This is a false choice fallacy done in bad faith. Nobody is voting in favour of the genocide by voting for the democrats.
Kamala has promised to keep supplying weapons for the Genocide. There’s no denying it anymore.
Look, I don’t like Kamala either and I think continuing to supply weapons is awful, obviously. But she’s the only realistic option at this point. You can still protest the genocide in Gaza AFTER the election (and I fully support you doing so, Hell I might even meet you at one), but look at it this way: if Kamala wins, you at least have a chance to make a change over there, but if Trump wins again, every Palestinian is as good as dead. Do I like either option? No! Do I think our elections are a good system? No! Am I going to vote for Kamala anyway? Yes! Because at this point, the choice is between shooting ourselves in the foot or in the temple
So did Trump.
Trump, who routinely touts his support of Israel more broadly, has reportedly said he supports Israel in its continued “war on terror” after the October 7 attack by Hamas.
This part always seems to be forgotten every time this comes up. Voting for Trump won’t suddenly stop it. He’ll either send just as much or more.
Look at the text on the bottom left of the meme
Well, if you put it in the picture then it must be a good argument.
/s
Just because one side is not 100% perfect doesn’t mean you have to support the side that is 100% bad. If you’re waiting for the perfect candidate who matches your beliefs on all point before voting you’ll never get to vote.
Why are there only two viable political parties?
It’s a result of the “first past the post” voting system used in the US. It naturally leads to a two party system.
Look at the last two sentences I wrote.
Look at the first reply
I did. Has nothing to do what I wrote. Pointing out Trump isn’t some hero of Gaza isn’t a “But Trump” anything.
So, go back and read what I wrote. Or would you like a “But Trump” comment?
Where did the post say vote for trump
Which presidential candidate won’t?
Claudia De La Cruz
She’s in the presidential election, but she’s not a presidential candidate when she’s on the ballot in 9 states.
You can write her in, can’t you?
In 3 states.
Increasing over time.
Kamala Harris:
At the same time, what has happened in Gaza over the past 10 months is devastating. So many innocent lives lost, desperate, hungry people fleeing for safety over and over again. The scale of suffering is heartbreaking. President Biden and I are working to end this war such that Israel is secure, the hostages are released, the suffering in Gaza ends, and the Palestinian people can realize their right to dignity, security, freedom, and self-determination.
The whole situation in Israel/Gaza is a mess. Innocent people are getting hurt on both sides. There are bad people doing horrible things on both sides. Real life is not a movie where the bad guys all conveniently wear the same uniform. Only children think the world is that simple. But hey, assuming the solution is simple saves you from hurting yourself by thinking about what is an incredibly complicated state of affairs.
Personally, I would prefer a president who acknowledges the complexity of the situation over one who thinks the world operates like we’re living in children’s book.
Real life is not a movie where the bad guys all conveniently wear the same uniform
A suit and tie.
Plenty of good people wear a suit and tie. Plenty of bad people wear something else.
Cope
Wow. Amazing argument. Such eloquence.
Quote the weapons embargo in the paragraph
Again, overly simplistic solution to a complicated problem. Something a child would come up with, not the potential president of the US.
Got it so Democrat voters endorse sending weapons to israel for Genocide. Glad you are honest about it.
Do you disagree with the idea that the “lesser evil” has been getting steadily more evil?
Yes, I do actually. There’s no denying that they have a long way to go, they at least seem to be trying to push in a better and more positive direction. And, yes, there are of course bad people among democrats as well. In an ideal world I’d rather have some other party to throw my support behind, but with the fptp duopoly the democrats are, by far, the best choice.
How are they moving in a positive trend?
Yeah, time to filter lemmy.ml. ah well
Ahh 0 up votes, 100 comments, my beloved
There are four options for American voters: vote red, vote blue, vote third party, or don’t vote at all.
Voting red is just bad. I highly doubt that the Gaza situation would get any better if Trump gets in, but I know for a fact that a lot of things will get much worse.
Voting third party is a wasted effort. Sure, every sane person would prefer different people to run America, but the the shit fptp system means they’ll never get any traction. In another election voting third party could be worth it, since a third party might slowly get more support, but not this one.
Not voting is just pointless. That’s just choosing to not impact anything.
That only leaves voting blue. It’s not great, but it’s the only option left.
This all hangs on the false assumption in the third statement.
Soll explain to us how voting for any third party would change anything for the better.
They don’t support Genocide.
Explain how voting for Democrat would change anything for the better instead.
So preserving your imaginary moral superiority is your only goal. Right. Gotcha.
Say you don’t know how the US electoral college works without saying you don’t know how the US electoral college works.
This astute logic brought to you by a person that thinks insulting the people they need the support of is a good idea.
I highly doubt that the Gaza situation would get any better if Trump gets in, but I know for a fact that a lot of things will get much worse.
What would Trump do that the Dems are not already doing? Trump would be a genocidal monster, yes, but we have DNC goers literally mocking Pro-Palestinian protestors and covering their ears:
There are four options for American voters: vote red, vote blue, vote third party, or don’t vote at all.
Nope, there are an infinite number of options. If a math question is “what number is greater than 10?” And the Dems said 4 and the Reps said 2, that doesn’t mean the Dems are correct. Voting will not save us, so we must move outside the realm of electoralism. Join an org, build up dual power, replace the DNC and GOP by force.
But those aren’t mutually exclusive things. Voting for the Dems doesn’t prevent you from doing those other things in the meantime.
If you only have two real choices that will affect the outcome and one of them is better than the other, voting for neither of them just makes things harder for those that would have made it slightly better. More compromises have to be made and that means the situation can’t improve.
I see constant posts about how Trump splitting their base is going to mean the end of the Republican party but that seems very short sighted. It is a simple matter of natural selection, and in a two party system only two parties will ever exist. It also inherently gravitates to very close races between those parties. Any split of the Republican party might cause a term or two of chaos, but it is just a matter of time before something fills the vacuum and balance is restored.
Each party would prefer to move further towards their end of the spectrum, but they are forced to move their values (or choose more centrist candidates) until they have enough of a majority to win.
Gerrymandering, the electoral college, what’s left of the judicial branch, apathetic voters, parasitic third parties, and wedge issues have allowed the Republicans to shift further right while maintaining their power. The only possible response to that from the Dems is to also shift right as well. If they didn’t the Republicans would just end up with trifectas or super majorities.
Trump was also able to shift racist/authoritarian/nationalist policies much further right by shifting his fiscal policies further left than what Republicans normally would do. His whole campaign was based on deficit spending (tax cuts without any real cost cutting, stimulus COVID spending, etc), public works (multi billion dollar worthless walls), and his focus on blue collar workers (not directly supporting unions but he pushed anti China + US manufacturing boosts).
Every vote for a third party is one less vote that the Republicans need to gain, which is a little more right that they can slide and maintain power, and since natural selection links the two parties it is also a little further right that the Democrats have to slide to maintain their power as well.
If you want to shift things left voting third-party won’t do it. Third parties have no power to make changes and never will in our current system.
Voting for the only party that has a chance of winning and is willing to make voting reforms to improve that system is the only hope of shifting the parties to the left where the actual political center of the country lies.
Voting for anyone else is illogical and won’t prevent this genocide. Protests, and organizations can maybe help in the short term to push the Democrats to change course but it also disenfranchises more voters to not show up, and pushes more to vote for third parties… And so the snowball tumbles down the hill to the right gaining momentum leaving us with frankly no good choice.
Voting is the least important part of the political process. America is not a democracy, voting merely serves to legitimize the state with an illusion of choice.
It might be the least effective especially for those not in swing states, but it certainly isn’t the least important.
And as far as “not a democracy” the NPVIC isn’t that many states away from effectively rendering the problems with the electoral college moot. Certainly a steep uphill battle though.
If voters actually turned out for primaries/elections there would be much better candidates. So your argument becomes “nobody else does it, and because of that the system is broken, and so I won’t do it either”.
It seems like people get caught up in the media hype on the presidential election and forget that some of the most important change needs to start from the bottom up, and a couple of. votes can make a huge difference in State levels, and congressional/senate elections. A president is worthless without a Congress/senate passing laws that actually matter.
Just look at what Minnesota has been able to with voter reform in the last year with their very narrow trifecta. I.e law went into effect this year that allows residents to sign up to automatically receive absentee ballots for every election/primary in their area. A minor improvement, but an important one. Guaranteed that there will be folks that wouldn’t bother to vote on non-presidential elections that will be now.
They also added a “right to be absent from work to vote” which gives Minnesotans the ability to vote without using any sort of vacation/leave time without losing pay. Full list of other rather import changes here
Things like that can snowball into a larger shift at the state level.
The state has no need for you to legitimize them. Even if the system is weighted against you every vote still has power, and the only thing that not voting accomplishes is sending a message that you are okay with the system as it is. There are plenty of politicians out there that want change to happen, and they can’t do it without enough votes behind them.
Maybe this is overly wishful thinking, but I do think there is enough data analysis on how people vote that it could be real: if a large body of people with a history of voting blue vote in this election and vote blue down the ballot but omit the president, or have a third party for the president instead, then that might actually send a message to the Democrats that they are fucking up their candidate selection badly, and make them at least marginally more likely to cater to the left when choosing candidates in the future.
That said I am not sure I can condone this tactic in good faith in this particular election given the alternative, but part of me feels like the right will perpetually have more and more abhorrent alternatives and there needs to be a line somewhere, and if it’s not at genocide then I honestly don’t know where it is.
No matter how you look at it all the options are bad. At least Tim being slightly left of Kamala shows Democrats slightly more willing to negotiate with disenfranchised left voters than chasing nebulous farther right independents. Not left enough to condemn genocide though so a very minor distinction
but the the shit fptp system means they’ll never get any traction
When do we fix the electoral system?
In another election voting third party could be worth it
Which one? Every election since before my time has been the most important election ever…
It’s weird how we can try to explain this to people for months straight and they’re still posting stupid memes about it.
I don’t think they are stupid. They are coping with the hand we are dealt.
Seems to me to be hitting the constant note we hear from people who claim to be communists - to not vote for Democrats. It’s complete nonsense.
It’s weird how you call your country a democracy but are forced to make choices you’re not at all comfortable with.
Weird how you generalize all people based on the propaganda you’ve seen
Umm, I don’t. We’re a Republic, always have been.
I call my country a flaming pile of shit sometimes, for what it’s worth
Because they have a LOT of money riding on convincing people not to vote blue. Gee, I wonder who benefits from that most.
Same people probably finding the temporary defacing of artworks.
wow! who could it be??
So, what course of action are you proposing? Vote Trump? Vote 3rd party? Don’t vote?
What’s your intended / expected outcome?
Voting 3rd party is a great idea. One that doesn’t support Genocide that is.
A normally blue voter voting 3rd party is indirectly helping Trump win the election. Do you think Trump’s Israel policy is going to be better than Harris’s?
Trump will be the same on israel. Are you going to reward the Democrats for 10 months of Genocide?
That’s complete nonsense. Trump is going to support Netanjahu going full fascist. The Democrats are going to offer at least some resistance. Not nearly enough obviously, but there is a clear difference nonetheless. A second Trump administration would be extremely damaging not just to the US but to the entire world. But that’s fine by you, isn’t it? People like you just want to see the world burn and all your ideas of how something better is somehow going to rise from the ashes are just bullshit.
You can’t defend a Genocide by pretending the Demcrats haven’t already gone full Fascist. All of Netanyahu’s commands have been obeyed to perfection.
Ah, “The Jews” are controlling the American government. Yeah, sure.
I know liberals are supporting a Holocaust but cool it with the antisemitism
Are you going to reward Trump for his decade of insane douchebaggery and criminal behavior? Why would we do that?
Never did I say vote for Trump you’re just putting words in my mouth now. But you’re saying you consider Trumps record of being a scamming piece of trash worse than literal Genocide?
If a massive number of voters would vote third party that would be great. But based on every presidential election ever that’s just wishful thinking. The reality is a vote for a third party is one less vote for the best chance to defeat Trump.
The reality here is we aren’t going to win with a non genocide candidate. The best we can do is go with the masses and vote the least bad candidate in.
Self-fulfilling prophecies are not an argument.
You don’t seem to have read or followed any of the logic here. Why’s that?
Someone who would otherwise vote for Harris voting 3rd party would help Trump win. Pretty simple. Not sure what’s so hard to understand about that. And Trump would be just as bad on Gaza, worst likely, and worse on every other issue facing the country as well. Not sure how many times we have to say it.
No voting third party helps third party win.
Voting for Harris is helping Genocide win.
Well, I’m not a single-issue voter.
I’m not rewarding them for anything, but I accept that it’s possible to oppose one policy a politician has, even a very important one, and at the same time support a lot of other policies they have, while also vehemently opposing almost all policies that their opponent supports, and make my choice based on that information.
Based on this post, you seem to be a single-issue voter, though, so I’m trying to understand what you’re hoping the outcome is. You acknowledge that a vote that supports Trump, even indirectly, is not helping the people of Gaza, so why would you vote against your own self-interests? What’s your goal?
If your goal is to show opposition to what’s happening in Gaza, there’s much more effective ways to do that. Get out there and protest - the protests at the DNC are getting a lot of news coverage, that’s where your activism could actually make a difference. Not here.
The guys is just a trump/maga shill who exploits the suffering in Gaza to attack the democratic party. That’s all he every posts about. Don’t waste your time.
I don’t think it’s a waste of time. Even if I can’t convince him specifically, there are other people reading these posts. If someone came to this thread who was less sure, and I can change their mind, that’s good enough for me.
Would you be a single-issue voter if you were the victim of Genocide?
If I were the victim of genocide, I wouldn’t be a voter at all, because I’d be dead. However, that’s kind of irrelevant - are you the victim of genocide? I’m assuming not, if you’re voting in the US election. Even if you’re Palestinian, your people are the victim of genocide, but unless you’re in Palestine, you aren’t.
That said, if you are Palestinian, I feel for you, I honestly do, and it would explain your view somewhat.
I think we can both agree that there’s only two outcomes that’re possible in this election: Trump wins, or Harris wins. (If you don’t agree, I’d be happy to hear your third outcome.) If you truly believe there’s no difference between the two of them, you need to do some research on the topic, because there are a lot of differences, even if they don’t pertain to this issue specifically.
If, between the two of them, you hope Harris wins, a 3rd party vote is voting against your interests. If you hope Trump wins between the two of them, a 3rd party vote is still voting against your interests, because you’re effectively taking a vote away from your preferred candidate among the two who could possibly win.
Edit to respond to your edit:
The outcome is the Democrats stop committing Genocide or they don’t get votes. “But Trump” isn’t even an argument.
Unless you’re out there protesting, or writing letters, or making phone calls, or in some way letting them know that their policy is costing them your vote, it’s a useless gesture. Posting on Lemmy isn’t going to change any politician’s minds. It’s not even going to change anyone’s mind here, in all likelihood. If you actually want to make a difference, you need to make your voice heard by the people whose minds you’re actually trying to change.
Not every victim of Genocide is killed. Any person who was put in a concentration camp by Hitler, or even persecuted, was a victim of the Holocaust. Similarly any person in Gaza is the victim of a Genocide. And you don’t have to be a Palestinian to empathise with people.
Your scope of analysis is limited to 4 years. There’s no long term analysis. If people vote for Genocide it will cement that Democrats can get away with anything if they fearmonger hard enough.
When people threaten to withhold votes for a Genocide they have to follow through or all the leverage falls away. It’s a game of chicken now.
The laws of thermodynamics are sometimes summarized as
- You can’t win
- You can’t break even
- You can’t quit
That summary applies to the Israel/Palestine conflict. Everyone is going to be pissed off no matter what we do, including if we do nothing.
Politically, the best way to deal with Israel/Palestine is “Hey, look, a squirrel”.
Doing mental gymnastics to ignore a Genocide is very convenient.
Climate Change is a much higher priority than Palestine.
Because it affects you personally?
No. In his previous term he clearly favoured Israel more than what the current government is. Examples I remember are moving the embassy to contested/Palestinian territory, having his corrupt step son manage policy in the middle east and wasn’t Kushner and the kids involved in shady business dealings in the area as well.
Stopping the genocide is very important, but it’s also very important to stop the facist from taking power. EVERYTHING, including Israeli mistreatment of Palestinians will be a whole lot worse with the facist in power.
Trump will kiss up to Netanyahu because they are both demagogues.
And the Democrats moved the embassy back right?
Proving they are trying to improve the situation for the Palestinians by righting a wrong done by the other, and far worse, of the two candidates. Right?
- Move the israeli embassy into Jerusalem
- Literal mass Genocide on the Palestinians in Gaza
Which of these is worse?
Just say you want Trump to win, we can all tell.
So you understand the mathematical flaws of First past the post voting?
How is the electoral reform campaign going in your state? Surely you wouldn’t understand the faults of the voting system and then do nothing to fix it!
This trope is false; frogs will attempt to escape when the water gets unpleasantly hot. They don’t allow themselves to be boiled.
Just saying.
Wanting people to not vote for the only option that can beat Trump?
Wonder who that benefits… 🤔🤔🤔
Why is the democratic party the only option?
That is a valid question in isolation, but bringing it up in discussions on where to vote is not leading to discussions or actionable improvements. It only functions to push voter disenfrachisement.
Not saying it’s your intention, but it is your effect.
Voting least bad is important. Don’t discourage it.
Working for better voting options is also important. Do push for that too, but find a constructive setting for it.
💪
Because it is.
It’s the only realistic option at this point. You can still protest the genocide in Gaza AFTER the election (and I fully support you doing so, Hell I might even meet you at one), but look at it this way: if Kamala wins, you have a chance to make a change over there, but if Trump wins again, every Palestinian is as good as dead. Do I like either option? No! Do I think our elections are a good system? No! Am I going to vote for Kamala anyway? Yes! Because at this point, the choice is between shooting ourselves in the foot or in the temple
Seriously believe even on Lemmy there’s gonna be weaponized sockpuppets/bots that try to speak the language in order to discourage voting: “Oh if you’re really based you’ll just protest by staying home.”
“You’re a neoliberal shill if harm reduction is your strategy rather than overthrowing the system and rebuilding it into an enlightened paradise overnight.”
I fancy myself an anarchist in ideals, but I’m sure as heck filling a ballot for Kamala so I don’t have to start taking my “bugout country” plans AS seriously yet…
For a lot of reasons, but if the opposition wins, everybody who works for a living is gonna get waffle-stomped, and the only ones who will get stomped harder are those who can’t work for a living.
We gotta play the hand we’re dealt and deal with the biggest fires first…
Man, whole lot of collaborating Bombala lovers in here.
If Linkerbaan could hurry up and get his ass permabanned from all of Lemmy I would really appreciate it
Was there this much anger and many memes every election cycle when the US was in the middle east invading countries?
9/11 got a lot of liberals to shut up about murdering brown people but a Holocaust being livestreamed is hard to hide.
I see that logic
