You're viewing a single thread.
lol we already have fascism. They’re crushing antiwar protests, the media is in lockstep, labor demonstrations have been broken and they’re pissing away the cost of healthcare, free college and any number of other benefits on supplying a genocide.
I’m never gonna vote for Biden again and if you don’t want to either, consider voting for the party for socialism and liberation.
You don’t have to support the genocide.
No I'm not going to throw away my chance to reduce suffering on pitching a fit.
It’s not pitching a fit to recognize that both of the two major parties candidates are unacceptable.
There’s a big difference between pitching a fit and saying “genocide is my red line.”
What’s your red line? What would cause you to vote third party instead of Biden?
- A third party would need to have a feasible chance of winning even a single fucking state, and the literal only chance of that would be if every single Democrat and Republican spontaenously and simulteanously dropped dead right before voting day.
- The amount of harm caused by Biden would have to be equal to or greater than than the harm caused by Trump, which is demonstrably not the case.
So no amount of parallel awfulness would prompt you to reject both parties? As an example, if the atrocities being visited on Gaza took place in America would that be enough?
If I've got two options and one of them reduces harm, and the other amplifies it, the only humane thing to do is the former.
The one you say reduces harm is detaining more people at the border than trump did and both aiding and denying a genocide.
When is it too far? What would be beyond the pale enough for you to turn your back on Biden?
I have to ask again: would you still vote for Biden instead of a third party if he were supplying weapons to and denying the bombing of American hospitals?
I know I sound like a broken record, but where’s the line?
If Joe Biden were blowing up American Hospitals than we're well past the point where voting would accomplish anything. But he's not doing that, he's just selling arms to a longtime ally of America and not paying close enough attention to the reasons people are telling him to stop. Still bad, but...
Oh he’s only supplying weapons to a country committing a genocide and then denying that it’s a genocide in public.
I’m gonna ask some questions that will probably sound like accusations but I’m asking them to feel out who you are and what matters to you, not to accuse or harm:
Still bad but what?
So you wouldn’t support Biden if the genocide were happening to Palestinians on American soil, what about if it was French people being invaded and bombed by Israelis wielding American weapons? What if it was Libyans?
What if instead of pissing away the cost of any number of domestic programs in weapons shipments to israel, Biden was sending arms to russia to use on ukranians?
It's a terible situation and I do not intend to imply otherwise, however at the end of the day. I am an American, and I need to think about what's best for America.
Palestine is still gonna be in the shit if Biden is re-elected, and if Trump is re-elected they'll be in more than just shit.
However, if Biden is re-elected, I don't have to worry about ending up in a concentration camp for being trans.
What’s best for America is to make your voice heard is support of a genocide?
Palestine is not in the shit, its people are in the process of being genocided.
One of my favorite stories is the ones who walk away from omelas. It’s pretty good.
You won't get an answer, these people's script is they have enormous latitude in calling people names, moving goalposts, and generally as much punching left as they can muster, but under absolutely no circumstance can they say -in any way, shape or form- that they won't vote for the blue team.
We are in a winner takes all system, It has limitations, Its very stable with 1, primary party, its possible to have 2 primary parties, its while not impossible, very very hard to have more primary parties.
Sure its possible particularly in a state for a new party to replace an existing one.. However most cases of this the new party becomes part of or replaces an existing parties leadership. However if you really want more parties we need something like instant runoff elections, Im very disappointed in how much push back on that has happened where its been attempted. (or a parliamentary system.. but i dont see that fitting into the US system)
You don’t need fundamental change to the system to not vote for the president committing a genocide. You can just pick someone else. That’s the point of a vote.
Oh okay so let’s just open the gates and allow it to go full force right?
Fucking moron
The daily volume of human suffering already bypassed that unleashed by the us after 9/11.
How much worse does it need to get before you wash your hands of this bloody administration?
Is there even a point where you’d turn your back on Biden?
The reason we're seeing libs get into such a tizzy about it all of a sudden is because it's finally being pointed inwards.
and remember the alternative to Biden is worse.. so I think you are a plant.
Of course it is. The whole reason Trump won the first time around was because enough people wouldn't hold their nose for Hillary in the right states.
Imagine the world if they did, with her choices for three justices (not to mention the 231 appointments in lower courts), and the handling of COVID.
Buttery males. 2024 is just a reboot of 2016.
but if youbdont like Biden's position, feel free to vote in more libral people to Congress, particularly if you are in a left leaning state
Will you always pick the “better” of the two parties? If not, how bad does it need to get before you vote third party? I like to ask it this way: where’s your red line?
The entire point of third parties in US presidential elections, right now, is to syphon votes away from the main parties. They are otherwise entirely useless.
They need more office down ballot....way down ballot...to start making any sort of progress towards the possibility of ever winning a presidential election.
It's not about "sending a message". Nobody is listening there. You want to send a message, put it in a letter or a picket sign. Not a ballot box.
That’s not true.
I use Perot 92 as a counter example, because if the significant influence that campaign had on the ultimate fate of nafta and how it turned out not to have acted as a spoiler.
Why would you say your feelings in a protest or a letter to your congressman but not in your ballot where it literally gets counted?
92 Perot had enough votes to allow Clinton to win Ohio, California, Pennsylvania, and likely several others, had the majority of his voters gone to the more closely aligned GHWB.
If you consider yourself conservative, Perot is likely the reason Clinton won the electoral college in a landslide, while he himself received exactly 0 EC votes.
Progressive people, especially those concerned about the environment, can say the same for Nader in 2000, and only have to look at Florida.
Back in ‘99 there was a paper that showed Perot had the most impact the opposite direction, reducing Clinton’s margin of victory. I remember it because back then it made the news that what everyone thought to be obviously true (the businessman from Texas’ campaign spoiled the republican vote) was wrong. It’s even cited in the Wikipedia article about Perot 92!
Florida literally went against bush jr in the recount and his brother who was the governor of Florida at the time had a significant impact on calling it before the recount came in.
Now once again: why would you make your feelings known in a protest, but not when they can actually be counted?
How cheap are you to get to toss out your vote so fascism can sweep up come November? Pretty fucking cheap by the looks of it.
Personally it wasn’t the genocide that put me off ever voting Biden, but I wouldn’t describe a person for whom that’s a bridge too far as cheap.
It’s also not throwing your vote away to vote third party. If it were there wouldnt be an effect to it, and of course there clearly is. A third party vote means that party gets more funding, airtime and media exposure.
There are powerful examples of third parties in the us exerting significant pressure on policy while also not being spoilers.
So how much would be too much for you? our children dying in our streets by us weapons?
I'm a disabled single father. I have a daughter. We are an atheist household. I know game theory. I also know about the massive disinfo campaign to try and stop as many democrat votes as possible. To republicans, I'm a satanic enemy of humanity.
I'm voting a straight blue ticket, I have convinced a dozen others to do the same. I am doing the thing I need to do to stop your little hypothetical. What would it take? Democrats would have to act as openly fascist, cruel, and hateful as the Republican party. They do not. They aren't fucking perfect because such a thing will never exist, but they are far from republican filth. A straight blue ticket is the best chance at an admin that will be open to change. Anything else helps republicans win and you know that pretty goddamn well. It's why you're here with that bullshit line of yours.
The democrats candidate is using his executive power to send arms to israel so they can perform war crimes. How much more openly fascist, cruel and hateful does he need to be? How much worse can a candidate get than the alternative when they’re literally doing something terrible that the alternative didn’t?
Voting for the administration that’s encouraging a crackdown on antiwar protests and supplying a genocide because you want to make sure it’ll be open to change.
I don’t have to want trump to win to see the absolute absurdity of that position.
I’m not saying all that to demean or belittle you, but instead to hopefully illustrate that we can’t build a just world by voting for Biden.
Third party candidates are not viable this election. Every poll that can be trusted to any degree is proof of this. Trumps base is going to vote for trump and the Republican party at large will very likely follow. Nearly the entire Republican party is openly fascist at this point and admitting that they plan to disassemble the government to suit their wants. They are open about allowing Israel to finish their genocide.
It is also well known at this point that disinformation campaigns really lean on trying to get any non Republican vote to either not vote at all, or vote third party. You have no logical arguments, no game theory, and no deeper understanding of everything on the table in this election. You mostly just use the appeal to emotion fallacy as if it's some magic gotcha. It is not, it is instead a signpost that you are not arguing in good faith.
Liars screamed "vote third party" last election too. Trump still lost, and we're working to ensure that stupid fuck loses again. Not only am I totally unswayed by your bs, I've ensured others will be voting straight blue as well. Youll maybe whine about it, but it won't change a thing.
If you would prefer a logical, utilitarian argument for voting third party I’ll happily oblige.
What are the prior assumptions your argument for voting for Biden rests upon? It’s easiest for me to work from what you already hold true.
Defend your pont using what was already said in this discussion. No appeal to emotion. Use current polling to help show that third parties stand any chance in hell. Essentially, prove you aren't one of the many many disinfo bots/agents.
I'll be carefully paying attention to any sources so sticking to generally trusted would be best
Okay: if the only vote acceptable to you is one that results in a win for that candidate or could feasibly result in a win for that candidate, you’re discounting a good portion of the outcomes of even the flawed American electoral system and how they effect the future.
Vote tallies are used to determine funding, ballot presence, debate opportunities, media representation and of course, public awareness.
It’s also important to recognize that we are not given the opportunity to vote against one or more candidates. There is no bubble on the scantron form that will indicate “I’m only doing this to keep the other guy out of office” or “I only support your platform on guns”.
We are given only the ability to voice support for candidates, their platforms and actions, with no room for nuance or debate.
Candidates and their teams and administrations aren’t shown weather or not you protested the arms shipments, spoke in defense of abortion or moved resolutions condemning the genocide forward in your local governments.
They will only see your vote.
Your vote for Biden is not a vote against trump, it is a vote of support for Biden and his fascist policy of genocide.
I am not making an appeal to emotion with that last sentence and hopefully the time and text spent to raise it to the level of logical and utilitarian shows that.
If you took all emotion out of your decision in November and purely cast your ballot based entirely upon utility, your analysis could very easily conclude that there is no acceptable option to support between the two major parties and that it’s better to be counted supporting a third party you would like to see more of in 2026, 2028 and beyond.
I’ve talked about red lines over and over in this thread and while I like the phrase because it’s something everyone can understand, I’m afraid it evokes the constantly shifting goalposts of our politicians own red lines and that limits its effectiveness. Instead of describing the hypothetical or real actions of candidates as red lines, I’ll use other phrases here to hopefully get the point across more clearly.
When giving support to either candidates platforms and actions is beyond the pale, a bridge too far, simply unacceptable to you using whatever methodology is appropriate to you, the only reasonable utilitarian, logical choice is to lend your counted and measured support to a party, candidate and platform you want to see next time.
If you can’t support the actions of the current regime or its opponent than this election is lost to you.
Now if we look beyond the actual votes themselves to the effect peoples discourse has on politicians platforms before the elections themselves it becomes even more difficult to defend saying “vote blue no matter who” or that you’ll be marking a straight ticket or whatever.
If we assume the pollsters and political parties are paying attention and using our discourse to modify their own platforms and actions in order to get support then it’s more utilitarian and logical to be posting about how you’ll never vote for the platform of genocide or that the democrats should dump Biden at the convention than it is to be speaking in opposition to those views because an administration that sees lots of people saying they need to change course or lose those votes come November is more likely to actually change course than one who sees lots of opposition to those voices in the form of “voting against trump”, “vote blue no matter who” or “harm reduction”.
That is of course if you’re against the genocide.