politics
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. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- 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
view the rest of the comments
That’s a false dilemma. There is a scenario where Biden wins because he does the right thing now.
You can't stop fascism over there by threatening to put fascists in charge here. Trump expressly approves of human rights violations, remember? He doesn't just tolerate them in allies; he likes them. They're a show of strength. Fascists love strength.
I'd like to see US military aid to Israel contingent on a better human rights record. Hell, I'd like to see a policy of bankrupting China if it doesn't free its slaves (including the North Koreans, who are held in slavery by Chinese support for Juche fascism).
I think those are long shots under liberalism, but they're impossible under fascism.
But if you throw the US to fascism because the liberals didn't do good enough, that is a revealed preference for fascism here on your part.
Our voting system sucks. But we still have to use it to keep fascists out of office.
You’re refusing to understand my comment, and doggedly holding to the false dilemma. If you have to compromise your morals now, to win tomorrow, then you’ve already lost. The election is next year, a lot can change before then. The war is happening now.
Our voting system requires that voters "compromise their morals" if they want to avoid electing the most immoral candidate.
That is a mathematical truth about first-past-the-post voting. It is part of why we should switch to approval voting, ranked choice, or another such system as soon as possible. Most other systems require less compromising your morals to meet the goal of keeping the worst candidate out of office.
The moral voter recognizes this, realizes they cannot fix the voting system before the next election ...and refuses the temptation to let the bad guy win just to spite the insufficiently-good guy.
Morality ultimately rests on outcomes, not purity. If you take actions that are consistent with getting fascists elected, that is your morality right there.
You’ve lost the plot and are condoning genocide to win an election.
You're supporting the growth of fascism. Please stop.
You first. People are dying now. The election is next year. Even Antifa, ya know, the anti-fascists, are against what Israel’s doing.
Alright, fine. Turn the pressure up on Biden hoping he'll shift positions before the election. Cool.
The thing is, even if he doesn't shift, he's still the best option. At the moment, Biden is sympathetic to a fascist foreign government, but he's not trying to institute fascism in the US. Trump IS an outright fascist, and literally tried to overthrow the government. Biden is bad, but Trump is far worse, and unfortunately because of the way our election system works, any vote that isn't for Biden is equivalent to a vote for Trump, including not voting at all.
It's simple math. Ex: Biden has 5 votes, Trump has 6 votes, and 15 people didn't vote at all. Of those 15, 4 are Republicans against Trump, 7 are leftists that think Biden is too right wing, and 4 are genuine fence sitters. The fence sitters split evenly, so 7 votes for Biden and 8 for Trump, the other 11 stay home. So in total you have 14 people who ostensibly are more left wing and 12 more right wing, so a left wing majority... but Trump the actual fascist right wing candidate wins.
You can argue all you want that Biden isn't good enough for you, but the truth is Trump isn't bad enough for you. If he was, you'd be willing to make compromises to prevent him regaining power.