this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2024
526 points (96.3% liked)

politics

19244 readers
2278 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) said policy differences toward Israel between her and President Biden won’t stop her from supporting him in the November general election.

“Of course,” Omar said Tuesday, when asked by CNN’s Abby Phillip on “NewsNight” whether she would vote for Biden if the election were held that day, in a clip highlighted by Mediaite. “Democracy is on the line, we are facing down fascism.”

“And I personally know what my life felt like having Trump as the president of this country, and I know what it felt like for my constituents, and for people around this country and around the world,” Omar continued. “We have to do everything that we can to make sure that does not happen to our country again.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] cyborganism@lemmy.ca 1 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Sure, but "right now" you need to vote for Biden or risk never being able to vote again.

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 31 points 9 months ago (1 children)

and the general election is eight fucking months away, so it’s 100% justifiable to vote however the fuck I want to in the primary.

Which I did, and I voted uncommitted. And I will vote for not Trump in November. But don’t mistake my enthusiasm for “not living in a fascist theocratic state” for enthusiasm towards Biden, because it’s not and never will be.

[–] cyborganism@lemmy.ca 11 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Apologies. I wasn't talking about the primaries. I was talking about the presidential election.

Edit: I didn't realize they were talking about the primaries. My bad.

[–] Addv4@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Edits aside, that is kinda the issue. I have disliked Biden not because he's Biden, but largely because I feel he's a little more conservative of a president than I would like. Will I vote for him still if he's up against Trump? Unless he genuinely gives me a reason to think he'd be as bad as Trump (pretty damn unlikely), yes. But I very much dislike his handling of the Israeli - Palistinian conflict, so much so that during the primaries I voted uncommitted. But every time I bring up my opinion, the default is not to say that I must be implicitly be a Trump supporter because I'm not 100% behind Biden. I live in the southeastern US, so I absolutely have family that are Trump supporters, and that argument of all or nothing is sounds very similar in my mind to those that support Trump. I'd argue that this rhetoric of total support will most likely be more damaging than not for the democrats, as it has actually made me more wary about voting for Biden than I suspect I would be otherwise.

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

All I’m seeing here is that you don’t seem to understand how the spoiler effect works in an entrenched two-party political system, which this is. Also, it appears you’re not aware of how absurdly tilted to the right the electoral mechanisms have become in this country - largely due to gerrymandering, and the continued refusal of Congress to reapportion the number of Representatives in the house from the cap imposed in 1929.

[–] Addv4@lemmy.world -1 points 9 months ago

I would say it is a spoiler effect if another candidate was running in the democratic party, but there wasn't, so now it pretty much the choice between Biden and Trump (I doubt there are many on the fence voters at this point). I also very much understand gerrymandering, I am a left leaning voter in NC after all. What is troubling is that it seems the simple solution is to not support Israel and back the UN in investigation of war crimes and handing out aid. But when you suggest that, the default is often to suspect that I am actively suggesting not to vote for Biden (I'm not), and that I am implicitly supporting Trump (who I acknowledge would handle the situation way worse). The reason I am worried about this is that it is very reminiscent of Trump voters that follow with questioning the reason why, which I have seen firsthand. There are likely going to be other big issues raised during this election year, and if they are often answered like this it isn't exactly confidence inspiring.

[–] TheKetchupSong@lemmings.world 15 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (4 children)

Question: If they run an even worse candidate next time, which considering the trend of them all, they will; Will you finally allow leftists to stop blindly voting for a party that doesn't reflect their values?

At what point will the responsibility be on the dems to appeal to us, instead of us blindly backing the blue against our better wishes?

[–] kofe@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago

Genuinely curious, how is Joe worse than Hillary?

[–] djsoren19@yiffit.net 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The answer is never, so it's time to start organizing now. Labor unions are on the rise for the first time in a century, and historically are an incredibly strong voting bloc. Coordination between them could lead to a proper leftist party, split from the Dems.

[–] sailingbythelee@lemmy.world 9 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Splitting the left would result in a permanent Republican majority.

[–] djsoren19@yiffit.net 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

That presupposes the Republican party survives. They've put a lot of capital into Trump, and if he loses this November there's a good chance he's just dead before he gets a chance to run again. None of the other claimants to the throne are anywhere near as popular amongst the cult.

Nobody is suggesting we get a leftist party together for November. That's just not possible, and getting a president would be meaningless. Organize for midterms, start getting house and congress seats. Work with the Dems while the Republican threat remains, but prepare for when their movement collapses to infighting

[–] sailingbythelee@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

That's true. I think there is a reasonable chance that the right-wing could split or collapse.

There is an interesting parallel here with Canada, which also has a FPTP system. Canada is more progressive than the US, so it already has two left-wing parties (one more centre-left than the other). But, for about a decade in the 90s, the right wing party split in two and this guaranteed electoral success for the centre-left Liberal Party. The interesting thing is that this was actually bad for the Liberal Party. They became arrogant, internally fractious, and scandal-prone. When the two right-wing parties re-merged, the Liberals suffered their worst defeat in history.

If the Republicans in the US split into two right-wing parties, there might be room for two left-wing parties as well. In fact, it would be good if a left-wing split ensured that the Dems weren't guaranteed electoral success, as this would lead them into making stupid mistakes. However, if the right-wing later re-united, the left would have to be prepared to reunite again as well. The problem is that the US is more right-wing than Canada, so vote-splitting on the left is more of a worry.

All of that said, it would be interesting to see how much support a left-wing working class party would have. I recall that there were midwest working class voters who were prevaricating between Trump and Bernie, not between Trump and Hillary/Biden. They didn't care about left vs. right politics as much as they wanted to vote for someone who would bring good working class jobs back to the Rust Belt. A left-wing party that really focused on bread and butter working class issues and not culture war bullshit might do well, but it's too risky when Trump is the alternative.

[–] go_go_gadget@lemmy.world -1 points 9 months ago

If moderates can't get over their unwillingness to compromise with progressives and leftists the split is guaranteed.

[–] yarr@feddit.nl 5 points 9 months ago

If you hate Democrats and Republicans, don't vote for them, but recognize that abstaining has consequences as well.

[–] the_post_of_tom_joad@sh.itjust.works -2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

And the real fun begins when you look at what the Dems do in the primaries. Progressives get outfunded in favor of "centrist" Dems BY the DNC and DGA, and the DNC/DGA also have a bad habit of trying to elevate the craziest Republican to the general election in states all over the country.

The DNC et al would like very much to continue forcing democratic voters to vote for them to save the democracy the party are actively undermining.

Yall watch that bit on John Oliver about the mark robinson? I looked into it. Yes, the DGA ran their game ("attack" ads designed elevate fringe candidates into the public consciousness) in North Carolina and helped him secure the Republican nomination.

How much can a voter force a party like "that" left?

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

And since DNC pulled NH primary delegates for something only republicans can change and Biden supported it...

We can't even use your point to convince people.

This sham of a Dem primary might be our last.

Do you think NH republicans learned their lesson and will change NH state law so the NH Dem primary doesn't have to be first?

Or do you think they'll leave the law in place so in 2028 the DNC cancels the NH primary again?

The only people that can fix it are NH republicans and the DNC. And the DNC seems fine with just not letting NH Dems have a say in who the candidate is.

What's stopping the DNC from canceling other states that vote progressive like NH was?

They've already argued in court they can do what they want, because primary is nonbinding and they can just ignore it anyways.

This is the danger of just blindly supporting Dems no matter what. They keep acting more and more like Republicans

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world 9 points 9 months ago (63 children)

DNC conspiracy theory nonsense gets so tiresome. You had some legitimate grievances over what happened with Bernie, but not really in the recent primary. Unless you can name the challenger to Biden that was worth spending money holding the primary for.

I sincerely hope the far left does fall in line with its own party eventually, with some voting reform we could make a multiparty system viable. For now though, much like in WW2, we have fascists to defeat. Regardless of how much liberals and communists may dislike each other, we are at least capable of civil cooperation.

It'd just be nice if you stopped trying to attack all forms of liberalism so hard and take over the dem party just like MAGA took over the repubs. It won't work on educated people in the same way fascism can convince the uneducated. We tend to know the difference between liberal and neo-liberal.

load more comments (63 replies)
[–] Eatspancakes84@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (4 children)

People complaining about the process of the Democratic Primary this year seem to have forgotten that there is only one viable candidate this time around. If somebody else viable had announced his candidacy this year, I would be there with you all the way. However, if an open primary implies that Biden has to debate anti-vaxer Kennedy as his closest competitor, I don’t see what the point is. This primary is not rigged by the DNC, but by other candidates (e.g. Whitmer/Newson/AOC) not running.

[–] z3rOR0ne@lemmy.ml 1 points 9 months ago

Sorry to chime in, but I find this particular debate/conversation going on within Liberal and Leftist circles interesting and at times frustrating.

While I don't buy that the DNC is involved or cultivating some sort of conspiracy to take the election, I do believe every US election from here on out will be a choice between Capitalist Technocracy and Imperialism and outright Theocratic Fascism. Do I prefer one? Sure (not fascism), do I think it's even remotely ideal? Not at all. Am I pissed that I'm at times criticized for wanting something unrealistic?

Yes, because a reality where those are constantly the two options presented EVERY election is pathetic and points to the fact we're just prolonging the end of US democracy because it failed to evolve into a socialist democracy soon enough and thusly became vulnerable to fascist rhetoric.

This is more likely the reality than "we can turn back fascism now and next year, when Biden is president, then we can protest what you want." That simply isn't what's going to happen. Trump is just the beginning of a Fascist wave, the ideology of Fascism, White Supremacy, and Theocracy has been allowed to fester for too long in America and it's like a cancer that has grown too deep for a single chemo treatment to treat it. You've got to cut it out stem and all, and that isn't a peaceful or painless process.

The left that is pro Palestine and calling out the war in Gaza as the genocide it is are the future of The Democratic Party in America whether you like it or not, unless we're finally going to splinter from Bipartisan politics, which I just don't see happening. But we can always justify lesser of two evils when the enemy is fascism. Very much how Netanyahu needs Hamas (as evidenced by his rhetoric and past policies, so too does the Democratic Party need Fascists deeply seeded in the ranks of the Republican party.

This ensures that Democrats don't have to enact laws that align more with the increasingly more leftist leaning public's desires for an end to American Imperialism, and can simply be not Fascists to win election after election after election.

All until Capitalism destroys not just this country, but the majority of humanity at large, because just like any dying empire, America has become a nation controlled by an elite class that, regardless of party, solely desire to retain the status quo regardless of the consequences to those not within said elite class.

So yeah, I'm voting Biden, but I don't expect Fascism to move even an inch regardless of the victor. It'll be there the next morning, and 4 years from now to try its hand again...and 8 years from now...again and again...until finally we fall.

We've had many chances to stomp Fascism in the head while still in the cradle, and we slept on it cuz we needed to "be fair" (but only to white supremacist fascists) and give Fascism a voice at the table in a Democratic system, and look how that infection spread! Now when it's at our doorsteps we want to fight it in an election!? Give me a break. If you think your vote matters, you haven't been paying attention. We're already a Fascist dictatorship, we just think that means boots and bad moustaches and killing Jews, but Fascism is just a nation state where those with the money make the rules and the people don't. Sound familiar?

load more comments (3 replies)