this post was submitted on 15 Oct 2024
546 points (95.2% liked)

politics

19107 readers
2678 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Saleh@feddit.org -2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

So your argument is that any basic logic is a strawman, because you dont want to face the logical contradictions in your statements?

Lets go back to the start:

What do you think he wants to achieve?

Who do you think is his target audience for the endorsement?

What do you think are the goals of Steins campaign?

[–] WrenFeathers@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I’m not doing this thing with you where you put me on a defensive so as to not have to debate in good faith.

Everthing you say starts off with “so what you’re saying is…” or “so your argument is….

…. and then entirely misrepresenting the statement made, which gives one to leave the wheelhouse of the discussion to defend themselves. It’s such a blatantly obvious tactic to use, I’m surprised it even still works.

Wel, either way- it’s not happening here. I said exactly what I said- and I was very clear about what I said. Misrepresenting my statements and those of others is by definition- arguing in bad faith and is against the rules of the community.

Keep pushing this and I will shut it down.

[–] Saleh@feddit.org -2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I said he wants to help Harris by harming Stein.

This is painstakenly obvios.

You said Steins goal is to take votes from Harris. So the target audience is potential Harris voters. So the target audience of the "endorsement" would be potential Harris voters. But the guy is a Nazi so he is alienating potential Harris voters from Stein, bringing them back to Harris.

If his target audience would be Trump voters he would also be helping Harris by moving Trump voters from Trump.

Either way Harris wins by this endorsement and this is his intended goal.

You just kept insulting me and making accusations instead of addressing the logical inconsistency in your contradicting claims

[–] WrenFeathers@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I have not insulted you once this entire conversation.

He isn’t intending to move Trump voters from Trump. Just like how the MAGA trolls here that pretend to be “leftists” can safely bag on Trump knowing no one here is voting for him anyway. They wouldn’t be doing anyone any favors by posting pro-Trump rhetoric in plain sight. They’d be laughed off the site.

But sewing dissent can be enough to sway a close election.

And there are a lot of right-of center voters that are on the fence that would back him over Trump- and therefore will support Shill- I mean..

Jill.

[–] Saleh@feddit.org -1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

And there are a lot of right-of center voters that are on the fence that would back him over Trump- and therefore will support Shill

So he is taking votes away from Trump, helping Harris.

[–] WrenFeathers@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Ugh… man. How do you not understand this?

There are republicans that don’t want to vote for Trump. You know this right? Tell me you have been paying enough attention to at least know this much.

And many of them would and/or will vote for Harris over Trump.

With me so far? Awesome! Let’s continue!

So now instead of voting for Harris, this clown pops up at the 11rh hour with “Hey everyone! Why not vote for Stein with me! She’s the best!!”

Savvy?

[–] Saleh@feddit.org -1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

If he wanted Trump to win, then why wouldnt he endorse Trump? This way he would bring normal Trump/Rep voters, to what, what they usually vote for.

Also it is not plausible that the followers of a literal Nazi leader from an organization that wants to exterminate all brown people would prefer voting for a mixed race women over voting for another Nazi.

[–] WrenFeathers@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

Because Trump is pretty much capped out. He’s not gaining support. He’s gone WAY too far right. And therefore, he is losing a lot of right-of-center votes. Just like any democrat that leans too far left- becomes unelectable.

Look…

Dude has been a LONG time supporter of Trump. Why on earth would he switch allegiance at the eleventh hour when Trump is offering everthing he his little racist heart desires. He has claims to have absolutely NO commonality with Stein’s policy or agenda, or at least hasn’t over the decades

So… why then? Why with a month left to determine an election is he hitching his wagon to a third party?

Because it’s a ruse. He’s directing undecided disenfranchised right-of-center voters away from Harris.