Trump led an insurrection against the US and was allowed to be president again despite not being eligible to do so.

Grifters excepting cash when it is handed to them is not surprising. The grifter working for the Trump administration is not surprising.

They didn't show the entire tweet chain. Murphy starts off saying we should abandon neoliberalism which is good. But then finished by uncritically supporting men's rights, abandoning social issues, and abandoning action on climate change.

He's calling for Democrats to move to the right. The big tent he's pitching is fascism. A true populist movement that champions socialism and progressive causes can bring people together while also championing these issues.

Always remember that we had a democracy. Fascists took it from us by leveraging the flaws in our institutions to take power.

The people who lie about our history do not value democracy, our freedoms, or us.

If pollution under Trump is as bad as he is promising the idea of hitting 5 degrees C by 2075 doesn't seem that far fetched.

It's 2024 so that's 51 years from now. I'm 31. If I'm not dead by then I would be 82. So I could, in theory, live to see it.

TLDR If you care about the Palestinians then vote for Harris because her being president is useful for reaching a ceasefire.

The other post about this topic got locked as I was typing a reply. I feel like my comment is relevant to this discussion so I would like to leave it here. I would think this reply, the original comment, and this post are tightly related and are all about the same thing.

One thing I’ve learned this election cycle is how few people have any knowledge of utilitarianism. Genocide is better than genocide+1. Not acting is a moral choice, and frequently a cowardly one.

There is utilitarianism the ethical philosophy and there is utility. Utilitarianism is still a form a moral reasoning as it subjectively elevates the maximization of happiness and well-being. And what constitutes happiness and well-being is not universal. Utility is a method of analysis used to determine how effectively a stated action advances a stated goal. Utility relies on empirical evidence, observation and math, and is goal agnostic.

For many people on Lemmy, their goals are probably roughly summarized by wanting to end Israel's genocide, Palestinian statehood, and general prosperity for the Palestinian people. Harris has stated multiple times that she wants a ceasefire. Trump has stated he thinks Israel needs to be allowed to finish what they started. Trump has also stated he's going to be a dictator on day one and that his followers are never going to have to vote again.

Moral reasoning that is consistent with our goals paralyzes us in this case. Voting for a candidate whose administration oversaw and contributed to a genocide of Palestinians is subjectively immoral. Voting for a candidate who is threatening to complete a genocide of Palestinians is subjectively immoral. Not voting or voting third party when the candidate threatening to complete a genocide of Palestinians is favored by the electoral college in a FPTP system is subjectively immoral. We can subjectively state one of these options to be the lesser evil, but we have no empirical way to measure evil. Thus in theory, there is no way to form a consensus with subjective moral reasoning alone.

For people whose goal is to support the Palestinian people, it is useful to elect Harris, because someone in power who wants a ceasefire is a useful step to actually getting a ceasefire. Where as Trump will allow Israel to complete it's genocide and end our democracy. This would allow Israel to continue it's genocide indefinitely without US citizens ever being able to influence US foreign policy again.

Everyone is prone to moral reasoning. It's intuitive and philosophers have been doing it since ancient times. In this case, there is a consensus around wanting to help the Palestinian people. But any given moral reasoning derived from our goal doesn't necessarily lead us to a course of action that can help them. With a clear goal in mind, utility provides a clear-cut and consistent answer in the form of voting for Harris. edit: typo

Have a coconut. 🥥

edit: Also, you missed the 196 Wizard War.

Biden wasn't viable because he has cognitive decline. Kamala will mop the floor with Trump in debates.

This test screwed me up in first grade. I thought it was some kind of grammar test so I kept asking if it was a verb, a noun, or an adverb. The test giver was some researcher and was convinced I wasn't taking the test seriously because I wouldn't say wugs. He got kind of angry and I found the whole thing to be kind of distressing. I asked to stop and he just got even angrier and said something like, "No one has ever had trouble with the wug test before". I was convinced I was bad at grammar for years after that. Anyway, wugs! =)

The Uncommitted Movement's goal to get high uncommitted voter turnout in the primary so that Joe Biden changes his outdated views on Palestine and Israel is great.

However if people vote uncommitted in the primaries because they are convinced Biden is Genocide Joe then they aren't going to want to vote for Biden in the general election.

I see a lot of people in comments sections, including this one, saying we should let states secede because they would lose federal funding and this would punish those states. I get that a lot of this is people joking around. But I would like to point out this isn't an effective way to punish the fascists who are actually causing problems.

The fascists in control of those states are usually wealthy individuals and won't be harmed by this at all. The people who will be harmed by this is our fellow people. Also, not everyone in those states identify as Republicans. Take Texas as an example where a majority of people are not Republican.

https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/religious-landscape-study/state/texas/party-affiliation/

Only 39% of Texas adults identify as Republican or lean Republican. 21% have no lean and 40% identify as Democrat or lean Democrat.

We are much better off pressing sedition charges against Abbott and his cabinet members if he actually tries something more serious than this or keeps this stunt going for too long.

So any president can engage in insurrection as recognized by a court completely unpunished as long as they aren’t an officer in the military and “only a civilian”?

It's even weirder, because she is saying this phrase, "any office, civil or military, under the United States” does not cover the office of the president. Which is a terrible ruling as the president is a civilian officer and thus covered by section 3 of the Fourteenth amendment. The ruling comes off as a blatant misreading of the text.

Maybe this legal system does deserve to be burned to the ground if it’s that ignorant.

Our government is being infiltrated by fascists at all levels. We need to vote the fascists out.

Today I learned pnw is pacific northwest. =) Also, side quests are a thing and sound fun.