Is this anyone’s position? Calling him Genocide Joe, protesting at his campaign events, is about holding his feet to the fire. I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone saying they won’t vote for Joe Biden because of it. Cause a vote for Joe isn’t a vote for Joe, it’s a vote against fascism.
Just because there’s opposition, doesn’t mean that not supporting someone means supporting the opposition.
There’ve literally been articles posted to the fediverse about people saying they’d rather not vote than vote for Biden because of his support for Netenyahu and the IDF.
Muslim Americans said they did not expect former President Donald Trump to treat their community any better if re-elected, but saw denying Biden votes as their only means to shape US policy.
“We’re not supporting Trump,” he said, adding the Muslim community would decide how to interview other candidates.
For the primary, sure that makes sense to try and enact change, but in the general election a vote for anyone other than Biden is the same as a vote for Trump.
I wanted to remain neutral when linking the article, but that’s my take as well.
While I hate that people weaponize the saying “voting for an independent party is throwing away your vote” as a way to pressure others into voting for their preferred party, the logic behind it is not wrong. It would take a substantial amount of organization and commitment to make a third party viable. Considering that, any vote that isn’t for Biden is effectively a vote for Trump.
It would take a substantial amount of organization to make a third party viable
That’s the thing, FPTP doesn’t allow that. It doesn’t “make a third party viable” even if you get all the votes needed. It’s “usurp one of the two parties” instead, as whichever party failed to conquer the contender gets subsumed by them, if their ideologies are in any way compatible.
I mean, I do think actually acting on that statement is foolish… but it doesn’t mean they never made the statement. Just because we believe something to go against the common good doesn’t mean people of generally good will don’t take those actions for what they believe to be good reasons.
The situations sucks. It has sucked for a long time. And it’s not going to get better quickly or easily. Unfortunately refusing to act in the main way you can to make that difference makes it that much harder and take that much more time.
If you haven’t been a part of the larger conversation till now, and you’re just jumping in with accusations and shit, you weren’t adding anything to begin with.
Is this anyone’s position? Calling him Genocide Joe, protesting at his campaign events, is about holding his feet to the fire. I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone saying they won’t vote for Joe Biden because of it. Cause a vote for Joe isn’t a vote for Joe, it’s a vote against fascism.
Just because there’s opposition, doesn’t mean that not supporting someone means supporting the opposition.
There’ve literally been articles posted to the fediverse about people saying they’d rather not vote than vote for Biden because of his support for Netenyahu and the IDF.
Then give me one. I haven’t seen these posts and you say they’re here, show me please.
Here’s one. It took me longer to type the search query than to find a relevant article from the search results.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/12/3/us-muslims-pledge-to-ditch-biden-in-2024-over-his-stance-on-israel-gaza-war
For the primary, sure that makes sense to try and enact change, but in the general election a vote for anyone other than Biden is the same as a vote for Trump.
I wanted to remain neutral when linking the article, but that’s my take as well.
While I hate that people weaponize the saying “voting for an independent party is throwing away your vote” as a way to pressure others into voting for their preferred party, the logic behind it is not wrong. It would take a substantial amount of organization and commitment to make a third party viable. Considering that, any vote that isn’t for Biden is effectively a vote for Trump.
That’s the thing, FPTP doesn’t allow that. It doesn’t “make a third party viable” even if you get all the votes needed. It’s “usurp one of the two parties” instead, as whichever party failed to conquer the contender gets subsumed by them, if their ideologies are in any way compatible.
I mean, I do think actually acting on that statement is foolish… but it doesn’t mean they never made the statement. Just because we believe something to go against the common good doesn’t mean people of generally good will don’t take those actions for what they believe to be good reasons.
The situations sucks. It has sucked for a long time. And it’s not going to get better quickly or easily. Unfortunately refusing to act in the main way you can to make that difference makes it that much harder and take that much more time.
Thanks!
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
snappy retort
See how that doesn’t add anything to the conversation?
deleted by creator
If you haven’t been a part of the larger conversation till now, and you’re just jumping in with accusations and shit, you weren’t adding anything to begin with.