I’ve been holding my nose and voting for lesser evil my whole life and we still got here. I’m not doing it again. If that means we have to solve this in the streets, it won’t be the first time. Progressive or bust.
No you don’t understand, we have to do the same thing we’ve done for decades, and this time, instead of things getting worse, things will get better. Please be practical.
Modern day liberals would have shrugged their shoulders at Hitler. Not even hyperbole. We have become so individualistic as a country that we don’t give a damn about our tax dollars killing civilians overseas.
Scratch a neo-liberal a fascist bleeds. They’d be the ones who’d vote for Hitler for “economic reasons.”
all y’all are shrugging your shoulders at trump and expecting someone else to do something, so hey. that’s EXACTLY what you would have done about hitler
As opposed to you who is doing…?
They’re not a modern day liberal, are you?
They can’t be held accountable for the “modern day liberal”, since they aren’t one. Your switcheroo is poopy-doo
Do you want the full list or just the big shit like building homeless shelters
It’s funny to say this in defense of the people who literally shrugged their shoulders when it came down to a vote to prevent Hitler from taking office.
If we were on reddit, I’d cross post this to selfawarewolves.
Honest question: what responsibility, if any, do you place on the Democratic establishment in all this? First we held our noses and voted for Joe Biden, who was clearly old as fuck, then we didn’t even get a primary because Biden dropped out of the race at the last possible minute.
Seems like every time the GOP puts up some God-awful candidate, leftists and progressives are expected to get in line and vote for establishment milquetoast candidates. Meanwhile, Democratic politicians are shifting to the right, with their pro-billionaire pro-Israeli “bipartisan” politics.
We draw a line at literal genocide. (Hence my earlier comment about Hitler.) Instead of blaming the politicians for failing to represent their voter-base, you blame the voters for failing to support their politicians. Fuck outta here.
Honest question: what responsibility, if any, do you place on the Democratic establishment in all this?
Probably similar, if not the same responsibility that you do.
The expansion of Israeli settlements in the west bank, and the treatment of Palestinians as second class citizens in on their own land enjoys bipartisan support in the US government.
Democrats are too willing to make concessions to try to flip middle of the road voters, and too fearful of enacting beneficial changes to engage the more leftist groups.
The Democratic leadership (both within the party and Congress) is selected by compliance and seniority, rather than capability, and momentum.
Democrats are too happy to preserve the status quo instead trusting their voters to turn out and take risks on disrupting broken systems.
I find the main differences between myself and the anti-kamala non-voters is that I understand that democracy is inherently a compromise. No candidate is going to reflect all your values. Every who makes it to the national stage is going to have positions that are unpalatable to some of their voters. I can live with continuing the status quo, especially when the alternative is a full on genocide, another endless war, more territorial expansion, the erosion of personal liberties, the undermining of elections, rigging of courts…etc.
At the end of the day, the people who held their vote or voted 3rd party in 2024 made a gamble. They gambled that trump wouldn’t win, and Democrats would get the message that they need to move further left to get more votes. That was the best outcome. What they risked for it, was literally everything. Food, water, shelter, rights, subsequent elections, the rule of law, and any possibility of limiting Israel’s genocide. That’s a fucking dumb gamble. Low chance of success, low chances of change, risked against an extremely high chance of losing everything. That’s a dumb fuckin’ bet. I have no idea how anyone with 2 braincells can look at the situation after abstaining their vote and going “yeah, I totally made the right decision, and none of this is my fault. I’m gonna go on the internet and brag about it.”
A lot of people view it differently.
We draw a line at literal genocide
To many people, you don’t. You require a candidate to be sufficiently anti-genocide in their addresses before you’ll vote for them, but you don’t view stopping an openly pro genocide politician as reason to vote for someone.
Seems like every time the GOP puts up some God-awful Republican, leftists and progressives are expected to get in line and vote for establishment milquetoast candidates.
Yes. Those shit candidates are at least less antithetical to our wishes. You don’t get “none of the above”. You get milquetoast or you get Hitler.
Instead of blaming the politicians for failing to represent their voter-base, you blame the voters for failing to support their politicians.
That’s the argument used against people who say people need to go to the movies to support the studios. The difference is that you will get one of the politicians, and in the US it’s one of two.
So pick: the mildest of diplomatic pressure against genocide while changing little of the structural support, or vocal encouragement with increased facilitation and also we bomb kids more, setup internment camps and try to kill trans kids.
What a lot of people see is people being given that choice and saying “they’re both the same to me”, and later indignantly saying how they’re against something they did literally nothing to stop and being angry at the people who didn’t sell it hard enough.
No one is owed your vote, and the Democratic party is really missing opportunities to appeal to a disgruntled leftward segment of the population, but it’s confounding to hear more vitriol at the party that didn’t do enough to sell not letting Hitler take office, than at the one that actually put him there, and usually coming from those that wouldn’t say no to Hitler without being sufficiently courted first.
… we bomb kids more, setup internment camps and try to kill trans kids.
See, democrats will try to stand behind marginalized communities as though we can math our way into ignoring US imperialism and murder. The math doesn’t work that way: either we give a shit about people’s right to live or we don’t. You don’t get to claim you care about trans kids while voting for a government that supports Israeli Hitler. This is what’s called having a semblance of moral principles. It’s not virtue signaling to demand our government stop BOMBING WOMEN AND CHILDREN, what the fuck is wrong with you people. Maybe if you went further left instead of being so ready to “compromise” we could, I don’t know, pressure our politicians into doing something.
The difference is that you will get one of the politicians, and in the US it’s one of two…What a lot of people see is people being given that choice and saying “they’re both the same to me”
This is the coveted Lesser of Two Evilstm argument. You people parrot this line as though it were a truism. Here’s an analogy: If I offer you a glass of lemonade with 50% urine and another glass with 10% urine, are you happy to drink the latter because of the difference? (On second thought, don’t answer that.) Arguing for the “lesser evil” only pacifies our anger in an attempt to redirect the people to continue supporting corporate Democrats no matter how bad our material conditions deteriorate. People who believe this argument preserve the status quo.
America has been in decline since Ronald fucking Reagan. Presidential powers have been growing for decades. Congress has been corrupt for decades. We have broken (and supported breaking) international laws for decades. We leverage our control of the global economy, and the global reserve currency, in favor of US billionaires. The rich have gotten obscenely wealthy while the average American is one missed paycheck away from financial ruin. The suggestion that we should continue voting for the lesser evil given this trajectory fits the definition of insanity.
The Democratic party is either powerless to stop these trends or they are complicit. At what point are we going to demand more?
You don’t get to claim you care about trans kids while voting for a government that supports Israeli Hitler.
Says who? Did your way result in less genocide, or more?
democrats will try to stand behind marginalized communities as though we can math our way into ignoring US imperialism and murder
Who said anything about ignoring? It’s harm reduction. The lesser of two evils is still evil. But you know what? It’s less evil. If I have to pick between two dead Palestinians and a dead trans kid, or two dead Palestinians, I’ll pick the option with less dead kids 100% of the time.
Saying that we can’t do something to help people because it’s accepting something bad is the same argument conservatives use to argue against needle exchange programs or sex ed. No one should be using heroin, so we shouldn’t try to keep them from getting HIV.This is what’s called having a semblance of moral principles.
I’m sure the children who were bombed are deeply appreciative of your intact principles.
Here’s an analogy: If I offer you a glass of lemonade with 50% urine and another glass with 10% urine, are you happy to drink the latter because of the difference?
Are you going to choose to drink the first because the situation is bullshit?
The suggestion that we should continue voting for the lesser evil given this trajectory fits the definition of insanity.
And leaning into it or doing nothing is just suicidal.
Here’s an analogy: If I offer you a glass of lemonade with 50% urine and another glass with 10% urine, are you happy to drink the latter because of the difference?
If doing nothing means I’m going to be force fed the lemonade with 50% urine, then I would prefer the latter option. I wouldn’t be happy about it, but it’s the better outcome.
I wouldn’t be happy, but if drinking the 10% one ensured I were less likely to have to drink the 50% one and was forced to drink one either way, I’m sure as hell drinking the 10%
Seems like everyone forgets their civics class but voting for a president is not the place to make your voices heard for issues.
You’ll typically have the top three choices: A democrat A republican A throwaway third choice
For most it will be voting for the lesser evil. Because the alternatives can mean rapid stagflation, war in the middle east, supporting paedophiles, and a myriad of other problems, while the other is essentially maintaining the status quo.
For proper change you have to organize locally, vote for local elections and keep pushing your representatives to represent you throughout the year. By the time primaries come around, typically candidates are already known figures and the party points are gathered from data throughout the year.
Honestly, after a certain point I feel like all the posts about people saying they would rather not vote at all despite the two distinct choices are some sort of psyops campaign to bring chaos to the world.
I can’t wrap my head around people seriously being more okay with this criminal in office than an imperfect candidate.
Honestly, after a certain point I feel like all the posts about people saying they would rather not vote at all despite the two distinct choices are some sort of psyops campaign
You know many people who don’t vote, it’s a third of the population. Why on God’s Green Earth would you choose “I feel like it’s a psy-op!” as a possibility?
A third of people don’t want to be involved in politics at all, and more join them every year. That’s not due to psy-ops, that’s due to generations of bOtH pArTiEs ignoring what voters want.
Something like 70% of people want universal healthcare. Still can’t get it. SEVENTY PERCENT.
About 90% of Democrats want universal healthcare. It doesn’t matter.
I vote, but just for cheap laughs.
Except when the Democrat party orchestrates the primaries anyway.
Its a bit different – Hitler was appointed chancellor by Von hindenburg. He never won an election. He was appointed by a man who was way too old – bedridden and dementia afflicted. He didnt even recognize Hitler when presented to him for the appointment, and thought he was talking to the old Kaiser. (kind of reminds you of Biden doesnt it…)
Whatever drugs you’re on, keep them to yourself.
She claimed that the US would have the most lethal force in the world. The only way you get and maintain that lethality is continual practice. You have to continuously fight wars if you want to stay the most lethal military in the world. This is one of the biggest reasons the US is so militaristic. People aren’t in the military for all that long. 4-8 years is typical. If you don’t fight wars all the time, you quickly lose your advantage. There’s no way to have the most lethal military without using it regularly.
So, if Kamala wasn’t talking about attacking Iran, who was she talking about? Who else was she intending to bomb in order to maintain US military lethality?
I’ve heard this line before.
How far do you think she would have gotten if she said “we need like a C- tier fighting force?”
Literally every president in my lifetime, and basically since we had a standing army, has talked about how strong our military should be.
Considering that almost none of them (with one very notable exception) started a war with Iran, equating a strong military with a desire to attack Iran seems far-fetched.
Why would a US attack on Iran under Kamala be farfetched?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Prosperity_Guardian
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US–UK_airstrikes_on_Yemen
Trump didn’t start this war. He ramped it up, but he’s fighting the same proxy war with Iran that Biden was.
Yeah, you’re not really selling it. Multi-national military action against the Houthis after they attacked civilian ships (in response to Israel attacking Gaza) is not the same as an elective war started by two dictators with no goals or obectives at all. If those two very different events are indistinguishable to you, then we have nothing to talk about further.
Literally every president in my lifetime, and basically since we had a standing army, has talked about how strong our military should be.
Because they’re all shitbags.
We are operating on promises made during the election here, only fair to assume in another time Trumps “no wars” campaign promises would be presumed true.
If only trump didn’t have a well document pattern of lying about literally everything. If only trump didn’t have a previously disastrous run as president. If only trump hadn’t spent his previous presidency firing all the “somewhat sane” people in his cabinet. If only trump and all his allies hadn’t been touting a plan for turning the US into a dictatorship. If only if only if only if only.
In a thread full of some of the dumbest takes I have seen justifying inaction allowing Hitler 2.0 to become the president of the US, your comment stands out dumber than all the rest. Congratulations.
And Kamala and the Democrats also have a track record of lying about literally everything as well. I know he lies about everything, I am operating on the average voters brain power. Your needless combativeness stands out dumber than all the rest. Congratulations.
Fuck maga, fuck the democrats, fuck fake bipartisan “democratic” empires, fuck this post and fuck you OP
Here folks, - a gentleman with a refined critical mind. Having enough of this circus.
Still supporting genocide in the midst of genocides.
Democrat bravery.
Some people would rather let the train run over 5 people instead of 1, just so their own hands stay “technically clean”…
Why not just vote on the lesser evil and try to change the system for the better even outside of election season?
Why choose very hard mode over hard mode?
Why do act utilitarians pretend that there’s is the only valid ethical system? Why are they ignorant that the very laws of your country aren’t written according to the ethical system you claim is the only valid one?
I am not a utilitarian at all.
I happen to agree with Utilitarians in this case, but overall I see their attempt to reduce ethics to a maths problem as childish and immature.
Strange to brag about being cool with being an active murderer.
Active saviour.
That’s an odd way to spell “I have no morals to stand on”.
Those pearls you’re clutching must feel so good right now
Found the illiterate.
Deontologist ethics are a bunch of nonsense that I have little respect for, somehow even less so than for Utilitarians.
Not flipping the switch, aka not voting for the lesser evil, shows you consider the cleanliness of your own conscience more important than any actual real consequences in the world. It is a disgustingly self-centered stance to take : you had a chance to make the world less of a bad place, you didn’t. You made the wrong choice.
Also, if you’re going to stoop to ad hominem, you should at least check your spelling. It’s “Vogue” not “Vouge”, and “Trolley” not “Trolly”.
Get this liberal shit away from me
Kamala may not have gone to war with Iran (good)
Kamala wouldn’t have torpedoed the american empire (bad)Kamala may not have gone to war with Iran (good)
She did promise “the most lethal military in the history of the world” or whatever, and that really only means one thing: killing a whole lot of people.
Pissrael is her master all the same.
Hear hear! Fuck 'em! Marg bar amrika!
Funny how linking this comment to your previous one in this thread proves that you don’t give a shit about the “lazy argument” about voting 3rd party. You know it was detrimental to the US and directly supported Trump, which you (rightfully) concluded is negatively impactful to the “American empire” as you call it.
Stop being a disingenuous troll.
I am not an American and I can’t vote in your elections, which are meaningless by the way. However, nothing disgusts me more than American liberals whining about how much better things would be if people had just held their noses and voted for the Democrats in spite of the ongoing genocide supported by the Democrats.
You had your chance and you blew it. It’s out of your hands now. You’re being kicked out of the middle east and eventually you will be kicked out of the rest of the world as well. The fate of the world will not be determined by your elections. They will be your problem and your problem alone.
None of them are better than the other. Stop comparing. These posts are either retarded or a psyop.
It’s crazy that harris prefered this over giving some paly group a little speaking spot at the convention.
Blaming anyone that voted third party is one of the most tiresome, braindead, selfish opinions. Seriously, get over yourself. The entire reason we’re in this mess is because of the two party system putting people against eachother instead of the greedy villains surviving the life out of the country. Stop being weak and giving in to the lesser evil. Compromising with harm only brings about more harm.
In conclusion, fuck you.
They will blame third parties, meanwhile 6 million of THEM couldn’t even be bothered to vote.
it’s never their fault, all the way down
It doesn’t matter who you voted for, neither group is putting the effort needed to protest and shut what the government is doing down. All parties are culpable to what is going on.
Im no different, I’m also guilty of this, but I recognize I need to do more and I’m trying.
Feeling righteous and indignant on the internet moves progress backwards and allows the bots to win.
Would you like a hankie?
They are correct, and your response here just proves how absolutely braindead you are. Maybe it’s time for some introspection?
Maybe it’s time for a hankie?
you’re hopeless, OP.
Took you this long to figure that out?
Blaming anyone that voted third party is one of the most tiresome, braindead, selfish opinions.
It’s also mathematically ignorant. If Harris received every single third party vote excluding RFK Jr’s, even if you include Libertarians who are more right-leaning, she still would’ve lost.
That is like saying that because nobody dies from measles, it is mathematically ignorant to support vaccines.
Yes, the Republicans haven’t won an election because of third party voters since Nader handed the win to Bush in 2000. But that is because people have been smart enough since then to not throw their vote away. Burned by fire.
[Harris] still would’ve lost.
That is probably the stupidest argument I have heard this week. And I have heard a lot of stupid arguments.
Harris didn’t dance naked through Washington wearing only a clown nose, but Harris still would’ve lost if she did that. By your argument, there is no reason for politicians not to dance naked through Washington wearing only a clown nose…
None of what you said makes any logical sense
Here’s the thing, in the reality that existed in November 2024, there were only 4 choices. 1) Vote for Trump, 2) vote for Harris, 3) vote 3rd party, or 4) don’t vote at all.
Simple math and logic dictate that at that point in time ANY ACTION other than voting for Harris was supporting Trump.
Argue all you want about the two party system being terrible, the distribution of Electoral College votes per capita over states being wrong, the impact of freezing the House seat numbers, or anything else related HAS NO IMPACT on the general election.
For the record, I hate all of the items I mentioned above, but NONE of that mattered come November.
Anyone disputing this is either a disinformation psyop/bot, a champion of a US downfall, or a complete moron.
You’re an act utilitarian. Rule utilitarians disagree with you. Yours is not the only ethical system, and it’s the height of hubris and arrogance to pretend that only your moral system is valid.
What moral system throws millions of vulnerable people under the bus so you can brag about how tall your horse is?
Try not to ask such loaded questions. You’re better than that. I know you can do better.
Again, act utilitarianism vs rule utilitarianism. Rule utilitarianism is what our laws use. You’re using act utilitarianism, which has a much poorer track record. A rule utilitarian would say, “we need a hard and fast rule that genocide is wrong. Anyone who supports genocide is a criminal that deserves zero support and respect. This rule creates the greatest good for the greatest number over time.” An act utilitarian says, “this genocide may be OK, if it’s the lesser evil. If I can convince myself it’s on net positive, then it’s the moral thing to do.”
Our laws use rule utilitarianism. You’re not allowed to argue in court that murdering a guy was a net positive to the world. We instead say, “banning all murders will result in the greatest good for the greatest number, so we’ll outlaw all murders.”
You can have two systems that each try to optimize for the greatest good to the greatest number. Rule utilitarians create bright rules that on net, over time, result in the greatest good for the greatest number and avoid the temptation to justify horrible acts by arguing for the greater good. Act utilitarians try to judge each act individually, ignoring a lot of the context and pretending that this act exists in complete isolation from all acts before and after.
Act utilitarianism is literally the moral philosophy of the Holocaust.
Ours laws as written maybe, but certainly not in practice. How can you argue that the outcome of our laws show any adherence to rule utilitarianism?
The apt poem for them
First they came for the Communists And I did not speak out Because I was not a Communist
Then they came for the Socialists And I did not speak out Because I was not a Socialist
Then they came for the trade unionists And I did not speak out Because I was not a trade unionist
Then they came for the Jews And I did not speak out Because I was not a Jew
Then they came for me And there was no one left To speak out for me
You should have talked about Morals when they fronted Biden who got not morals.
We did, loudly. it didn’t matter for shit.
I made the literal exact same argument in 2024! And then I grew up, and realized that the future exists. Harm reduction in the short term is not worth harm multiplication in the long term. The next republican will be worse than this one. We need to elect politicians who will reduce harm, not delay it.
So going with harm exponential growth in the short term was the better choice? Sounds like a grown up choice making to me.
Want to reduce harm? Make the republicans unwinnable across the board so that actual progressives can differentiate themselves from the rest of the Democrat party. Party in-fighting is great when you have the margins to not lose to the fascists.
As I stated over and over come November 2025 there was only one choice (unless you are an accelerationist/anti-Western/psyops operative).
All the would’ves, could’ves and should’ves don’t matter anymore when you’re at the ballot box.
The harm we’re experiencing right now is a direct result of Biden’s failure to hold Republicans accountable for their many crimes, and his appointment of Harris as his successor sans primary. Even if Harris had won 2024, that would simply guarantee an even worse republican win in 2028 instead. Real harm reduction involves electing politicians who will reduce harm, not delay it. You know how you make the Republicans unwinnable across the board? Force the Democratic party to run candidates that can beat “no preference.”
I voted Harris, and I tried my god fucking damnedest to convince everyone I know to vote Harris too. It failed, because she couldn’t beat an empty fuckin chair. How about we change our strategy? Instead of putting up with whatever slop the DNC feeds us, let’s make sure they have primaries this time, and let’s make sure they run people worth voting for.
Anyone who thinks they can debate voters into voting for someone they don’t like after saying all that is also a complete moron. I would never question your intelligence so I assume this is simply to feel better about the situation.
My point is that anyone who says they didn’t like Harris when she was literally the only viable choice come the general elections must therefore be totally fine with Trump, because that’s what the actual effect of their decision was.
All of this idealistic backwards reasoning they are using to somehow absolve themselves from having fucking Trump as the president is just foolishness.
Well she clearly wasn’t a viable choice, was she?
It’s all of your USAmericans fault. At least the people voting this party are trying to change the status quo.
Or may be the democratic leadership was totally fine knowing well and good that Harris or Biden has good chance of losing and they still fronted her. All of this money motivated selfishness of Democratic establishment just piles on top of having Trumps president. They should have fronted AoC or Bernie very early on.
It’s a democracy, until it isn’t.
Simple math and logic dictate that at that point in time ANY ACTION other than voting for Harris was supporting Trump.
Logically, it must then follow that ANY ACTION other than voting for Trump was supporting Harris.
Did I also vote Marianne Williamson, Cenk Uygur, and Cornell West by voting for Jill Stein? Or just Trump and Harris? I’m trying to figure out the limits to this new infinite-voting glitch we discovered together.
Logically, it must then follow that ANY ACTION other than voting for Trump was supporting Harris
Yes, from the perspective of those who saw Harris as the worst outcome (cue clip of the “apparently I’m an idiot” lady).
For the others, not really no. Sure a coin flip could technically land on the edge, but in real-world conditions it’s even less likely to be called that way.
No because 1) he won so any votes not going directly to him didn’t matter in the end, and 2) Republicans tend to fall in line and vote R no matter what versus idealistic leftists and accelerationists who won’t vote for anyone unless they 100% align with their views, and interesting that the hard line for them is Gaza, not any of the other catastrophic outcomes from the Trump presidency. Almost like these were disingenuous arguments to begin with.
Next time push for a better candidate with some morals instead of a sad compromise that lacks any moral integrity like Harris or Biden. I think, people like you are a giant problem who are very flexible with their moral systems as long as it doesn’t directly hurt you. Reminds me of the poem:
First they came for the Communists And I did not speak out Because I was not a Communist
Then they came for the Socialists And I did not speak out Because I was not a Socialist
Then they came for the trade unionists And I did not speak out Because I was not a trade unionist
Then they came for the Jews And I did not speak out Because I was not a Jew
Then they came for me And there was no one left To speak out for me
People like you don’t care until they come for you. May be speak up when they front people like immoral Biden or Harris.
you’re dense as a rock.
sometimes speaking up and voting thirdparty and not voting the small evil IS the moral choice, sure.
however, in the reality of " a fixed amount of people will vote republican no matter what, and a variable amount will vote dems if they feel like it " you have to allow yourself to go against the most moral choice and opt for the 2nd most moral.
If both candidates support getting rid of Gaza, but one of them also wants to nuke half the planet, the choice is obvious no?
Not to mention compounding factors like… if you actually want change for the better you vote for the thing with the highest likelihood of winning. the thing that changes things to your side.
Maybe the missing votes and the 3rd party wouldn’t have been enough, maybe. But if all those missing votes showed up and the US still ended up ruled by the current clown, maybe the discussion would have just been “wow MAGAOTTS fucking suck” instead of all the useless finger pointing and infighting.
But go ahead, tell me how flexible morals are shady, compared to the rigid and tunneled “this thing is bad and i will die on my little bump” rigid morality that is oh so common with the MAGAOTTS mentioned earlier.
People like you are either intentionally bad faith actors (of which Lemmy is ABSOLUTELY INFESTED with), or willfull naive about the realities of the world.
One more time, a little slower this time, the reality of the situation was that come November of 24 the choices were absolutely clear. No amount of whining about how it SHOULD have been changes that.
Unfortunately enough people were misled, chose to light it all on fire, or were too naive to make the right choose in the general election that we all (globally) need to deal with the consequences.
Trump because America’s president, but definitely the world’s problem.
don’t expect them to accept logic.
Oh I dont lol
Do better next time when choosing a candidate.
Good on you for breaking this down to a fifth grader level. Problem is most people here don’t seem to have that level of comprehension.
First past the post creating a two party system is a result of math. You might as well complain about Pi would be easier to remember if Pi=3.0 . Math doesn’t care about your feelings.
thats a good point. pi being 3.14159 is bullshit and I’ve had enough of it.
The US electoral system is not a universal constant. It is not pi or the speed of light. It is a system by which rich people maintain control over a declining imperial power, based on a document written by slave owners 250 years ago as part of a tax dodging scheme.
but but but Russia!!! China!!!
No fuck you, how would compromising and voting for the lesser harm have been worse than what we have now?
Flash back to 2020. How could voting for Biden be worse than letting Trump have a second term?
Trump’s administration was in shambles by 2020. Everyone working for him fucking hated him. He wouldn’t have done half the shit he managed in 2024-2026. He would have convinced his base to take the Trump Vaccine, and covid would have been less deadly. In 2024 we might have had a primary, instead of the democrats forcing a fuckin cop onto our ballots.
But hey, let’s vote for Biden! We’ll get some infrastructure funding, and… uh…
Never ceases to amaze me that she cared more about killing innocent people than she did about winning that election.
It’s not about your stupid little election anymore, Americans. There is nothing more unimportant than your two parties. You’re being kicked out of the middle east and the basis for your global empire is crumbling. Soon you’ll be kicked out of the rest of the world too, and the contest between the “do nothing” party and the “make life worse” party will matter to Americans and Americans alone.
Trump being President proves the USA is going down, and the world economy will suffer for it. But, inevitable.
You may not enjoy what follows
It had to happen, I choose to enjoy it
We’re just getting started.
Good luck
Good thing for the world. US has committed alongside USSR most amount of violence in the world in last 70 years. Not to mention US has invested many terrorist groups and many problems that exist today.
I agree entirely except for the thing about the USSR
USSR bombed Afghanistan to stone age.
Yeah, but it’s not comparable to what America did in Korea or Vietnam
You’re right; it was much worse.
Huh, I looked it up and it was worse than I thought. Still only 10% of the population compared to 20% of the population in North Korea, but still very bad. Nevertheless, the Soviets did it once, while the Americans did it a whole bunch of times.
That’s a nice fantasy, but, it’s not real. This will be painful for the US and it will have less of an ability to leverage its ability to project power for diplomatic gains, it will be far more painful for the overwhelming majority of the rest of the world. The only winners in this are Russia and Iran (pending sanctions relief and the ability to rebuild their infrastructure), but the US and China (and their closest economic partners) lose the least, and between nations that’s as near as makes no difference to winning.
For as long as the US remains a cohesive entity, it will remain a world power, if maybe not the global hegemon that it has been, but it’s a long road from here to there and despite the best attempts of Trump et al, we’re not there yet and there are many things that could yet happen to derail that process.
It’s incredible that peoples’ minds are so colonized that their first instinct is to blame voters instead of party leadership that shut down all discussion of Biden’s declining health, undemocratically anointed a wildly unpopular successor and then failed to listen to voters who were saying that supporting an ongoing genocide was a bridge too far.
Yeah it sucks
The party leaders ousted Biden because of his declining health. Are you stupid?
As if we all don’t know what actually happened. Biden was the candidate even though they had far better candidates including Bernie and AoC. Even Harris was crap. But keeping licking up to establishment.
American “democracy” in summary
But vote blue no matter who, do you trump to win, whatever they say that is bullshit. Never mind the Democrats leadership and neo-liberal majority have shown they’re just controlled opposition at this point. They don’t make real change, and I bet when it’s all said and done, if they get into power, will still reach across the fricking aisle.
The real change would have been to not have any of this shit we have now.
Nah, next time push for better and not a sad compromise. Learn a lesson.
Trying to explain to Americans that the fact they don’t Primary Challenge incumbent democrats is a massive part of the problem; is tiresome.
