view the rest of the comments
politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
People either don't seem to understand, or are pretending not to understand for political purposes, that Harris has a very thin line to toe until the election. If she says anything strongly in either way regarding Israel/Palestine, she will lose.
Anyone telling you that she is worse than Trump on the issue is a goddamn liar
Harris started her political career by condemning Obama for not perfectly obeying Israel. She votes for Israel every time. She even tells a story how she planted trees for Israel as a child.
The only fine line she is trying to walk is keeping her pro-Palestine voters while doing everything Israel is asking of her.
I'm curious what you think Israel is asking of the Vice President of the United States? What is it that you think the VP does?
She's a candidate talking about what she'll do in her term. Stop playing dumb.
No one is asking her to do anything as VP, this person is saying harris is committed to enabling israel's genocide and has a history of supporting israel unconditionally. we want her to commit to upholding american laws around not supplying arms genocidal regimes as president; which israel categorically is currently. literally every organization that has investigated israeli conduct in Gaza and now Lebanon has come to the same conclusion. The UN, WHO, our own internal analysis.
They've gone way past self defense and managed to kill more of the hostages than hamas has.
How many of the dead hostages would you say Hamas is responsible for?
I'd probably lay the majority at their feet. between turning the region into a war zone, starvation etc, the chances of them surviving the situation is close to zero. as far as wikipedia is concerned out of the 251 hostages.....
so frankly Israel's track record here for 'rescuing' the hostages is pretty abysmal. and I can't think of a worse way than to turn a region into a war zone to rescue them. so far it looks like hamas has been fairly willing to negotiate prisoner releases. who knows if thats still the case though. since you know we killed off the leader who was looking to get a peace deal. but I doubt many more are going to be returned alive after this. I feel for those families and its unfortunate their countries leadership is going to get most of them killed.
but at the end of the day it doesn't matter who killed those hostages. they're dead and nothing will change that. all I know is turning the region into a blood bath didn't help their chances.
How many of these people do you think would be dead if Hamas hadn't kidnapped them?
How many people was Israel holding prisoner indefinitely and without charge or access to any representation? I'll answer that for you, a bit over 12000.
How many of those killed on Oct 7 were killed by Israeli forces?
How many innocents have been raped or murdered in isralei custody?
How many dead journalists? Doctors? Aid workers? How many utilities workers (6 more mudered yesterday). Say what you want, each and every one of those deaths is a war crime.
How many attacks on the UN and UN workers?
Israel has far far dirtier hands than anyone else so I dont think you get to self righteously open with, "How many of these people do you think would be dead if Hamas hadn’t kidnapped them?".
Ridiculous nonsense.
[citation needed]
Here is a good compilation
https://www.dropsitenews.com/p/can-kamala-harris-wipe-the-blood
"Soon after being elected to the Senate in 2016, Harris earned a reputation as an ardent defender of Israel. She spoke two years in a row at AIPAC conferences and co-sponsored legislation aimed at undermining a United Nations resolution condemning Israel’s illegal annexation of Palestinian land. One of her first international trips as a senator was to Israel where she met with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in 2017. “I support the United States’ commitment to provide Israel with $38 billion in military assistance over the next decade,” Harris told an AIPAC conference that year. “I believe the bonds between the United States and Israel are unbreakable, and we can never let anyone drive a wedge between us. … As long as I’m a United States senator, I will do everything in my power to ensure broad and bipartisan support for Israel’s security and right to self-defense.” Harris has compared building support for Israel to the coalitions forged during the U.S. civil rights movement"
I dont think you understand much either, if she doesnt make a stand she will lose
edit: I scanned over the she modifier sorry. yes that would be true. but shes no better either.
remains relevant to others in the thread.
She may lose either way; and you're an idiot if you think people who are disgusted by us supplying weapons to the genocidal regime in israel are worse than trump.
I'd rather put boots on the ground to defend israel than let them continue a genocide of hundreds of thousands of innocents.
I'd add 2a: Even if you don't vote for president be sure to vote down-ballot. You can just leave the president section blank. But don't be tempted to write in someone because that may invalidate your entire ballot.
Writing in a name won't invalidate a ballot, at least not in any state i'm aware of, what lead you to say that? genuinely curious.
In some states a write in has to be registered as a candidate for the write in to work.
At least that’s how it worked when I lived in MD.
lol wow thats nonsense. (that such a rule exists) =)
I love how you're carefully avoiding the Abilene effect and how it could lose the election in even strong states.
Yes, lose. Because
And even if we declare the two viable options - note I said viable there - to be guaranteed as equally detrimental for Gaza when we all know it's not, it simplifies the equation. If we cannot appreciably affect the outcome in our election choice we move to the choice which has the most potential for effect after the election. CLEARLY
And that's the programme. It's been explained so many fucking times that I'm not sure how "but her emails" you need to be not to get it.
This is as clear the nose you sever to spite your face, and it's truly sad to see such cognitive dissonance in someone not voting conservative out of greed or gambler's mindset.
Try to clue in before voting, okay?
its not, as evidenced by the fact there are 5 options, now as we both obviously know FPTP is a horrible system and leads to a collapse of viable parties, but even in that situation you have 3 options. A,B, Neither. and I'm nethier. neither kamala nor trump have policies that i support. and trump can't impact the larger scheme of things i care about my local government prevents that.
no its a neutral stance, and you're upset that people dont care about your prefered candidate because she doesn't bring anything to the table that my state doesn't already have. if i lived in texas/florida the equation would be different but i don't and harris will easily win in my state.
but you don't get it. harris doesn't bring anything to the table. if i was an arab in michigan right now i'd be looking at her ticket and going:
If voting 3rd candidate gets that person to the poll booth and they vote 3rd party/blank/etc and down ticket dems vs not showing up at all. I take that as a win. Its not our fault harris, the alleged law and order candidate, wouldn't commit to enforcing the law on arms sales. if the zionists have a problem with that, well thats on them, maybe you should bitch about them being intransigent about fucking genocide.
already voted mate, maybe get a clue in the future on the entire system before opening your mouth. you're position only is rational by assuming there is only one office on the ballot. sadly harris didn't turn it around in time to win my vote. but thats her fault not mine. I have a laundry list of issues that if she ticket any of them personally I would have voted for her. she didn't. not my fault. genocide was just one of the ones where the ask was so small it should have been a no brainer. If the majority of the zionists are willing to support trump if harris won't sell israel weapons I don't particular care and think you should save your ire for them not me.
I'm not preventing harris from not being genocidal thats on her, I'm not stopping zionists from recognizing that israel's behavior is unconscionable, thats on them. If harris loses because of israel's behavior feel free to bitch at those voters they're the ones who caused the loss by not supporting their brothers and sisters of another faith from being subject to a genocidal war.
I'm not the one preventing us changing our voting system to ranked choice. that's on the DNC/GOP. Hell I've canvased and gathered signatures for the damn thing in my state what have you fucking done to kill the spoiler effect?
I'm simply not going to give my vote to a candidate who won't commit to supporting labor and won't commit to not committing a genocide; especially when it won't change the outcome in any manner.
also what makes you think we're part of the same group? This simply doesn't apply.
edit: changed jews -> zionists, because its not the jews in america causing this problem.
She might just lose for not saying anything strongly anyway.
Trump supporters always underreport in polls. She's not holding her own in the swing states. Harris is going to lose and usher in fascism and the end of the republic, all so she can take some sweet, sweet far-right-wing foreign government bribes.
Yeah, but then centrists will get the right wing policies they want and get to blame the left for it.
And get to fund raise off it
Everyone is a genocide-loving centrist despite reaching the same conclusion as you and voting as you claim to this election.
No, just the ones who expect perfect worshipful silence when those we're expected to vote for keep selling weapons for genocide.
The ones who sling accusations of being a trumper/russian/bot as soon as anyone says that Netanyahu is less than god incarnate and that the US should not be selling weapons for genocide just to prop up the political career of a genocidal fascist.
Right, only you are allowed to sling accusations. And if anyone calls you a MAGA it is because they are genocidal. They should have known from the context of you writing the exact same thing as the people who "couldn't possibly vote for anyone but Jill Stein" that you are both against the genocide and know that Donald will be worse.
Maybe you shouldn't assume that anyone who disagrees with you is a trumper. But then again, why would you do that? It might mean treating people who think genocide is wrong with some respect, and you have no respect for anyone but Netanyahu.
Case in point. It's not "everyone who disagrees with me," it is specifically disingenuous trolls. You see it as everyone because there is little difference between a troll and yourself.
You write some of the exact same shit as the LARPing Trumpers. Everyone is genocidal unless they agree with absolutely everything you say and do. In fact the only difference between you and them is when you get questioned why Donald is preferable. Then it is "oh, I am voting for Harris, though."
It makes more sense to assume you are indeed a MAGA trying to depress turnout and only lying about your vote to avoid criticism. Truly disgusting how you live a life of deceit. Utterly despicable that you choose to use this to support Repubs expansion of conflict and genocide.
You assumed that I was a trumper the instant I said anything against genocide, and you do so to anyone who disagrees with you on the subject.
Since you have chosen to call me a liar and a trumper, why should I give you the benefit of the doubt should you ever claim that you don't support genocide?
I certainly did not. I have seen your pattern of behavior calling everyone who even slightly disagrees with you a genocidal Netanyahu stan. That is what I am commenting on, not the isolated incident of you doing it yet again. Not the strawman you are whining about "I'm only saying genocide is wrong." You are behaving as the other LARPers do. Constant trolling intentionally to provoke arguments.
You are therefore a liar and a MAGA, as proven by your own behavior regarded with your own standards of evidence.
I don't give the slightest fuck what a MAGA thinks of me. Go give your benefit of the doubt to your LARPing far-right colleagues.
What are you gonna call me after Harris wins and you can no longer pretend that the people you hate for not supporting genocide are all maga?
If you say so.
She might... That would suck.
If centrists don't like that they don't get 100% of everything they want, in this case unconditional support for genocide, they can vote blue no matter who.
I'm not sure you even understood my comment. And yet at least 10 other people read this and were like "yup, that sounds right."
Suspect.
They're a troll. Somehow everyone who disagrees with them even slightly is a centrist who wants the war to happen.
Somehow anyone who disagrees with the genocide even slightly must be a trumper in all cases.
If you're not voting Harris, you're a Trump supporter, yes. Regardless of how you feel about it, that is literally just how our voting system works. We all need to push for a system where third parties matter, but until that actually happens, please live in reality.
And I am voting Harris. No reason for any of you to start paying attention to this now, though. You have your single talking point and you're going to repeat it regardless of the actual positions of the person you're talking to.
Lol there's that hyperbole
If it's not the case, maybe centrists can come up with a new thing to say to people who disagree with genocide.
People generally have really poor reading comprehension. I've been surprised by how bad it is here on lemmy. I've had folks argue against things not even remotely close to what was said, and then other morons will come along to dogpile.
people are scanning, it happens, done it myself. the problem is people are so scared of harris losing they're attacking people who have no interest in supporting harris as a result of this issue and think that will somehow get them to vote harris. shrug
if harris loses she loses and thats on her. she wants to play the law and order candidate while simultaneously not committing to upholding the laws we have on the books and enabling a genocide well thats on her.
Can't help that shes committing the same errors of judgement that biden did and we didn't support him either after he started breaking strikes and enabling genocide.
The people you describe attack Harris voters too. They attack anyone with misgivings about genocide support.
No, I did. You were saying that her hands are tied because the pro-genocide centrist wing of the party is so fickle that they will stay home or vote Trump if Harris starts disagreeing with you about genocide.
So, if centrists don’t like that they don’t get 100% of everything they want, in this case unconditional support for genocide, they can vote blue no matter who.
Now make up some more conspiracy bullshit about me running a botnet of sockpuppets or whatever it is you do when you can't accept that more than one person is opposed to genocide.
Holy victim complex, batman
I mean, it's what he was saying in the comment I replied to.
Yeah that's where I'm gonna stop reading.
Have a nice week.
You certainly remain unburdened by an overabundance of reading, yes.