Harris, if you're listening... Your position on this issue is very unpopular.
Yes but money speaks more and louder in politics rather than votes.
There are deeper root causes for the political class' dedication to Israel to the point of genocide. While I suppose capitalist class dictatorship could be euphemistically referred to as money, the political class true believers in the project like Genocide Joe and by extension his lockstep veep, see a strategic value in Israel's constant violence as a European settler colony. Biden even had a famous quote about the need for an Israel, it is about American domination of the entire region to control the petrodollar and disrupt a locus of national independence.
These are cynical people, not simply sellouts. They think genocide is worth it. They also want your vote so they do some kabuki, present the half-assed aesthetic that they care about "ceasefire" while maintaining intense material support for the genocide. They are banking on their electorate being accepting of genocide.
Is Trump's any different?
No, that's why people subscribed to the duopoly have no prob. supporting genocide.
Ok, so her stance in the current conflict is not worse than Trump's?
Effectively making it pointless at best to bring up now, at worst it will stop people voting for her and the world will have to deal with Trump and his lackeys for another 4 years.
Focus on getting Harris in office, then focus on changing her attitude in the conflict.
I am sorry but that is the only way to do it.
I may not be American, but even I can see that while you might sway Harris on the issue, there is zero chance swaying Trump about anything other than being worse:
Focus on getting the genocide candidate in and then change her mind? No thanks.. that's delusional.
You just said that both parties as equally bad on this issue, so why not call out Trump as well?
Because Trump is called out by his very existence. Calling him out every time we're talking about the hundreds of things where his policies are bad would be preaching to the choir.
Trump is not called out by his very existance.
Trump is called out as a result of his actions.
Calling out Harris at this stage will only serve to drive away voters from her, which will only benefit the Trump campaign.
You have two evils fighting for power, pick the lesser.
This situation will continue untill the US gets rid of the electors and FPTP in elections.
Only then can third parties have a real chance and you can actually vote with more granularity.
This situation will continue untill the US gets rid of the electors and FPTP in elections.
So, until we succeed in a revolution. Sounds good! I recommend joining PSL or FRSO.
Wow the level of speaking over people demonstrated here is astounding. Don't you think if calling out Trump would have worked people would be doing that instead of trying to convince Harris?
Instead of treating critics like fools why don't you attribute more nuance to them that you clearly think the conservatives lack?
And are you so dumb to believe that People criticizing Harris are going to vote Trump? If you see such a comment just hold your fingers and don't engage. Either they are people who are genuine and will vote harris anyway.. or a rightwing leaning folk and won't listen to you. All you're doing commenting is either feeding trolls or alienating Harris voters who are concerned about her stance on Palestine.
And are you so dumb to believe that People criticizing Harris are going to vote Trump?
No, certainly not, but some may not vote at all, which would benefit the Trump campaign.
Because Harris is currently the Vice President of the United States when this specific thing is happening. Hope this helps!
Harris is a genocide candidate supporting a genocide as part of the genocidal Biden-Harris administration. I should not need to tell you that you should oppose genocide rather than trying to use tortured and wrong primary school political logic for how support for genocide is actually opposing it and that the time to make demands is when you have thrown away any concept of leverage.
Just repeat after me: "I will not vote for any politician that has supported genocide".
I will not vote for any politician that has supported genocide
This is admirable, in a normal democracy, the US has a broken democracy, someone abstaining from voting for the less bad option will directly benefit the worse option.
I am just trying to bring some realism into the discussion, in a democracy without FPTP your option would be fine, with FPTP a lack of vote for one option will directly benefit the other.
If you don't want Trump to manage this crisis, you gotta vote Harris.
I am aware if such tortured illogic, I already described it as wrong and simplistic.
Since you refuse to oppose genocide, just be plain. Say, "No I will not say that. I will vote for a genocide candidate."
You know. Just be honest.
I'll be honest, if I were an American, I'd vote democrat, since they seem far more likely to abollish the electoral college and FPTP than the republicans.
You live in a fantasy world where you think that abstaining from voting will do anything other than support the Republicans.
I may not like either side very much, but I am a realist, and the reallity is that the Democrats are the lesser of two evils.
So far you have only complained, and not shown any even vaugley realistic alternative to mine, and don't say abstaining from voting, or voting for a third party, in todays America it will only benefit the Republicans.
But I do have to appologize, I am truly sorry for expecting a resonable debate with a user from lemmy.ml and especially on a lemmy.ml community, I am very sorry for wasting both of our time.
I'll be honest, if I were an American, I'd vote democrat
Like I said, you should be honest and say, "I'd vote for a genocide candidate". I kept my response short and direct and you opted, for a second time, to ignore the point and self-indulge your poor logic on political power and electoralism.
Regarding the rest, You should not have expected a debate on your electoral reasoning as (1) I was already dismissive of it from the get-go, implying I am already aware of it, (2) you have at no point acknowledged this and are instead trying to, for lack of a better word, mansplain it, (3) you haven't asked for a debate nor have I indicated we were having one, and (4) you are not responding directly to what I have to say. What you are doing is not debate, but a bad faith engagement to provide apologetics for supporting genocide.
I would be happy to discuss your electoral reasoning if we could get past this basic hurdle of direct responses and good faith engagement.
God damn, it really is "But Trump!" every time you criticize Harris
Yes, I am glad you keep up.
I don't believe we can afford Trump to win another term, and no, I am not blind to Harris' issues either, but this is like comparing a fully rotten and moldy apple with a normal apple that happens to have bad bump on it.
a normal apple that happens to have bad bump on it.
It must be bait that you describe supporting an ongoing genocide as "a bad bump on a normal apple". Come on, I never doubted that that's what you really think of the people in the third world, but saying it out loud like that? If you want to be a good Harris propagandist, you're going to need to do a better job of pretending you care about humans and it's just such a shame that you can't vote against genocide. That's the way that you scoundrels vote shame properly, with crocodile tears and disavowal.
This has been the behavior for decades!
Sure Kosovo, but at least he's not the other guy!
Sure Yemen, but at least he's not the other guy!
Sure Palestine, but at least he's not the other guy!
And yes, Republican Presidents have made HUGE mistakes with their international policies, but I hear about them ALL THE TIME! And for good reason. They should be held accountable.
This sweeping under the rug because of "blue no matter who" mentality shares more similarity with right wing extremities than with normal people.
They should be held accountable.
I would like everyone to be held accountable. How does letting Trump win help the country? Is he going to hold them accountable for anything you've listed?
This sweeping under the rug because of "blue no matter who" mentality shares more similarity with right wing extremities than with normal people.
Keeping openly fascist tyrants out of power isn't sweeping it under the rug.
You act like preventing neoliberal dems from winning an election will "teach them a lesson" or "hold them accountable". It won't. Every time a Republican wins an election it pushes democrats further to the right in an attempt to be the reasonable centrists. Look at the last several decades and tell me that isn't what happened. Corporate Democrats don't get more brave and try to capture the leftist's vote, they cower and try to claw more independents as the Republicans push more to the right.
The answer isn't to not vote or vote third party. The answer is to get involved and fucking make them more left. Be the third party and start local, protest, make your voice heard.
Ok, when you are not even trying to argue in good faith, I am done.
Why the fuck would I argue with someone who minimizes genocide like that? It's not like your rotten opinion means anything, and anyone else sees the shit you tried to pull comment 1.
Is genocide not fully rotten?
Ok, when you are not even trying to argue in good faith, I am done.
It's entirely good faith. In order for your apple metaphor to be taken accurately, the severity of both candidates must be upheld. You are minimizing genocide.
Do I hear a great opportunity to win over right wing voters?
““He’s doing a good job,” Trump said about the Israeli leader. “Biden is trying to hold him back, just so you understand, Biden is more superior to the VP. He’s trying to hold him back, and he probably should be doing the opposite, actually. I’m glad that [Netanyahu] decided to do what he had to do, but it’s moving along pretty good.”
I still find it strange and suspicious that everyone here refers to the war in Gaza as genocide.
And that the genocide in Yemen is attributed to US and not to Iran. And that the genocide in Syria by Iran and Russia is never mentioned.
I wonder if you'll are Iranian Chinese Russian propaganda agents or whether some of you are truly that far gone
You think it's suspicious to describe the forcible removal of a mostly civilian population from an area as a genocide? Why? Are you stupid???
The intentional killing or displacement of a population is exactly what "genocide" means.