iād say sanctioning the icc for attempting to stop said genocide is being pretty aggressive about it, as is continuing to block any un-led action, as is continuing to send arms
which do you disagree with?
biden is supporting genocide
voting for a hypothetical candidate supporting genocide is voting in support of genocide
The rest of your comment is inane prattle.
i know you wanted to do the olā switcheroo but it doesnāt really work when you responded to everything in my comment
i know you wanted to do the olā switcheroo but it doesnāt really work when you responded to everything in my comment
Mea culpa.
Biden is not supporting The Genocideā¢ that people started paying attention to once it became a trendy thing to talk about on Tiktok, The Genocideā¢ that you seem to be concerned with. The Genocideā¢ that benefits Netanyahu and Putin.
By virtue of being an American citizen Biden is culpable for the slow burn genocide that Palestinians have been subject to since 1948ish. The same genocide that you are also culpable of and are equally in support of.
Most of Bidenās actions are political theater to not alienate Jewish voters and the powerful AIPAC. A group that he desperately needs to win reelection because progressives donāt reliably vote.
The ICC has never stopped a genocide in its entire existence, so to say that sanctioning the ICC is aggressively supporting The Genocideā¢ is just not true. The ICC could send out charges and arrest warrants for every politician in Israel without America ever lifting a finger and it would have absolutely no impact on The Genocideā¢, positive or negative.
UN action is equally useless, so whatever action you think would have stopped The Genocideā¢ that Biden blocked it wouldnāt have done shit.
Israel and Netanyahu have made it clear that they will continue the invasion into Gaza with or without US military support, so any arms we may have given Israel have no impact on their willingness to wage war.
What other specious evidence of aggressive support do you have?
As a last point, voting for a candidate doesnāt mean you support all of that candidates actions or views. Thatās why Republicans do so well; Republican voters have one or two issues they agree with passionately (immigration, gun control, abortion restrictions, etc.) and vote enthusiastically for the candidate that supports their thing regardless of the candidates other positions.
On the other hand progressives/leftists/whatever pick a hill to die on, and if a candidate disagrees with them a little bit on that issue they will refuse to vote for the candidate regardless of how many other positions they agree on.
The genocide debate is a perfect example; people like you have convinced yourself that Biden supports genocide so you refuse to vote for him because you disagree about that one point. No matter what other points you may agree on, or how much more Trump supports genocide and other positions you disagree with, people like you refuse to vote for Biden and in the end Trump gets elected. Real take my ball and go home energy.
Biden is not supporting The Genocideā¢ that people started paying attention to once it became a trendy thing to talk about on Tiktok
It became ātrendyā more or less immediately at the point that it started happening.
The ICC has never stopped a genocide in its entire existence
What genocide has the US stopped since the creation of the ICC?
If you canāt name one, then literally anything Biden could do up to and including nuking Palestine āwouldnāt have made a difference anyway.ā
UN action is equally useless
UN action is useless because of veto powers. Whatever the UN wants to do, somebody will veto it.
In this instance, the person vetoing that action is Biden.
Israel and Netanyahu have made it clear that they will continue the invasion into Gaza with or without US military support, so any arms we may have given Israel have no impact on their willingness to wage war.
I mean I agree with this, but why would you continue to send arms once theyāve demonstrated what theyāll be used for unless you kind of donāt care about it?
What other specious evidence of aggressive support do you have?
If you can honestly look at the sum total of Bidenās actions and go ānah heās trying his best to stop itā then thereās not much point in continuing this discussion, since weāre essentially in two different realities at this point.
As a last point, voting for a candidate doesnāt mean you support all of that candidates actions or views.
Again, you might hate genocide, but objectively, voting for a candidate aggressively enabling genocide is voting in support of that genocide
If somebody hates racism, but gets tricked into voting for Trump by Black Voices for Trump, would you say theyāre voting in support of racism or not?
you disagree about that one point
Itās almost comical that you can be so flippant about genocide. āItās just one genocide guys, come on.ā
Thatās why Republicans do so well; Republican voters have one or two issues they agree with passionately
So youāre arguing itās good to be a single issue voter?
On the other hand progressives/leftists/whatever pick a hill to die on
So youāre arguing itās bad to be a single issue voter?
They are two different kinds of single issue voters.
Republican single issue voters get their get their candidate elected by strongly supporting them because of a single issue.
Progressives also help get the Republican candidate elected by refusing to vote for Biden because they strongly oppose one issue.
The neat part is the progressive is helping the Republican get elected who is usually even farther off the issue than the Democratic candidate.
But hey, the ONLY THING THAT MATTERS IS THE GENOCIDEā¢. If you donāt vote for Biden The Genocideā¢ will stop instantly and youāll be guilt free because you didnāt vote for it. But at the same time you wonāt have to feel guilt for any of the bad shit that comes with a Trump presidency for reasons.
If somebody hates racism, but gets tricked into voting for Trump by Black Voices for Trump, would you say theyāre voting in support of racism or not?
I canāt say what they are voting in support of regardless of how they vote. That was painfully clear. Iāll say it explicitly: voting for a candidate doesnāt mean you support any of the candidates positions. It just means more of their positions align with yours than the other candidate.
Do you think neo-nazis that want the death penalty for race mixing support Trumpās brand of racism? Or do you think theyāre voting for Trump because they know heās closer to what they want than Biden and they know their 3rd party candidate has no shot of ever getting elected?
They are two different kinds of single issue voters.
this all started from mental gymnastics, and youāre currently trying to straight up claim that single issue voters are in general effective for the republicans but ineffective for the democrats becauseā¦reasonsā¦?
Iāll say it explicitly: voting for a candidate doesnāt mean you support any of the candidates positions
For the record, youāre still strawmanning my position, as you have been the entire time. I donāt know whether this is out of malice or a plain failure of comprehension, butāagaināvoting in support of something is not the same as supporting it. Your neo-nazis are voting in support of Trumpās specific brand of racism.
That said, your response to the hypothetical means you believe your intention is the only important thing in how you exercise your voting right. In which case, what are we doing here? People who arenāt voting for Biden because of his stance on Palestine arenāt intending to get Trump elected, so theyāre blameless, right?
Tell that to the Rohingya.
The US also didnāt save them, so I donāt know what point youāre trying to make here.
The mental gymnastics youāre doing to dodge these very simple and straightforward points would make Neo in the matrix proud.
this all started from mental gymnastics, and youāre currently trying to straight up claim that single issue voters are in general effective for the republicans but ineffective for the democrats becauseā¦reasonsā¦?
Itās a pretty simple concept. Iāll use a pizza analogy since kids love pizza.
Republican voters love pineapple on pizza, but we donāt have any pineapple pizza. The Republican voter says āthatās okay, Iāll have the supreme pizza because itās pretty closeā. So the single issue Republican voter gets pizza and the Republican candidate gets elected.
Progressives voters love anchovies on pizza, but we donāt have anchovy pizza, we only have pepperoni pizza. The progressive voter says āfuck off, I donāt want your shitty pizza without anchoviesā and then shits all over the pizza. So the progressive single issue voter gets no pizza, no one else gets pizza, and the Democratic candidate doesnāt get elected.
In this case eating pizza is voting for the candidate, not eating the pizza is not voting for the candidate. The Republican single issue voter votes and helps the Republican get elected. The progressive single issue voter doesnāt vote, doesnāt help the Democratic candidate get elected, and since we have first past the post elections in America he helps the Republican get elected.
If you want to pretend like you still donāt get I understand. Youāve intentionally missed the basic concept so many times that you it would be pretty silly to admit you understand now.
The Republican voter says āthatās okay, Iāll have the supreme pizza because itās pretty closeā. So the single issue Republican voter gets pizza and the Republican candidate gets elected.
compromise with a middle ground is literally the opposite of single issue and itās insane that youāre still trying to pretend it isnāt
single issue isnāt āham is kind of like pepperoniā
single issue is āpepperoni or i donāt eat pizzaā
cool, but thatās not what i said
i said voting for biden is voting in support of genocide
you might hate genocide, but objectively, voting for a candidate aggressively enabling genocide is voting in support of that genocide
the rest of your comment is just filler
deleted by creator
iād say sanctioning the icc for attempting to stop said genocide is being pretty aggressive about it, as is continuing to block any un-led action, as is continuing to send arms
which do you disagree with?
i know you wanted to do the olā switcheroo but it doesnāt really work when you responded to everything in my comment
Mea culpa.
Biden is not supporting The Genocideā¢ that people started paying attention to once it became a trendy thing to talk about on Tiktok, The Genocideā¢ that you seem to be concerned with. The Genocideā¢ that benefits Netanyahu and Putin.
By virtue of being an American citizen Biden is culpable for the slow burn genocide that Palestinians have been subject to since 1948ish. The same genocide that you are also culpable of and are equally in support of.
Most of Bidenās actions are political theater to not alienate Jewish voters and the powerful AIPAC. A group that he desperately needs to win reelection because progressives donāt reliably vote.
The ICC has never stopped a genocide in its entire existence, so to say that sanctioning the ICC is aggressively supporting The Genocideā¢ is just not true. The ICC could send out charges and arrest warrants for every politician in Israel without America ever lifting a finger and it would have absolutely no impact on The Genocideā¢, positive or negative.
UN action is equally useless, so whatever action you think would have stopped The Genocideā¢ that Biden blocked it wouldnāt have done shit.
Israel and Netanyahu have made it clear that they will continue the invasion into Gaza with or without US military support, so any arms we may have given Israel have no impact on their willingness to wage war.
What other specious evidence of aggressive support do you have?
As a last point, voting for a candidate doesnāt mean you support all of that candidates actions or views. Thatās why Republicans do so well; Republican voters have one or two issues they agree with passionately (immigration, gun control, abortion restrictions, etc.) and vote enthusiastically for the candidate that supports their thing regardless of the candidates other positions.
On the other hand progressives/leftists/whatever pick a hill to die on, and if a candidate disagrees with them a little bit on that issue they will refuse to vote for the candidate regardless of how many other positions they agree on.
The genocide debate is a perfect example; people like you have convinced yourself that Biden supports genocide so you refuse to vote for him because you disagree about that one point. No matter what other points you may agree on, or how much more Trump supports genocide and other positions you disagree with, people like you refuse to vote for Biden and in the end Trump gets elected. Real take my ball and go home energy.
It became ātrendyā more or less immediately at the point that it started happening.
What genocide has the US stopped since the creation of the ICC?
If you canāt name one, then literally anything Biden could do up to and including nuking Palestine āwouldnāt have made a difference anyway.ā
UN action is useless because of veto powers. Whatever the UN wants to do, somebody will veto it.
In this instance, the person vetoing that action is Biden.
I mean I agree with this, but why would you continue to send arms once theyāve demonstrated what theyāll be used for unless you kind of donāt care about it?
If you can honestly look at the sum total of Bidenās actions and go ānah heās trying his best to stop itā then thereās not much point in continuing this discussion, since weāre essentially in two different realities at this point.
Again, you might hate genocide, but objectively, voting for a candidate aggressively enabling genocide is voting in support of that genocide
If somebody hates racism, but gets tricked into voting for Trump by Black Voices for Trump, would you say theyāre voting in support of racism or not?
Itās almost comical that you can be so flippant about genocide. āItās just one genocide guys, come on.ā
So youāre arguing itās good to be a single issue voter?
So youāre arguing itās bad to be a single issue voter?
They are two different kinds of single issue voters.
Republican single issue voters get their get their candidate elected by strongly supporting them because of a single issue.
Progressives also help get the Republican candidate elected by refusing to vote for Biden because they strongly oppose one issue.
The neat part is the progressive is helping the Republican get elected who is usually even farther off the issue than the Democratic candidate.
But hey, the ONLY THING THAT MATTERS IS THE GENOCIDEā¢. If you donāt vote for Biden The Genocideā¢ will stop instantly and youāll be guilt free because you didnāt vote for it. But at the same time you wonāt have to feel guilt for any of the bad shit that comes with a Trump presidency for reasons.
I canāt say what they are voting in support of regardless of how they vote. That was painfully clear. Iāll say it explicitly: voting for a candidate doesnāt mean you support any of the candidates positions. It just means more of their positions align with yours than the other candidate.
Do you think neo-nazis that want the death penalty for race mixing support Trumpās brand of racism? Or do you think theyāre voting for Trump because they know heās closer to what they want than Biden and they know their 3rd party candidate has no shot of ever getting elected?
Tell that to the Rohingya.
this all started from mental gymnastics, and youāre currently trying to straight up claim that single issue voters are in general effective for the republicans but ineffective for the democrats becauseā¦reasonsā¦?
For the record, youāre still strawmanning my position, as you have been the entire time. I donāt know whether this is out of malice or a plain failure of comprehension, butāagaināvoting in support of something is not the same as supporting it. Your neo-nazis are voting in support of Trumpās specific brand of racism.
That said, your response to the hypothetical means you believe your intention is the only important thing in how you exercise your voting right. In which case, what are we doing here? People who arenāt voting for Biden because of his stance on Palestine arenāt intending to get Trump elected, so theyāre blameless, right?
The US also didnāt save them, so I donāt know what point youāre trying to make here.
The mental gymnastics youāre doing to dodge these very simple and straightforward points would make Neo in the matrix proud.
Itās a pretty simple concept. Iāll use a pizza analogy since kids love pizza.
Republican voters love pineapple on pizza, but we donāt have any pineapple pizza. The Republican voter says āthatās okay, Iāll have the supreme pizza because itās pretty closeā. So the single issue Republican voter gets pizza and the Republican candidate gets elected.
Progressives voters love anchovies on pizza, but we donāt have anchovy pizza, we only have pepperoni pizza. The progressive voter says āfuck off, I donāt want your shitty pizza without anchoviesā and then shits all over the pizza. So the progressive single issue voter gets no pizza, no one else gets pizza, and the Democratic candidate doesnāt get elected.
In this case eating pizza is voting for the candidate, not eating the pizza is not voting for the candidate. The Republican single issue voter votes and helps the Republican get elected. The progressive single issue voter doesnāt vote, doesnāt help the Democratic candidate get elected, and since we have first past the post elections in America he helps the Republican get elected.
If you want to pretend like you still donāt get I understand. Youāve intentionally missed the basic concept so many times that you it would be pretty silly to admit you understand now.
compromise with a middle ground is literally the opposite of single issue and itās insane that youāre still trying to pretend it isnāt
single issue isnāt āham is kind of like pepperoniā
single issue is āpepperoni or i donāt eat pizzaā
republican voters only want pepperoni