You must log in or register to comment.
I’m not crazy about Biden, but I’ll happily vote for the shitty status quo vs literal “I’ll be a dictator”
But Trump really really wants it!
And isn’t it about time that a rich white guy got what he wants?
Getting some strong Bobby Newport vibes
Bobby had a better reason than Trump does.
Somehow I forgot about that
That’s what the firehouse of bullshit does.
deleted by creator
How exactly is Biden even an evil? So much discourse around him complains about his handling of Gaza and Ukraine lately.
What do people actually want him to do?
Feels like so many people saying I don’t want to vote for the lesser of two evils or I’m going to vote third party slept through civics class and think that the President can do things like unilaterally declare war or distribute aid package to other countries. That’s now how the US government works. Congress is the one who creates those packages.
Here’s what he can do, officially https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powers_of_the_president_of_the_United_States. I don’t see much there that helps with any of the things people are complaining about. Pretty much any executive order he’s tried to make has also been shot down by our current very useless Congress.
It’s time to stop blaming the President for not doing the things he cannot do and start blaming our current Congress for being utterly useless. Get every obstructionist regressive Republican out of Congress and then we can blame Biden when we see him veto a bill that grants trans protections or aid to Ukraine and Palestine. Then we could call the man evil.
I fully intend to vote for the Democratic nominee in November, but let’s not rewrite history, shall we?
I didn’t see that he’d done this, and now that you mention it he definitely did do something similar with Ukraine at first. Kinda makes me irrationally angry [but I’m actually not sure how he’d show support to Palestine still since the Hamas are the only group that he could really use to do that and they’re not exactly the good guys either… He did recently command the US military to air drop supplies], but unfortunately anything Trump would do is going to be much worse so now’s not the time to try and stick it to the DNC as a wider group. Next cycle is going to be another good opportunity since they won’t be able to just put forth Biden again.
Trump would do is going to be much worse so now’s not the time to try and stick it to the DNC as a wider group.
First, I didn’t say anything about “the DNC as a wider group”.
Second, if stating a simple fact will cost Biden the election, then he’s going to lose the election. I will be voting for Biden, and anyone with half a brain should be able to see that Trump would be worse in just about every measurable way, but if that isn’t the case, it won’t help to pretend he didn’t do something that he very clearly and publicly did.
People here aren’t criticizing Biden because they want to see him lose the election (for the most part). They’re criticizing Biden because they strongly disagree with a decision made by the person they voted for to represent their interests. How is Biden supposed to know the sentiment of his base if they avoid discussing it? Applying political pressure to your representatives is a good thing and should be encouraged.
deleted by creator
I think you may be shadowbanned or something? Everything you post gets automatically deleted for me.
A reluctant friend sounds like someone who really isn’t sure if they want to be your friend.
They’re reluctant to vote.
Stop eating lead paint.
This was unnecessarily rude, but I won’t deny I had a chuckle.
Thanks, Captain!
Why would they be reluctant?
Because, unfortunately, a lot of people don’t fully understand what’s at stake here, or just don’t care. I have friends who are over the age of 21 who still haven’t even REGISTERED to vote, let alone think about WHO they want to vote for.
Tf is RFK?
Robert F Kennedy Jr
Who’s predicted to be Trump’s pick for vice president… because apparently watching Trump supporters chanting about hanging his last VP wasn’t a large enough red flag.
Are these two famous? Idk.
Left one is Billie Eilish
I’m not positive because I’m bad at faces, but I think that’s America Ferrera on the right.
It is! I had to look it up!
She looks a little different these days than she used to I guess. Apparently she got her first nomination!Like I said, I’m bad at faces, but I’m not so bad with blatant distinguishing features like scars. There’s something about the shape of her mouth that made me pretty sure.
Good for her. I caught a few episodes of Superstore and she was good.
I’m confused. On the issues states RFK is Pro-Choice. Did this change recently? Or is this listing just too anecdotal?
If he were to issue an EO barring abortion, a federal judge would issue an injunction before he got through signing his last name.
Also, SCOTUS has already ruled it a states issue.
SCOTUS also said it was settled law, so I wouldn’t trust them.
SCOTUS also has been breaking earlier rulings. I fully expect them to side with the federal ban.
BANNING is a state’s right…not allowing. Except with guns, reverse it for that one.
Biden and the Democrats have already taken away abortion rights and are in no rush to give them back. I’m tired of them getting away with it because “it was the Republicans who pulled the trigger.” Ya, and the Dems stood by and did nothing to stop it for 51, God damn, years
not a fan of biden, but saying he took away abortion rights is literally wrong and anyone reading this should question why someone would frame it that oversimplified way.
Ah the ole “blame democrats for what republicans literally did” tactic.
Questioning that leads me to think that while the commenter is literally wrong, they were not attempting to state a literal fact. They are trying to point toward inaction (re: abortion not being codified) and equating it to the action of criminalisimg abortion (even laying blame on the inaction over the action).
That’s obviously literally false, but it’s also pretty clear to me that isn’t the point they were making, which you appear to have chosen not to engage with. Anyone reading this should question why logical one-ups take precedence in discourse over addressing the material argument. Just an outsider perspective, what I don’t see here is any reason for animosity for placing blame on democrats for something they were inarguably involved in. When blamed by someone totally estranged from the right, that feels the D’s are supposed to be their representation, it’s pretty piss poor representation in some respects and arguing it isn’t just seems ridiculous to me
Anyone reading this should question why logical one-ups take precedence in discourse over addressing the material argument.
Instead I challenge folks to consider what place illogical and false statements have in a discussion, especially when there’s no acknowledgement of exaggeration, and it’s over a medium that allows for no additional context (Lemmy comments). Say what you mean, and mean what you say. Your best friends might know that you’re actually a fairly well informed person who just exaggerates a little when getting on your soapbox, but there is no such assurance of that online, we’ve all read far more insane comments.
A certain orange Cheeto always had his acolytes interpreting his statements by going “what he REALLY meant was…”, let’s do our best to avoid ambiguity where we can.
“It’s as if the Democrats banned abortion by not taking action while roe v wade was enforced”
On the whole I agree with you, I don’t think it warrants such absolute statements though. I often subconsciously expect people to fill in the gaps without providing sufficient context, because of my ADHD. Discerning intended meaning behind a potentially ambiguous statement is something I do constantly and would hope others to do of my statements. I don’t think I should need to disclose my condition to others as a prerequisite to converse, and I think my thoughts on various topics have value even if I’m not careful to put them forward in a well-rounded way. Giving someone the benefit of the doubt transcends the literal nature of conversations generally and instead goes to considering the material conditions of the speaker. For instance, the literal indications given by the commenter would suggest they are republican, but I’d put it to you that they consider themselves estranged from the right. Would you disagree? I’m not asking for your opinion of how appropriate their rhetoric is for purposes of advancing the causes of those estranged from the right - just to guess at the position you think they’re coming from. Because if we can agree that they think they are coming from a position of progress, but you still think it’s most appropriate to lambast people in such a position for speaking incorrectly on it, I don’t know if either of your positions are viable towards helping that progress to come to fruition. It seems needlessly divisive and counterproductive in the context of the unity of the right. Some republicans might come out and say they’re voting Biden as part of a strategy to protect their own positions in other elections, I wouldn’t count on the actual republican constituency having any issues voting as a bloc.
I get that it’s a tough position to be in and that you’re likely trying to foster unity of the left yourself, but I’d encourage you to actually look into things such as voting uncommitted in earnest, to be able to convince people it’s a bad thing more effectively, if that’s still your opinion on it. If you’re interested, here’s a video someone I follow uploaded the other day that I felt gave me a decent and well-reasoned alternative perspective on it: https://youtu.be/63wxNNd33Cg?si=b6CY0R9_-mHB9s99
The proper reply to being called out for relaying an untruth is “my bad, what I meant is __”, and life goes on. That’s how discourse should go.
It’s not asking for much.
There’s no need to pander to ambiguity when a miscommunication is easily corrected.
RE: actual subject on Biden, no horse in this race. Just chimed in because I hate seeing potential misinformation.
I feel like you’re demanding the take part of the give-and-take flow of constructive argumentation upfront. This serves mostly to misdirect from the issue rather event attempt to tackle it, and that’s why it’s not compelling to me
That’s fair.
IMO online comments are an extremely poor medium for ambiguous comments because:
- There’s very little context provided.
- “Conversations” typically are composed of, at most, 3-4 messages from each party.
- It takes a while for each party to type up their response.
Due to these reasons, ambiguities should at least attempt to be cleared up with up front.
Sure you don’t have to do that, but then you just get misunderstood, wasting everyone’s time.
What you’re suggesting applies far more easily in an IRL conversation. I can look for body language, like a smile indicating joking. Conversations take seconds instead of minutes, and there’s far more back and forth
I bet you think he honestly tried to forgive college debt as well…
Dumb ass dems have themselves a pretty sweet situation, they get to perpetually be shitbags, put up shit candidates, line their pockets with dirty war money. All because they only have to be slightly better than the shitbag on the other side of the isle. We Americans really are getting fucked. For a LONG TIME. We have been drug into a hole that will take us decades to get out of. And the dems are jut taking advantage of the lowered ethical standards.
They will still lose this election. And they will blame the people that didn’t show up to vote for their shitbag candidate. Fuck them all, greedy fucks. Our children will suffer.
We need ranked choice voting. It’s the only thing that will end the tyranny of our two party system.
We suffer because of idiots like you and the right doing their best to drag us back to the dark ages. I hope one day you gain enough knowledge to realize how stupid what you just wrote is.
What about my comment is incorrect? Do you actually like Biden and think he is the best person for the job? I am still going to vote for him in November. Because he is slightly less shitty than the other shitbag. I’m just pissed off about being forced to do so. I am pretty politically active and I always vote. There are a lot of people like me that won’t take the time out of the day to stand in line and vote for Biden, and I don’t blame them. However, there are a ton of morons that will do it for Trump. Trump is going to win. And it will be the dems fault. Just like 2016. Should be an easy election but they have to go as far to the right as possible and take advantage of the situation to get a controllable sock puppet in there, to the point that we have to worry that a bankrupt, corrupt criminal that is guilty of sedition the last time he lost an election is a candidate we actually have to worry about. This election should be a slam dunk. But here we are, and they know exactly what they are doing.
Actually, we suffer because idiots like you insist that democrats don’t need to improve because the other guys are worse. How about a party that actually fights for us instead of the other way around?
If your strategy is to choose the lesser evil, evil always wins.
Your apparent strategy of choosing the greater evil also means evil always wins and is worse.
As opposed to? You either choose the lesser evil, choose the greater evil or you opt-out which in turn is choosing to allow the greater evil. You aren’t choosing good by not participating.
Vote your ideals in the primaries. But when the general election comes along, you choose the best option. Simple as that.
The lesser of two evils is enabling a genocide. When do you guys rise up?
The greater of two evils will accelerate the exact same genocide in question (Gaza) and enable genocide in other areas, e.g. Ukraine, and possibly Taiwan in the future if and when that situation escalates. This is not the argument to make, unless you’re intentionally arguing in bad faith.
They are arguing in bad faith, friend. These types of people are just trying to sow dissent. I am glad you made your point, as it succinctly points out the flaw in their logic. Kudos! 👍
The third option is to start fresh. Maybe you guys can finally outlaw slavery!
Hey, buddy. Do you have a job? Are you able to quit that job and never have to worry about anything else?
Because if not, well guess what! You are also a slave, just like I am! The true enemies of us all are the elite who throw their infinite wealth around like candy, and fuck us all from the top down, except of course, themselves. The only way to combat this egregious issue, is to band together. Right now, in our reality here in the states, is that we have to choose crusty ass Biden, instead of Wannabe Dictator, rapist, and pedophile extraordinaire Donald Trump who has also gone bankrupt around 7-8 times, and that’s not even including his moral bankruptcy!
So, your argument here is kind of lost in the void, because the above is our only legitimate way to keep whatever little bit of Democracy we sort of have.
You’re so close you could almost taste it. Strike breaking Biden isn’t going to reverse decades of social decay. Trump is the symptom, not the problem. At best you’re kicking the can down the road, at worst the climate apocalypse starves most of us before it matters.
You people are saying that you’re okay with genocide as long as it’s Biden doing it on the other side of the world, and not trump doing it to you. Rise up and fight back.
We are saying you are choosing to escalate genocide. I’m not sure why you want MORE genocide, but you keep trying to push people in that direction…
I’m literally saying y’all need to rise up, can you not read? Choose no more genocide.
All I see is someone claiming to “want” to end genocide, but working to escalate it through supporting Trump’s election…
It is really rather baffling.
Apparently not any time soon, judging from the amount of defensive outbursts and copium in the replies. I guess it hit a little close to home. Anyways, Cornel West 2024, truth, love and justice, y’all✌️
Remember when evil was allowed the greater evil to win (Reagen/Thatcher) and the Left in the English-speaking world turned more left as the after effect, creating a wave of new and innovative left-leaning thought?
Oh right, Bill Clinton and Tony Blair.
Fine, we’ll do a revolution tomorrow, happy?
3rd party in 2024 is the only way to escape the MIC
Ross Perot got nowhere.
Ralph Nader got nowhere.
Why would it be different this time?
I’ll vote third party anytime someone has a realistic chance to win, but that’s not the U.S. presidential election. There’s a reason for the trope “throwing your vote away”.
In an ideal world we’d get rid of the electoral college and implement ranked choice voting. Until then, the primaries are where we maybe have some chance to influence who becomes president.
If the uncommitted vote wasn’t obvious, there 100% will be a strong front-running 3rd party here in a couple of weeks or so.
Esp once those 3rd parties see the amount of dissent that exists surrounding the 2 main candidates
From your other comments seems like you’re trolling.
But for anyone else reading this: I had seen numbers between 10-20% from Michigan and Minnesota for people who voted “uncommitted” in the primaries. There is smaller turnout for primaries than general elections, and democrats are only half or so of the turnout at the general election.
It’s extremely unlikely that a 3rd party candidate will win with a fraction of the primary voters who are a fraction of the general election voters. If people went forward with a 3rd party candidate it does seem likely it could throw the election to Trump.
I support the uncommitted campaign in so far as it alarms Biden about losing voters who want to see action protecting Palestinians and makes him change his positions.
I don’t think those same people should vote 3rd party during the general election because of the classic bullshit choice we have to keep making: the lesser of two evils.
Let’s also remember: there are many obstacles to even getting listed on the ballot, and those requirements vary state by state. Even if someone well funded decided to run today, it’s unlikely they could get their name on the ballot in every state. (So add ballot access reform to the wishlist along with ranked choice voting and eliminating the electoral college)
If/when Biden makes those decision too late (hint: it’s too late), I fear most of you are farrrr too dense to vote for an actual candidate.
Which will result in Trump.
Why should 10% of third-party voters support the Democratic nominee when 90% of Democrat voters could simply support [third-party candidate that I can’t even name]? Surely getting 81 million voters to change their minds is a trivial task! Y’all are just dense!
there 100% will be a strong front-running 3rd party here in a couple of weeks or so.
I’ll wager money against that considering a “strong front-running third party” takes more than two weeks to happen.
MIC
“Man In Charge”? What does MIC mean??
Military Industrial Complex
The sad reality when Americans haven’t even heard of the shackles on their ankles.
Careful, my eyes almost rolled right out of their sockets.
Or maybe it’s just that nobody uses the shortened “MIC” in regular conversation–they would just say the full thing. No need to shorten, just write it out.
Yeah abbreviations have never existed before, great hill to bootlick from
Did you check @RoyalEngineering’s passport? Otherwise, I’m not sure that you can assume they’re an American.
Believe it or not, the world is not America.
Not really sure they’d have a passport, being from the States and all.
Got it, you used your psychic powers to figure out what country they’re a citizen of.
You used to live in L.A. for quite some time.
Acting like everybody on here is a complete anon is a naive hill to die on.
OP is American lmao.
