Putin believe the U.S. and NATO started this war with their "expansion" and are to blame. Putin wants the U.S. to stop sending weapons to Ukraine to defend themselves. These are also Stein's positions and she has no blame for Putin.
Somehow counties wanting to join NATO for protection against a known aggressor is being aggressive. Swed/Fin did not want to join NATO before the invasion. Putin changed those citizen's minds.
She said that it was wrong and illegal and that she didn't agree with it, in the very video you sent!
When asked if she felt it was wrong, she said, "Absolutely, yes. It was wrong, it was a criminal act, it's a violation of international law."
You have a habit of leaving out important information, here let me get it for you:
"Absolutely, yes. It was wrong, it was a criminal.act, it's a violation of international law. At the same time, this war has been ginned up by the US and NATO expansion towards Russian Territory."
She's defending Putin's actions, clearly.
She’s defending Putin’s actions, clearly.
I don't see it that way. She said "“Absolutely, yes. It was wrong, it was a criminal act, it’s a violation of international law." How do you see that as she is defending his actions?
Her saying that the US and NATO sucks doesn't support war.
I'm not voting for her, so I don't care. But you're wrong.
She didn't say NATO and the US suck, she said they started it. You are either willfully misinterpreting this or are so disenfranchised from our current political climate that you're ignoring serious red flags.
She specifically said she this it's wrong what Putin is doing, and this it's against international law. You are either willfully misinterpreting this or are so disenfranchised from our current political climate that you’re ignoring serious red flags.
She's just pulling a "I'm not racist, but..."
You dont say all that shit and then be like, b-but they started it! After having din-din with daddy Pootin.
If you feel any of the content in the article is inaccurate, please feel free to contact the news org that wrote the article.
No, I'm contacting the person spreading it on the Fediverse, you.
No, I’m contacting the person spreading it on the Fediverse, you.
So you don't think certain types of news stories should be shared on the Fediverse then? So are you promoting censorship? Because you seem upset that I am posting news articles about third parties, but you are fine with the 1,000s of articles that are pro-Harris. Right?
So you would prefer I only post news that YOU agree with. Correct?
No, I think they should be shared without bias and you have a terrible track record just from the comments and posts I've seen of your's. You're the type of user to make an entire post about another user and then cut the parts out of your own wrongdoing, I saw that. So yeah, I have a problem with the way YOU present information to be biased towards your own opinion. You aren't presenting information with the intent of sharing knowledge, you share things in a manipulative way that doesnt show the full details of the people you support.
No, I think they should be shared without bias
Any bias you have is on you. I just shared an article. I didn't write it.
You’re the type of user to make an entire post about another user and then cut the parts out of your own wrongdoing, I saw that.
Examples? My post history is public. The entire post history of this community is public. And the modlog is public as well. I haven't hid anything from anyone.
So yeah, I have a problem with the way YOU present information to be biased towards your own opinion.
Then block me. All I do is post the news, I don't write it. How you view it or the bias you inject into it is your problem, not mine. I literally posted a disclaimer when I posted the article, just so the talk wouldn't fall into just talking about me. Not my problem if people can't read the disclaimer.
If you believe any part of the article is inaccurate, I encourage you to reach out to the news organization that published it. If you think the article doesn't align with the community guidelines, feel free to contact the moderators. Thank you!
While I personally disagree with this stance in this particular case, I think it's reasonable to say on the one hand, A did wrong and A was bad, while also pointing out that it takes two to tango and that maybe there were some things that B could have done better.
So to recap, I agree with Stein on A ("It was wrong, it was a criminal act, it’s a violation of international law.") but disagree with Stein on B ("this war has been ginned up by the US and NATO expansion towards Russian Territory.")
In fact, I'm quite bothered here as Ukraine joining NATO doesn't involve Russian Territory unless Ukraine itself is Russian Territory, which I simply cannot agree with.
Thanks for your reasonable response. You make great points.
I'm not voting for her, so I don't care.
This genuinely surprises me. You hype up Stein a ton on Lemmy. Pretty much every pro-Stein post I see on here is posted by you. And you defend her doggedly in the comments. That seems like a lot of effort and emotional investment for a candidate you won't be voting for.
You hype up Stein a ton on Lemmy.
I'm not hyping her up. I'm posting news articles. I'm actually voting Socialist Workers Party. I like Stein, but I'm not voting for her.
If you feel any of the content in the article is inaccurate, please feel free to contact the news org that wrote the article.
Supports Russian terrorism and their propaganda justifications for it though so thppt.
::: spoiler spoiler
2. Funding for Ukraine
Do you support continued funding for weapons in Ukraine? What conditions or limits would you place on that funding?
Chevron Icon
Stein has criticized the money and weapons the United States has sent to Ukraine, and she wrote, "yes, Russia illegally invaded Ukraine – but did so with a gun to its head, or in this case, nuclear-compatible missiles.”
She only admits the invasion is illegal because she'd have to be a complete berserker to think others take her seriously otherwise. The rest is one of Putin's many BS excuses.
Any links to Stein saying she supports Russian terrorism? I'm not voting for her, but I've never heard her say this.
She won't say the words "I support Putin's positions". She will just SUPPORT those positions.
If she's never said it, then I don't believe it. Sorry, friend.
You don't believe she supports Putin's positions even when she says she supports those positions herself? Mkay
Has she said it? What Putin positions does she support?
When asked if she felt it was wrong, she said, “Absolutely, yes. It was wrong, it was a criminal act, it’s a violation of international law.”
From your link.
That has nothing to do with her supporting his positions and blaming the U.S.... which she does.
That has nothing to do with her supporting his positions
When asked if she felt it was wrong, she said, “Absolutely, yes. It was wrong, it was a criminal act, it’s a violation of international law.” From your video link.
Doesn't sound like she is supporting his decision. Especially since she literally said she thinks it's wrong.
The russianphobia in this place is blinding.
I didn't say she supports his decision, I said she supports his positions. I think you are purposely trying to avoid that. She blames the U.S. for the invasion and agrees with Putin on how dangerous NATO "expansion" is. The last countries near Russia that joined NATO were in 2004. Russira is committing a genocide and invaded for no reason. Russia phobia is completely understandable.
I said she supports his positions. I think you are purposely trying to avoid that.
And I think you are purposely exaggerating about her positions because you think she is taking votes away from Harris.
If you believe any part of the article is inaccurate, I encourage you to reach out to the news organization that published it. If you think the article doesn't align with the community guidelines, feel free to contact the moderators. Thank you!
Well if she didn't admit to being a foreign asset, we know for sure she cannot possibly be! /s
You have a history you seem proud of where you are unwilling to comprehend consequences. When 2 people are fighting each other and you step up and hold their arms behind them so the other can take free wacks, who do you support?
BuT yOu DiDn'T SAY yOu SuPpOrT tHe OtHeR gUy... in what world does that matter?
You have a history you seem proud of where you are unwilling to comprehend consequences.
Thanks for being interested enough in me to worry about my "history." I don't have to prove anything to you. I disagree with you. You disagree with me. And that's ok.
If you believe any part of the article is inaccurate, I encourage you to reach out to the news organization that published it. If you think the article doesn't align with the community guidelines, feel free to contact the moderators. Thank you!
'Interested' is not the word I would use. We've had a couple conversations (I'm not fooled by the name change) where you systematically refuse to integrate information that contradicts your world view and follow up with nonsense copypasta as if that somehow absolves you of any obligation to improve.
The issue isn't the news organization. It's you refusing to concede she parrots Russian rhetoric and takes their side with the Ukraine conflict despite conceding it is an illegal war. Her tap dancing around it to not openly admit she is Putin's plant is your ONLY response. You do not provide any rebuttal other than "I am not convinced". "Reach out to the news organization"? Are they going to find where you live, bury you in a pile of Stein quotes of her spouting russian talking points while playing a video of RT broadcasting the same thing until you finally admit "OMG EVIDENCE MATTERS"? No? Then why bother?
So spare me your BS copypasta deflecting any responsibility and actually contribute something of value to the conversation. Can you find a contradictory quote from Stein where she declares the 'peace plan' she intends for Ukraine listed in her platform commits to pre-2014 Ukraine borders? If you can't, then admit she is anti-Ukraine/pro-Russian and stop defending her with vapour.
(I’m not fooled by the name change)
What do you mean? The name change isn't for "fooling" anyone. When I update my "display name" the names get updated to all my past posts. So there is not "fooling" anyone.
And I have the same username, I haven't changed my username, so not sure what you mean by not being fooled by a name change. My entire post and comment history is public.
you systematically refuse to integrate information that contradicts your world view
OR maybe I just haven't changed my mind or my opinion.
You haven't changed your opinion about voting for harris. Does that mean you "you systematically refuse to integrate information that contradicts your world view"?
Her tap dancing around it to not openly admit she is Putin’s plant
Exactly. She's never said it. I don't belive she is. Let it go. You have your opinion, I have mine. I respect your opinion. Respect mine.
You do not provide any rebuttal other than “I am not convinced”.
I am under no obligation to provide any rebuttal or prove anything to you. I gave you my opinion. Accept it or not. Not my problem.
Also, I'm not even voting for Jill Stein, so calm down.
It does not matter who you claim you are or are not voting for. You defend her. With nothing but blind stubbornness. Still haven't rebutted the fact she has pro-Russian stances. Just more head in the sand.
I don't have to prove anything to you. I told you my opinion. You can accept or not. I don't care.
If you believe any part of the article is inaccurate, I encourage you to reach out to the news organization that published it. If you think the article doesn't align with the community guidelines, feel free to contact the moderators--they have removed articles that don't fit in the community. Thank you!
Let's see, perhaps a "I'm not voting for her I'm just posting articles", with a side of "I'm not doing anything wrong, contact the author if you disagree".
Top it off with a bit of modbait perhaps, as a treat?
Let’s see, perhaps a “I’m not voting for her I’m just posting articles”, with a side of “I’m not doing anything wrong, contact the author if you disagree”.
Exactly. And I stand by those words. You can believe what you wanna belive. I've said my part. Accept it or not. Not my problem.
Top it off with a bit of modbait perhaps, as a treat?
I don't know what that means.
Well, it's not all of them though, from the article,
According to CAIR’s analysis, Harris leads Stein among Muslim voters in other swing states, including Georgia (43% to 17%), Pennsylvania (37% to 25%), and Nevada (26% to 13%, with Trump at 27%).
Democrats deserve to lose 100 percent of the Muslim vote. and good chunks of any one else that opposes genocide and US Imperialism, but it'll be the same people that say we need to protect marginalized communities that don't give a flying fuck about US Imperialism killing people around the world. The majority of them only care about human rights within the US border, which translates to they don't give a flying fuck about anyone's rights. If they're willing to sacrifice someone elses rights to protect theirs, they need to reevaluate themselves.
Agreed.
To cut through the nonsense and save everyone time, especially since many in this community have a habit of resorting to personal attacks when responding to my posts recently: I support and respect everyone’s right to vote for who they want to.
I'm just posting this article that’s already available on a much bigger platform than Lemmy—I didn’t write it, just sharing it for discussion.
Zero people believe you're authentic
Sealioning before anyone even says anything.
Weird...
If you feel any of the content in the article is inaccurate, please feel free to contact the news org that wrote the article. If you feel this article doesn't fit the community's guidelines, please contact the mods. Thank you!
https://www.instagram.com/p/C-qXXvet419/?locale=en_US%2Cen_US
Stein agrees with Putin. It suprised me.
Putin believe the U.S. and NATO started this war with their "expansion" and are to blame. Putin wants the U.S. to stop sending weapons to Ukraine to defend themselves. These are also Stein's positions and she has no blame for Putin.
Somehow counties wanting to join NATO for protection against a known aggressor is being aggressive. Swed/Fin did not want to join NATO before the invasion. Putin changed those citizen's minds.
She said that it was wrong and illegal and that she didn't agree with it, in the very video you sent!
When asked if she felt it was wrong, she said, "Absolutely, yes. It was wrong, it was a criminal act, it's a violation of international law."
You have a habit of leaving out important information, here let me get it for you:
"Absolutely, yes. It was wrong, it was a criminal.act, it's a violation of international law. At the same time, this war has been ginned up by the US and NATO expansion towards Russian Territory."
She's defending Putin's actions, clearly.
I don't see it that way. She said "“Absolutely, yes. It was wrong, it was a criminal act, it’s a violation of international law." How do you see that as she is defending his actions?
Her saying that the US and NATO sucks doesn't support war.
I'm not voting for her, so I don't care. But you're wrong.
She didn't say NATO and the US suck, she said they started it. You are either willfully misinterpreting this or are so disenfranchised from our current political climate that you're ignoring serious red flags.
She specifically said she this it's wrong what Putin is doing, and this it's against international law. You are either willfully misinterpreting this or are so disenfranchised from our current political climate that you’re ignoring serious red flags.
She's just pulling a "I'm not racist, but..."
You dont say all that shit and then be like, b-but they started it! After having din-din with daddy Pootin.
If you feel any of the content in the article is inaccurate, please feel free to contact the news org that wrote the article.
No, I'm contacting the person spreading it on the Fediverse, you.
So you don't think certain types of news stories should be shared on the Fediverse then? So are you promoting censorship? Because you seem upset that I am posting news articles about third parties, but you are fine with the 1,000s of articles that are pro-Harris. Right?
So you would prefer I only post news that YOU agree with. Correct?
No, I think they should be shared without bias and you have a terrible track record just from the comments and posts I've seen of your's. You're the type of user to make an entire post about another user and then cut the parts out of your own wrongdoing, I saw that. So yeah, I have a problem with the way YOU present information to be biased towards your own opinion. You aren't presenting information with the intent of sharing knowledge, you share things in a manipulative way that doesnt show the full details of the people you support.
Any bias you have is on you. I just shared an article. I didn't write it.
Examples? My post history is public. The entire post history of this community is public. And the modlog is public as well. I haven't hid anything from anyone.
Then block me. All I do is post the news, I don't write it. How you view it or the bias you inject into it is your problem, not mine. I literally posted a disclaimer when I posted the article, just so the talk wouldn't fall into just talking about me. Not my problem if people can't read the disclaimer.
If you believe any part of the article is inaccurate, I encourage you to reach out to the news organization that published it. If you think the article doesn't align with the community guidelines, feel free to contact the moderators. Thank you!
While I personally disagree with this stance in this particular case, I think it's reasonable to say on the one hand, A did wrong and A was bad, while also pointing out that it takes two to tango and that maybe there were some things that B could have done better.
So to recap, I agree with Stein on A ("It was wrong, it was a criminal act, it’s a violation of international law.") but disagree with Stein on B ("this war has been ginned up by the US and NATO expansion towards Russian Territory.")
In fact, I'm quite bothered here as Ukraine joining NATO doesn't involve Russian Territory unless Ukraine itself is Russian Territory, which I simply cannot agree with.
Thanks for your reasonable response. You make great points.
This genuinely surprises me. You hype up Stein a ton on Lemmy. Pretty much every pro-Stein post I see on here is posted by you. And you defend her doggedly in the comments. That seems like a lot of effort and emotional investment for a candidate you won't be voting for.
I'm not hyping her up. I'm posting news articles. I'm actually voting Socialist Workers Party. I like Stein, but I'm not voting for her.
If you feel any of the content in the article is inaccurate, please feel free to contact the news org that wrote the article.
Supports Russian terrorism and their propaganda justifications for it though so thppt.
::: spoiler spoiler 2. Funding for Ukraine
Do you support continued funding for weapons in Ukraine? What conditions or limits would you place on that funding? Chevron Icon Stein has criticized the money and weapons the United States has sent to Ukraine, and she wrote, "yes, Russia illegally invaded Ukraine – but did so with a gun to its head, or in this case, nuclear-compatible missiles.”
www.washingtonpost.com :::
She only admits the invasion is illegal because she'd have to be a complete berserker to think others take her seriously otherwise. The rest is one of Putin's many BS excuses.
Any links to Stein saying she supports Russian terrorism? I'm not voting for her, but I've never heard her say this.
She won't say the words "I support Putin's positions". She will just SUPPORT those positions.
If she's never said it, then I don't believe it. Sorry, friend.
You don't believe she supports Putin's positions even when she says she supports those positions herself? Mkay
Has she said it? What Putin positions does she support?
Few seconds on Google would tell you but here
https://www.instagram.com/p/C-qXXvet419/?locale=en_US%2Cen_US
When asked if she felt it was wrong, she said, “Absolutely, yes. It was wrong, it was a criminal act, it’s a violation of international law.”
From your link.
That has nothing to do with her supporting his positions and blaming the U.S.... which she does.
When asked if she felt it was wrong, she said, “Absolutely, yes. It was wrong, it was a criminal act, it’s a violation of international law.” From your video link.
Doesn't sound like she is supporting his decision. Especially since she literally said she thinks it's wrong.
The russianphobia in this place is blinding.
I didn't say she supports his decision, I said she supports his positions. I think you are purposely trying to avoid that. She blames the U.S. for the invasion and agrees with Putin on how dangerous NATO "expansion" is. The last countries near Russia that joined NATO were in 2004. Russira is committing a genocide and invaded for no reason. Russia phobia is completely understandable.
And I think you are purposely exaggerating about her positions because you think she is taking votes away from Harris.
Where has she said "I support Putin"?
It's in the spoiler I already posted.
She never said she supported Putin.
If you believe any part of the article is inaccurate, I encourage you to reach out to the news organization that published it. If you think the article doesn't align with the community guidelines, feel free to contact the moderators. Thank you!
Well if she didn't admit to being a foreign asset, we know for sure she cannot possibly be! /s
It's literally in her party platform:
Stop fueling the war between Russia and Ukraine and lead on negotiating a peaceful end
Without US/Nato (which she also intends on disbanding) support Ukraine's peace is subjugation. Period.
"Every moron in the Green Party needs to remember the company that Jill Stein keeps," Christopher David said.
None of that says she "supports Putin" though.
You have a history you seem proud of where you are unwilling to comprehend consequences. When 2 people are fighting each other and you step up and hold their arms behind them so the other can take free wacks, who do you support?
BuT yOu DiDn'T SAY yOu SuPpOrT tHe OtHeR gUy... in what world does that matter?
Thanks for being interested enough in me to worry about my "history." I don't have to prove anything to you. I disagree with you. You disagree with me. And that's ok.
If you believe any part of the article is inaccurate, I encourage you to reach out to the news organization that published it. If you think the article doesn't align with the community guidelines, feel free to contact the moderators. Thank you!
'Interested' is not the word I would use. We've had a couple conversations (I'm not fooled by the name change) where you systematically refuse to integrate information that contradicts your world view and follow up with nonsense copypasta as if that somehow absolves you of any obligation to improve.
The issue isn't the news organization. It's you refusing to concede she parrots Russian rhetoric and takes their side with the Ukraine conflict despite conceding it is an illegal war. Her tap dancing around it to not openly admit she is Putin's plant is your ONLY response. You do not provide any rebuttal other than "I am not convinced". "Reach out to the news organization"? Are they going to find where you live, bury you in a pile of Stein quotes of her spouting russian talking points while playing a video of RT broadcasting the same thing until you finally admit "OMG EVIDENCE MATTERS"? No? Then why bother?
So spare me your BS copypasta deflecting any responsibility and actually contribute something of value to the conversation. Can you find a contradictory quote from Stein where she declares the 'peace plan' she intends for Ukraine listed in her platform commits to pre-2014 Ukraine borders? If you can't, then admit she is anti-Ukraine/pro-Russian and stop defending her with vapour.
What do you mean? The name change isn't for "fooling" anyone. When I update my "display name" the names get updated to all my past posts. So there is not "fooling" anyone.
And I have the same username, I haven't changed my username, so not sure what you mean by not being fooled by a name change. My entire post and comment history is public.
OR maybe I just haven't changed my mind or my opinion.
You haven't changed your opinion about voting for harris. Does that mean you "you systematically refuse to integrate information that contradicts your world view"?
Exactly. She's never said it. I don't belive she is. Let it go. You have your opinion, I have mine. I respect your opinion. Respect mine.
I am under no obligation to provide any rebuttal or prove anything to you. I gave you my opinion. Accept it or not. Not my problem.
Also, I'm not even voting for Jill Stein, so calm down.
It does not matter who you claim you are or are not voting for. You defend her. With nothing but blind stubbornness. Still haven't rebutted the fact she has pro-Russian stances. Just more head in the sand.
I don't have to prove anything to you. I told you my opinion. You can accept or not. I don't care.
If you believe any part of the article is inaccurate, I encourage you to reach out to the news organization that published it. If you think the article doesn't align with the community guidelines, feel free to contact the moderators--they have removed articles that don't fit in the community. Thank you!
Why did you delete and repost this?
Because someone mentioned the last one was from New York Post and didn't think it was a good source. So this is from a more legitimate source.
The news source of this post could not be identified. Please check the source yourself. Media Bias Fact Check | bot support
Ah doing another stein lap?
Let's see, perhaps a "I'm not voting for her I'm just posting articles", with a side of "I'm not doing anything wrong, contact the author if you disagree".
Top it off with a bit of modbait perhaps, as a treat?
Exactly. And I stand by those words. You can believe what you wanna belive. I've said my part. Accept it or not. Not my problem.
I don't know what that means.
Well, it's not all of them though, from the article,
Democrats deserve to lose 100 percent of the Muslim vote. and good chunks of any one else that opposes genocide and US Imperialism, but it'll be the same people that say we need to protect marginalized communities that don't give a flying fuck about US Imperialism killing people around the world. The majority of them only care about human rights within the US border, which translates to they don't give a flying fuck about anyone's rights. If they're willing to sacrifice someone elses rights to protect theirs, they need to reevaluate themselves.
Agreed.
To cut through the nonsense and save everyone time, especially since many in this community have a habit of resorting to personal attacks when responding to my posts recently: I support and respect everyone’s right to vote for who they want to.
I'm just posting this article that’s already available on a much bigger platform than Lemmy—I didn’t write it, just sharing it for discussion.
Zero people believe you're authentic
Sealioning before anyone even says anything.
Weird...
If you feel any of the content in the article is inaccurate, please feel free to contact the news org that wrote the article. If you feel this article doesn't fit the community's guidelines, please contact the mods. Thank you!