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. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- 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
view the rest of the comments
She can only be a threat to democrats in a first past the post voting system.
The Green party doesn't run on its policies. They've opposed nuclear for decades, and we'd be having a very different conversation about global warming if they hadn't basically won there. They have opposed WiFi and cell phone radiation as "cancer causing", and have supported homeopathy. If they ran on their policies, they would find a dwindling number of people on the left who actually support them, because they're vestigial loons concocted in a 1960s hippie lab.
The Green party runs on being the only party on the left that's bigger than almost nothing. That's it, that's all they do.
So she's only a threat in the system we actually have?
Yes. And also, a loon who does not want to run on the policies her party supports, because she would lose even in a better voting system.
And what do you call a "serious" party that manages to lose to people like Donald Trump?
A party blind to the problems with American society.
Now that we have that out of the way, is the Green Party able to defend their policies on their merits?
I can imagine that they at least attempt to. I don't really understand what you're getting at though. Given their place in the American political landscape, they don't really have to. Democrats on the other hand, given their position, have to be able to defend all of their policies on the merits. That's what this whole conversation is about-- democrats mad at the left for making them defend the indefensible.
Maybe if you read my comments, you wouldn't be confused.
I am reading your comments, but I am still missing your point. Nobody that votes for the Greens in the US thinks they are in any danger of winning and outlawing WiFi.
Then maybe they should start. I have to do a lot of qualification to justify voting Democrat. If I'm going to vote Green, I expect to be doing a lot less qualification than with Democrats. The only reason I would is because nobody holds Greens to account on what their actual policies are. Which only helps the Greens, because they're fucking loons.
You have to care about all the dem policies because they stand a chance of winning and enacting (or not!) them. For (many?) potential green voters it may only matter that they are right about one or two acute critical issues. To be blunt: the dems don't care about stopping the genocide of Palestinians. That issue is critical enough and acute enough that many people will simply never vote for anyone on the wrong side of it, but they still want to vote. In which case either the dems come around to the moral policy or those voters choose someone else. Like it or don't like it, I'm just explaining how I see it.
Blaming the dems for not stopping a genocide? That's rich, the world is letting Israel commit genocide after they were attacked. Why isn't Russia doing anything to stop the genocide? Why are we all ignoring the genocide that China is doing? There isn't some kind of narrative you're trying to get to is there?
Holy fuck. The US, currently led by the dems, is giving billions in material, lethal aid to the Israelis, while also providing political cover for them to continue their genocide, both in their domestic statements, as well as at the UN. I don't vote in Russia, I don't vote in China. I vote and pay taxes in the US.
Come on man you don't pay taxes or vote in America. Look at your post history my dude, it's clear you don't live here.
I don't know how you can come to such a conclusion from my post history. I'm sure i would get a good laugh out of whatever example you "found". I don't hide the area I live in (Humboldt county, California). I was born and raised on the east coast. I'm not going to get much more detailed than that, but you probably wouldn't believe it anyway.
And plenty of people thought roe was set in stone and the Republicans were just barking, but look where that got us.
But I'm guessing that was just a distraction to not answer the question because no, they can't campaign on policy.
Are you saying that republicans and greens are equally likely to win any given presidential election?
So, this old, tired shit again.
Democrats do not support Genocide, and the war in Gaza is not clear cut. First, who started it? Hamas started it. They and Netanyahu want this war. They want to grind each other down so the loser is dust and the winner is weakened so whoever else is out there (Iran for Israel, the USA for Hamas and their supporters) can come in and mop up and finish the job.
Suppose Harris announces tomorrow that she's going to leave Israel out to dry. What happens? Russia promptly moves in and offers Israel guns, missiles, bombs, and fuel, and promptly accuses the USA of supporting Genocide. They and their Green Party USA useful idiots (complete with Stein sharing a table with Putin) are already claiming that the USA is supporting Genocide, but they'd just shift it over to the Israelis, which would be a correct statement in that situation. We'd come out looking bad.
And if you think the Green's ratfucking America is bad, imagine how people of Jewish decent, especially moderates and nationalists, might respond to it. Considering they represent up to 5% of the voting populations, and have lots of friends, leaving Israel to hang out to dry would likely lose far more voters than cowtowing to the anti-"Genocide" faction would gain the Dems.
But calling Democrats mass-murderers is easy to do because people are dumb. All we can do is remind everyone that if you vote Green instead of Blue on Election Day, you're going to get Red on Inauguration Day, and Project 2025 up the Back Entrance.
Yours is the old, tired shit. I see you trying to shift the rhetorical focus. "Genocide is bad, so now shift to denying the genocide, or at least justifying it." If Israel is justified, then this issue just evaporates! Right? Except the whole world knows that Israel is unjustified-- not just in this moment of slaughter, but for many years before as well. Peruse the decades of UN votes where only the US defended Israel's crimes.
Yes, there are many Zionist Jews in the US, and there are also many Jews in the US that are horrified by Israel's destruction of Gaza. I have marched with some in support of Palestinian lives. Are there more Zionist or non-zionist Jewish votes to be had in the US? I honestly do not know. On the one hand, that is a political consideration, but it is also a cynical one. People should look to their leaders to defend just principles.
Your fantasy of Russia moving to replace the US as Israel's patron is... wild.
And you miss my point entirely. To be clear:
Democrats being mass murderers, or even supporting mass murder, is the old, tired bullshit I was calling out.
It's not true, and I don't know how much clearer I can make that to you and your ilk. Your choice to support third parties because you believe this bullshit will get people I care about far more than Israelis and Palestinians killed because the fucking Republicans will win and dial up everything you say is bad about Democrats to fucking 11 and not only kill the people you claim to care about but also fucking kill the people I care about in this world. I'm not the only one that thinks this, which is why you get so much pushback here. I hope the strong language and the note about my Black Bisexual Pagan Goth Wife all the BS artists pushing 'pick Third Party to check Genocidal ~~Joe~~Kamala' are putting into the line of fire will get through to you. This choice you're advocating here is gonna get my wife killed, and I'm not going to meekly stand by quietly while you push this nonsense!
If you don't care about Palestinian children being slaughtered right now, by democratic action and inaction, why should I care about what might happen to your family? I have very little power about any of this. What I do have, is human empathy and some fundamental principles that I try very hard to never compromise. I don't look forward to the future either, but I won't be blackmailed into overlooking support of genocide.
So, because we don't do exactly what you want, you will put Blacks, Hispanics, Gays, Transgenders, Muslims, Jews, Pagans, Asians, and a whole host of other people here in the USA under a Republican Fascist Theocracy, which not only will harm those people, but also legitimately harm the people you say you care about more far more than they are being harmed now, and you wonder why you get so many negative votes and comments.
I categorically renounce and denounce your claim that Democrats are genocidal. This bullshit is all on Netanyahu and Hamas, not on innocent Israelis or Palestinians or the Democrats who aren't even in control of a damn thing in Israel. Anyone who listens to you over me is a damn fool. You vote whoever the fuck you want, but I'm still going to call you out as a fake supporter of Palestine as you scream how you can't vote for "Genocidal Democrats" because you're gonna get everyone you say you support and a whole bunch more actually killed with your vote. And with that, I'm done with you.
Holy histrionics, Batman!
Edit: You should really examine how you can hold me responsible for what may possibly happen to all those people you listed, purely based on how I do or don't vote... while at the same time categorically rejecting any responsibility of the democratic leadership for supporting the genocide in Palestine.
I don't care what the dem leadership says about it, nearly as much as I care what they do about it. That the Biden admin and the rest of the dem leadership have real power to stop Israel, yet don't do it is materially the same thing whether they wring their hands about it or not. Maybe the confusion is around the word "support". I don't mean it in the sense of like, thoughts and prayers. I mean "support" in the sense of send offensive weapons, block any hostile measures by the UN and run interference on public demonstrations against your genocide. Plenty of dems fit the second meaning. The first meaning is irrelevant.
So might as well keep funding then? Lol
You're grasping for justifications where there are none. The US could very well guarantee Israel's security from Iranian attack the way it is doing right now: by parking a carrier strike group nearby. Incidentally, we could use those same assets to simultaneously enforce a no-fly zone over Israel to prevent further bombing. Beyond that, Israel guarantees its own continued existence by way of a nuclear arsenal.
If I ever start my argumentation like this, can someone remind me that I obviously lost the argument?
Edit: or should i just imagine someone will at least attempt to remind me?
We? Nah man, you're not part of we.
I don't even understand what you are trying to say. Is this a subtle insinuation that I'm not a US citizen or something?