I like Joe. He did infrastructure and the chips act. He’s a meat and potatoes guy. But his best attribute will always be not being Donald Trump.
I don’t like Joe. I’m still voting for him because he’s not Donald Trump
Fun fact: 10% of Americans will vote for a guy that had his brain eaten by a worm. Just look at five thirty eight
Absolutely, but at a certain point people have got to accept that if the best strategic choice they have is still complicit with genocide, then they need to make that strategic choice (libs: I am saying vote for Biden, get the fuck off my back about it) and then work to build an alternative.
If they aren’t working against the system, and they get pissy every time someone mentions the genocide because it might hurt their better strategic choice, then they are doing genocide denial. Maybe they’re not saying the genocide isn’t happening, they’re just saying people shouldn’t keep bringing it up when it’s inconvenient for them. Denying that people should talk about genocide is a kind of genocide denial. If the better option can’t survive without genocide denial then maybe the problem isn’t the people talking about genocide but the better strategic option being complicit in genocide.
Maybe the problem is a political system that keeps putting genociders in power.
On one side I have an old catholic bum who overall doesn’t do much on the other I have a convicted felon who wishes to remove my human rights and wants to turn the country into a dictatorship.
As a centrist, I’m undecided…
Also from my interactions on here:
On one side I have an old catholic bum who is committing genocide (by allowing companies to sell to a man who is committing genocide), and in the other side I have a convicted felon who would absolutely continue the genocide while removing my human rights and wants to turn the country into a dictatorship.
As a leftist, these two are exactly the same and I’m not voting.
Please explain to a non American, why a convicted felon not in federal prison but instead running for president?
What’s funniest to me is seeing all these posts having downvotes.
Conservatives mad and their tears are delicious.
Schadenfreude has never felt so good.
It’s not conservatives. Conservatives aren’t on Lemmy.
It’s the majority of Democrats who now believe Israel is committing genocide. And who can’t afford housing or groceries
I’m not saying it’s not those people, they’re definitely a large part of it.
But conservatives are definitely on Lemmy. Just try talking about minority rights anywhere and watch them seep out of the cracks in the pavement to suck all of your energy out.
The only attacks on minorities that I’ve observed on here are attacks on those who think Gazans should not experience genocide.
Plenty of people on here who simp for the American ruling class though
Or they read it as throwing shade on Biden for being nothing but “Not trump”
Which would be fair. The shade for running on being the least bad option twice, not the downvotes.
So the campaign hasn’t changed.
“Don’t question my genocide or I’ll have cops beat you up and arrest you while demanding order. And I’m not Trump. Biden2024.”
Are you too young or too stupid to remember how Trump employed law enforcement during the BLM protests?
Are you too senile or stupid to know that Trump has nothing to do with Biden’s platform?
I disagree. Unfortunately, “not Trump” is the best platform for him, especially right now. Recently, he and Harris did their “are you with us” fundraising and my thought was “no, but I’m against Trump.”
I hate genocide and what Israel is doing to Palestine, but Biden is, unfortunately, the best option put on the table. Two shit options in terms of the Middle East, sure, but one is still shittier.
I hate genocide… BUT…
Just so precious.
Won’t trump also continue the genocide? So aren’t the options Genocide A, or Genocide B? But Genocide A is also a convicted felon… So. Yeah, easy choice.
Good thing our country is a Democracy and there are a multitude of other options. Not just Fascist Dictator A or Fascist Dictator B.
Is it though? I’d love to know who the other options are in a First Past the Post democracy.
Please keep politics out of this shitpost community
Mod here. I currently couldn’t give less of a shit.
…But I’m willing to change my mind.
Idk I just find it tiring when I go to meme subs to have fun and relax and instead I get reminded of how downhill stuff is going. Plus sometimes people have arguments in the comments which isn’t a very lightheaded or shitposty thing
Eh, I feel you. But on the other hand, I know I’m not the only one in this community, so everything doesn’t have to be to my liking. Frankly, a lot of y’all post some really stupid shit here. But as long as people stay civil and follow the bare minimum rules we have, I’ll leave it alone. I’m not a Nazi Reddit mod. This is a shitpost community. Let’s post some shit.
… But like I said. There’s a limit, and rules can always change if things get out of hand. If you see anything, feel free to report it. We check the feed pretty often.
Yeah, I guess that’s a sensible stance
One is a convicted felon, 34 times over, and there is more on the way. The other has never been suspected of any criminal act.
tHeY’rE tHE sAmE! bOtH pArTiEs ArE tHe SaMe! LoL aMiRiTe
So many idiots can’t figure out who’s really rigging the game against them, even when it’s staring them in the face, blasting them with racist and fascist language and actions, with the breath of chronic bad health habits and the smell of soiled diaper.
Idk, he’s sponsoring a genocide. I’m pretty sure that counts as war crimes. To be fair it’s not like any US president in the last half century hasn’t been some kind of war criminal.
I mean now that the other guy is a literal criminal it makes it less likely that the genocide sponsor’s refusal to remove his material support for a historically unpopular genocide will make him lose election to the literal criminal, and that’s true. But like, I just want you to understand what it is that you’re celebrating.
I don’t know a stronger way to say that the bar is in hell, but that phrase is so well worn that it’s lost any punch it ever had.
Edit: typically, the only responses seem to think I’m saying this in support of Trump but like… I’m not. So if you remove that imagined motivation, where’s the lie? There isn’t one, right?
The other guy, the one with 34 felonies, has said he’d help expand the genocide.
How do you miss these things?
How do you so constantly and completely deflect any and all criticism to the other guy?
I have the answer: because that’s how the two party system works to push you towards defending the genocide guy.
Like, you get that the genocide support has a good chance of making him lose to the somehow-worse-genocide-guy, right? Like why aren’t you mad about that? Why do you constantly have to tell everyone to stop talking about the genocide support? You realise that’s a kind of genocide denial, right?
There are exactly two options here. It’s either the life long politician that’s actually been walking back support of the genocide, or the conman convict that has proudly stated he would be happy to make the shit even worse.
Gee, I don’t know…
I’m also not a one issue voter.
There are exactly two options with voting. I assume you don’t see any others because your entire political imagination has been contracted to voting. I believe I anticipated your answer when I said that the two-party system has done this to your brain.
And “walking back” support of the genocide is one way to say that he hasn’t actually removed any of the material support, and also a way to obscure the fact that the “walking back” has mostly been lip service.
Who else is a viable candidate for president this election?
Nobody.
Two questions:
-
Do you think I am somehow saying people shouldn’t vote for Biden? If so, can you explain where I have said that?
-
Do you think the fact that Biden is the tactically superior choice means that we should not discuss that he is complicit in genocide?
-
Don’t forget found liable for rape too. Imo worse than his felony charges.
is that the terminology because of a civil case?
Jurors rejected E. Jean Carroll’s claim of rape. They found Trump liable for sexual abuse. But sexual abuse doesn’t sound as spicy as rape so people are content to misinform others.
you’ve confused the legal definitions with the layman use of the word.
To quote Judge Kaplan “clarified that the jury had found that Trump had raped Carroll according to the common definition of the word.”
- New York Penal Law defines rape as vaginal penetration by the penis, which Carroll stated perhaps entered only “halfway”.
- A state law passed in late January 2024 expanded the state’s legal definition of rape to include nonconsensual vaginal, anal, and oral contact, effective non-retroactively beginning in September 2024.
I’m only interested in legal definitions as it’s objective, and layman can be subjective.
Also, wouldn’t halfway penetration still be penetration? Why would this not qualify as rape? Or is this due to her uncertainty via using the word “perhaps”?
