this post was submitted on 14 Oct 2024
1009 points (78.2% liked)

Political Memes

5354 readers
1715 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] emmy67@lemmy.world 63 points 4 days ago (13 children)

Nobody expects Kamala to solve it. They do expect her to stop supporting genocide.

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com 85 points 4 days ago (71 children)
[–] wildncrazyguy138@fedia.io 60 points 4 days ago (2 children)

At least some, like Ralph Nader, regretted it. Now we have those actively seeking to spoil the vote.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (70 replies)
[–] 737@lemmy.blahaj.zone 31 points 4 days ago (5 children)

the israeli declaration of independence was 76 years ago

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] cashsky@lemmy.world 12 points 3 days ago (4 children)

Please look up Brett Mcgurk before you praise Biden and Kamala's stance on Israel. Literally following Bush era policies in the Middle East.

[–] UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml 5 points 3 days ago

Democrats still celebrate Obamacare, which is rebranded RomneyCare. Keeping those insurance corporations nice and safe... what an accomplishment.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml 6 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Imagine a scenario with multiple political parties competing to defeat the Republicans. With more representative electoral systems, voters could choose any candidate they prefer, ensuring that even if their choice doesn’t win, their vote can still be counted against the republican party with no spoiler effect. Since voting methods are determined at the state level, we don’t need to wait for federal changes; some states have already implemented electoral reform. Alaska recently picked a more moderate conservative over Sarah Palin because of Ranked Choice voting

Who would oppose having multiple chances to take power from the Republican Party? The Democratic Party would. In states they control, they could replace First Past The Post voting with an electoral system without a spoiler effect. Yet year after year, election after election, the democrats sit on their hands and do nothing about FPTP voting.

Democrats frequently acknowledge the shortcomings of FPTP voting, and have done so for longer than I’ve been alive. Just mention voting for a third party to any Democrat, and they’ll readily express their awareness of the flaws in the voting system used by most states. Comments for articles about the Green Party will further illustrate their understanding of this issue.

The Democrats seem to prefer the country balancing over a fire pit of fascism rather than truly competing for our votes. Party over country at all costs.

[–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

Who would oppose having multiple chances to take power from the Republican Party? The Democratic Party would.

Oh? Specifically and only Democrats?

It's crazy when you fuckers stop even pretending to do the "bothsides" song and dance and just straight up do partisan attacks on Democrats only.

[–] banner80@fedia.io 60 points 4 days ago (76 children)

The comment section for this type of posts is always such a shit show.

This is essentially saying 2 things:

1 - It's insane that some here seem to think that to remain "independent" of politics you can abstain or vote third party to show your discontent for how slowly the Dems deal with Natenyahu's BS. Your abstain or 3rd party vote does nothing to "move the Dems to the left" when in reality you are removing them from power to give it to Trump, who has already promised to triple down on helping Netanyahu achieve whatever he wants.

The election is happening right now. There's no time and space to negotiate new candidates or parties. It's either the disappointing Dems, or the christo-fascist GOP. The time for standing on principle was 3 years ago, or next year at the start of the new cycle. Today is about pragmatism - how close we can get to the desired outcome, and which of these parties is more interested in listening to your position moving forward. It should be abundantly clear that Harris is by a huge margin the better choice for your desired outcomes.

2 - The Israel operation in Gaza, that we all want to stop, is not something that can be just ended with the click of a button. A bunch of actors in that region are hell bent on killing each other, like when Hamas did genocide on Israel last year, and now we have multiple state actors moving armies against each other. The brain-dead premise that somehow Democrats "want genocide" makes it impossible to have a serious conversation.

If you don't vote for Harris over a mess in the Middle East that we didn't directly create and are not directly responsible for, and that the Biden administration is trying to solve even if it's too slow for your taste; and instead you act in favor of helping Trump who will absolutely empower Netanyahu to do whatever he wants, then not only are you directly voting against your own interests, but you are engaging in a level of dumb-fuckery of supreme proportions. And fucking all of us over hard while at it.

In short: By opposing Harris right at the finish line of the election cycle, you are going to inflict Trump's dictator regime and the runaway christo-fascist GOP on the entire planet, because you are dissatisfied with how mediocre Dems have been at trying to stop Israel. You think this makes you virtuous. It does not.

[–] hobovision@lemm.ee 42 points 4 days ago (9 children)

I mostly agree with you, especially point (1), but what are you talking about with "Hamas did genocide on Isreal last year"? They did a terror attack for sure, but that's not genocide. Wiping out significant percentage of a population because of their ethnicity or culture is genocide (see what Isreal is doing in Gaza) and it takes months to years.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (75 replies)
[–] h3mlocke@lemm.ee 26 points 4 days ago (3 children)

How tf does one "excerpt pressure?"

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Prunebutt@slrpnk.net 51 points 4 days ago (26 children)

"1000 year old conflict" is already Zionist propaganda.

load more comments (26 replies)
[–] febra@lemmy.world 44 points 4 days ago (25 children)

First and foremost, this isn't a 1000 year war. It's a bit over 100 years at most. The colonization of Palestine started around 100 years ago. Israel was founded in 1948.

Secondly, Kamala isn't working towards achieving shit. Her government is literally still sending weapons to Israel as Israel is shooting at UN peacekeepers, burning people alive, attacking five different countries, and much more worse.

load more comments (25 replies)
[–] andros_rex@lemmy.world 33 points 4 days ago (4 children)

Kamala might fund genocide in Israel. But Trump will fund genocide in Israel, and genocide here.

We can be ideologically pure when we don’t have fascists at the doorstep. Thousands of children just FUCKING VANISHED during Trumps term. What’s going to happen during his second? Texas was (is?) putting barbed wire in the river on the fucking border. Trump will give free rein to murderous politicians (Texas is also about to execute another innocent man btw). People are going to die here.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 33 points 4 days ago (4 children)

Trump would be a disaster for the middle east. He wouldn't even be good for Israel. Sure, he'd support Israel now, but Trump loves strongman leaders, and there are plenty of them in the middle east, so he'd love Netanyahu, but he'd probably also cozy up to any other regional strongmen and destabilize things even more.

But, the Biden/Harris admin has been effectively sponsoring the genocide by giving military aid to Israel. It's clear that Israel is the biggest military power in the region, and it has been for decades. It has no need for military aid. The best way to help civilians is to make Israel afraid to piss off its neighbors. Right now it's convinced it could beat them in any war, so it's happy to grind the Palestinians into dust, daring Iran, Egypt, etc. to interfere.

Yes, it's a complex geopolitical issue, and an all-out regional war would put many more civilians in danger, not just the Palestinians. But, giving military aid to Israel while they engage in genocide isn't a good way to prevent a regional war.

Even if you're a single-issue voter who doesn't care about women's reproductive health, doesn't care about the rule of law, doesn't care about free speech, doesn't care about corruption, and is only 100% focused on the fate of Palestinians, even then you should be voting for Harris. Even if you don't like her policies, there's still a slight chance she'd listen to reason once elected. Trump would be an utter disaster.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›