• Varyk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    85
    arrow-down
    30
    ·
    6 months ago

    Says the people who swallowed the genocide every year they’ve been alive but decided to get unproductively upset at the moment it will help conservatives most.

    • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      Not in 2000. Republicans win when Democrats abstain or vote third-party. I’m not judging, but sharing personal experience. I voted for Nader along with plenty of others. In turn, we had Bush respond to 9/11 and decide how to address climate change instead of Gore.

      • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        6 months ago

        Yes in 2000, third party didn’t cede yhe election to Bush.

        There were much more influential factors.

        1. Disenfranchisement of democratically leaning voters, voting machines literally being relocated for no reason on election Day.

        These " random, unforeseeable" technical problems across many states coincidentally disenfranchised black and white voters 10 to 1 vote.

        1. Before the votes were counted, katherine Harris, who worked for Jeb Bush, the governor of California and George Bush’s brother, requested that at that specific moment, while George Bush had a lead in the number of Florida votes recounted, Florida election officials be allowed to stop counting votes(If they kept counting, the projection was for Gore to win the count a second time)

        2. That went to the supreme Court, who said “yea, election officials shouldn’t be made to count every vote if they don’t want to”, so George Bush ended up winning in his Governor brother’s state.

        Those travesties had a much greater impact, a magnitude greater, than your perfectly legitimate vote for Nader.

        In every election, you should vote for the candidate than most aligns with your views.

        I’m voting for Biden because he has an impressive executive track record on civil rights, the environment, sustainable technology in his first term and I hope he does the same in the second.

        No other candidate that I’m aware of is more likely to do as much for the issues I think should be most urgently addressed.

        Anyone voting for the green party or any third party should not be dissuaded from doing so because the American election system is broken.

        By voting for a third party, they’re fixing that break.

        • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Don’t forget that the ballots in Florida were really poorly designed, and caused Pat Buchanan to get a very high number of Democratic votes.

        • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          Please explain how voting third-party fixes anything when a third-party candidate has never received even one electoral vote in the history of our nation since 1968.

            • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              I didn’t know that! I knew he was a famously bad candidate, but I just looked it up, and you’re right. Turns out he won 46 votes. Not bad.

          • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            6 months ago

            In first world countries, voting third parties is called" “voting”, where you vote for the preferred candidate.

            Voting for a third party fixes The way that Americans think voting is supposed to work, that you choose the color you like the best and bleed for them regardless of what you believe in.

            • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              That’s nice and all, but in the US we use the Electoral College to vote for President. They are in no way obligated to follow the popular vote. Candidates need 270 electoral votes to become President. A third-party candidate has never received even one electoral vote since 1968.

              Also, the US is no longer a first-world country due to wealth inequality and lack of accessible healthcare nationwide. We have been downgraded to a developing nation.

              https://theconversation.com/us-is-becoming-a-developing-country-on-global-rankings-that-measure-democracy-inequality-190486

              • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                6 months ago

                Yes, those are both of my points from the previous comment.

                The voting system in the US is broken and people need to start voting correctly.

                They are too afraid to.

                As I’ve mentioned, the US is not a first world nation. That’s why I said that first world countries know how to vote, while the US does not.

                Why are you framing my own points defensively?

                • Perfide@reddthat.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  The voting system in the US is broken and people need to start voting correctly

                  You’re missing the point. As long as the electoral college and first past the post remain, third party candidates will never win. Never. It has nothing at all to do with people being “too afraid”.

                  The last time a 3rd-party candidate got ANY electoral votes(despite what the other person said, it has happened) was in 1968, and that was literally only because it was during the tail end of the civil rights movement and Nixon wasn’t quite racist enough for the south compared to the full blown white supremacist George Wallace.

                  The ONLY time a 3rd-party candidate has done better than one of the two major parties was over 100 years ago in 1912. The only reason for that is because the candidate in question was 2x former Republican President Theodore Roosevelt, running as a 3rd-party specifically to oppose his handpicked successor turned rival Taft, who had become immensely unpopular with Rooseveltian Republicans. Well, two reasons: surviving an assassination attempt & giving a speech leaking blood with the bullet still in him like a total badass, just weeks before the election, probably helped too. Guess what though, it caused a huge spoiler effect that gave Woodrow Wilson a landslide 81.9% of the electoral vote despite only getting 41.8% of the popular vote.

                  Third parties are just inherently incompatible with our current election system. We need to adopt ranked choice voting and ditch the electoral college first.

                  • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    5
                    ·
                    6 months ago

                    I’m not missng the point, you’re agreeing with me without realizing it.

                    As i said, the us voting system is broken, needs reform and is teaching Americans to be afraid of voting.

                    A broken system doesn’t make the voters wrong. The system is wrong.

                    Voting for your candidate, whichever numbered party they are, is the right way to vote.

      • fiercekitten@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        6 months ago

        Republicans win close races via fuckery. While US Americans are all distracted by the presidential race, republicans around the country are plotting all kinds of fuckery to rig the congressional races, the ones that are collectively far more important than the presidency.

        Everyone is focused on Joe Biden, but the reality is that, without a democratic congressional majority, very little will continue to happen. Even with a majority in both the house and senate, i don’t think Democrats will fix (or want to fix) many of the broken parts of the system, like Citizen’s United, FISA, Copyright, DMCA, healthcare, supreme court expansion, gerrymandering, anti-trust and regulations, regulating Wall Street, regulating banks, fixing the housing market, taking power back from the supreme court, etc.

        • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          It’s not fuckery. It’s voter disengagement. Republicans know that they have limited numbers, but they vote with party loyalty. All they need to do is sour the left on their candidate to win. The largest historical Democratic turnout was 2020.

            • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              6 months ago

              That’s fair. I should’ve written it’s not exclusively fuckery.

              Regardless, voter disenfranchisement has been their main play for decades. They keep doing it because it works without having to speak to the good qualities of their own candidate.

          • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Voter disengagement helped along by media consolidation. It’s not profitable to cover House races anymore unless something crazy is happening, so people aren’t made aware of it. State and local elections are even worse. Sometimes the only information about a candidate I can find is their private Facebook profile.

    • blazeknave@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Thank you for saying the truth. I’ve cared since the 80s. It’s cute people turned on the news. Gaza has nothing to do with our elections unless you’re a Russian plant.

      • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        Absolutely, or a limp maga.

        People have gone from blindly supporting anything #Israel and condemning anything #Palestine without making any distinctions between civilians and their government, and then once they couldn’t deny the violence, they were like “got it, so Israel always bad and Palestine always good” without learning anything more about the situation.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Oh we’ve cared. It’s just that previous democratic presidents were working to stop settlements and work towards the two state solution.

      This turbo kill approach is new.

      • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 months ago

        Biden is the first US president to issue sanctions against Israeli colonizers on Palestinian land.

        Previous presidents of any side for the past 70 years have been sending military aid to Israel.

        You got your facts way wrong.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Yeah sure, he sanctioned 5 of them. While he’s supplying massive amounts of war material for their genocide. It’s performative at best. And those settlers are still blocking aid with the help of the Israeli authorities who tell them where to find the shipments and don’t clear them off the road.

          • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            They’re sanctions against illegal Israeli colonization and he’s the first president to issue them.

            He even paused military aid to Israel, which I don’t think has ever happened before either.

            Biden was also the first president to directly contradict Israel and enact consequences over the idfs policy even though the IDF have been executing civilians for decades.

            You couldn’t be more off base.

            • Maggoty@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              That pause is evidence itself that he knew they were committing war crimes with our military aid. Which he did not pause even 90% of. He paused airplane bombs. Everything else from Bullets to Artillery shells was still getting sent the entire time.

              And your statement is false, Bush got them to remove settlements. I was just talking about previous democrats but if we want to include all presidents then there are certainly some who have done more to slow down Israel. For example in the 1990’s there was the Oslo Accords.

              Performative actions do not absolve you of illegally supplying weapons to a criminal regime.

              • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                6 months ago

                So your contention is that

                1. Although Biden is the only president to actively contradict and issue sanctions against the Israeli government and its settlers for their colonization and war crimes,

                2. Biden’s the least active president to actively contradict and issue sanctions against the Israeli government and its settlers for their colonization and war crimes.

                Even though nobody else has contradicted Israel or issued sanctions and Biden has.

                You are confused.

                • Maggoty@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  You are ignoring key issues I’ve brought up to continue your counter factual narrative. I’m used to dealing with this from Republicans. Getting this from Democrats is seriously disappointing.

                  • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    6 months ago

                    This is the historical narrative.

                    You might not want to make up stores if you don’t want to be disillusioned.