this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2023
114 points (82.0% liked)

politics

19086 readers
4989 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

CBC.ca

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] RGB3x3 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

What are people supposed to do when each election is close enough that any loss of support means handing over the presidency to an authoritarian wannabe?

I'm sure many would like to hold him to a higher standard, but the risk of ending up with a fascist as president is way too high.

[–] Viking_Hippie -4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

There you go with the false equivalency.

You can support politicians without doing so blindly and unquestioningly. In fact, complacency like yours is one of the main factors that caused the conditions that made something as bizarrely awful as a Trump candidacy viable.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

But you have a two party system?

Are you still going to vote dem then and just keep making empty threats about not voting for them while requesting ceasefire?

What are your other options here?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The only option is to continue to vote for the least-bad candidates, and work to change the voting system such that a two party system is no longer inevitable.

[–] Viking_Hippie -5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, because that strategy has been working SO well so far.. 🤦

What was it Einstein supposedly said about the definition of insanity?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

I mean, the other other option is violence/terrorism.

When peaceful revolution is made impossible, violent revolution is inevitable.

But the outcome is wildly unpredictable. You can easily end up with a worse result than what you had before.

[–] Viking_Hippie -4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I see that you're aggressively ignoring the point in favor of the very false dichotomy I'm on the record as fed up with.

To list the thousands of better things to do than either a) reflexively defend Biden no matter how wrong his stance is or b) vote for Trump would take a lot of time and effort better used in other ways than speaking to wilfully deaf ears.

Fortunately, improving my Lemmy experience by adding you to the aforementioned list after adding a user note to remind me why takes significantly less of both than even writing this reply.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You keep avoiding the question. If i don't know the point you're making, I can't be ignoring it.

What is the point you are trying to make here?

I don't care about all the ways you are not making your point, you've listed those already.

[–] capital 0 points 1 year ago

The title of the thread reads “no ceasefire, no votes”.

If the Democratic nominee doesn’t win, who wins?