The discourse on American politics sometimes devolves to “Leftists who won’t vote” & “MAGA Republicans” teaming up to “getting revenge on liberals”.
You must log in or register to comment.
If you aren’t familiar with Project 2025 there’s a good video deep dive here: https://youtu.be/dk7sCJalxAo
MAGA wants revenge and it isn’t limited to just liberals.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/dk7sCJalxAo
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
I’m shocked and dismayed to see “Protest both candidates by telling them you’d be okay with either” on 196 of all places.
If you don’t vote for Biden, Trump is gonna win. You guys know that, right?
Yes but what about the horrible things Biden is doing that Trump will also do plus a fuckton more?
You mean the horrible things Biden is doing in trying to be the adult in the room and doing everything he can to actually make a ceasefire actually happen instead of screaming “GENOCIDE” with tears in his eyes which accomplishes exactly nothing?
Yeah he’s a horrible man for actually working on a problem instead of conforming to the emotions of teenagers on TikTok.
It’s an astroturfing campaign by the fascist right.
They’ve infected Lemmy.
I want to believe that. I really do. But after reading the comments on this post I don’t think I can
but if I vote for Biden, he might win. I don’t want that, either
Well, one of them is going to, and it might as well be the one who doesn’t think climate change is made up and campaign on how miserable he’s going to make the lives of gay and trans people.
Oh, and funnel arms to Israel even faster than Biden currently is.
Gather around for a personal story.
The year was 2015 and a friend who lives in a school bus visited town. We were all smoking weed in his bus and he said “Oh please let Clinton loose”. I asked WTF are you thinking? And he responded that he spent lots of time protesting and that it didn’t work because people weren’t listening. It seems no matter how many terrible fascists get elected, liberals still won’t listen to him.
Liberals never pay attention to popular protests unless the talking heads on TV tell them to.
I lost my faith in American “Democracy” during Occupy Wall Street, when the national media completely shut out any of the actual demands being made in favor of a “they don’t even have any goals” narrative.
I still remember how well that propaganda worked on people. It became commonplace for liberals to complain that the OWS protests were aimless and lacked message.
I still see them repeating that shit!
Even when liberals are shown protests on TV, they often walk away with the wrong message. It seems the only time it doesn’t happen is when the state uses violence in a way that is indefensible.
And even then it’s down to a coin flip whether they’ll care.
Well that’s on you for thinking of democracy like it’s a holy religious institution that can make a decree to give you what you want. That’s not what democracy is.
Democracy is a grind. You have to vote in every election and over time things improve. If you aren’t willing to do that because “you lost faith” it shows you aren’t really dedicated to these causes. You are conceding decisions to others who are dedicated enough to what they believe in to vote in every election no matter how long it takes to get what they want.
And that’s not really a bad thing is it? You went to a protest and then gave up. Why should you get what you want as opposed to someone who will vote in every election, volunteer to help the political party that’s closest to their beliefs, phone bank, go door to door, get that party elected, then call their representative explaining what they want. Why shouldn’t they value what people with that level of dedication want over the wants of the people that give up when they encounter a single obstacle?
Democracy is bullshit when public opinion is managed by three multimedia conglomerates. It doesn’t matter how many hours you spend trying to push the envelope when the range of acceptable political opinions is already constrained to what the billionaires who own this country find acceptable.
I mean, fuck! They’re going to ban TikTok nationally just because AIPAC doesn’t like the kids being so pro-Palestine! The media landscape is 10x worse than it was even just 12 years ago.
You’re simultaneously complaining about corporations influencing other people while also not even considering that TikTok is a corporation that’s influencing you?
You ever consider the possibility that people reading the news from mainstream organizations are not mindless idiots that can’t think for themselves?
You’re someone that’s been consuming propaganda from an authoritarian regime being spread by a corporation that’s beholden to another authoritarian regime and you believe in antisemitic conspiracy theories. Some people may indeed just go along with whatever a corporation tells them to think, but consider the possibility that you might be one of those people.
I don’t use TikTok, or Facebook, or Twitter, or Whatsapp, or Nextdoor, or cable news channels, or state media, etc.
I protested at the DNC years ago with an anti-war group. Liberals won’t listen to anything that even remotely pushes them out of their comfort zone. They’d rather keep voting until something magically changes (it won’t), or they waste the rest of their time criticizing you for “allowing the right to win.”
I have to say, it’s pretty fucking annoying to be scolded by liberals that do nothing but fill in a circle, while you’re doing things like marching to protest war, writing articles, participating in things like Food Not Bombs… meanwhile, they are in a state of malfunction because you refuse to vote for one of the two right-wing candidates propped up in front of us by the ruling class so we can do the same old song and dance again while thinking something will be different this time.
Did his protests get more attention under trump?
He doesn’t protest anymore, but I get your point. As noted elsewhere, the protests got more attention because the responses were more violent. Is that good? Considering how the police have even more money than before I am not so sure…
looseloseyeah turns out that pesky international policy liberals barely pay attention to? fucking us over big time. and by us i mean almost the entirety of the not-western world.
and it really doesnt matter how much you try to talk to them, i guess they will not care (or just pretend to) until its too late for they themselves.
“Revenge”?
Vindictiveness doesn’t have anything to do with it, I just can’t bring myself to vote for genocide.
If anything, it’s resignation and apathy as everything I predicted back in 2016 continues to come to pass.
Trump is going to win in November because the Democrats care more about preserving their AIPAC financing than representing their constituents.
Okay then vote against genocide.
Donald Trump is Genocide at home and abroad.
Joe Biden is “only” Genocide abroad, and probably less of it.
Therefore, a vote for Joe Biden is a Vote against genocide.
No, it doesn’t matter that he’s an active participant in the apparatus that’s creating the genocide, because if he’s in office there’s less genocide. Which is the important part, and pretending otherwise is sophistry. By abstaining from voting, you are increasing the likelihood of more genocide, if you discourage others from voting, you are an active participant in the overall social apparatus that is probabilistically increasing the ammount of genocide.
The utility calculation is dead simple: more votes for Biden in key states makes more genocide less likely, and discouraging people from voting for Biden makes more genocide more likely. Therefore, discouraging people from voting for Biden is a pro-genocide strategy and voting for Biden in battleground states is an anti-genocide strategy. I live in a solid blue state, so I reserve the right to vote third party, but I will also encourage other people to vote for Biden.
You should vote for Biden unless you live in a solid blue state, and even then it’s not a bad idea.
Offering a sandwich with more and less peanut butter when I am allergic to peanuts still means I will be sick. I’m hungry and I want a sandwich with no peanut butter. There are third party candidates providing sandwiches with no peanut butter. I am sorry demand decreases for the sandwich with less peanut butter, but I am unable to stomach peanuts.
Alright, but it’s not really about you, is it? There’s untold many hungry people, some of which are allergic to peanuts, and the only crate left has nothing but.
There are several people needed to open the crate. Maybe it can be opened without you, maybe it can’t maybe it’s stuck regardless. But even if you don’t want peanuts, it’s incredibly selfish of you to not only refuse to help feed the people who can be fed but also pretend to be of upstanding moral character when you do so. So take an antacid and show up at the ballot.
There’s untold many hungry people in the world because our comfort depends on it. In fact, what a wild metaphor to continue using when there’s thousands starving to death in Palestine right now with our tax money. Hey, but at least we’ll get cheap oil shipped to us through that new India>Saudi Arabia>Palestine trade route that’s being set up as a competitor to the “new Silk Road” thing china is doing. Cheap oil might be that peanut butter sandwich that people over here need to stay financially afloat, but it’s only a few layers removed from your actions being responsible for genocide. Some people don’t like this fact and would rather we had actual representation in our government.
because our comfort depends on it
That’s not actually relevant to the discussion; dismantling the United States, capitalism, and/or all imperialism isn’t on the table.
If you want to have a birthday cake, and you see Timmy about to start playing with a loaded gun, you should still stop that from happening even if it doesn’t get you birthday cake. That’s especially true if there’s no birthday cake readily available.
Edit: the more I think about it, the better an analogy this is, because if >!little Timmy blows his brains out after you chose not to stop it, it seriously hampers the ammount of birthday cake you eat in the future. Because if there’s birthday cake available you probably won’t be able to eat it after that, people will be less likely to invite you to a birthday party, and little Timmy won’t have any more birthdays.!<
CW: casual discussion of graphic and dark topics.
People are upset they can’t vote to dismantle the system and so they don’t vote thinking that it somehow withdraws their consent. I feel like that Patrick’s wallet meme where we all agree voting doesn’t do the things we want, including withdrawing consent.
Oh look, it’s another metaphor that ignores the fact that doing what we’re doing is actively harming other people (and comparing genocide to “eating cake”). You gave the gun Timmy was playing with to his brown friend and even disengaged the safety for him. And then you’re surprised when the little boy’s parents are upset you gave him the loaded gun. You’re right. This is a good metaphor for this situation we’re in.
This reply is so bad I’m comfortable not giving an actual response.
Edit: I should’ve just said “ratio”. 😂
There is a flaw in making a collective choice individualistic. Helping others is a moral thing to do and I was there in 2020 even though peanut butter sucks. Individually, I will get a sandwich, probably with peanut butter.
However, this crate landed on Palestinians. Helping the people under the crate seems important.
However, this crate landed on Palestinians. Helping the people under the crate seems important.
What does that even mean in the context of the previous metaphor? The crate itself doesn’t represent anything; the actions that the crate is subjected to represent acts that are not done to something.
There is a flaw in making a collective choice individualistic.
Yea; that’s why talking about yourself doesn’t change the ethics of the situation. Good👏 Job!👏
I referenced a news story in which the parachute on an air dropped aid package failed to deploy crushing people underneath.
Genocide is not ethical. Voting for genocide, but less, does not change the ethics of genocide. Part of the coalition that elected Biden in 2020 will not vote for him again due to his support of genocide.
The options for such voters are:
- Being complicite in genocide
- Voting third party or not at all
I understand the two party system created by first-past-the-post. I understand third party candidates are unlikely to win. I understand Democrats are rightfully nervous. If Democrats are nervous enough, they should do something to change the minds of voters that will not vote for genocide.
Voting for a sandwich without peanut butter will result in other people deciding what sandwich you get, and the only realistic options are those with peanut butter.
Also, you’ll have to eat the sandwich.
I understand needing to eat the sandwich. I also understand making a collective first-past-the-post choice individual is a flawed argument.
However there is an individual component to saying I really can’t eat peanut butter. The decision then becomes stand your ground (no peanut butter), compromise (just a little peanut butter) or protest (full peanut butter; see you in the ER). The claim is the compromise is best.
How do we reach a point where we no longer need to compromise on peanut butter?
Okay then vote against genocide.
Okay, then put it on the ballot.
Therefore, a vote for Joe Biden is a Vote against genocide.
No, it doesn’t matter that he’s an active participant in the apparatus that’s creating the genocide
On the contrary, I think it matters very much.
By abstaining from voting, you are increasing the likelihood of more genocide, if you discourage others from voting, you are an active participant in the overall social apparatus that is probabilistically increasing the ammount of genocide.
By voting, you are prolonging the existence of the United States and guaranteeing that the genocides it supports will continue. You have made yourself an active participant in reifying the implied consent of the governed that entitles the government to act on your behalf, and with your consent it will continue to ship weapons to apartheid regimes.
The utility calculation is dead simple: more votes for Biden in key states makes the governments’ dealings with the Israel appear legitimate and discourages people from taking meaningful action which might alter that relationship. Therefore, discouraging people from voting is an anti-genocide strategy.
By voting, you are prolonging the existence of the United States
Sophistry. Half the U.S. doesn’t vote in elections, and they’re still a global super power. Whoever told you that is an idiot.
makes the governments’ dealings with the Israel appear legitimate
More sophistry. The government’s legitimacy isn’t brought into question by a lack of votes; your actions are no different from someone who is simply politically disengaged and apathetic.
Keeping quiet isn’t an effective component of destroying the United States. Engaging in this argument the way that you are is a pro-genocide strategy because you are increasing the probability of more genocide.
Half the U.S. doesn’t vote in elections, and they’re still a global super power.
You admit that half of the country is already on my side and still call it sophistry?
The government’s legitimacy isn’t brought into question by a lack of votes
That’s because our government isn’t democratic. It only pretends to be so that the citizenry doesn’t depose it.
Keeping quiet isn’t an effective component of destroying the United States.
Hence, this discussion.
Engaging in this argument the way that you are is a pro-genocide strategy because you are increasing the probability of more genocide.
As opposed to engaging in this argument in the way that you are, begging me to vote for more genocide because you’re afraid the wrong half of our two-faced, one-party government would be put in charge of it.
on my side
Nope, that’s a misrepresentation of my argument and you know it.
because you’re afraid
✨ Correct. ✨
I love happy roadkill, and I’m familiar with this comic. I’d have gone with the one where the elephant is reaching down the donkey’s pants, though; it gets your message across more poignantly.
The the two parties form a bulwark against mainstream progressive political action. This is an inarguable fact, and if the option were between the DNC and green party, I’d vote green. The GOP is currently in a state of extreme disunity; it’s in a condition strikingly similar to the whigs prior to their dissolution and so losing Texas will likely cause the party to fracture as well as giving Biden a guaranteed victory. Once the GOP is made irrelevant, a left-wing electoral movement may be able (with the help of non-electoral leftist activitists) to form a genuine left-wing party, which will make direct action easier and our ultimate victory just that much closer and more likely.
So, don’t vote for genocide. Vote for one of the anti-genocide candidates, like Jill Stein or Cornel West.
Might as well stay home and save myself the trouble of wasting my time. Third parties aren’t viable in a first-past-the-post election system.
In my state at least if a third party receives at least 5% of the vote they’ll get significantly more funding in the next election cycle. Pretty sure that’s true across the US.
You mean that thing that hasn’t happened since Ross Perot in Texas 30 years ago?
Surely his Reform Party is still around after having their funding boosted, right? Nope, they dissolved in '97 after doing even worse at the polls in '96 than in '92.
That’s simply not true. The Reform Party got Jesse Ventura elected governor of Minnesota in '98.
Yet voting 3rd party sends a signal that many are upset instead of apathetically staying at home. Silent consent is the very thing you accuse Democrats of in a sister thread.
Sounds like you want me to write in a vote for Literally Anyone Else, the Texan candidate who would make a perfect protest vote if he had even halfway decent politics.
No, I’m withdrawing my consent, for all the good that does in this abusive relationship between the state and its citizenry. If America was a real democracy then our poor turnout figures would invalidate every election back to the founding.
If America was a real democracy then our poor turnout figures would invalidate every election back to the founding.
Yeah, it would be nice if our system allowed for withdrawing consent.
No, I’m withdrawing my consent, for all the good that does in this abusive relationship between the state and its citizenry.
I don’t see how that’s consistent with your last sentence. But you do you I guess.
So you’re just throwing up your hand and giving up?
I gave up 14 years ago. American politics is rotten to the core and cannot be saved.
My only hope at this point is to keep as many people alive as possible through the troubles ahead.
I’m much less concerned about the hostility of those who openly demand genocide than the inaction of those who merely pretend to oppose it.
Strong “at least they’re honest about it” energy
The worst thing I could wish for you as a person, is that this comment follows you around for the rest of your life.
The complaint is about duplicity, not an acceptance or exoneration of those who openly agitate for it.
An ‘ally’ who goes along to get along, but has a radically different value set is not an ally. “9 people sit a a table with a Nazi and say nothing - how many Nazis are at the table?” We decry the Russians who don’t speak out against Putin, but shuffle uncomfortably when the DNC’s top candidate is pursuing a path that enables atrocities?
It’s a bullshit complaint for many reasons, but one of them is that they already stated that they won’t participate in an easy activity to help mitigate genocide.
You misspelled “prolong”.
When trans kids are being shoved into meat grinders I’ll let them know that it’s okay because you mastered the peak of internet wit.
I’d certainly hope so, as I was loosely paraphrasing Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s “Letter from Birmingham Jail”:
I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action”; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a “more convenient season.” Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.
In your mind, MLK was okay with the right kind of genocide?
Where did that come from? Of course not.
It’s easy to know where one stands in relation to enemies. The same can’t be said for false allies and fake friends like all the liberals who turn a blind eye to genocide when it’s their guy enabling it.
Gives me an idea for a new meme to cover the other half:
“Leftists who won’t vote” 🤝 “Democrats” agree on being “apathetic”.
In 2016, the leftists and MAGA got revenge on liberals by getting roe overturned and installing a conservative court for a generation. Leftists are really humble though, because few will take credit for this historic achievement.
Non-american here, why is it that the 2016 election was lost because of a “leftists not voting” boogeyman instead of Hillary Clinton being a deeply unsympathetic canidate, pushing away an objectively better canidate (Bernie) because it was “her time”, and doing jack-shit to visit swing states to give speeches? From what I remember, she did the bare minimum because she thought she would have the election in the bag anyway.
Oh, and that whole court thing, wasn’t that because of that piece of shit democrat judge not retiring under obama because she had some main character syndrome or something and instead decided to die under a republican president? Why is she not the one at fault here?
Damn, even foreigners get the deal better than resistance libs.
Oh no why didn’t the DNC serve me my ideal candidate in a silver platter? I didn’t participate in primaries, I didn’t participate in local elections and then I ended up having to vote for Hillary! I’m going to protest by letting a clown take office.
And then when it turns out the clown is a fascist dictator I’m going to keep arguing about why my favorite candidate isn’t being served up to me in a silver platter!
Yes the system sucks and the Democrat candidates suck, but you can’t fix the system by abstaining your vote at the last second.
THE CORRUPT SYSTEM DEPENDS ON YOUR THIS EXACT BEHAVIOR.
And I know you probably did participate but it wasn’t enough. You need to convince others, you need to protest and raise awareness when it matters.
Letting a clown dictator run the country doesn’t further your cause.
I never said that abstaining from voting is the right move here, quite the opposite, I’m completely for harm reduction and would vote for the democrat option everytime. Don’t know how you got that from my post. It’s just so weird for me that none of the blame is placed on the democratic party and it’s establishment canidates doing jack-shit and when they lost in 2016 because of sheer incompetency, it’s somehow the fault of “leftists abstaining to vote” (any sources on that claim? Anyone got any stats on that?)
Also, drop the sarcastic tone when you lack reading comprehention this much. Nowhere in my post was abstaining to vote even implied to be the best course of action (it’s not), I was just asking why noone seems to blame the DNC for it’s incompetency.
Fuck the DNC their corrupt system pushed Bernie out unfairly. There’s no disagreement there. But people abstain from voting because they’re upset with the DNC. That’s what I have an issue with. That’s like getting mad at fire so you let it burn your house down.
Sorry didn’t mean to come off so harsh.
No worries, I completely get your frustrations. Not voting in general is the dumbest thing one can do in that situation, especially when one of the options is a fascistic clown. I get that you’re very passionate about this, and I hope I haven’t come of as (too) harsh in my reply as well.
I’m voting for a third party instead of the slightly less evil fascist. I recommend y’all do as well. Dr. West and Claudia La Cruz are good options.
If you’re not in a swing state I recommend you do the same.
So you’re voting for Trump
Not sure how you got that out of my comment. I knew the literacy rates in the US were bad but jeeze.
Removed by mod
Nope, it’s actually a vote for a third party. Vote for Biden is a vote for Trump. See how dumb that sounds?
A third party has literally no chance of winning. By voting for a third party or abstaining from voting, you are taking a vote away from Biden and thereby aiding Trump.
If you’re too ignorant to understand that, then I can’t help you
The fact that you’d rather let Trump win to stick it to Biden than try to prevent literal fascists from taking over our nation says a lot about you as a person.
you are taking a vote away from Biden
it’s my vote to give and it’s biden’s vote to earn. it’s not like he doesn’t know what cornel west voters want. he just doesn’t care to earn that vote.
So you’d rather let Trump win, got it.
this is election misinformation
It’s really not
it is. a vote for any person must be counted for that person. they cannot count my vote for cornel west as a vote for biden.
Your vote for West means nothing when there is zero chance they’ll win. You are throwing away a vote that could have been used to combat Trump.
By voting for third party, you may as well not be voting at all. And in both cases, you are saying you don’t care who wins. Which means you don’t care if Trump wins. Which means you are complicit in Trump’s victory if it is to happen.
So I will blame all of you just as much as the Reps if that comes to pass, and the blood will be on your hands as well.
I live in California, junior.
Okay? Good for you
“Fundamentally, nothing will change.”
-and then it didn’t
Now, here we are. Again.
Don’t abstain or vote third party to get revenge on vile liberals.
Do it because you have a backbone and can spend your time better doing almost anything.
If Imran Khan sitting in jail can win at a fraudulent election run by the Pakistani army even after his party members were arrested and assasinated, surely the DNC can run a candidate who isn’t happy to fund a genocide so they will actually get enough votes to win.
Imagine trying to convince someone to vote between Hitler and Stalin. Like “Yeah I’ll take Hitler please because at least he won’t kill all of us equally like Stalin. He actually cares about germany because he’s building infrastructure.”
Biden couldn’t even hold on to his fake penny throw of sanctioning a whopping 7 Israeli settlers. He could at least pretend to care.
He still has time to redeem himself with quite literally one of the lowest bars you could ever have, but the DNC is happy losing if it means the USA stays peachy keen with AIPAC.
If you think there’s a simple solution to the Gaza issue you’re an idiot.
If you think the wannabe dictator who tried to override the election and install himself as a real dictator is even comparable to Biden, because Biden doesn’t have a solution to a thousand year old conflict then you’re an idiot.
So either you’re an idiot who has no idea what’s going on or you’re a Putin puppet.
Biden doesn’t have a solution to a thousand year old conflict then you’re an idiot
Israel became a thing less than a 100 years ago, and this genocide started 6 months ago.
This statement is almost as idiotic as your assumption that anyone who disagrees is either brain dead or a Putin bot.
How low does one have to go to defend someone who has all the power to decide not to fund a genocide. He just approved a sale of 2000 MK84s and 500MK82s as if he wants Israel to finish the job.
Yes the Jewish people didn’t exist before Israel. The Jewish Diaspora never happened. The crusades didn’t happen. The Europeans didn’t colonize, divide and create proxy wars.
Netanyahu is a shithead that allowed a bunch of medieval terrorists kill his people so he can retain power.
Civilians have been getting slaughtered in that region for millennia fighting their own brothers because they are carrying the wrong flag.
No we shouldn’t be content with Palestinians dying, but you can’t deny Hamas wanted this response and wanted their people to die because that’s how they raise funding and support.
It’s a shitty messy situation with civilians being used as pawns.
Yeah I’ve notes that my conversations with MAGAs and leftists are essentially the same conversation. Trying to explain what’s real and what’s fake to people who don’t trust the media because of vaguely antisemitic conspiracy theories. Trying to explain economics who reject anything about the subject that’s more complex than blaming some bad guys. They’re both equally likely to fall for whatever narrative their corner of the internet is telling them. They both blame Biden for every problem. Both think that the President is the king and whatever he decrees will happen automatically and are angry about those decrees not being made. Both are ignorant of how anything works. Both want to disrupt the functioning of society with no actual plan for what to do beyond that.
Both of these are ultimately just angry about how unfair the system is and neither are willing to actually think about how to actually fix these problems. They right that system isn’t fair, but it’s not going to change from emotion alone and it’s not going to instantly change because of a decree from the President. Both of these groups are ineffective in making the change they want because they can’t see past their anger.
MAGAs and Leftists are essentially the same people. Both will be angry over that statement.
Anyone else remember when Trump was the first President in decades to not start a new war and the left kept saying he was a fascist nazi who led an attempted coup then Biden got in and started a new war bringing humanity the closest it has ever been to nuclear war and then supported genocide? Yeah that was interesting, and now the left is adamant that “something bad” will happen if Trump gets in again. Who knows? He might even stop the war with Russia and that would be HORRIBLE because clearly we need to meddle in Russia’s sphere of influence and prop up non-NATO member countries. Can you imagine if America wasn’t acting as world police? Think of the defense contractors.
Like that time he assassinated an Iranian general? Total dove that guy: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/donald-trump-no-wars/
There is a pretty big difference between starting a war and killing one guy and his entourage. You understand? People seem to hate to accept that Trump was the first President to not start a new war in decades. Decades of Presidents and wars all over the world. Millions of deaths. Some people, like myself, would like to see an end to endless American wars and this is enough of a “single issue” to win my vote.
Do you understand that more drone assassinations happened under Trump than even Obama?
