• Andy@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    15 hours ago

    You know what would to be really, REALLY uncomfortable?

    If Harris loses, there’s a strong chance that it might be over this terrible war. What a stupid, stupid reason to have to live through another Trump presidency.

    • MinFapper@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      14 hours ago

      What a stupid, stupid reason to have to live through another Trump presidency and continue the war unchanged.

      FTFY

      • chuckleslord@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 hours ago

        What a stupid, stupid reason to have to live through another Trump presidency and continue the war, with even more support than ever.

        FTFY

        Evangelicals like the genocide, brings their death cult closer to its end.

        • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          58 minutes ago

          Except it really doesn’t since that world already ended in the mid 1800s, much like the Green Sahara period ending, and The Bronze Age Collapse ended the world 6000 years ago causing them to write that apocalyptic fictive.

          How many horse drawn carriages do you see on a daily basis? How many oxen plow your fields? That was the norm until the mid to late 1800s. That world already ended. They just refuse to accept their own books.

      • YeetPics@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Nah, your boy trump promises to end the war in mere hours (with industrial genocide).

        So let’s not vote for kkkamala harriss because we care so much about Palestinians.

        • volodya_ilich@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          The genocide in Gaza is bipartisan, and the ongoing atrocities are taking place under a democrat administration.

          • Mac@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            19 minutes ago

            If it’s bipartisan then you are free to vote based on other issues.

          • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            45 minutes ago

            Harris has promised to enforce the laws of the US. If she does do, then The Hayes Act would prohibit any arms shipments to Israel. I’m not saying that is definitely what she intends to do, I am saying that is the most diplomatic she can be in the current political climate of the US, and still win, with the intention of deescalation in Israel while still supporting Ukraine.

            • volodya_ilich@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              33 minutes ago

              The party is literally in the government right now. Biden is a rotting corpse who is obviously not making the decisions for US international policy, so the arm deals with Israel are with the full consent and approval of all the democrat elites. Harris won’t change this as it hasn’t changed for the past 80 years.

    • MisterScruffy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      The harris campaign is openly hostile to the anti-war anti-genocide vote. They are not interested in trying to get our votes. If they make the calculation that they need the anti-war vote to win they will try to appeal to us but they have decided (so far) that they don’t want us and don’t need us.

      Don’t blame us for not voting for a candidate who doesn’t want our vote and is actively hostile to our position.

      • Andy@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 minutes ago

        I agree with all of that. Except for the part about possibly appealing to the anti-war voter if it would help them win. There are some – Biden for instance – who clearly would rather lose than do that. I don’t know Harris well enough to judge.

        I think it’s sad that people complain when someone says that they won’t vote for the lesser of two evils. It’s sad because it shows a profound misunderstanding about how democracy is supposed to work, and what they’re entitled to demand from their fellow citizens.

        The largest voting block in every election is the depressed voter. And the reason is that our system is constructed to favor a broken two-party system even at the expense of civil participation that can solve our problems. Millions of people don’t vote because they see no benefit in doing so. The problem to be solved is that the political system has failed these people, not that they aren’t showing sufficient enthusiasm to do paperwork to satisfy the demands of people who feel invested in the outcome of elections.

        The media falsely claims that each candidate has 47% support when really they each have about 30% support, and a larger number of people have not felt any interest in supporting either candidate. That’s a massive failing in reporting and political process.

      • hobovision@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        6 hours ago

        So you have three options, all having a bad outcome on the most important thing you care about.

        One of the options maybe has better outcomes on some other things you care about.

        Another option has bad outcomes in almost everything you care about, plus maybe even a worse outcome to your most important thing.

        The third option is to leave it up everyone else to pick between the first two.

        I know what I’d pick, what will you do?

        • volodya_ilich@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          You’re absolutely ignoring their comment. If democrat voters showed a spine and conditioned their vote to an end to the genocide, the democrat leadership may decide that it’s worth it to cater to these voters to win the elections if that’s what they want. By enabling all their actions through “vote blue no matter who” you’re just degrading the democracy further, and postponing the choice 4 more years during which nothing will happen.

          • Soggy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            12 minutes ago

            “If we hold the country hostage, they’ll definitely do what I want before the opposition makes everything irreversibly worse.”

        • MisterScruffy@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 hours ago

          The only two real options are both pro genocide, pro military industrial complex which tells me this country is fucked there’s nothing I can do to help that. All I can do is follow my conscience and my conscience won’t let me rest if I vote for genocide

    • mightyfoolish@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      13 hours ago

      unchanged

      Getting worse means changes are required… Trump wouldn’t make anything better but there is no reason to suggest Harris wants to make things better.

    • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      13 hours ago

      Hey at least he could never win again, silver lining lol. Then all we have to do is kill him when he tries to go dictator which honestly shouldn’t be that hard, the nearest secret service agent may even do it…extrajudiciously.

      (I have a pet theory that one of the functions of the secret service is to quickly turn from bodyguards to assassins if a dictatorial president does attempt a real take over. I mean, why not? if it isn’t it should be.)

      • Andy@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        32 minutes ago

        A world where Trump gets elected and then assassinated is a world where JD Vance is president of an America that elected Trump and then saw him assassinated. That’s how you get Gilead by 2025. That is NOT something to fantasize about. That’s a hell scenario. And it’s why people who think that there’s any solutions to our problem that come out of a gun are – and I mean this with all due respect – very, very dumb.

        And to put a fine point on this: it’s not that this wouldn’t be a bad idea if not for JD Vance. It’s illustrative of how political violence in real life almost universally makes whatever problem might’ve motivated the violence suddenly far worse rather than better.