this post was submitted on 01 Nov 2023
140 points (84.3% liked)

politics

23300 readers
3382 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

...yeah, I'm sure Trump will have your back...

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Can't blame 'em.

Biden sucks. Biden has ALWAYS sucked. His only selling point was damage control over Trump. But that's thin and a tough sell with his full throated endorsement of Israeli oppression. At no point is real change an option in the voting booth, it's just picking the lesser of two evils. I don't fault those who can't stomach it.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Not voting or voting for Trump will be directly against any interests American Muslims might have regardless of whether Biden "sucks" or not.

In the US 2-party system where the winner takes all, not voting is the same as voting for Trump.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

Would that mean voting for the party that wanted to ban Muslims from entering the country?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Abused minority: attempts to use the only leverage they have to influence policy away from full-throated support of an ongoing genocide

Neoliberals and their useful idiots: "You must want fascism!" 🤦

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

That's how first past the post voting works. It sucks, but until that changes it's what we got.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Yeah, except for the fact where even THREATENING to do anything but meekly go along with it gets you ridicule if not outright hostility, no matter how noble the goal.

If you truly think it sucks, why are you vehemently defending it against viewpoints closer to your own than those of the out of touch establishment?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Last time I acted on a threat like this, we got Bush Jr. I absolutely did not want to see Tipper Fucking Gore in the White House again, so I voted Green Party. Turns out, me and a bunch of other people doing the same thing almost certainly resulted in the resulting 20 years of constant war, and the deaths of countless innocent civilian non-combatants. I really do believe that blood is on my hands.

Every potential US president with any real chance of winning - all of them - will support Israel. Taking voting action that will lead to a guy who will not only continue to support Israel, but will fan the fires of anti-Islamic rhetoric, and is also a right-wing white supremicist who openly hates poor people... that's the definition of "cutting off your nose to spite your face."

They're angry. I*m angry. My representatives know I think our support of Israel in this genocide is unconscionable. Threatening to not vote for the lesser of two evils is an understandable statement of frustration, but until there's a credible alternative candidate who says they'd cut military support for Israel... well, it's just punching a brick wall.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Last time I acted on a threat like this, we got Bush Jr.

puts on mechanic outfit that's your problem right there! You've got your intended effect meter on backwards. puts it back to "politician acts on threat from constituents"

I really do believe that blood is on my hands.

Blaming yourself for what others do is a classic sign of being in a toxic relationship. You didn't invent the undemocratuc Electoral College, without which Dubya would never have been president and none of his war crimes were suggested by you.

Every potential US president with any real chance of winning - all of them - will support Israel.

Yeah, as long as people like you reinforce the toxic status quo by doing their best to vehemently oppose every attempt to hold them accountable.

My representatives know I think our support of Israel in this genocide is unconscionable.

And your representative also knows that they can count on you and others to run interference every time someone tries to effect meaningful change.

Threatening to not vote for the lesser of two evils is an understandable statement of frustration, but until there's a credible alternative candidate who says they'd cut military support for Israel... well, it's just punching a brick wall.

You would have told Martin Luther King to cut it out with the "brick wall punching" for sure.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago

I know, but they wouldn't have gotten the opportunity to do so if not for the EC.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Because we tried that and got Trump. That's the risk here.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago

No, you tried going along with the neoliberal way of doing things and everything went so shitty for regular people that a lot of those who were already most vulnerable to demagoguery were radicalised to the point of Trump.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 2 years ago

Brilliant, so they can get deported?

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›