Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., said in an interview with NBC News that he will encourage progressive voters to still back Democrats on the ticket in November even if moderates are victorious in the primaries.
3500 people died in one day due to extreme heat in India. At that rate you’d surpass Gaza’s death toll in less than 20 days, and it’s only getting worse. Countless more are now turning into climate refugees, forced from their unlivable homes just like the Palestinians. Tell me how little those lives mean to you.
Tell me you’re fine with 3500 deaths - the vast majority being children, the elderly, pregnant women and chronically ill - on top of hundreds of Gazan children just to keep your moral purity. Palestinians are still being murdered, but at least the excess mountain of human suffering let you feel good about yourself.
3500 people died in one day due to extreme heat in India.
The pedophile trump didn’t start climate change, you can blame the red and blue party for that, both parties served capitalism and corporations for a century and boycotted people who tried to change the system for good.
Tell me how little those lives mean to you.
I’m the one advocating for human lives and you are calling me out for it
Tell me you’re fine with 3500 deaths - the vast majority being children, the elderly, pregnant women and chronically ill
I’m not and that’s why i’m arguing we shouldn’t vote for the parties that enabled this to happen. The genocide in gaza is just the tip of the iceberg of what the US government has been involved with.
on top of hundreds of Gazan children just to keep your moral purity. Palestinians are still being murdered, but at least the excess mountain of human suffering let you feel good about yourself.
I’ve never argued that, that’s more what you are doing right now.
Lmao I didn’t know parrots could ride bikes but here you are backpedaling! Impressive!
both parties
Blah blah blah both parties. Guess what, we could have swallowed the pill to keep the vast majority of those people alive 20 years ago when voting in the 2000 presidential election. Instead people “both sides-ed” and stayed home with atrocious turnout. They made the choice that killed those people and YOU are making the same choice today. But your choice is even more callous because we don’t have to theorize about the tragedy, you can see it happening live.
The march of fascism and collapse of capitalism is irrelevant to the conversation. One corrupt politician
spent decades building climate into his political platform, regardless of what other theoretical ways he would fuck us. The other was drill baby drill. And now those people are dying.
I’m the one advocating for human lives and you are calling me out for it
No jackass, YOU’RE advocating for non-voting as a tribute to DEAD victims. Your gesture didn’t bring them back to life or even slow the genocide. The USA is trampling around causing as much, if not more, damage than ever.
I’M advocating for human LIVES. Real people, alive today and just as oppressed under the boot of capitalism, who now are going to die because every non-Democrat vote didn’t value their lives. That’s the difference in our stances.
The genocide in gaza is just the tip of the iceberg of what the US government has been involved with
For reference, 1.3 million people is about as many deaths as the USA caused in Vietnam. You’re perfectly capable of rationalizing suffering on the scale of one of the largest human tragedies in modern history but you draw the line at what is literally “the tip of the iceberg” in your own words.
The fact is that you don’t care about minimizing human suffering, you care about having to see viscera. Admitting that the real world requires shitty choices causes cognitive dissonance with your ideological naval gazing; it’s simpler to brush those dying Indian children away as necessary for your imagined scheme.
I’ve never argued that, that’s more what you are doing right now.
But you did! Your argument was an emotional appeal to videos of dying children. You couldn’t vote for a collaborator to that tragedy that because it made you feel bad. You felt it would be an endorsement of genocide and incongruent with your self image.
I acknowledge that my 2024 presidential vote went to a genocide enabler; I’ve laid out the reasons it was strategically defensible in keeping millions alive and mitigating permanent damage to the only biosphere we’ll ever get. Can you stomach your choice? Can you tell me what rational tree of outcomes had such a high likelihood of improving humanity’s future that you would tacitly endorse the death of millions? Or are you ashamed that you made an emotional, unconsidered and impatient decision?
https://www.indiatoday.in/science/story/india-heatwave-deaths-study-extreme-heat-public-health-emergency-climate-change-2920200-2026-06-01
3500 people died in one day due to extreme heat in India. At that rate you’d surpass Gaza’s death toll in less than 20 days, and it’s only getting worse. Countless more are now turning into climate refugees, forced from their unlivable homes just like the Palestinians. Tell me how little those lives mean to you.
Tell me you’re fine with 3500 deaths - the vast majority being children, the elderly, pregnant women and chronically ill - on top of hundreds of Gazan children just to keep your moral purity. Palestinians are still being murdered, but at least the excess mountain of human suffering let you feel good about yourself.
The pedophile trump didn’t start climate change, you can blame the red and blue party for that, both parties served capitalism and corporations for a century and boycotted people who tried to change the system for good.
I’m the one advocating for human lives and you are calling me out for it
I’m not and that’s why i’m arguing we shouldn’t vote for the parties that enabled this to happen. The genocide in gaza is just the tip of the iceberg of what the US government has been involved with.
I’ve never argued that, that’s more what you are doing right now.
Lmao I didn’t know parrots could ride bikes but here you are backpedaling! Impressive!
Blah blah blah both parties. Guess what, we could have swallowed the pill to keep the vast majority of those people alive 20 years ago when voting in the 2000 presidential election. Instead people “both sides-ed” and stayed home with atrocious turnout. They made the choice that killed those people and YOU are making the same choice today. But your choice is even more callous because we don’t have to theorize about the tragedy, you can see it happening live.
The march of fascism and collapse of capitalism is irrelevant to the conversation. One corrupt politician spent decades building climate into his political platform, regardless of what other theoretical ways he would fuck us. The other was drill baby drill. And now those people are dying.
No jackass, YOU’RE advocating for non-voting as a tribute to DEAD victims. Your gesture didn’t bring them back to life or even slow the genocide. The USA is trampling around causing as much, if not more, damage than ever.
I’M advocating for human LIVES. Real people, alive today and just as oppressed under the boot of capitalism, who now are going to die because every non-Democrat vote didn’t value their lives. That’s the difference in our stances.
For reference, 1.3 million people is about as many deaths as the USA caused in Vietnam. You’re perfectly capable of rationalizing suffering on the scale of one of the largest human tragedies in modern history but you draw the line at what is literally “the tip of the iceberg” in your own words.
The fact is that you don’t care about minimizing human suffering, you care about having to see viscera. Admitting that the real world requires shitty choices causes cognitive dissonance with your ideological naval gazing; it’s simpler to brush those dying Indian children away as necessary for your imagined scheme.
But you did! Your argument was an emotional appeal to videos of dying children. You couldn’t vote for a collaborator to that tragedy that because it made you feel bad. You felt it would be an endorsement of genocide and incongruent with your self image.
I acknowledge that my 2024 presidential vote went to a genocide enabler; I’ve laid out the reasons it was strategically defensible in keeping millions alive and mitigating permanent damage to the only biosphere we’ll ever get. Can you stomach your choice? Can you tell me what rational tree of outcomes had such a high likelihood of improving humanity’s future that you would tacitly endorse the death of millions? Or are you ashamed that you made an emotional, unconsidered and impatient decision?