politics
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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
If preventing a genocide is hurting "foreign policy interests", then those interests are shite.
exactly what i was thinking.
if this is the lesser of two evils, you probably have reached evil long ago.
Yep they keep saying lesser of two evils while the options get more and more evil despite claiming "incremental progress". Moderates are completely disconnected from reality or they're just too afraid to actually push for something better.
The problem is with Trump, particularly, there's good reason to be afraid.
"We want to punish the democrats for supporting Israel, so we are going to let Trump win"
GOP proceeds to double down on oppressive wars, no improvement for Gaza. Further, you get a government full of leaders that, in the wake of losing in 2020, openly pondered ways of just rigging the election so they don't have to get votes to win anymore. You had laws proposed in GOP states to declare the legislature could pick whatever electors they wanted ignoring their voters. You had people running for non-partisan election administration positions promising they'll make sure Republicans win, no matter what. They actively tried to send fake electors that particular cycle, even without any legal backing.
So, in at least one scenario, congratulations, you successfully admonished Biden for his misbehavior, and now, we have at least as bad misbehavior, and maybe some unwinding of democracy to make sure we never get to influence foreign policy ever again.
I agree. The threat of Trump seems like a bigger risk to me than the risks introduced by stopping the supply of arms to Israel or vowing to veto any attempts to block a rail strike. But apparently moderates and Joe Biden would prefer to avoid those risks and instead gamble they can win the general election anyway. But what do I know? I'm not part of the majority voting bloc so I'm not responsible for what happens.
I mean, to the extent any voter is "responsible" for what happens, if you abstain from voting or explicitly vote for a candidate you know is going to lose to make a point, then you have some responsibility for the result, and thus it better be a result you reasonably expect to live with. If you think Trump isn't any worse than Biden, then voting for the candidate you like best, their chances be damned makes sense. If you sincerely think Trump is a risk that can't be tolerated, then when general election comes around, you unfortunately should probably vote for Biden.
I personally think Trump is too problematic to risk his victory on principle. Any other presidential contest I can recall, sure, punish the mainstream by voting third party, it's not like any of the presidential candidates were that much worse than the others. If somehow Haley became the republican frontrunner, by all means, I might not prefer her, but I don't have a dire sense of dread about her. She wouldn't be a better choice than Biden on Gaza, but at least your vote was probably clearly seen to be one he forfeited because of his stance. It's just a matter of how important it is to vote against a particular candidate as to whether you have the comfortable option of voting for your favorite versus voting against an unfavored candidate.
The vote of a majority of people in the country will have no impact on the result of the election whatsoever. Most of us don't live in the sliver of electorally competitive states.
If you live in Georgia, you should be deeply pondering the very real consequences of a protest vote, but this idea that every voter is responsible is just not how our system works.
Sure. But the bulk of the responsibility rests on the moderates as they are the majority voting bloc.
I'll accept my grain of responsibility as someone from an, apparently irrelevant, minority wing.
Quick question, can you explain to me how it wasn't evil to burn babies in their cribs, rape daughters in front of mothers, and behead fathers in front of sons? Cause I really can't see it any other way after 10/7.
the world isnt black and white and one evil can't justify another, even greater evil. its a convenient excuse, but its good to notice oppression has the habit of creating more of the twisted people you speak of.
Incredible that this amount of cognitive dissonance can fit into one sentence.
motherfucker is tryna justify genocide dude, thats not a hill to die on.
I hate genocide, like the genocide that Hamas committed on 10/7.
i'm sure you are sadder for the couple israeli dead by hamas than the ones killed by the idf themselves.
and i'm guessing the tens of thousands dead and many more expelled by us bombs are not people to you.
You sure seem to put a lot of words in my mouth for someone who believes that a genocide wasn't perpetrated on 10/7.
most of the people you killed are children 👉👌
When you crossed the border on 10/7 and murdered Israeli babies in their cribs, did you realize that you were calling down a firestorm on your Hamas brothers?
when you believed such stupid conspiracy theory, did you consider they just wanted to justify genocide?
oh i guess thats the excuse you wanted all along to murder woman and children in gaza.
I think the entire current situation in Palestine is a conspiracy. I don't think a single Palestinian has been killed. I think 100% of them were Hamas.
k
sure.
Woohoo! Excited to see how much more ass the IDF can kick in Gaza!