You know what would to be really, REALLY uncomfortable?
If Harris loses, there’s a strong chance that it might be over this terrible war. What a stupid, stupid reason to have to live through another Trump presidency.
Except it really doesn’t since that world already ended in the mid 1800s, much like the Green Sahara period ending, and The Bronze Age Collapse ended the world 6000 years ago causing them to write that apocalyptic fictive.
How many horse drawn carriages do you see on a daily basis? How many oxen plow your fields? That was the norm until the mid to late 1800s. That world already ended. They just refuse to accept their own books.
Go fight with Hamas if you’re so emboldened to direct action.
You won’t, of course.
Your “totally rational and justified” calls for voting differently surely will fix the situation on the other side of the planet. You’re totally saving the Palestinians!
Not so far down the planet when it’s your government funding the genocide, giving the perpetrators their political legitimacy in the international sphere, and literally shipping the weapons with which the genocide is carried out.
go fight with hamas
Go make a counter-reactionary terrorist insurgency or political group in the US if you’re so concerned about the other types of rights you’ll lose if Trump gets into office
Harris has promised to enforce the laws of the US. If she does do, then The Hayes Act would prohibit any arms shipments to Israel. I’m not saying that is definitely what she intends to do, I am saying that is the most diplomatic she can be in the current political climate of the US, and still win, with the intention of deescalation in Israel while still supporting Ukraine.
The party is literally in the government right now. Biden is a rotting corpse who is obviously not making the decisions for US international policy, so the arm deals with Israel are with the full consent and approval of all the democrat elites. Harris won’t change this as it hasn’t changed for the past 80 years.
Harris openly said in the DNC convention that she believes in “Israel’s right to defend itself”, while not letting any pro-palestinian talk in the convention (cops had a representative though). It’s painfully obvious.
Oh no, the person running for POTUS didn’t want protesters at her rally? Why could this be? She must love killing Palestinians because I can’t fathom the image of protesters at a convention would sully her image and hurt her chances at winning.
Israel wants Trump. They know that Trump will supercharge their campaign and they are counting on Jill Stein to siphon off votes from Harris. That’s why they’ve upped their campaign like this. They are goading Stein to get more press and convince more liberal voters. Because they know that, due to the significant democrat base that unreservedly supports Israel no matter what they do, Harris will never pull her support while campaigning but they are sure that if she wins Biden and she will start playing hardball to get them to stop and they don’t want to stop, they want to wipe out all Palestinians. This has been a stated goal of theirs. And Trump and the Republicans will help them do it more than Harris will.
The thing I find hilarious is Jill Stein had no coverage while RFK was still in contention. Then as soon as the handlers realized he wasn’t going to work they pivoted to the next alternative.
I’m sorry, but this narrative so completely exonerates Biden and Harris for their direct responsibility for risking the election over this.
The notion that Harris is in a bind is an absolute fiction. The overwhelming majority of Americans want an arms embargo with Israel. It has broad bipartisan support, including with an overwhelming majority of Democrats. And in top of that, she chose to not even let a popular Palestinian American lawmaker from Georgia give a vetted speech endorsing her at the DNC.
She is risking this election. That is a personal choice. I hope she wins, but if she loses because she didn’t have votes she made clear she doesn’t want, that is not on Jill Stein, that’s a Harris decision.
The harris campaign is openly hostile to the anti-war anti-genocide vote. They are not interested in trying to get our votes. If they make the calculation that they need the anti-war vote to win they will try to appeal to us but they have decided (so far) that they don’t want us and don’t need us.
Don’t blame us for not voting for a candidate who doesn’t want our vote and is actively hostile to our position.
You’re absolutely ignoring their comment. If democrat voters showed a spine and conditioned their vote to an end to the genocide, the democrat leadership may decide that it’s worth it to cater to these voters to win the elections if that’s what they want. By enabling all their actions through “vote blue no matter who” you’re just degrading the democracy further, and postponing the choice 4 more years during which nothing will happen.
“let’s blame voters for wanting to vote against genocide instead of blaming the party which is committing genocide and openly speaking of having the most LETHAL army in the world”
The only two real options are both pro genocide, pro military industrial complex which tells me this country is fucked there’s nothing I can do to help that. All I can do is follow my conscience and my conscience won’t let me rest if I vote for genocide
I agree with all of that. Except for the part about possibly appealing to the anti-war voter if it would help them win. There are some – Biden for instance – who clearly would rather lose than do that. I don’t know Harris well enough to judge.
I think it’s sad that people complain when someone says that they won’t vote for the lesser of two evils. It’s sad because it shows a profound misunderstanding about how democracy is supposed to work, and what they’re entitled to demand from their fellow citizens.
The largest voting block in every election is the depressed voter. And the reason is that our system is constructed to favor a broken two-party system even at the expense of civil participation that can solve our problems. Millions of people don’t vote because they see no benefit in doing so. The problem to be solved is that the political system has failed these people, not that they aren’t showing sufficient enthusiasm to do paperwork to satisfy the demands of people who feel invested in the outcome of elections.
The media falsely claims that each candidate has 47% support when really they each have about 30% support, and a larger number of people have not felt any interest in supporting either candidate. That’s a massive failing in reporting and political process.
You know what would to be really, REALLY uncomfortable?
If Harris loses, there’s a strong chance that it might be over this terrible war. What a stupid, stupid reason to have to live through another Trump presidency.
FTFY
FTFY
Evangelicals like the genocide, brings their death cult closer to its end.
Except it really doesn’t since that world already ended in the mid 1800s, much like the Green Sahara period ending, and The Bronze Age Collapse ended the world 6000 years ago causing them to write that apocalyptic fictive.
How many horse drawn carriages do you see on a daily basis? How many oxen plow your fields? That was the norm until the mid to late 1800s. That world already ended. They just refuse to accept their own books.
No. It will be so much worse.
Nah, your boy trump promises to end the war in mere hours (with industrial genocide).
So let’s not vote for kkkamala harriss because we care so much about Palestinians.
The genocide in Gaza is bipartisan, and the ongoing atrocities are taking place under a democrat administration.
If it’s bipartisan then you are free to vote based on other issues.
“we can ignore genocide as long as it’s bipartisan”
Go fight with Hamas if you’re so emboldened to direct action.
You won’t, of course.
Your “totally rational and justified” calls for voting differently surely will fix the situation on the other side of the planet. You’re totally saving the Palestinians!
Not so far down the planet when it’s your government funding the genocide, giving the perpetrators their political legitimacy in the international sphere, and literally shipping the weapons with which the genocide is carried out.
Go make a counter-reactionary terrorist insurgency or political group in the US if you’re so concerned about the other types of rights you’ll lose if Trump gets into office
Good one, troll.
Harris has promised to enforce the laws of the US. If she does do, then The Hayes Act would prohibit any arms shipments to Israel. I’m not saying that is definitely what she intends to do, I am saying that is the most diplomatic she can be in the current political climate of the US, and still win, with the intention of deescalation in Israel while still supporting Ukraine.
The party is literally in the government right now. Biden is a rotting corpse who is obviously not making the decisions for US international policy, so the arm deals with Israel are with the full consent and approval of all the democrat elites. Harris won’t change this as it hasn’t changed for the past 80 years.
Biden is a rotting corpse, but he’s also a self admitted Zionist. Harris isn’t.
Harris openly said in the DNC convention that she believes in “Israel’s right to defend itself”, while not letting any pro-palestinian talk in the convention (cops had a representative though). It’s painfully obvious.
Oh no, the person running for POTUS didn’t want protesters at her rally? Why could this be? She must love killing Palestinians because I can’t fathom the image of protesters at a convention would sully her image and hurt her chances at winning.
Seriously, are you this fucking dense?
Netanyahu is a Democrat?
Israel wants Trump. They know that Trump will supercharge their campaign and they are counting on Jill Stein to siphon off votes from Harris. That’s why they’ve upped their campaign like this. They are goading Stein to get more press and convince more liberal voters. Because they know that, due to the significant democrat base that unreservedly supports Israel no matter what they do, Harris will never pull her support while campaigning but they are sure that if she wins Biden and she will start playing hardball to get them to stop and they don’t want to stop, they want to wipe out all Palestinians. This has been a stated goal of theirs. And Trump and the Republicans will help them do it more than Harris will.
The thing I find hilarious is Jill Stein had no coverage while RFK was still in contention. Then as soon as the handlers realized he wasn’t going to work they pivoted to the next alternative.
I’m sorry, but this narrative so completely exonerates Biden and Harris for their direct responsibility for risking the election over this.
The notion that Harris is in a bind is an absolute fiction. The overwhelming majority of Americans want an arms embargo with Israel. It has broad bipartisan support, including with an overwhelming majority of Democrats. And in top of that, she chose to not even let a popular Palestinian American lawmaker from Georgia give a vetted speech endorsing her at the DNC.
She is risking this election. That is a personal choice. I hope she wins, but if she loses because she didn’t have votes she made clear she doesn’t want, that is not on Jill Stein, that’s a Harris decision.
Red and blue serve the same interests
Getting worse means changes are required… Trump wouldn’t make anything better but there is no reason to suggest Harris wants to make things better.
The harris campaign is openly hostile to the anti-war anti-genocide vote. They are not interested in trying to get our votes. If they make the calculation that they need the anti-war vote to win they will try to appeal to us but they have decided (so far) that they don’t want us and don’t need us.
Don’t blame us for not voting for a candidate who doesn’t want our vote and is actively hostile to our position.
So you have three options, all having a bad outcome on the most important thing you care about.
One of the options maybe has better outcomes on some other things you care about.
Another option has bad outcomes in almost everything you care about, plus maybe even a worse outcome to your most important thing.
The third option is to leave it up everyone else to pick between the first two.
I know what I’d pick, what will you do?
You’re absolutely ignoring their comment. If democrat voters showed a spine and conditioned their vote to an end to the genocide, the democrat leadership may decide that it’s worth it to cater to these voters to win the elections if that’s what they want. By enabling all their actions through “vote blue no matter who” you’re just degrading the democracy further, and postponing the choice 4 more years during which nothing will happen.
“If we hold the country hostage, they’ll definitely do what I want before the opposition makes everything irreversibly worse.”
“let’s blame voters for wanting to vote against genocide instead of blaming the party which is committing genocide and openly speaking of having the most LETHAL army in the world”
The only two real options are both pro genocide, pro military industrial complex which tells me this country is fucked there’s nothing I can do to help that. All I can do is follow my conscience and my conscience won’t let me rest if I vote for genocide
I agree with all of that. Except for the part about possibly appealing to the anti-war voter if it would help them win. There are some – Biden for instance – who clearly would rather lose than do that. I don’t know Harris well enough to judge.
I think it’s sad that people complain when someone says that they won’t vote for the lesser of two evils. It’s sad because it shows a profound misunderstanding about how democracy is supposed to work, and what they’re entitled to demand from their fellow citizens.
The largest voting block in every election is the depressed voter. And the reason is that our system is constructed to favor a broken two-party system even at the expense of civil participation that can solve our problems. Millions of people don’t vote because they see no benefit in doing so. The problem to be solved is that the political system has failed these people, not that they aren’t showing sufficient enthusiasm to do paperwork to satisfy the demands of people who feel invested in the outcome of elections.
The media falsely claims that each candidate has 47% support when really they each have about 30% support, and a larger number of people have not felt any interest in supporting either candidate. That’s a massive failing in reporting and political process.