You must log in or register to comment.
This post insinuates that Donald Trump would be any better on genocide. There’s the lie.
He would definitely be better at committing genocide.
Conveniently forgetting to mention that the words on the Kamala side should also be on the Trump side as well. Also, if you want to be accurate, it should be mentioned that Trump is actively encouraging Netanyahu to go even further, complaining that Israel isn’t doing enough genocide for his tastes.
I also hate how this blames the candidate and not the voting populace. Kamala may not even win as it is, but would almost certainly loose if taking a strong stance on Gaza. Blame the American people and stop playing this whataboutism game.
All that aside, Kamala is the fastest way to ending the genocide. It may not be her current platform, but she’s the best shot at getting the US to change its stance.
I too would like Jewish Trump to have to explain himself to a prosecutor.
Yes… But don’t conveniently forget that the racist stuff should go on the kamala side too. She’s spent her entire life putting minorities in cages, bombing non-yts, and otherwise violently enforcing an extremely racist system.
You can change the system better from inside.
I used to believe this until I came to the conclusion that the ruling class won’t ever allow their powers to be reduced or removed.
This is mind bogglingly dumb. You should hear what trump et al are talking about re: Israel.
This both sides nonsense is childish at best and demonstrates an utter lack of understanding or perhaps willfull ignorance.
Or, given your absurd postinf history, a group of folks as part of a larger operation to sow distrust in democratic institutions etc. The dumber stuff I see from you the more I lean to the latter.
You should hear what trump et al are talking about re: Israel.
Post it!
He also supports genocide but doesn’t think it’s “heartbreaking”?
How about his repeated claims that Jewish folks who vote Democrat hate Israel/themselves?
I suppose it’s a bot posting this BS.
Which one are you minimizing with your vote, racism or genocide?
Minimizing genocide, albeit in the classical sense of the word which is to reduce the amount of. This should be an inarguably good thing so voting for the less genocide party doesn’t seem complicated.
Now admittedly, if all the kids and keyboard warriors had been so staunchly opposed to US foreign policy, showing up to the Democratic primary would’ve been the move. Unfortunately, elder voters crush the youth despite being a smaller portion of the population so, unsurprisingly, American policy tends to reflect their views.
But hey, bitching on the internet is surely almost as good as voting in the primaries, right? Wait…
The younger adults showed up to a primary and won it. But, unfortunately, the SCOTUS ruled that private organizations can nominate whomever the fuck they want regardless of the outcome of the vote. Those adults don’t vote anymore.
It’s certainly their fault. /s
Uhhh, which primary are you thinking of? I could be wrong but I’d be stunned if the 25 and under crowd outvoted the over 65 in any primary in the last quarter century.
And is the SCOTUS ruling you’re confused about Citizen’s United?
You moved the goal post then assumed I was an idiot. This was a time when you probably should’ve asked one good question. If you do so now perhaps another user will answer.
What? Which goal posts did I move? You can feel free to use whatever goalposts just give me the primary you’re thinking of and the age range you’re including.
Also still waiting on whatever wild SCOTUS ruling you’re thinking of.
Whoever you vote for, you are “minimizing genocide” by this logic.
Given Trump’s full support of genocide, I would say voting for him would be choosing genocide and not “minimizing”.
Alternatively, one could disengage from the electoral system and instead focus on actions history has proven effective.
I don’t have that much fertilizer though.
Befriend a farmer.
Lol, which wars fought by a democracy are you thinking have been ended by non democratic means?
The failed invasions and colonizations of Vietnam, Afghanistan, etc. were ended through brutal defeat despite decades of “democratic” support.
The post to which I was responding was:
Alternatively, one could disengage from the electoral system and instead focus on actions history has proven effective.
So, going by you Mr answer, are you suggesting the appropriate non electoral response is to go fight in Gaza?
The New Deal, the Civil Rights Act, Women’s Lib, cessation of hostility in Vietnam, the Clean Water Act, the ADA, Lol.
Ummm, all of those came about via democracy?
Edit: Also, most of those weren’t wars…
None of those were the result of democracy.
Hahahahaha. Wrong
All of those were accomplished through the electoral system though….
None of them were accomplished through the electoral system.
No, we realize that the genocide under Trump would be orders of magnitude worse and that voting for someone other than Harris will guarantee a trump victory. Voting for Harris is the only effective voting strategy that minimizes genocide.
The people who feel this way value their own ideological purity and feelings about who they vote for more than the lives of all those extra people killed with Trump at the helm.
The post title was Where’s the lie?.
I suppose this meme just highlights a lie of omission for not clarifying that they’re both pro-genocide—except the racist dude has publicly said there hasn’t been nearly enough genocide.
Yes, the Democrats are currently pro-genocide also. You got it.
So who’s funding you again?
You can criticize both parties for being dog shit. It’s really ok.
Still vote for the lesser dog shit blah blah.
This guy is voting for Harris.
What a big phony!
Republican Party: openly supports Israel and pushes for the genocide. Continues to fund Israel. States all of this stuff. Overt.
Democratic Party: covertly continues to fund Israel, but knows that they can’t publicly say that. So they frame it with bullshit platitudes like asking Netanyahu to “reduce civilian casualties”. They’ll use the term “ceasefire” but will never push a true ceasefire. Covert.
Obligatory notes:
- No I’m not funded by Russia. I’m just some dude living in the US that has followed politics and police brutality stuff for ages.
- No, I don’t support tankie shit; I follow socialist and Marxist philosophies, but authoritarianism can fuck all the way off.
- Vote shaming is for people that can’t face reality. It’s anti-working class bullshit that the ruling class benefits from. It’s okay to criticize your party. They work for you.
- I’m not magically endorsing Trump and the republicans because I stated some hard truths about the Democratic Party. If you think that’s the case, I implore you to put aside the kindergarten-level logic and get real.
Also, the Political Memes community temp banned me for the same meme because they didn’t like it.
It’s because they are trying to filter for an agenda.
Sounds like some liberal shit. The same folks that probably shame third party voters and are okay with third parties being blocked from getting a place on the ballot.
Your notes are spot on.
Which one of these options do you think would be worse for the Palestinian people? The one who very overtly wants them dead, or the one who covertly sells weapons to their murderers to feed the military industrial complex and keep deep-seated US alliances strong?
It’s not a hard question.
I’m gonna wager that the result is the same at the end of the day because the same amount of bombs fall. I see a trend. “Delayed”, “temporarily delayed”, “threatened to withhold”.
Why? We have one person telling them “don’t do that” and another encouraging them saying “Go harder” and you really don’t think there’s gonna be a difference in the actions the IDF takes?
Israel needs the US as an ally to continue doing what it does, and if their actions become completely indefensible to the US people (they haven’t yet; people are stupid) they will lose that alliance, so long as a Democrat is in office. Trump has ALREADY shown his willingness to ally with dictators, but his voters literally just don’t believe it. Just as they won’t believe that the “most moral army in the world” is committing genocide. Quite literally the only possible way that this situation improves for Palestine is a Kamala presidency, somebody who is actually calling for a 2 state solution and ceasefire instead of “kill those dang muslims”.
Hey, I’ll take any ceasefire at this point. If she goes through with it, I’m all for it. But history doesn’t make me optimistic, and she’s using the same 2 state solution stuff we’ve heard before and it sounds like appeasement.
The US has gone so deep on this venture that backing out risks basically everything. Members of the Knesset have already stated that if Netanyahu agrees to anything that stops or reduces the genocide, they’ll kickoff a coup. So I’m not optimistic that any president in our lifetime will finally put an end to this, and words amount to nothing.
Everyone here missing the point that America never has been a democracy and your choice has always been an illusion. The rest of the world knows this from the USA invading every other country for freedom and democracy. Who wins doesn’t matter. The poor, the global south, minorities, women, etc. will all get screwed over unless you literally fight back.
Correct.
Example…
This seems like pretty strong evidence for always voting against the republican party, especially considering the later actions of Carter concerning this situation.
In essence what you’ve shown is proof that the Republican party is always worse for the world as a whole than the Democratic party. Good job!
You know Donald Trump said if he didn’t win the election that the nation of Israel would cease to exist. So it seems to me that if you really want to help Gaza your choice is pretty damn clear.
Dude’s gotta be a drugged out meatball to think harris won’t serve the same masters.
Yeah yeah both sides are the same…lmfao
Idk, it’s not like the US can simply decide not to have a president, neither is there a third option. This is not a question of “do you like X or do you like Y?” but rather “would you rather choose X or Y?”
Given limited choice many things stop being dealbreakers.
Republican party: Fascism
Democrat party: Fascism Lite
Libertarian party: Not quite Fascist but they support unregulated capitalism (and they’re 50% fascism lite)
Green party: Russian proxy that supports Trump
