politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
I love how you're carefully avoiding the Abilene effect and how it could lose the election in even strong states.
Yes, lose. Because
And even if we declare the two viable options - note I said viable there - to be guaranteed as equally detrimental for Gaza when we all know it's not, it simplifies the equation. If we cannot appreciably affect the outcome in our election choice we move to the choice which has the most potential for effect after the election. CLEARLY
And that's the programme. It's been explained so many fucking times that I'm not sure how "but her emails" you need to be not to get it.
This is as clear the nose you sever to spite your face, and it's truly sad to see such cognitive dissonance in someone not voting conservative out of greed or gambler's mindset.
Try to clue in before voting, okay?
its not, as evidenced by the fact there are 5 options, now as we both obviously know FPTP is a horrible system and leads to a collapse of viable parties, but even in that situation you have 3 options. A,B, Neither. and I'm nethier. neither kamala nor trump have policies that i support. and trump can't impact the larger scheme of things i care about my local government prevents that.
no its a neutral stance, and you're upset that people dont care about your prefered candidate because she doesn't bring anything to the table that my state doesn't already have. if i lived in texas/florida the equation would be different but i don't and harris will easily win in my state.
but you don't get it. harris doesn't bring anything to the table. if i was an arab in michigan right now i'd be looking at her ticket and going:
If voting 3rd candidate gets that person to the poll booth and they vote 3rd party/blank/etc and down ticket dems vs not showing up at all. I take that as a win. Its not our fault harris, the alleged law and order candidate, wouldn't commit to enforcing the law on arms sales. if the zionists have a problem with that, well thats on them, maybe you should bitch about them being intransigent about fucking genocide.
already voted mate, maybe get a clue in the future on the entire system before opening your mouth. you're position only is rational by assuming there is only one office on the ballot. sadly harris didn't turn it around in time to win my vote. but thats her fault not mine. I have a laundry list of issues that if she ticket any of them personally I would have voted for her. she didn't. not my fault. genocide was just one of the ones where the ask was so small it should have been a no brainer. If the majority of the zionists are willing to support trump if harris won't sell israel weapons I don't particular care and think you should save your ire for them not me.
I'm not preventing harris from not being genocidal thats on her, I'm not stopping zionists from recognizing that israel's behavior is unconscionable, thats on them. If harris loses because of israel's behavior feel free to bitch at those voters they're the ones who caused the loss by not supporting their brothers and sisters of another faith from being subject to a genocidal war.
I'm not the one preventing us changing our voting system to ranked choice. that's on the DNC/GOP. Hell I've canvased and gathered signatures for the damn thing in my state what have you fucking done to kill the spoiler effect?
I'm simply not going to give my vote to a candidate who won't commit to supporting labor and won't commit to not committing a genocide; especially when it won't change the outcome in any manner.
also what makes you think we're part of the same group? This simply doesn't apply.
edit: changed jews -> zionists, because its not the jews in america causing this problem.