745
‘Useful Idiot for Russia’: DNC Decides to Go Off on Jill Stein
(www.thebulwark.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 20 Sep 2024
745 points (100.0% liked)
politics
19107 readers
3571 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
All these articles attacking Stein my make people not vote for her, but they aren't going to convince anyone to vote for Harris.
If you don't want Trump, you only have one choice.
I don't want any cheerleader for genocide.
In what world has Trump done anything to suggest he'd support or push a ceasefire?
Harris has both said and done more to push for a ceasefire than literally every other candidate on the ballot.
There is no third party candidate that has a hope of winning right now, thus every vote for third party is the same as not voting.
And not voting is effectively the same as voting Republican, so you're either voting for Harris, or you're supporting Trump.
Where the hell did you see me say I would ever vote for Trump? Harris has not done a fucking thing to "push for a ceasefire". The strongest thing she has said, as far as I know, is that she " wouldn't be silent about what is going on in Gaza". The very next day, she published a letter condemning the people who protested Netanyahu's visit. The dem party is full of outright and de facto Zionists, who preferred to have conservatives speak at their convention rather than Palestinian Americans. I'm not voting for, or supporting either Trump or Harris. Harris does still have time to win the votes of people like me. I hope you're calling your dem reps and demanding it.
If you don't think Trump would be even worse ~~for~~ than Harris in regards to Palestine, you're delusional. Contrary to popular edgelord opinion the lesser evil is still better than the greater evil.
I agree that she should be more clear on demanding a ceasefire (although she did actually partly demand just that in March, at least for 6 weeks - and again during the debate), and that this war could probably be stopped if she made such demands. The current US administration is working to end the fighting, so not voting for the party that is actually working to end the war is at the detriment to the people of Gaza.
Now compare that to Trump:
So he would basically allow a full scale genocide, no holds barred.
That being said though, this is likely not going to end anytime soon due to the massive pager/radio attack on Hezbollah that's likely going to make this whole quagmire even worse. And I 100% agree with you that the US/Kamala/Biden should put Israel in it's place before this whole powder keg turns into WWIII, which is not outside the realm of possibilities to anyone who has studied history and the role multiple global conflicts played in the past to lead to world war.
But she's working night and day on a ceasefire deal....😂
Are you people allergic to good faith arguments?
No, but it seems like you people are.
They arent going to convince anyone to vote for Trump either, so what's your point, comrade?
My point, comrade, is that all this desperate energy spent tearing down Jill Stein would be better spent changing the policies that are turning off potential dem voters.
Methinks perhaps you overstate the intensity and desperation of the energy, but your point is absolutely valid, and they should do that outside of election season too!
Going to add as well that the only party that might actually change those policies will be the dems, since the GOP SUPER won't, and the green party has zero chance of gaining any power.
Well since you've said it - yeah the Dems have more political power. Which is why it would show leadership and political finesse for Dems to focus their messaging around policy changes that would enable a fairer and safer voting system that eliminates spoiler candidates, like approval choice voting. THAT would attract 3rd party voters. Because it includes them. Instead the messaging above alienates and divides people. It's bad.
I actually don't understand how we all collectively watched Whose Line? in the 90s and somehow still don't understand the concept of "yes, and," and including people's concerns. If Dems want 3rd party voters, they will have to respect their concerns and not try to verbally abuse them, or use fear, obligation, guilt, or shame to emotionally abuse them.
And btw yes I'm voting for Kamala. But man watching Dems fumble EVERY ELECTION because they can't let go of emotional manipulation and abuse rhetoric is so cringy.
Yeah watching the Dems is painful AF. They get real close to GETTING it and then fall back into their political safe zone. The 3rd party voters might not have the numbers, but they have good ideas for the future of the country that need to be considered.
We need more Bernies & AOCs on the inside to pull dems back (at least) toward centre and make them understand that 3rd party voters have some great ideas for bringing positive change and equity. Even if the Dems can't fully embrace them, let's nudge the needle back toward progress by paying attention to them. The Dems might do. The GOP won't. So if there are only two viable parties in the presidential (and congressional) race there's a clear choice if anyone really wants the opportunity to (frustratingly slowly) change anything for the better.
I always say it's easier to shame dems into doing the right thing. The GOP have no shame to leverage.
Trump doesn't care about Ukraine at all. What do you think of that?
I agree. This feels the similar to gerrymandering or restricting access to vote for minorities. They should be able to win without having to walk through a gutter.