Do you have a source for that? As far as I can tell he supported decriminalization and allowing individual states to legalize but I don’t see any sources where he supported full legalization.
I have a feeling he’s waiting until closer to the election because the voters have such a short memory. Thats what I would have recommended if I worked for him lol.
"First, I must confess that over the last 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 the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Council-er 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 can’t agree with your methods of direct action;” who paternalistically feels he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by the myth of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait until a “more convenient season.”
Shallow understanding from people of goodwill is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."
There’s no reason for this to be on the list at all, it’s less harmful than beer and has actual medical uses. Alcohol has practically no medical use, kills thousands every year and leaves thousands more with life long debilitating health problems, but it’s not even a controlled substance.
Alcohol makes more babies to keep the labor flowing so rich people can keep getting richer. Don’t abort it, that’s against religion. Just keep it alive until it can work. This is my tinfoil hat theory.
In addition, this article is about his “plans” to do this. Not about his actions. Every election cycle around this time the incumbent president puts out articles about his (because there’s been no her yet) “plans” to reclassify or otherwise loosen marijuana restrictions, but nothing ever happens.
Yup, dangling the bait, same old bag of tricks to avoid just doing whatever they can to achieve the populist progressive policies they claim to support.
Yep and then you’ll get a bunch of people arguing “well the president doesn’t really have much power to change things” in response to the criticism before immediately flipping to “well if [my candidate] doesn’t win the next election, fire and brimstone will rain down from the sky and it will be hell on earth because the other guy will have limitless power!”
This is an argument coined by fascists that is now being used by party loyalists in both the Republican and Democratic parties because they want to maintain the status quo. This is what happens when you keep voting for one of two right-wing parties.
The problem with a two party system - if you are politically engaged enough that Biden’s stance on Israel is enough to change your vote, you probably also don’t align with any of Trump’s policies.
If you are a Democrat, your choices are:
Accept that Biden is the lesser of two evils and vote for him regardless
Somehow decide that all the explicitly stated policies that Trump is proposing are better than Biden’s support for Israel, and vote Republican
Don’t vote - unless you live in a very, very blue state this is practically the same as voting Republican
Vote 3rd party - essentially the same as not voting
Is no one going to acknowledge that a huge portion of the American electorate actually supports Israel’s genocide? Part of living in a democracy is accepting that official policy reflects some mixture of the views of the electorate. If the US electorate is still mixed in its view of Israel then the official US policy should be mixed as well (which it is).
I will use my vote to push for an end to the genocide, the release of hostages, and a stable 2-state solution. But I will not abandon core democratic values just because I find myself in the minority.
Well, no, that’s the one thing you can’t really argue. Biden is indistinguishable from Trump on Israel.
It’s difficult for neoliberal types to wrap their head around, but there is no meaningful difference because neither will stop Netanyahu and the IDF from doing what they’re doing. Biden has not been a moderating force here, he’s been a validating force. Biden sees Palestinians as subhumans the same way Trump does.
I disagree. Trump said the problem with Israel’s actions in Gaza is that they keep recording it, and that they should just finish the job. Netanyahu is so fond of Trump, he inaugurated a town after him in Golan Heights.
So Trump would suggest (again?) that they not record their atrocities…that’s the difference. He doesn’t need to be president to suggest that.
Him giving them propaganda advice is immaterial to the fact that neither Biden nor Trump are or would do anything to hinder the actual genocide.
Netanyahu doesn’t have to like Biden, and in fact he routinely pisses right in Biden’s face and then goes and keeps doing what he’s doing. But yeah, Biden hasn’t publically suggested they should stop recording their atrocities. Oh man, what a fucking hero he is. It’s night and day!
Biden should be acting on the genocide but he isn’t and neither will Trump. The only two people capable of being in office in the next 4 years.
So pressure Congress, protest and do everything you can but in the meantime those two are nothing alike on most other issues and being a single issue voter has never made the system better.
Believe it or not US presidents have had blood on their hands for years. Even seemingly peaceful actions like the withdrawl from Afghanistan get blood everywhere. If elections could stop the bloodshed they would have.
The reality is voting does affect some things but its going to take far more than a vote to stop the killing.
Ok, you don’t believe in democratic rule and things like our country being complicit in bloodshed and genocide are a foregone conclusion, got it. Blocked.
“bloodshed and genocide are a foregone conclusion” -things nobody said
What part of “Its going to be harder than just voting” do you not understand? Stopping violence means putting your life and wellbeing on the line. No amount of online virtue signaling will stop a genocide.
If elections could stop the bloodshed they would have.
The reality is voting does affect some things but its going to take far more than a vote to stop the killing.
You did say that.
Also, you’re arguing that we should put our life and wellbeing on the line to stop this, while simultaneously arguing that being anything but a party loyalist is inexcusable? That’s insanely absurd.
Trying to vote against genocide in the US is obviously not possible - the US was built on genocide, and is designed to be impossible to stop while its not creating inconvenience for people who can vote here. The entire system from the ground up is designed not to be influenced to enough of a degree where that’s an option. Its like trying to swim in a lead suit.
This is why social movements in the US need bodies. When you’re affecting people who can vote or people near them US politicians are easier to influence.
Again you argue that genocide and violence are foregone conclusions while somehow trying to claim that voting for one of the two parties perpetuating it is going to make a difference, or at the very least arguing thst not voting for one of these two parties is somehow wrong. This is completely nonsensical.
Nobody is forcing you to be a party loyalist and there’s no restriction mandating that a Democrat or Republican hold these offices outside of the self-imposed restrictions created by people like you. If you want to shackle yourself to the status quo then so be it, but don’t try to con others into doing the same.
No one is under the impression that voting for either candidate would lead to the end of support of Israel. It’s also not about party loyalty. As I pointed out to you here, it’s about everything else.
You vote uncommitted/blank for the presidency if you want to communicate your unwillingness to tolerate democratic complicity in genocide to the Democrats.
The Uncommitted primary votes mean nothing if people aren’t credibly willing to follow through when Biden gives anti-genocide protestors the finger.
So you’re suggesting Trump then? I’m not sure if you’re aware of the state of the US election system, but there are two candidates that have a chance of being elected. One of them has a voter base that will vote regardless of criminal convictions for attempting to overturn an election, inciting an insurrection, and selling national secrets.
I answered it before you asked it. Trump’s base is loyal to Trump first, and America second. They won’t sway regardless of his convictions, let alone international relations with Israel. Encouraging voter disengagement, abstaining from voting, or voting uncommitted would only fall on the ears of the voters opposing Trump, thereby improving his chances of winning.
A non-vote from a voter who otherwise would have voted against Trump is a vote for Trump. This is how this election must be seen with polls this close and civil rights, international war, and climate change on the line. Stop encouraging voter disengagement unless your goal is another Trump presidency.
I’m not encouraging voter disengagement, I’m saying that Biden simply cannot get my vote without stopping his support of genocide. I simply will not put my name on it.
I still plan on engaging in June and in November though, whatever happens in the interim.
It really bothers me how they’re so willing to lay every Injustice at one side without considering the other or the other areas of the political apparatus they can effect.
But I guess I shouldn’t be so surprised that’s business as usual
civil rights, international war, and climate change on the line.
Those aren’t “on the line” because they aren’t considerations for either one of these candidates.
You’re just arguing to perpetuate the very system that brought us to this point. Don’t try to claim “that’s just how it works” either as it only works that way because of people like you ensuring its survival.
Trump repealed 112 environmental regulations, sending us back over a decade, that Biden has been working hard to replace.
Trump left the Paris Accord, which Biden has signed agreement to.
Trump repealed the Obama-era rights for gender-affirming care that Biden just replaced.
Trump repealed net neutrality, which Biden just reinstated.
Trump stated that Russia should be allowed to attack anyone that doesn’t pay enough to NATO, and told Orbán that he intends to pull support from Ukraine.
Yet the climate change is still getting worse with no concrete action to turn things around.
Gender affirming care is now being banned across the country.
Minorities can no longer receive preferential treatment in hiring or schooling to boost their engagement in areas they’ve historically been excluded from.
Women no longer have the right to abortions.
Net neutrality can just be repealed again by the next FCC chairperson.
Russia continues their invasion of Ukraine in addition to Israel now invading Palestine with the US blocking any NATO resolutions to end the conflicts.
Again, none of this stuff is “on the line” if you’re going to continue to vote for one of these two right-wing parties unless your goal is to perpetuate the suffering.
Very little of this even contradicts anything I said, so your “uninformed” comment is way off base.
What does Trumps climate policy have to do with Biden’s inaction?
Biden just made it illegal for gender-affirming care to be legislated by states
You might want to reread that because he did no such thing. It legislates that federally funded healthcare providers can discriminate against someone because of their sexual orientation or gender identity, meaning a trans woman or gay man can’t be turned away from the hospital when they come in with the flu or a broken arm. It does nothing to prevent states from banning gender affirming care same as it doesn’t prevent states from banning abortions.
SCOTUS repealed Affirmative Action and overturned Roe vs. Wade, due to the heavily conservative appointments
The appointments Republicans were allowed to make because the Democrats rolled over and allowed McConnell to stonewall Obama from making an appointment a year before his term was up before again rolling over and allowing Trump to make an appointment a month before his term was up?
Russia will succeed in their invasion if the US fails to provide support, which is Trump’s position
Meanwhile Biden kicked Ukraine funding to congress to be used as a political football where it was lumped in with more funding for Israel and a sale of TikTok to a US company so that the US government can backdoor into it like they do with all the rest of US social media in order to monitor our communications. What a feat!
Ok, well, I decided right now that I was going to vote for Trump but now I’m voting uncommitted, so that’s a vote for Biden in your book. You should be happy.
You can always vote however you want I’m not trying to change that I’m just trying to get you to understand that your actions may not have your desired end result and why.
We agree on what needs to happen just not the methods.
Can you explain how voting for Biden is “avoiding 2016 pt. 2?” It seems “2016 pt. 2” keeps happening anyway because people insist that we keep doing the same thing over and over again.
Do you sincerely not see a difference in the last 4 years as opposed to the four prior? We’ve had an increase action on health Care, student debt, decriminalization of marijuana, environmental action and a whole lot more.
I’m not saying it’s perfect I’m just saying he’s the best option we’ve got and if you want to sway him more in the direction you want then in the meantime pressuring Congress will allow you to do that.
Lack of votes don’t pressure anyone only votes do.
The only difference I’ve noticed is the lack of daily headlines regarding some new ‘gaffe’ committed by the president.
This vague list of action might as well be meaningless as it is little more than half measures and virtue signaling. Healthcare is still as expensive as it ever was, college is still as expensive as it ever was, marijuana is already legal in 1/2 the country and medically legal in 4/5th of the country, climate change is still rapidly getting worse, homelessness is increasing, housing prices are increasing, wages are still suppressed, unions are still suppressed, women, minorities, and LGBT people now have fewer rights.
Biden is only the best option we’ve got if you limit your support to one of two individuals out of 330 million citizens.
Lack of votes is the only way to pressure someone. How would anyone feel pressured to do anything after they’ve already received your vote? It’s not like you can take it back after the fact. This is precisely why neither of these two parties has to do anything beneficial in order to win elections. They deceive you into trapping yourself in a box where only two candidates exist while banking on the fact that you’d never vote for the other one.
If you want change, you actually have to change your actions. It’s not going to happen by doing the same thing you’ve always done.
I’m sorry but evidence does not support your claims, there are plenty of white papers to support the theory that votes and indeed the demographics that vote the most have the most sway in political policy especially in the US.
I’m saying you have a choice to make between two candidates, it shouldn’t be that narrow and we should try to change that but for now under the system we’ve been given that is our options barring violent protest.
Or you can choose to act upon any other apparatus of the political system such as Congress or municipal government. Not voting is an ineffective means of asserting your political intent.
Unfortunately, if you view a vote as being complicit you’re complicit no matter what.
Because with the two party bias there are only two people capable of being in that office and not voting for either of them is still a vote in and of itself.
To be clear I don’t care who you vote for but you need to accept the reality that you are choosing one of the two whether you mean to or not.
That’s why Congress is the only realistic way we can pressure our political system to stop what’s currently going on. The government doesn’t stop at the president and plenty of our Congress supports it too which is what allows it to be the way it is.
Yeah you absolutely can but that will whether you intend to or not give power to the other party. Which if your goal is to assuage your moral complicitency then I think you need to rethink your end result.
He needs to rethink his end result? What about your end result, the thing that we’re currently experiencing? You’re trying to twist people’s arm into keeping the machine going even though that machine has been failing us for the last 50 years, yet somehow you think this time it’s going to make a difference.
Could you please be a little more polite I’m still a human being. I understand it’s an emotional topic but I’ve remained cordial.
I think my prior responses outline pretty thoroughly why I think it will achieve a worse end result. I also understand that it may not be their intent however I don’t think that really matters.
The end result is not concerned solely with this coming election cycle. The lesser of two evils strategy is an undeniable failure, propping up lunatic opponents to make right-wing Dems more palatable is a failure, it has led us to the brink of fascism. At no point has the “tide begun to turn” because people went along with neoliberal strategy. The only chance at stopping that momentum is reforming Democratic politics, that cannot occur if Dems face no electoral consequences for the very worst fascist behavior.
A vote for Biden is a vote for the direction this country has been going for 40 years, it’s a concession to the right-wing of the democratic party. You are simply in a privleged enough position to not have been effected by it yet so you are looking to your own immediate self-interest and chastising others for not helping you preserve your bubble.
No I am very affected by it, please do not assume. I have never chastised you. Every single time I have talked kindly and merely pointed out some moral fallacies in your argument.
Unfortunately not voting for them doesn’t teach them anything we learned that in 2016, the DNC still holds most of the same positions, abstaining just does not work with the current voting structure.
The only thing we got in return was 4 years of environmental deregulation, deregulation of employment protections, deregulation of election protections and so much more.
We are at a pivotal point in our planet’s history where if we don’t stop the excess carbon being put in the atmosphere there won’t be anyone left to save. I know Biden hasn’t taken as much action on this as everyone would like but he’s taking a heck of a lot more than Trump ever will.
So even if your long-term goal was achieved by putting pressure here and not voting which I’m can assure you given past circumstance it won’t, the irreparable damage to the planet and our country can’t simply be undone if your goal is achieved.
However Congress is not in such a lofty position and much easier to pressure so I urge you to pressure them instead. As they have the means to make an actual difference.
I don’t think someone telling me to actively put my stamp of approval on a genocide can lecture about moral fallacies. That’s simply not a position you can take.
In any case, you’re trying to convince the wrong person, I don’t have the power to change what Biden is doing. You need to be finding ways to make your case to him and your representatives about their choice not to pressure him.
He has time to take action before November, he’s aware of the conditions people have placed on their votes. He seems convinced that the votes of people like you will carry him. If you don’t want him playing chicken with ypur rights it’s up to you to make that clear.
Voting is not a stamp of approval I’ve established that pretty strongly with evidence and theory. It can never be a stamp approval as long as the current system for voting is in place.
You do have a moral fallacy you say that you’re complicit if you vote for someone who is immoral. To extend this logic you’re also complicit in every other evil that could have been prevented. I don’t think we need a replay of 2016 to establish that a republican victory will do more harm both short and long-term.
I’m not saying you shouldn’t pressure him I’m saying you can’t. Your methods will not work, never will. Because the voting system we have in place does not allow lack of votes to pressure, only votes pressure. It’s why millennials get so little of what they want because they don’t vote like older generations do.
So why is pressuring Congress the one piece of action you actually have left so out of the question?
there are only two people capable of being in that office
No, anyone eligible is capable of holding that office. The reason why it’s typically only a member of one of two parties is because of people like you to continue to give them your vote and pressure others to do the same.
I wish you all the luck in the world but I can tell you now that it is not me acknowledging the fact that our system has an inherent two party bias that assured the last 50 years of one of the two parties.
How can you argue that it’s impossible for anyone outside the Republican or Democratic party to hold office while also arguing that’s it’s imperative we vote for one of them? Both can’t be true and if you really believe that it’s impossible to affect things, I see no reason why you should feel the need to be arguing with us at all.
Are you just simply incapable of imagining that but much much worse? Like seriously. I get it dude, what the Israeli government is doing is fucking monstrous. And anyone paying attention to anything knows that not re-electcing Biden will make the nightmare several orders of magnitudes more awful.
That’s my whole point. Yeah it’s bad right now, but it can and will get worse if Trump is elected. This is a fact.
There is no restraint placed on Israel, they are doing exactly what they would do under a Trump admin because you can’t do less than nothing.
It’s like saying “I know we left the door unlocked and open and that’s how the burglers got in, but can you imagine how much worse it would’ve been if we had removed the door from the hinges?”
I can only assume you haven’t actually been paying attention to what’s happening in Gaza. It is a genocide. Israel is doing exactly what they want with no restriction.
Trump literally moved our embassy to Jerusalem. You’re a fucking fool if you think Trump and the psychotic dispensationalists that make up his base wouldn’t make that situation much much worse, then I honestly do not know what to tell you. These people literally want more of this shit because they think it means the rapture is coming. And yes, that is a significant portion of his financial base. That isn’t fringe Republican stuff anymore.
Shit is really fucking bad over there, but if you don’t think it can get worse (and do so with direct aid and support of the US government), then you must understand very little about human behavior.
Surely it’s so egregious an action that Biden will reverse it any day now because he’s totally different than Donald Trump on Israel. At least Biden is only actively funding a genocide and not moving our embassy to Jerusalem.
I bet Trump would vote for legislation making it illegal to criticize Israel. Good thing he’s not in office.
If you vote for either of these candidates, you’re encouraging the eradication of Palestine. We’re currently funding and arming them in their pursuit of genocide.
Kinda funny to see this sentiment here right below the MLK Jr. quote calling out your exact point of view.
who constantly says “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I can’t agree with your methods of direct action;” who paternalistically feels he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by the myth of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait until a “more convenient season.”
You’ve misinterpreted this quote. This is about violent protest and Democrats unwillingness to engage or support them during trying to forcefully take back the rights.
However that’s decidedly not the solution you have proposed. You’ve proposed inaction.
You’ve misinterpreted the quote here as King famously advocated for nonviolence, and at the time Democrats were the party of racists opposing integration and civil rights. In fact, this is so widely known that it now makes me question your motives here.
You may well ask: “Why direct action? Why sit ins, marches and so forth? Isn’t negotiation a better path?” You are quite right in calling for negotiation. Indeed, this is the very purpose of direct action. Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. My citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent resister may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word “tension.” I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth. Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, so must we see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood. The purpose of our direct action program is to create a situation so crisis packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation. I therefore concur with you in your call for negotiation. Too long has our beloved Southland been bogged down in a tragic effort to live in monologue rather than dialogue.
…We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. Frankly, I have yet to engage in a direct action campaign that was “well timed” in the view of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation. For years now I have heard the word “Wait!” It rings in the ear of every Negro with piercing familiarity. This “Wait” has almost always meant “Never.” We must come to see, with one of our distinguished jurists, that “justice too long delayed is justice denied.”
…I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, 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.
Actively choosing not to vote for one of two parties oppressing us and harming the nation is not “inaction.” I’d argue that continuing the status quo is the very definition of inaction as not only are you doing nothing to change things, you’re voting to perpetuate it.
You’re right upon submitting it to scrutiny of the source that had originally broke down that quote I believe I was incorrect about the part of the violent protests.
I’m very aware that it was about the Democrats lack of support for his movement and their inaction during that time. The failures of the democratic party are very clear.
I’ve never taken issue with what you’re saying. You can repeat it as much as you want, not even telling you to delay action I wish you would take action right now. What you are encouraging though is absolutely inaction in every sense of the word.
To put your logic to the test please explain to me how the 20-year low of voter turnout for the Democrats in 2016 was able to meaningfully affect policy.
As I said before, both of these parties represent the status quo so there’s no motivation for them to create any meaningful policy when they know they’re still going to retain roughly 50% of the government at any given time.
Democrats have held a super majority multiple times over the years and the best we got from that was a Republican crafted healthcare plan that cemented the role of private insurers into law and ensured that there’d be zero political will to meddle with healthcare again for a very long time. That’s the best we get from them even after being good little minions and ensuring they could control the whole show with our votes.
Not voting does nothing. It doesn’t show that you disagree, it doesn’t prevent things from happening.
It is the ultimate inaction that agrees with the status quo. As fucked as the two party system we have is, not engaging with it still let’s it perpetuate. You can’t just wash your hands of the system with some dreams and wishes that inaction causes change. No one, and I truly fucking mean no one, is counting the people who don’t vote.
If you want to cause change, then marches, protests, and disruptions are the tools. Not sitting idly by while others make their opinions heard. Until we have a voting reform, this is the tool we have. So work towards changing or replacing that tool with something better. But don’t think not using it will somehow make a difference.
Edit: ah fuck, it’s this right wing conservative account that keeps popping up. I should block you, but it’s better to have opposing viewpoints and be able to respond than it is to allow you to speak without debate.
Not voting does nothing. It doesn’t show that you disagree, it doesn’t prevent things from happening.
Voting for Biden didn’t change anything in 2020 either as now in 2024, we’re right back where we were in 2016 and 2020. Acting like we should just compromise our morals this time by supporting a guy funding and arming a genocide because ‘the other guy is so much worse’ is just a trap they’ve put you in because there is always going to be ‘the worse other guy’ so long as you help perpetuate this cycle.
Voting for Dems and Republicans is inaction as you’re doing nothing but maintaining their positions of authority and maintaining the status quo. The only way this could be seen as ‘action’ is if your goal is keeping them in power.
No one, and I truly fucking mean no one, is counting the people who don’t vote.
This is hilarious as the other guy replying just brought up the low Democratic turnout in 2016. People are absolutely counting this. The fewer people that support these two parties, the less power and influence they’ll have. This opens up space for alternative parties, the same as it would if we were talking about businesses like Walmart and Target. You think they’re behemoths that can just survive forever without any customers, but that isn’t the case.
If you want to cause change, then marches, protests, and disruptions are the tools.
It’s funny you bring that up because college students are currently doing that on campuses and college administrators along with Democratic and Republican leaders are siccing the police on them and disparaging them in the media.
Not sitting idly by while others make their opinions heard.
Are you not hearing my opinion here?
Until we have a voting reform
When will we have it? It sounds like you’re passively waiting for it to arise by doing nothing other than electing the same people each election.
Edit: ah fuck, it’s this right wing conservative account that keeps popping up.
🙄 typical misinformation. I challenge you to quote or link to even one right-wing viewpoint I’ve given at any point in time.
I sure hope that dude is a troll or a bot I really try to give most people benefit of the doubt but those might take the cake was the most insane takes I’ve ever heard.
As I wrote in a thread further down, discouraging people from voting is unethical disengagement. Trump’s base will vote for him even if he’s convicted of all 88 criminal charges, so your argument is falling on the ears of his opponents.
My point above is that the voting options are bad or worse for Palestinians. Worse also comes with harm to Ukrainians, Taiwanese, and Americans.
And Biden’s base will vote for him regardless of the number of dead innocent men, women, and children killed with US funding and weapons, so that should cancel out any support from Trump’s base.
Don’t speak about ethics while demanding that we support slaughter.
There’s no “bad or worse” here. If you vote for Biden or Trump, you’re voting to make things worse for everyone.
Meaning as long as shitty Republicans are around, the Democratic party can count on your vote, right?
Do you not see how that gives them zero incentive to rock the boat or make any of the drastic changes that are sorely needed?
Do you think one day the Republican party is just going to evaporate leaving the Democrats to ‘finally’ start doing all that stuff they’ve been promising us in order to get elected?
Add comment