be decided by one vote and can be just as important.
Typically more important for the average citizen. Federal changes may effect you in years, decades or never. Whereas your local politicians impact your day to day life.
Definitely not the case for women and queer people this year, but generally true.
You haven't been to the circus show that is my city board of ed meetings.
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-05-01/ca-16-results-recount-tk-tk
Five votes. In a district of 735,000 people.
So the two runners-up were competing for who gets to lose in a run-off election?
:-/ It's not the votes that count, but who counts the votes.
I see people saying it when they're in heavily gerrymandered districts and deeply disenfranchised states. Dems have been playing the "Just go out and vote!" game in Florida for a quarter century, and Repubs keep finding new ways to yank the football. Even ballot initiatives don't work, as the Florida gerrymandered legislature just reverses out whatever voting rights or decriminalization laws the public passes.
Okay, then protest. And also VOTE.
Throwing your hands up in the air saying "voting doesn't work so I'm not going to do anything" is just allowing them to dictate everything that will happen.
Studying the history of the electoral system and the patterns of disenfranchisement isn't equivalent to "doing nothing". And in the end, you have to be rational rather than idealistic. When Vladimir Putin is counting the votes, you're not going to vote him out of office.
Russians that literally live under Vladimir Putin risk their lives to protest. You have politicians that you admit want to become the next Putin but won't say anything or of fear of pepper spray.
There's an internet meme about France surrendering. French politicians try to increase the retirement age and the population takes to the streets. American politicians try to take away your democracy and American citizens just roll over to expose their belly.
It's not the French that surrender at the slightest bit of difficulty.
So do American college kids.
French politicians have been squeezing the pension system since at least 2006, and the street protests have come and gone without discouraging new efforts to dismantle the system.
Bully to them for trying, but without material control over industry, they're all sound and fury.
I've been voting for 24 years and have never seen this happen. They double down and that gets their voters even more fired up to vote.
Well said. People also need to take steps to ensure they have not been kicked off of voter rolls (the Republican dirty tricks just never end). I think sites like vote.org can help with that.
And VOTE DOWN BALLOT. If Democrats voted down ballot as frequently as Republicans do, the Republicans would lose House and Senate by a wide margin.
And even if they dont do better, elect them anyway. That'll teach them.
Don't vote and help their much worse fascist opponents get elected instead, which will affect the general population, not the wealthy elites. That'll teach them!
Either way the working class gets fucked
You're correct. But they get fucked much harder one way than the other. It's all about harm reduction.
Harm reduction is a myth, people have been preaching harm reduction for decades and there's been no reduction in harm. Quite the opposite, poverty has increased. Homelessness is at a rate not seen since the Great depression, income inequality is the highest ever recorded. The most percentage of people living paycheck to paycheck is higher than any other level recorded. There has been no reduction in harm.
Wasn't homelessness during the great depression roughly at a percentage rate of 1.5% of the nation (upwards of 2 million people)? Are you sure we have a homeless rate not seen since the great depression? As for all the other stuff...yeah that's pretty bad, especially the income inequality over the decades and decades.
Sincerely, the boot on your neck
You are now just blatantly lying. Poverty and homelessness has been trending down for decades.
Let's see. The government tells us that poverty is trending down for decades, yet the number of people living paycheck to paycheck has been increasing. The number of renters that cannot afford their rent has been increasing, homelessness is at the largest level ever recorded, but the claim is poverty is decreasing. Have you ever stopped to consider? Maybe they are lying?
More damn lies.
No it's not.
No it's not.
Not even close.
You got any sources for your bullshit, other than "my ass"?
2016 Paycheck to paycheck rate 38%
2020 Paycheck to paycheck rate 63%
2023 paycheck to paycheck rate 78%, up 6% since 2022
50% of renters cant afford their rent
Hopelessness at record level
NPR article about record homelessness
I won't say you are lying, but ignorant of the facts.
Ah so you're doing that disingenuous bullshit where you're saying the TOTAL number of homeless has gone up while intentionally implying you meant the homelessness RATE has gone up.
Guess what? Our POPULATION has gone up over the past hundred years too.
Even just looking at pure numerical data, only last year did the number of homeless edge above the 2012 level, which is the earliest we have good data for. There's no way in hell it's beating out 2009-2011 after free great recession, much less the great depression.
As for poverty, it's currently around HALF of our earliest data from 1925. Trending down steadily.
Capitalism has its problems, but trying to paint a picture of life getting worse over time is absolutely bullshit.
This is why things are shit, people refusing to acknowledge the oligarchy is killing us.
I love how all the loudmouth dickholes shutup when presented with facts.
Are you off your fucking tits??
Sorry, I can't hear you over the Russian dick in your mouth
Solid rebuttal for a 12 year old! Does your mom know you're online talking to adults?
What??
I'm not going to vote for Biden until he stops funding a genocide. You cannot say put pressure on them and vote for them no matter what. They do not give a fuck what you think if you're going to automatically vote for them. That's why the uncommitted votes in the primaries scared them so much.
Trump thanks you for your service.
Oh no, you're only the thousandth person to tell me that. It's so persuasive. Either I vote for the guy funding a genocide or the Boogeyman gets elected1!!111!!1
Vote for the guy that's unfortunately not willing to break with decades worth of support for Israel or the guy who's said he'd send in ground troops wins.
There is actually a third option this time around, not that he's any better with bird flu on the way. But no it's never an either/or proposition. You are in fact allowed to leave that spot on the ballot blank.
Just understand that you have zero ground to stand on by not voting.
Yet another fallacy meant to coerce votes for bad candidates. I'm not politically disengaged. This is a political choice.
If you're not participating, you're not in the conversation. Simple as that.
Nobody said I wasn't participating. I said I wasn't voting for Biden.
As long as you're voting on everything else on the ballot, fair enough. Also, I'm hoping you don't live in a battleground state.
Oh yeah. It doesn't work if you don't vote at all. They have to know they left those votes behind.
Yes, that's the reality of the situation, whether you like it or not. If you don't care if that happens, fair enough. But don't try to say that not voting for Biden doesn't help Trump.
I didn't say that. I said that at this point, months into this debacle, it's obviously not persuasive to me. I am not willing to sell the lives of Palestinian children to make my life marginally more comfortable.
And what do you think Trump will do to help the Palestinian children? Please be specific.
You can't get extra dead. Here's the IPC's take on Gaza right now-
Those kids aren't going to be alive in November.
That wasn't my question. What is Trump going to do to help Palestinian children?
I freely admit he won't help them. I'm also telling you it won't matter by then because you can't be extra dead.
Helping elect the guy who wants all the Palestinians dead so his son-in-law can have beach front property, while also making everything else worse isn't the moral high ground you seen to think it is.
And no, whatever third option you're talking about isn't going to win.
It's not an either/or question. There isn't some secret vote where Trump gets points for disaffected Democrats. And the other choice is to just not. Or Biden could follow the laws of our country and stop supplying a genocide, and stop fucking with asylum. At this point he's going the wrong way for me to vote for him.
Those children will die regardless of who you vote for or if you don't vote at all. It's a horrific tragedy that is completely out of anyone who isn't in power's control. So instead of worrying about that, worry about what you CAN control - preventing fascists from gaining more power and making things even worse than they already are.
No a tragedy is a plane crash. A tragedy is a tornado directly hitting the school gym everyone sheltered in.
This is a war crime, a massacre, an act so vile that civilized countries have agreed it should not be done, ever.
And we do not have to be complicit.
Nothing you said contradicts Samus.
We can control our complicity. Politicians can be brought to heel. Saying we can't do it is just another way of excusing ourselves from worrying about what our leadership is doing.
I’d be willing to bet you couldn’t point to Palestine on a map this time last year.
I bet you don't know who I am, what I went to college for, or where I was before college. Because you're very wrong.
I’ll bet I know what you don’t know. And that’s where Palestine was on the map prior to October 7th.
And they're right. And you're wrong but don't want to listen, so here we are.
If the choice is people dying or people dying then the system is no longer legitimate.
So do you plan on doing anything about it, or just going to pout about it and feel good about not voting when those people get bombed harder?
This is just virtue signaling. If you cared about the people you'd want to reduce the harm they're facing, not try to moralize your bad choice on the Internet.
This is a two-way street though. You'd think the democratic establishment would also want to increase their electoral odds in order to reduce harm.
Like, the stakes are so high, and it's so weird to see them betting the horse on Israel. It's frankly irresponsible for Democrats to be playing politics like that at a time like this.
They're not betting the house on Israel. They're hedging. They increased aid to Palestine, they delayed arms shipments, and they've been pursuing a ceasefire deal like their lives depended on it.
You want them to bet the house on Palestine.
Increased what aid? The aid agencies are reporting the warehouses are empty. There is no aid getting in.
US sends aid, Israel or Hamas steals it. You want Biden to put American troops on the ground to ensure distribution?
Then stop sending weapons. If Israel cannot guarantee aid delivery then they should not receive weapons. Especially considering aid delivery is as simple as driving into Gaza and letting starving people grab food. If they can't keep their settlers from stopping the trucks and they can't effectively distribute aid then they aren't in control and we need a UN peacekeeping mission there right away.
And there is no credible evidence Hamas is stealing aid. Those are just more Israeli claims with no evidence backing them up.
Finally, an actionable demand. I happen to agree. Stick with that. Stop with your extra lies and bullshit.
Ah yes all moral actions are just utilitarian so we should abandon morality.
So, nothing.
K
American voters have never had the power to decide US foreign policy.
You have the choice of people dying or MORE people dying though. Seems like a very obvious choice.
On top of this, you have the bigger picture. What will happen if Trump wins?
This is just the most benign parts of Project 2025. It gets worse from there.
So, on top of more people dying, we'll suffer here at home because of idiots like Maggoty here.
Sure, but I don't even want to get into all that. They'll just pivot back to the stupid "genocide Joe" bullshit. I want to pin em down on that, because even THAT makes no goddamn sense.
Not really. You can't extra die. People are starving now. Not next January.
You think that, under Biden, literally every single Palestinian will die?
Because that's what Trump has said he wants.
First, Trump isn't any more or less capable of doing that than Biden. Both of them have the same toolset to work with.
Second, yes, if you starve the open air concentration camp you can in fact kill everyone there in a few months.
Yeah but one will and one won't. Who cares about capacity, we're talking about (well documented, I should add) intentions.
Trump would definitely do it faster and more thoroughly.
How would he do it faster? The last time he tried to get the military to commit crimes they straight up told him no and reminded the entire force their oaths are to the Constitution, not Trump. He can certainly deploy them, but he cannot force them to participate in crimes once there. The very first Corp level Civil Affairs officer that touches the ground will ensure Aid is processed into Gaza as fast as possible, no matter what the Israelis or Trump think about it.
So Trump would need an entirely new force which doesn't happen overnight, and oh yeah we've got to somehow get Biden to reverse course on this and lose while doing the right thing in a race against a convicted felon. Because as it stands Trump won't need to do anything. This isn't something on the timeline of years. That's what happens when the world manages to get aid into the affected region and we play whack a mole with starving people. (And there's still a ton of people dying.) In the scenario where aid is effectively stopped we don't have that effect and the death rate is going to be far higher.
I think we're down low enough that no one is at risk of being suckered in by your brain rot, so I'm just gonna quit with the charade that you're a reasonable person making arguments in good faith.
That you think everyone here lacks intelligence enough to fall for that nonsense speaks volumes about your own.
No I think you're just being willfully ignorant because it's easier and those dead kids are over there.
Right… the dead kids. The perfect hot button rhetoric to swing around when you want to really drive the point home that “biDeN bAaAD!!”
You’re seemingly as textbook as one could be.
He could... Just not. That is an option.
Cause letting the guy who wants to send in the us military to "wipe em all out" win is waaaaay better for those people you pretend to care about.
Hilariously that would give them more access to aid than Israel is giving them. Trump wouldn't be able to stop the US military from distributing aid as part of its normal operations mode. As usual he has no clue how the military works.
dafuq kinda nonsense is this? lesse, a president who supports wiping out Palestinians is better for Palestinians because then they get more aid?
?????
It makes sense if you're a fucking moron
Anything to get Trump elected, eh?
Oh look, another original take. You're only the (checks notes) hundredth comment attempting to gaslight me into thinking I'm a trump supporter because I'm not blindly loyal to Biden. Not even the Democrats, Just Biden. And you guys accuse Trump supporters of being a cult.
Hmm… when 99 people in a room full of a hundred people suggest something-
Maybe it’s best to not believe that one dude that disagrees with them.
Spades are sometimes just spades. Regardless if they tell you they’re not.
No. The bandwagon is not a logical argument.
It’s not a bandwagon. It’s just simply a basis of observation.
That is literally the bandwagon argument.
Threat you're unaware of your own hypocrisy here is absolutely hysterical!
K
Mathematically, either Biden or Trump will win, with 100% certainty.
As lamentable as it is for Palestinians, you drawing the line in the sand over foreign policy in Palestine & Israel will not help Palestinians. I would even go as far to say that Biden's policy on Israel is marginally better than what Trump's would be. The GOP is actively hostile against Palestine. At least with Biden we are getting (gentle) push-back on Israel.
So, if it's a given that either Biden or Trump will win, you have one of four options, depending on your political leaning:
I don't see any other option, but if someone has one - one that helps Palestine - I'd be interested to hear option 5.
If the choice is genocide or genocide then it's not a real choice and this election is not legitimate.
In spite of you saying it's not a real choice, you seem to be choosing #3 or #4.
Bold choice. We'll see how it goes.
No. That's your categorization. Not mine.
It is my categorization. But it's a logical framing.
I'd be interested to hear if there are any other logical possibilities outside the four I named.
You might be making an illogical choice, and that's ok. It is you, and you can make your own choice.
The democratic party realizes it's losing voters instead of gaining them and reverses course. And yes that requires being willing to carry out the threat of not voting for Biden in November.
You base all your facts on feels, dontcha?
I won't be responding any more to you, since you are an untrustworthy interlocutor. And I mean that!
Electoral boycotts aren't new. And our entire political philosophy is based around voters holding elected leaders responsible. Saying we have to vote for someone completely removes that accountability.
I base my facts on research and my college education in politics.
Classic Lemmy. They're quicker to blame you than they are Biden for bad policy.
A true optimist would suggest that Joe Biden could absolutely reverse course. It's like they've all given up on that possibility.
Pretty much. I'm open about the fact that I would vote for him if he reversed course. Nope, still just shouting at me and calling me a trump supporter.
Lemmy.world, shocking
Oh don't worry most of .world wishes I would just shut up and let them enjoy their sense of moral superiority over Trump's supporters.
Projection at it's finest.
My ratio on this subject disagrees with you.