this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2024

-83 points (10.5% liked)

politics

18928 readers

3210 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

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.
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.
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.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
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.
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

outrageousmatter@lemmy.world

aidan@lemmy.world

jordanlund@lemmy.world

HLMenckenFan@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

-83

How Jill Stein's Muslim Surge Could Sink Kamala Harris (www.newsweek.com)

submitted 5 days ago by UniversalMonk@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

45 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 45 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] abff08f4813c@j4vcdedmiokf56h3ho4t62mlku.srv.us 1 points 1 day ago

I think this is an important topic. It's reasonable to ask, if Stein is doing so much better than Harris among some groups, then what's the reason for this? What can Harris learn and adjust in her campaign to win over those folks and get those votes?

It's interesting to note that this isn't universal - even though Stein has a lead in some states among these voters, they tie nationally and Harris has a lead in a few other important states (e.g. Georgia). I wonder what accounts for the difference?

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 15 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Nope

[–] cranakis@reddthat.com 7 points 5 days ago

I'd add LOL.

[–] ripcord@lemmy.world 3 points 5 days ago

GOOD point.

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 12 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Which would completely devastate American Muslims and what they want. The only thing Stein can do is throw the election to Trump.

Here's Trump's agenda:

He wants Israel to kill people faster:

https://apnews.com/article/trump-biden-israel-pr-hugh-hewitt-21faee332d95fec99652c112fbdcd35d

“They’re losing the PR war. They’re losing it big. But they’ve got to finish what they started, and they’ve got to finish it fast, and we have to get on with life.”

He wants to revoke the citizenship from Americans:

https://www.aclu.org/documents/trump-administrations-plan-strip-citizenship-thousands-americans

And daetain them in concentration camps:

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-does-not-rule-out-building-detention-camps-mass-deportations-2024-04-30/

And do the same thing to Mexico that Israel does to Lebanon:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_occupation_of_Southern_Lebanon

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/donald-trump-mexico-military-cartels-war-on-drugs-1234705804/

[–] pooperNickel@lemm.ee 2 points 4 days ago

[–] KaRunChiy@fedia.io 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Lol. No

[–] UniversalMonk@lemmy.world -5 points 4 days ago

Great! Then ya have nothing to worry about! :)

[–] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone -3 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Loving these posts from you, bc the comments section is often a convenient list of users to block. Checking in on your posts to block people has improved my experience on Lemmy a lot

[–] otter@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 5 days ago (3 children)

Agreed. So clearly a shill, it's pitiful. Hope they don't get sent to the front, though. 🫣😅🤷🏼‍♂️

[–] UniversalMonk@lemmy.world -5 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (2 children)

Agreed. So clearly a shill, it’s pitiful.

You do realize that the poster you are responding to, meant that they are using it to block comments from people like you who are against third-party voting, right?! lmao

They weren't insulting me, they were supporting me. :)

[–] pooperNickel@lemm.ee 2 points 4 days ago

I mean basically no one supports you so it was a safe assumption

[–] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

*they

[–] UniversalMonk@lemmy.world -3 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Updated and corrected! Apologies!

[–] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone -1 points 5 days ago

[–] UniversalMonk@lemmy.world -3 points 5 days ago

I don't know what that means. Can you clarify? What do you mean "sent to the front?"

[–] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone -4 points 5 days ago (1 children)

[–] otter@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Aw, that's adorable. ^whoosh.

[–] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone -1 points 5 days ago

Jealous of my sick wheels?

[+] UniversalMonk@lemmy.world -8 points 5 days ago (1 children)

bc the comments section is often a convenient list of users to block.

Right?! Glad I can help, friend!

[+] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone -8 points 5 days ago (4 children)

Soon enough, I'll be able to state that I'm voting for Stein if Harris doesn't commit to ending military aid to Israel (and support M4A or similar), and anyone with something dumb to say about that simply won't show up on my screen

[–] elbucho@lemmy.world 6 points 5 days ago (2 children)

It's actually pretty funny that you and OP are seeing eye to eye on this, considering you want the US to stop funding Israel's genocide, and OP is 100% cool with Israel's genocide. Politics makes for some strange bedfellows, indeed.

[+] UniversalMonk@lemmy.world -6 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

and OP is 100% cool with Israel’s genocide.

I didn't post the article you are referring to. I didn't write it. Nor did I produce it. I didn't have anything to do with it.

And I never ever EVER said I was cool with Israel's genocide. Nice try.

I know you are upset that I am not the only person who isn't voting for Trump or Harris. But come on man, try harder. lmao

[–] elbucho@lemmy.world 3 points 5 days ago (1 children)

The article posted by the OP in that instance was a bullshit apologetic thinkpiece about how the people opposed to Israel's genocide of Palestinians are just ignorant, which includes the re-framing of genocide into "self-defense". You not only didn't have a problem with that, but you essentially defended OP against someone who did - me. At no point did you condemn any of the morally bankrupt positions the article OP posted took, and then you went and said that you like Israel. Could just be that you said that just to antagonize me, and you don't actually mean it. If that's the case, then at the very best, you're a disingenuous jackass who doesn't take the genocide seriously. At worst, you're a supporter of it.

Which is it?

[–] UniversalMonk@lemmy.world -5 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

I didn't defend OP at all. Go read the thread. I said telling someone to go fuck themselves wasn't really going to change anything.

Again, I didn't post the article, nor do I know anything about it or the poster.

And I stand by what I said: Telling someone to go fuck themselves isn't very helpful.

At no point did you condemn any of the morally bankrupt positions the article OP posted took, and then you went and said that you like Israel.

It's not my job to condemn, support, or even comment on an article someone else posts.

Also, just to be clear, I do like Israel. My girlfriend is Jewish, and I’ve been there—it's a beautiful place. That doesn’t mean I have to agree with their leaders or condone genocide.

By implying--actually saying--that I support genocide is a gross distortion of the facts and you should feel icky about yourself. All of this over me suggesting to you that telling someone to go fuck themselves wasn't helpful!?

And notice, I didn’t delete your comments—I left them up. I believe in diversity of opinion in that community.

There are going to be posts you don’t like, so accept it and move on. Or feel free to block the community or me. But don't lie and say I'm cool with genocide.

[–] elbucho@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

It’s not my job to condemn, support, or even comment on every article someone else posts

No, it certainly isn't. But the fact that you declined to respond to OP, and chose to respond to someone criticising OP instead is very telling about your priorities.

Also, just to be clear, I do like Israel. My girlfriend is Jewish, and I’ve been there—it’s a beautiful place. That doesn’t mean I have to agree with their leaders or condone genocide.

Ok, crazy hypothetical time here... let's say that we were discussing some other famous genocide. You can pick any one you'd like. And let's say that some piece of shit posted an article on the channel you moderate saying that "hey - actually it's not a genocide, it's just, like, pre-emptive self defence, guys", and someone calls that person out. If someone responds to that by saying: "Hey, I like <name_of_country>", would you take that to mean "I really like the rivers and hills, and I have a passing familiarity with the place", or would you not take the dumbest possible interpretation, and instead treat it as if instead of being a complete nonsequitor, it was in the context of the conversation to date? When you said: "I like Israel", it was in the context of Israel committing a genocide. Who gives a shit if the place is pretty? The conversation had nothing to do with how scenic the country is, but rather how terrible their government is.

By implying–actually saying–that I support genocide is a gross distortion of the facts and you should feel icky about yourself.

You want me to feel icky about interpreting the things you said in the way that makes the most sense? Maybe in the future, if you don't want to be misunderstood, be clear about what you're talking about, and don't try to weasel out of responsibility. Your entire whining response to me between that post and this boils down to you not taking responsibility for being obtuse.

I believe in diversity of opinion in that community.

Ah yes - classic liberal thinking: "People who deplore genocide and people who cheer it on should be equally heard!" Fuck you.

But don’t lie and say I support genocide.

Ok - condemn Israel, and condemn the poster who posted an apologetics piece about Israel's genocide. I don't give a shit how pretty you think the countryside of Israel is.

[+] UniversalMonk@lemmy.world -7 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

But the fact that you declined to respond to OP, and chose to respond to someone criticising OP instead is very telling about your priorities.

It doesn't tell anything. I told you that telling someone to go fuck themselves wasn't cool. I stand by what I said.

Ah yes - classic liberal thinking: “People who deplore genocide and people who cheer it on should be equally heard!” Fuck you.

This community's guidelines require you to be civil. Falsely accusing me of being cool with genocide and saying what you just said, are against the guidelines and the spirit of this community. Please remain civil.

Ok - condemn Israel, and condemn the poster who posted an apologetics piece about Israel’s genocide. I don’t give a shit how pretty you think the countryside of Israel is.

I don't have to explain anything to you or do anything of the sort. I stand by my comments that you telling people to go fuck themselves does nothing to help the situation. Thanks.

[–] elbucho@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

I don’t have to explain anything to you or do anything of the sort.

Yup. Called it. No wonder you are acting like such a weasel. You are at the very least ok with it, and at most support it. But you don't want anybody else to know that about you, so you're trying to pretend you're taking some kind of moral high ground.

You know what the moral high ground actually is? Condemning genocide. It's possibly the most basic moral test that exists, and you failed it spectacularly. I stand by every negative thing I've said about you.

[+] UniversalMonk@lemmy.world -6 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

You are at the very least ok with it, and at most support it.

Nope. I don't have to support or condem any article that is posted. Not my role, friend.

But you don’t want anybody else to know that about you,

No clue what you are even going on about.

Condemning genocide.

I've already said that I don't condone genocide AND pointed out that you were wrong for implying that. If you don't understand those words, then I can't help you.

Stay mad, but I'm not changing anything about the post.

I’m not obligated to explain myself to you. :)

[–] elbucho@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

Man, I'm going to feel like a real dick if English isn't your first language, but "not condoning" is very much not the same thing as "condemning". For example, I would not condone anybody hurling insults at you, especially if I think they're over the top. That being said, I wouldn't condemn it either. Do you see the difference?

I’m not obligated to explain myself to you. :)

True - your obligation is merely to your own conscience. If you ever get tired of being a garbage human being, you're going to have some serious soul searching to do.

[–] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Yuck. Thanks for sharing that

[+] UniversalMonk@lemmy.world -6 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

I didn't post the article he is referring to. He's saying that to sow doubt. But you will see, I had nothing do with posting that article, nor did I write it.

Some guy named Allah posted that article. Don't know him, never heard of him, other than he posted that article.

No clue why someone would lie and imply that I had anything to do with it, other than he is just annoyed that I'm not the only one who is not voting for Harris or Trump.

[–] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone -3 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I just thought the part where you said "I like Israel" was yucky, given what makes the most sense to infer from that, within the context that you said it.

Though maybe all that can really be inferred from that in good faith is that you just wanted to annoy a stranger on the internet, which is admirable

[+] UniversalMonk@lemmy.world -7 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

just thought the part where you said “I like Israel” was yucky, given what makes the most sense to infer from that, within the context that you said it.

I do like Israel (I've traveled there because my gf is Jewish) but I do not and never have supported genocide. It's more like "condemning the policies, not hating everyone there" sorta thing. And it is a beautiful place.

[–] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone -1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

That's obviously the mature take, but my point was that you said it in a problematic context without nuance, which comes across as intentionally inflammatory.

I assume you're aware, and simply appreciate an opportunity to be pedantic (though I may be projecting there) but, jic- the headline(s) that the conversation were about say "Israel [bad thing]" but it's understood as "Israeli government/military [bad thing]." When you comment within that context without specifying that you're essentially referring to a different subject (the country/ their peoples), your comment is understood to be referring to the same subject as the article/headline (I.e., the government/military)

[–] pooperNickel@lemm.ee 1 points 4 days ago

Intentionally inflammatory is this fuck's only MO

[–] pooperNickel@lemm.ee 1 points 4 days ago

Gotta make sure you block 85% of Lemmy so you get that real echo chamber going!

[–] skeezix@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago

why wouldn't Harris support audio books?