Yeah, alienating people for not supporting genocide is such an excellent move. Did you happen to work as a strategist with Harris campaign because this is right up their alley.
Why because I don’t blindly support and fiercely defend a strategy that tanked nearly three Democratic presidential candidates in a row?
Nah, it’s definitely going to work the fourth time. I’m back on board.
I won’t deny that it was a stupid move by the dems, but at the same time choosing to abstain from one of the most important elections in US history because you don’t want to choose between the lesser of two evils is just naive. Life is literally full of choosing between the lesser of two evils, inside and outside of politics. And I understand that the situation in Gaza is fucked up, but I also know that by abstaining it only made the situation worse. I know its not 100% their fault as there were many factors that led to Trump winning, but I personally don’t think betting with other people’s lives is altruistic. I think it’s selfish.
It’s a fucking war. Sometimes the only option you get is to put off losing. We didn’t do that, in no small part because of idiot idealists who apparently refuse to understand a concept so basic even chimps get it. Now, thanks to that and SO much more, even being hopeful is approaching the realm of deluded fantasy.
I have no problem alienating people who think their own precious idea of morality is somehow so sacrosanct it can’t be compromised even to actually save the lives they pretend to care about.
Kamala/Biden were already losing before the Palestine conflict started. Palestine did not cause Kamala to lose the election. She could have used Palestine as a signal that she intended to truly strike out in a new direction, but she chose not to do that.
Unfortunately, that kind of radical break from the past was the only hope any Democrat had in 2024. People have this weird view that 2024 is an anomaly. It’s not. 2020 was the anomaly. Trump only lost in 2020 because of covid. If not for covid, Trump would have easily won in 2020.
You might as well be blaming Gaza for the Libertarian party not winning. The existing Democratic party is as nonviable at the presidential level as the Libertarian party is. The current Democratic leadership is fundamentally incapable of winning a national presidential election. They literally are not capable of it. They got lucky in 2020 due to a disaster of historic proportions, but in normal times, they are not capable of wielding a candidate that will win a presidential election.
Only radical change and reform in the DNC can change this. And this is ultimately why scapegoating the handful of people who actually stayed home due to Gaza is counterproductive. If you think Kamala lost in 2024 due to Gaza, you’re going to be sorely, sorely disappointed in 2028 when another DNC centrist fails to win, even when the Gaza issue is no longer on the table.
“It’s a fucking war that’s why we need to give them bombs, arms, jets, cash, and our full support. It’s our only option”
Look, I get it, and I’d be grieving too if I openly supported such atrocities, and it all turned out to be for nothing, but you’re eventually going to find yourself standing alone with the other RadLibs as nobody finds diet-Republican ideals appealing.
I feel like there’s very little chance you intentionally misinterpreted my comment, so in the interest of keeping civil discourse alive: what’s happening in Palestine isn’t a war, it’s a massacre, and I was referring to the nascent civil war and fascist takeover of the US when I said ‘war’ (and to the things like rampant persecution of LGB (and especially T) people, the open violence against the poor and minorities, etc.).
When you refuse to pick the lesser of two evils, what you are actually saying is you’re comfortable with either one.
When you refuse to see that picking evil will never lead to anything other than additional harm and suffering, you’re saying you’re comfortable with that.
How can you take issue with the person who chose another path and not the one you literally described as “evil?”
and by not picking either “evil” you allowed the worse one to win causing additional harm and suffering, and you’re comfortable with that
you chose nothing thinking your inaction was the start of the great revolution that will fix the world
i’m thinking logic is not your strong suit
In a real life trolley problem, you are supposed to blame the ones driving the train and tying up people to tracks, not the guy pulling the lever.
Yes not voting was stupid, but it’s dumber to actually think they hold the blame. The dems won’t even acknowledge being pro genocide was a bad move and it’s because they feel confident their base has been manipulated to blame a scape goat.
What kind of change are we to expect if we can’t even be vocal about something so ridiculous as supporting genocide even after most of us held the line and voted for it anyways. Keep them accountable and stop giving them an easy out.
You can be vocal about it and still vote for the lesser evil in order to reduce harm and save lives.
