|
theCalamity posted:That’s what people and the Democrats said in 2020. Vote for us and we’ll pass the voting rights law. They got into power and failed to do so. But now people must vote for more democrats. How many more Democrats? How many Democrats do we need? The answer is enough to overcome the filibuster, but even then it's not at all clear that Democrats will actually go through with the things they say that they intend to do. Barack Obama posted:“The first thing I’d do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act.” Barack Obama posted:When South Dakota passed a law banning all abortions in a direct effort to have Roe overruled, I was the only candidate for President to raise money to help the citizens of South Dakota repeal that law. When anti-choice protesters blocked the opening of an Illinois Planned Parenthood clinic in a community where affordable health care is in short supply, I was the only candidate for President who spoke out against it. And I will continue to defend this right by passing the Freedom of Choice Act as president. Barack Obama posted:Asked about the Freedom of Choice Act at Wednesday’s news conference, Obama said it “is not the highest legislative priority.” B B fucked around with this message at 18:44 on Oct 28, 2023 |
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 04:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 19:49 |
|
|
Skex posted:From a pure pro democracy standpoint I'd rather vote 3rd party than not vote at all. It's a valuable data point to know what people support even if they lose. The Dems are capable of stopping fascism. Right now, we have Biden siding fully with a fascist regime in Israel. Many democrats want to give the police more money. We’ve seen Pelosi campaign for an anti-choice democrat over a progressive. Eric Adams has his police robot and is now wanting to give immigrants a one way ticket out of NYC. How many liberal cities have swept up homeless camps? I’m sorry but they aren’t going to stop fascism. B B posted:The answer is enough to overcome the filibuster, but even then it's not at all clear that Democrats will actually go through with the things they say that they intend to do. As far as I know, they could do away with the filibuster rule with a simple majority vote. When faced with the need to get poo poo done, they failed to even do that. theCalamity fucked around with this message at 04:47 on Oct 28, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 04:43
|
|
|
The problem with the entire argument of whether you, individually, should vote or not is that it's all but a philosophical debate at the national level. Outside being a resident of Florida in 2000, nobody here has ever come close to their specific vote mattering. Which makes calls that either side of the debate are materially hurting people hyperbolic as all hell. Especially since the vast majority of people live in party locked Red/Blue states where their vote is entirely irrelevant. Donating, volunteering, and otherwise advocating within your community for issues you care about are a million times more impactful than your specific vote for virtually any office above your county/state level. Being morally unable to vote for Biden, or whoever your Senator is will be dwarfed by magnitudes if you are pushing for the policies you believe in. Because those people who are affected by your efforts will be making their own choices, and their theoretical votes are far more numerous than your theoretical vote.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 04:51
|
|
|
small butter posted:Of course there is. Abstaining from voting does not absolve you of what happens if the Republicans win. You're making a decision to retreat and ceding power to Republicans and getting far worse outcomes because you disagree on an issue. Great, so what do I need to do to absolve myself of what happens if the Democrats win, because "encouraging a genocide, frequently through misinformation," is not "questionable" or an "imperfect choice," it is, in fact, the "worst outcome," of which there isn't really some bigger, deeper bottom. Perhaps you should take this situation more seriously instead of so glibly.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 04:52
|
|
|
FLIPADELPHIA posted:"you must vote for the pro genocide candidate with better domestic policies" is not persuasive to me. And if I have to own the actions Republicans do when they win despite not voting for them, you certainly have to own the genocide Joe Biden supports by actively supporting him. It doesn't have to be persuasive to you. I vote for higher taxes and Democrats who will enact policies that will probably not benefit me as much as others because I'm thinking about the net effect on other people. I mean, there is nothing difficult about this. On net, Democrats benefit society more than Republicans do. It's one of the easiest decisions you can make. Edit: Probably Magic posted:Great, so what do I need to do to absolve myself of what happens if the Democrats win, because "encouraging a genocide, frequently through misinformation," is not "questionable" or an "imperfect choice," it is, in fact, the "worst outcome," of which there isn't really some bigger, deeper bottom. Perhaps you should take this situation more seriously instead of so glibly. I'm not being glib. I'm being direct in the same way I'm being direct about eating the string beans I do have when I don't have superior cruciferous vegetables that evening. The error you're making is thinking that you're absolving yourself by not doing anything, when in fact you are when you make the decision to abstain. You would have a worse response to the conflict in every measurable way if a Republican was in power, and then they will gently caress up a lot more things nationally and overseas on top of it. small butter fucked around with this message at 04:58 on Oct 28, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 04:53
|
|
|
Hey sorry about getting heated earlier. This whole situations stressful and sucks and feels like there's nothing that could be done so I got a bit wigged out and ultimately I feel that both sides of this specific voting debate have a point
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 04:57
|
|
|
small butter posted:The error you're making is thinking that you're absolving yourself by not doing anything, when in fact you are when you make the decision to abstain. You would have a worse response to the conflict in every measurable way if a Republican was in power, and then they will gently caress up a lot more things nationally and overseas on top of it. Please articulate how a Republican could possibly handle this Israel/Palestine situation worse.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 05:19
|
|
|
Fork of Unknown Origins posted:You get that there is some irony in talking about all the things your vote can’t, or hasn’t done, while you also have a fantastic counter example, Beshear. Abortion is illegal in Kentucky. There was a referendum last November where the people voted against adding an amendment to the state constitution banning abortion, but that didn't change anything. But yeah, Beshear is much better than the toad who was in before him, especially since that election happened right before the pandemic started. That guy was so poo poo even the Republicans didn't like him, which is how Beshear managed to squeak out a victory last time. Although, like I've said, I do vote, partly out of habit and partly because of this specific conversation. But people keep assigning this almost totemistic power to The Vote that isn't warranted. And it's understandable, because it's part of the American Civil Religion, it is the great ritual that we take part in to affirm our society and its values. But hearing predicto posted:you get out there and vote for the Democrat to keep the fascist out of office. You do it if only to help protect your gay friends and your female friends and your minority friends from bad poo poo that is happening under GOP rule. when I have voted in every election I have been able to and the fascists keep winning regardless, just feels hollow. It's also funny how people will beat their chests and stroke their beards and blame the 700 socialists in KY for writing in Howie Hawkins which clearly allowed Trump to win the state, but when the Louisiana Democratic Party spends less on their entire campaign than a mid-size car costs it's suddenly "pff, well yeah, why waste the effort".
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 05:24
|
|
|
I AM GRANDO posted:Voting is not a moral action. The problem with the way people think about elections is that they are not only meaningful political actions, but the only meaningful political actions they are allowed. In reality voting means almost nothing and people assign it outsized significance because they can’t conceive of politics as anything other than voting. It’s a silly thing to argue about because it’s so insignificant compared to everything else that you can do to realize a better world. The problem is that this argument goes too far in the opposite direction. Voting is not the single most important thing you can do and if your interact with politics is to vote and never do anything else then you're effectively doing nothing, yes. However at the same time voting does have power, especially the lower down the ladder you are discussing, and is a functional tool that should be used the same way every other tool should be used. It doesn't have to be either/or. Even if voting is the least important tool, it's still a valid tool to use which can have consequences especially on the city or state level. Just as people overplay the impact of voting, people also like to downplay the impact of voting because it allows them to feel justified for not doing something because not doing something is easier. Everyone who genuinely spends their time and energy trying to improve the world generally votes if they are able to. If you decide to vote third party (or just leave it blank) for higher up positions that is still better than not voting at all. No form of progressive movement is strong enough to be able to afford not to attack from every single possible angle possible.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 05:32
|
|
|
Voting is just one part of the wider battle to slowly make things better in this country. It isn't glamorous, it isn't guaranteed, and it means sometimes having to hold your nose and vote for someone who will move the country sideways instead of backwards or forwards. But Plan B here is basically Swamp Maoism.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 05:36
|
|
|
Probably Magic posted:Please articulate how a Republican could possibly handle this Israel/Palestine situation worse. It seems like Republicans have mainly been trying to use this to hammer Biden on being "weak" by trying to use diplomacy with Iran. DeSantis basically called all of Gaza anti-Semitic. Tim Scott wants the attacks to come "with Israeli and American hardware." Pence wants preparations for American involvement in attacks to rescue American hostages. https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/israel-hamas-war-republican-presidential-candidates-rcna121893 DeSantis even prepared some ships with privately-funded weapons and drones to ship over to Israel. https://apnews.com/article/desantis...tial%20primary. I haven't been happy with Biden either, but if it was up to the GOP, we'd be more crazed about our rhetoric and not even trying to use backdoor channels to restrain Israel. I'm a bit tired of people asking "How could the GOP be worse at ______?" They always find a way.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 05:38
|
|
|
theCalamity posted:That’s what people and the Democrats said in 2020. Vote for us and we’ll pass the voting rights law. They got into power and failed to do so. But now people must vote for more democrats. How many more Democrats? How many Democrats do we need? Yes they "failed" to do so by dint of not having 60 votes in the senate or the ability to exempt it from filibuster rules because of two specific intransigent conservative Democrats (or one Conservative Democrat and a chaos agent, whatever you want to describe Sinema as). It passed in the House. Of course, your argument excludes the 50 (now 49) Republicans who voted against the John Lewis Voting Rights Act. As if they are somehow blameless for this, or the implication that every single Democrat who voted for the bill was doing so disingenuously knowing it could never succeed. If you want a "how many democrats do you need?" argument the answer is 60+ in the Senate, but also almost everyone here knows that this is most likely impossible in today's world. Your argument also ignores positive things that happened in spite of this, like North Carolina's HB 589 being struck down as unconstitutional. Probably Magic posted:Please articulate how a Republican could possibly handle this Israel/Palestine situation worse. Declare that the US recognizes Jerusalem is the rightful capitol of Israel, move the US Embassy to Jersualem...you know, things that actually happened while Republicans controlled the White House in a period lasting from January 2017 to January 2021? Things that probably emboldened Bibi Netenyahu to continue to be a violent psychopath who somehow has escaped consequences for his myriad crimes even more successfully than Trump thus far? EDIT: The President puts his son-in-law in charge of creating Peace in the middle east with a small loan of $2 Billion from the House of Saud? Angry_Ed fucked around with this message at 05:48 on Oct 28, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 05:42
|
|
|
Probably Magic posted:Please articulate how a Republican could possibly handle this Israel/Palestine situation worse. small butter posted:For all you know, Trump might have even been firing from the carrier stationed there. Personally sending troops. Not urging Israel to wait and cutting off all American humanitarian aid. I mean, he already inflamed tensions by moving the embassy to Jerusalem just a few short years ago. How do you know that that wasn't the final straw that led to the Hamas attack and Israel's devastating response? You can use your imagination, though. In addition to above, maybe Trump would get on stage and call Palestinians racist slurs and then single out Tlaib and call for their deportation. Maybe stop Palestinian aid completely until we can figure out what the hell is going on. Maybe he will bomb Iran for providing weapons to Hamas after assassinating another Iranian general. We can write books about how this could be even worse.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 05:44
|
|
|
Under a GOP administration we may be in this exact same situation without Hamas doing anything to provoke it
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 05:46
|
|
|
Gonna be honest, "he would say harsher words", "he might embed US trash among the 300,000 reservists", and "his staffers wouldn't be spreading rumors about somehow restraining Netanyahu behind closed doors"...Isn't a lot of daylight when talking about a genocide! At least Dukat lowered the casualty rate! Angry_Ed posted:Declare that the US recognizes Jerusalem is the rightful capitol of Israel, move the US Embassy to Jersualem...you know, things that actually happened while Republicans controlled the White House in a period lasting from January 2017 to January 2021? I assume we no longer recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital, now that a Democrat is in charge. Thank god for that, It would have been pretty embarassing if we just stuck with it; that would have implied that we'd always taken it as a given behind closed doors, and don't care now that it's the norm. quote:EDIT: The President puts his son-in-law in charge of creating Peace in the middle east with a small loan of $2 Billion from the House of Saud? Good point; it would have been embarassing if it came off like the United States saw the idea of a Palestine-favorable peace plan as a joke that only exists to dangle in front of the collaborators. Neurolimal fucked around with this message at 05:53 on Oct 28, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 05:50
|
|
|
It's not super long ago that control of the Virginia legislature came down to a literal coin toss because of a seat that got equal Democrat and Republican votes. I mean, that hasn't happened on the federal level and is less likely to because of larger sample sizes, but even if it wasn't far more likely for people to vote federal and ignore state/local than vice-versa, if the value of voting is the possibility that you might get to be the real world version of a dumb Kevin Costner movie it feels like your actual objection is more to the idea of collective action than it is to anything about the US electoral system or political parties.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 05:50
|
|
|
Angry_Ed posted:Yes they "failed" to do so by dint of not having 60 votes in the senate or the ability to exempt it from filibuster rules because of two specific intransigent conservative Democrats (or one Conservative Democrat and a chaos agent). It passed in the House. Angry_Ed posted:Of course, your argument excludes the 50 (now 49) Republicans who voted against the John Lewis Voting Rights Act. As if they are somehow blameless for this, or that every single Democrat who voted for the bill was doing so disingenuously knowing it could never succeed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 05:55
|
|
|
Nobody said voting is the most important thing to do, if anything it's the lowest bar to enter into politics at all. Pretending that everyone who wants you to vote thinks "vote harder and do nothing else" is bullshit, nobody had said or thinks that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 05:59
|
|
|
theCalamity posted:No need to put fail in scare quotes. They promised to do something and then failed to even pass the law. I don't really know what your complaint is any more. "they promised to do something" ok so should they just have said "nothing will fundamentally change" instead? Should they only say they will do something when they absolutely know it cannot possibly fail to happen? Honestly I don't think anybody on the Democratic bench was expecting Sinema to go full loony on them. Manchin was obviously a far more known element. Either way the issues of the filibuster still existed. They tried. They didn't succeed. How punishing Democrats at the ballot box for not doing a thing that was already an uphill climb doesn't make sense to me because right now Democrats having the ability to set committees and procedure in the Senate is a better outcome than the 50-50 split beforehand or worse, Mitch McConnell being Majority Leader again. Angry_Ed fucked around with this message at 06:08 on Oct 28, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 06:04
|
|
|
Killer robot posted:It's not super long ago that control of the Virginia legislature came down to a literal coin toss because of a seat that got equal Democrat and Republican votes. I mean, that hasn't happened on the federal level and is less likely to because of larger sample sizes, but even if it wasn't far more likely for people to vote federal and ignore state/local than vice-versa, if the value of voting is the possibility that you might get to be the real world version of a dumb Kevin Costner movie it feels like your actual objection is more to the idea of collective action than it is to anything about the US electoral system or political parties. As far as I can tell, everyone who's argued for not voting at the national level due to moral qualms has stated that they do vote local/down ticket. There's very few races where the city council or state house race affects international policy, which is where the vast majority of arguments against voting blue no matter who are coming from.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 06:06
|
|
|
Angry_Ed posted:I don't really know what your complaint is any more. "they promised to do something" ok so should they just have said "nothing will fundamentally change" instead? My complaint is that they’ve failed to do critical things such as voting rights and abortion rights and supporting Israel as they commit a genocide. I’m not writing off all Dems, but as of now, in this moment, if they continue to support Israel, I will not be supporting them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 06:07
|
|
|
theCalamity posted:No need to put fail in scare quotes. They promised to do something and then failed to even pass the law. I’m sure that there would need to be more than 60 Dems, right? Because if one conservative Dem votes against a bill, then it’s dead, right? So at least 60 Dems are required. I don’t see that happening without an extremely charismatic president like Obama in 2008. Even then, there was only 59, correct? That’s a really tall order. The filibuster is a Senate rule, not a law of the land or of physics. Weakening or removing it requires the same 50+1 votes of any other change to Senate rules. In 2021, the last time it came to a vote, there were 48 votes to do so. Of the Democratic holdouts, one (Sinema) has since left the party and the Democrats have picked up one new seat, so you'd need one more at least. This kind of support for removing it is relatively new: it was considered unthinkable by many of the current Yes crowd, such as Bernie, back in the ACA era.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 06:08
|
|
|
Eric Cantonese posted:I'm a bit tired of people asking "How could the GOP be worse at ______?" They always find a way. People need to understand this. Not voting for democrats is openly saying "I want everything to get worse".
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 06:16
|
|
|
Republicans will invade Mexico if they win the 2024 election.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 06:19
|
|
|
Eric Cantonese posted:It seems like Republicans have mainly been trying to use this to hammer Biden on being "weak" by trying to use diplomacy with Iran. DeSantis basically called all of Gaza anti-Semitic. Tim Scott wants the attacks to come "with Israeli and American hardware." Pence wants preparations for American involvement in attacks to rescue American hostages. You really just have to look at how far Trump stepped up unfettered support of Netanyahu and the Israeli right to answer the question. He's an architect of this situation, between greenlighting the full-bore settlement of the West Bank again, moving the embassy, recognizing the Golan Heights as part of Israel, doubling down on Iran, and more. You don't have to ask how Republicans would make things worse today because you can look back and see how where there's only one line of footprints in the sand, that's when Republicans were carrying Bibi.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 06:34
|
|
|
The Democratic candidates on the ballot weren't put there by divine intervention - if both party candidates are in favor of Palestinian genocide (and they absolutely are), it's because the majority of primary voters in both parties voted for that. You can take your ball and go home because of it, but if ~70% of the country wants to genocide people, putting someone in power that is pro-genocide is literally the intended outcome of democracy. There is no hidden Anti-Racist Marxist majority waiting to rise up and overthrow the yoke of FTTP voting any more than there is a hidden radical Christian majority being suppressed by George Soros. If voting doesn't give you the outcome you specifically want, it's not because democracy is broken.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 06:47
|
|
|
I'd argue that when it comes to Americans, it's less a thirst for genocide and more a near complete apathy for anything happening across the ocean. Israel/Palestine issues are deeply cared about by a minority of the electorate. A minority that until very recently has been overwhelmingly pro-Israel. Most people are voting near 100% based on domestic issues, with the only blip being arguments over foreign aid or if we should be in a declared war.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 07:28
|
|
|
theCalamity posted:That’s what people and the Democrats said in 2020. Vote for us and we’ll pass the voting rights law. They got into power and failed to do so. But now people must vote for more democrats. How many more Democrats? How many Democrats do we need? Well, the For The People Act got 50 votes in the Senate and 48 votes for overturning the filibuster to pass it. So at least two more Democrats in the Senate. Probably best to add a couple more just in case one of them is Manchin-esque. And of course if we could get up to ten more, then perhaps a filibuster-overturn wouldn't even be necessary at all. This is not mysterious secret stuff. We actually know exactly what happened to the For The People Act. The basic workings of the Senate aren't that complicated. theCalamity posted:The Dems are capable of stopping fascism. Right now, we have Biden siding fully with a fascist regime in Israel. Many democrats want to give the police more money. We’ve seen Pelosi campaign for an anti-choice democrat over a progressive. Eric Adams has his police robot and is now wanting to give immigrants a one way ticket out of NYC. How many liberal cities have swept up homeless camps? I’m sorry but they aren’t going to stop fascism. The other side are openly fascist white supremacists who want to ban abortion nationwide and criminalize gender-affirming healthcare. If you think Biden's acquiescence to Israel and Eric Adams' police robot purchases are more important to you than that, then I guess that's your choice, but there's not much point in hiding it behind flimsy excuses. If you're fine with the Republicans winning and banning abortion, ending welfare, sending trans people to prison, deporting every non-white non-citizen, repealing all gun laws, and taking the axe to Social Security, then sure, feel free to not back the lesser evil. Every US president for the last several decades has supported Israel's ongoing genocide of Palestinians. Israel did this exact same poo poo in 2008 and 2014, and Bush and Obama backed them all the way. If backing Israel's ethnic cleansing in Gaza is disqualifying for a candidate, then Biden was disqualified long before 2023. I'm glad that Americans are finally, finally starting to clue in to what's been happening in Gaza over and over again for all this time, but it's wild to see the abrupt outbreak of new single-issue voters who never really seemed to have a strong opinion about US support of Israel before this month, but are suddenly ranking it as their top political priority, above transphobia, anti-immigrant sentiments, healthcare, poverty, police violence, gun violence, and other domestic issues. Main Paineframe fucked around with this message at 08:03 on Oct 28, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 08:00
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:The other side are openly fascist white supremacists who want to ban abortion nationwide and criminalize gender-affirming healthcare. Main Paineframe posted:Every US president for the last several decades has supported Israel's ongoing genocide of Palestinians. Israel did this exact same poo poo in 2008 and 2014, and Bush and Obama backed them all the way. If backing Israel's ethnic cleansing in Gaza is disqualifying for a candidate, then Biden was disqualified long before 2023.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 08:42
|
|
|
I know this isn't necessarily USCE, and you can ping me for that if you want, but I want to say... It's deeply amusing how we're raised to see single-party countries as these ultimate expressions of Authoritarian hell, that the public has no choice in what they may do, the will of their overlords is absolute.... But I'm pretty sure China, Cuba, USSR never had/has to get threatened with The Super Murder Death Times And Also gently caress Minorities Party into supporting The Super Murder Death Times And Also gently caress Minorities Outside the Country Party. In fact it often seems like their party apparatus actually votes/voted on, you know, policies, as opposed to cultural flags. Looking at America, Canada, Chile, the UK, the Baltics, Capitalist Slaughter seems to be the ultimate end-state tenet of a multi-party Democracy as opposed to a single-party Democracy. George Washington was explicitly against the party system because he figured that it would divide the nation and exacerbate each group's worst traits, and he turned out to be 100% correct.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 09:05
|
|
|
FLIPADELPHIA posted:"you must vote for the pro genocide candidate with better domestic policies" is not persuasive to me. And if I have to own the actions Republicans do when they win despite not voting for them, you certainly have to own the genocide Joe Biden supports by actively supporting him. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 09:15
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Well, the For The People Act got 50 votes in the Senate and 48 votes for overturning the filibuster to pass it. So at least two more Democrats in the Senate. Probably best to add a couple more just in case one of them is Manchin-esque. And of course if we could get up to ten more, then perhaps a filibuster-overturn wouldn't even be necessary at all. people voted for GoodParty yet Bad Things continue to occur at an almost insane pace despite GoodParty being in charge why is that? BornAPoorBlkChild fucked around with this message at 09:50 on Oct 28, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 09:27
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:But I'm pretty sure China, Cuba, USSR never had/has to get threatened with The Super Murder Death Times And Also gently caress Minorities Party into supporting The Super Murder Death Times And Also gently caress Minorities Outside the Country Party. In fact it often seems like their party apparatus actually votes/voted on, you know, policies, as opposed to cultural flags. Looking at America, Canada, Chile, the UK, the Baltics, Capitalist Slaughter seems to be the ultimate end-state tenet of a multi-party Democracy as opposed to a single-party Democracy. Single-party or authoritarian states also tend to have a Super Murder Death Times And Also gently caress Minorities Party (as the only party), where the policy routinely seems to be "how do I, as a party member, profit" and "we don't like minorities who are culturally too divergent". Ask your friendly neighbourhood Uyghur or Kurd or Rohinga or non-Russian citizen of Russia about it anytime. At least, a democracy is more susceptible to outside and inside pressure, which is good. If you, however, truly believe the statement you made, it's time to take a walk and get some perspective. It's myopic at best.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 10:04
|
|
|
Killer robot posted:It's not super long ago that control of the Virginia legislature came down to a literal coin toss because of a seat that got equal Democrat and Republican votes. I mean, that hasn't happened on the federal level and is less likely to because of larger sample sizes, but even if it wasn't far more likely for people to vote federal and ignore state/local than vice-versa, if the value of voting is the possibility that you might get to be the real world version of a dumb Kevin Costner movie it feels like your actual objection is more to the idea of collective action than it is to anything about the US electoral system or political parties. George Lopez was in that movie? I knew he was super catholic, but I didn't think he was that far right.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 12:59
|
|
|
theCalamity posted:I wouldn't consider Biden's support of a genocidal apartheid regime to be a flimsy excuse, if that's what you're saying. That and Eric Adams police robot and the one way ticket to immigrants away from NYC are examples of Dems failing to stop fascism. All of those issues, including abortion and gender-affirming healthcare are important to me. I don't want to tell one group to wait your turn because we have to deal with this other thing. I did that too many times when I voted for the Dems and I'm exhausted from it. Did you not care much about ending the war in Afghanistan? I would consider that a major issue and was easily near the top for issues I was most passionate about. I thought the same was true for a lot of posters here, but I guess not as you haven’t mentioned it for your litmus test as of recent Kalit fucked around with this message at 14:31 on Oct 28, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 13:56
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:I know this isn't necessarily USCE, and you can ping me for that if you want, but I want to say... Aside from the Washington bit, this is a little silly. Mao was responsible (arguably, not the topic of this thread) for the worst massacre in history, and Stalin wasn't exactly a picnic either. If you think the US is a failed imperialist nation, sure, but that doesn't mean you need to up-lift rhetorically other fairly anti-human-rights nations. It is a genuine problem that the US voting system ultimately makes for a weird Hobson's choice, but that system isn't changing anytime soon and certainly you won't get a Maoist rebellion going on in the US any sooner.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 13:56
|
|
|
Rappaport posted:Aside from the Washington bit, this is a little silly. Mao was responsible (arguably, not the topic of this thread) for the worst massacre in history, and Stalin wasn't exactly a picnic either. This will get you shot in cspam (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 14:24
|
|
|
Kalit posted:Did you not care about ending the war in Afghanistan? And you’re exhausted from voting? It’s literally one of the easiest things to do if you’ve already been registered/voted in the past Is this intended as an argument for voting Biden? Because the US troop withdrawal was negotiated and initiated by the Trump administration quote:On 29 February 2020, the US, represented by diplomatic envoy Zalmay Khalilzad, and the Taliban signed the Agreement for Bringing Peace to Afghanistan, commonly known as the US–Taliban deal,[49][50] that provided for the withdrawal from Afghanistan of "all military forces of the United States, its allies, and Coalition partners, including all non-diplomatic civilian personnel, private security contractors, trainers, advisors, and supporting services personnel" within 14 months (i.e., by 1 May 2021). The Biden administration also continues to cripple the country economically, both by maintaining sanctions and by freezing out the country from accessing its $7B in reserves , so I don’t find his policy regarding Afghanistan to be compelling at all
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 14:31
|
|
|
The Top G posted:Is this intended as an argument for voting Biden? Because the US troop withdrawal was negotiated and initiated by the Trump administration …so you know how politicians lie all of the time? Trump lies even more. I know, it’s hard to believe, but it’s true! So, yea, Trump claimed he was going to do it. But Biden is the one who did it and stuck by it after everyone was telling him to redeploy forces. On top of that, Trump had distanced himself from taking credit and stated how terrible the withdrawal had been: https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/08/donald-trump-joe-biden-afghanistan If you think that Trump would have carried through the plan and stuck with it, I think you need to remember who Trump is.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 14:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 19:49 |
|
|
Kalit posted:Did you not care much about ending the war in Afghanistan? I would consider that a major issue and was easily near the top for issues I was most passionate about. I thought the same was true for a lot of posters here, but I guess not as you haven’t mentioned it for your litmus test as of recent I haven’t mentioned a lot of things Doesn’t mean I don’t care about them. For the record, ending the war in Afghanistan was a great thing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 14:42
|
|