American Politics

[dracornithologist]

25 minutes ago, purpledragonclaw said:

He blames NATO for Putin's actions. That's a straight Russian propaganda talking point. That's why I call him sympathetic. The idea that West believes he can end this via discussion with Presidents Putin, Jinping, and Zelenskyy is very naive. 

 

I'm not singing Biden's praises, I'm saying none of these candidate's hands are clean. West will serve the same purpose every Green party candidate does: siphoning Democratic votes. 

NATO isn't to blame for Putin's actions, but that's not what West said. He said, rightly, that US imperialism bears some responsibility. This is why I'm looking for more nuanced conversation here.

 

Everyone keeps ignoring the fact that rather than siphoning Democratic votes, Cornel West actually reads well with the center Trump voters, and he's targeting them with his campaigning. Nobody I know who wants to vote for West would ever vote for Biden. 

 

Everyone keeps ignoring the fact that the only one with the power to make people vote Democrat in November is Biden and his party, by actually making change. I get why people want to ignore inconvenient truths in order to repeat narratives that excuse inaction and an oppressive status quo, but, again. Tiring! Try calling your representatives and asking for real change instead of blaming people for not wanting to vote for someone who keeps acting against the interests of the voters.

[purpledragonclaw]

Quote

Third-party presidential candidate Cornel West suggested Tuesday that NATO was just as culpable for the Ukraine war as the Kremlin, calling the alliance an "expanding instrument" of Western imperialism that "provoked" the Russian invasion.

In a Tuesday post to his social media pages, West—a leftist philosopher and academic running on a fierce anti-war platform—said that ongoing efforts by NATO allies to arm Ukraine represented a policy of escalation that, if left unresolved, "could lead to World War III."

 

Quote

"NATO is an expanding instrument of U.S. global power that provoked Russia into a criminal invasion and occupation of Ukraine," wrote West, who is seeking the Green Party's presidential nomination.

He continued: "This proxy war between the American Empire and the Russian Federation could lead to World War III. We must stop the war and war crimes (including cluster bombs used by all parties) and embark on diplomatic talks that should lead to a just peace."

 

Source.

 

He blamed NATO. 

 

Your last paragraph ignores the history of third-party candidates siphoning Democratic votes, which benefits the Republican party. In a better system, we would have more than two parties. I think both parties are rotten. However, I'm not going to pretend the third-party candidates put forth provide viable alternatives. There's a reason third-party candidates tend to have Republican money backing them.

 

Quote

Everyone keeps ignoring the fact that the only one with the power to make people vote Democrat in November is Biden and his party, by actually making change. 

 

This is no longer true. Please don't underestimate the damaging effect dark money and foreign interference have on elections anymore. Social media has been used with devastating effect to spread misinformation and disinformation by foreign influence. Nowadays people can enter their echo chamber of choice, hear someone say something false that they won't check because they agree with it, and spread it as truth online. This has hurt Democrats far worse than Republicans (Cambridge Analytica, anyone)?

 

You mention the genocide happening in Gaza. I don't think any president or candidate is solving it. 

[dracornithologist]

1 minute ago, purpledragonclaw said:

 

 

Source.

 

He blamed NATO. 

 

Your last paragraph ignores the history of third-party candidates siphoning Democratic votes, which benefits the Republican party. In a better system, we would have more than two parties. I think both parties are rotten. However, I'm not going to pretend the third-party candidates put forth provide viable alternatives. There's a reason third-party candidates tend to have Republican money backing them.

 

 

This is no longer true. Please don't underestimate the damaging effect dark money and foreign interference have on elections anymore. Social media has been used with devastating effect to spread misinformation and disinformation by foreign influence. Nowadays people can enter their echo chamber of choice, hear someone say something false that they won't check because they agree with it, and spread it as truth online. This has hurt Democrats far worse than Republicans (Cambridge Analytica, anyone)?

 

You mention the genocide happening in Gaza. I don't think any president or candidate is solving it. 

 

The quote you yourself pull from West shows him describing NATO's part in the conflict, which is a fact. That is not blaming NATO, that is talking about the focus of his policies: what America can do about American actions. It is disingenuous to keep seeing that as somehow siding with Russia when it's simply a more nuanced take. 

 

"There's a reason Republicans fund third parties" and there are reasons Democrats fund Republicans - because people in power stay in power by convincing everyone else that they have to act the way they always act to keep everything the same. 

 

I understand feeling defeatism and I know quite a few people who just aren't going to vote. That's fine. I don't judge how people decide to focus their energy. I do take objection to the tired, disproven narrative that third party voters are the reason Biden is likely going to lose, instead of his own poor performance. This is a narrative that assumes an entitlement to someone's political voice without a single political action to back it up.

[purpledragonclaw]

I'm going to quote this again by itself since you didn't address it:

 

Quote

"NATO is an expanding instrument of U.S. global power that provoked Russia into a criminal invasion and occupation of Ukraine," wrote West, who is seeking the Green Party's presidential nomination.

 

I don't know how you read that as anything but NATO provoking Putin.

 

There's no nuance here. And this is Russian propaganda.

 

I don't think anyone here is defeatist.

[Rosedamai]

Not an American, so some might say that I don't have a stake in this debate but, what I'm seeing on this thread is unfortunately a phenomenon that's very similar to what has been happening in my  country-where the supposed 'more liberal' party and their constituents basically does not engage in policies or actions that would actually result in more equality or a better protection of people's rights but basically threaten more left-leaning or liberal members who express doubt with their party with 'oh so you want to vote for (horrible conservative party and/or their candidate) then?' and honestly the more I see this pattern of behavior emerging from not only my country but in other countries as well, the more frustrated and disillusioned I get. Which is not what you want when you want to reach out to more liberal/left voters. To be quite frank I sincerely think that these tactics amount to basically holding the people hostage by threatening them with the 'more evil/conservative' choice, basically amounting to 'vote for us or you're a bad person who supports so-and-so policies' while not doing much to actually address the concerns of your more liberal/left demographics and pandering to the rich and privileged members of your constituency. 

It is not the burden of the more liberal/left voters of your country, wherever you're from, to vote for you no matter how atrocious certain parts of your policies are, because you need to stop the other party. It is up to you to make your policies more appealing to said demographic. It is YOUR responsibility and if you don't manage to gather enough votes to stop the other party, that onus is on you, not them. The public has basically, with their votes, said that 'you need to be better' and instead of mulling over that and trying to become better you blame the more liberal/left voters? Even when they've, in the past, swallowed their ideological differences and voted for you to stop the other party? How is that fair? Do they not get a say in how they want their society to be run? 

[dracornithologist]

13 minutes ago, purpledragonclaw said:

I'm going to quote this again by itself since you didn't address it:

 

 

I don't know how you read that as anything but NATO provoking Putin.

 

There's no nuance here. And this is Russian propaganda.

 

I don't think anyone here is defeatist.

 

"No one could possibly be an alternative to Trump except Biden" is defeatism, when everyone refuses to engage with any suggestion of any action that could help him win, like real political change. 

"Propaganda" is paid for EDIT for clarity and specificity: by an actor. Are you claiming Cornel West, a longtime advocate for marginalized people in the United States, if being paid for by Russia, or a different actor, to describe what NATO did as provocative? Do you have anything to back up that claim? Because otherwise, what you're describing is, "a fact that makes the US look bad in comparison to Russia". Yes, NATO took provocative actions towards Russia. Those are true statements about a years long campaign that Biden and the United States more broadly were a part of. Cornel West clearly describes Putin's actions as criminal, and acknowledging other factors in a situation is not the same thing as being paid by Russia to 'sow discord'. It is just talking, again, about the facts of the situation.  

Edited May 25 by dracornithologist

[purpledragonclaw]

To your first paragraph, I'm not saying that. 

 

Putin has said himself NATO is why he invaded. West is repeating a Russian talking point.

 

Propaganda is using information, whether factual, false, or half-truths, to influence public opinion. That's what West is doing. And this line he's pushing came from Putin. 

 

 

[dracornithologist]

Okay, so once again, the facts are, NATO did take provocative actions towards Russia. Did you read the articles I posted? Putin, while an abhorrent, evil, war criminal, obviously has said true things from time to time. It is not repeating a Russian talking point for Cornel West to distinguish himself from his opponents in the race by being the only one to talk about the US's responsibility in the violence and suffering that Ukraine has undergone; it is smart political thinking to understand there were several points in time at which the US could have taken a less provocative posture and possibly averted at least some portion of the damage. That is entirely aside from the fact that there are actors in the United States who personally profit from prolonging the violence. Being interested in peace means being able to acknowledge hard histories. I do prefer a candidate who is interested in America's responsibilities over a candidate who is interested and has always been interested in fighting proxy wars over oil. 

Continuing to decide not to engage with 99 percent of what I'm saying, and the fact that almost every engagement with my comments have ignored any descriptions of calls to political action, does mean that you're saying you believe voting third party is not a viable alternative, that you believe voting for Biden is the solution - and that is defeatism, because you're refusing to engage with anything that would make it possible for that to not end in defeat. Not believing in an alternative to Biden is defeatism. If you're saying you believe in other alternatives, then I'm glad to hear it, because it's been feeling pretty lonely. 

[purpledragonclaw]

Yes, I did. Just as you didn't comment on everything I posted, I didn't comment on everything you posted.

 

I'm not defeatist, I'm a realist. Change isn't happening within the system. Third-party candidates are in the system. 

 

Biden isn't the solution. Trump isn't the solution. Democrats and Republicans aren't the solution.

 

The system is rotten. 

 

I think we want the same thing, we just disagree on how to get there.

[dracornithologist]

1 minute ago, purpledragonclaw said:

Yes, I did. Just as you didn't comment on everything I posted, I didn't comment on everything you posted.

 

I'm not defeatist, I'm a realist. Change isn't happening within the system. Third-party candidates are in the system. 

 

Biden isn't the solution. Trump isn't the solution. Democrats and Republicans aren't the solution.

 

The system is rotten. 

 

I think we want the same thing, we just disagree on how to get there.

 

Is there something you've said in this conversation with me that I haven't addressed? I didn't touch the Taiwan comment because I know less about US responsibility in Taiwan than I do in Ukraine. But was there something else you feel like I left unaddressed in the things you've said? I try to be complete. You don't have to address everything I say but when, time after time, I'm presenting lengthy analysis, and time after time, someone decides to respond to just say one small thing about how third party voting is bad - well, I've said it before, and maybe I'll say it again. It's tiring! Maybe that's why I associate it with defeatism. 

 

The system is indeed rotten. Like I've said in multiple places in this thread (the last few pages), community organizing is at least one major way that I prefer to lean into surviving a terrible government. I definitely don't think shaming third party voters or misrepresenting their positions is the solution. It feels like that's the exact 'discord' being sown that I keep being told to look out for. That's why I keep responding to this thread; it really bewilders me to see such misrepresentation, and I believe a better understanding of people's different views could lead to more collaborative, collective understanding and action, rather than bipartisan brawls. 

[purpledragonclaw]

You didn't address the effect of mis- and disinformation that harms Democratic messaging. Some people do not have access to all information in some parts of the world, and what does reach them is twisted and tends to skew right. This is also a big problem in other countries like the UK and France. Disinfo campaigns are a global problem.

 

I'm not actually disagreeing with the heart of your post, that Biden is a war criminal and Trump is also terrible. I just don't think third-party candidates are the answer. Jill Stein was the final nail in the coffin for my beliefs in a third party.

 

You see how we're able to still have a discussion about this and share our ideas and opinions? That's a good thing. It shows we're not close-minded to learning new ideas. 

 

I'm also pretty active in my community because I believe change starts at home. I'm also in constant communication with almost all of my elected representatives. I have not given up by any means, I just go for candidates I believe can buck the system and align with my views for as long as possible. 

[dracornithologist]

1 minute ago, purpledragonclaw said:

You didn't address the effect of mis- and disinformation that harms Democratic messaging. Some people do not have access to all information in some parts of the world, and what does reach them is twisted and tends to skew right. This is also a big problem in other countries like the UK and France. Disinfo campaigns are a global problem.

 

I'm not actually disagreeing with the heart of your post, that Biden is a war criminal and Trump is also terrible. I just don't think third-party candidates are the answer. Jill Stein was the final nail in the coffin for my beliefs in a third party.

 

You see how we're able to still have a discussion about this and share our ideas and opinions? That's a good thing. It shows we're not close-minded to learning new ideas. 

 

I'm also pretty active in my community because I believe change starts at home. I'm also in constant communication with almost all of my elected representatives. I have not given up by any means, I just go for candidates I believe can buck the system and align with my views for as long as possible. 

 

Yep, this conversation rules! And right, like I was saying, I have never said third parties are the solution. I've been talking about how if people fear Biden losing the election, the answer is not to shame third party voters, whose votes they are not entitled to, but rather to pressure Biden into real change. I'm glad we can have this conversation, but for some reason, whenever I have this conversation, people feel the need to focus on just how third party voters are somehow stealing something from them. It feels like the comment about how it's a good thing was maybe meant to be patronizing? I can't tell. 

You're right, I didn't talk directly about disinformation - partially because you were talking to me specifically about the Cornel West NATO comment, which is not mis or disinformation. Disinfo campaigns are a global problem, absolutely. One that the US pays for and has for a long time. 

I'm glad, like I said, to hear that you're interested in alternatives! That rules, and I hope you keep at it. 💖

[purpledragonclaw]

4 minutes ago, dracornithologist said:

 

Yep, this conversation rules! And right, like I was saying, I have never said third parties are the solution. I've been talking about how if people fear Biden losing the election, the answer is not to shame third party voters, whose votes they are not entitled to, but rather to pressure Biden into real change. I'm glad we can have this conversation, but for some reason, whenever I have this conversation, people feel the need to focus on just how third party voters are somehow stealing something from them. It feels like the comment about how it's a good thing was maybe meant to be patronizing? I can't tell. 

You're right, I didn't talk directly about disinformation - partially because you were talking to me specifically about the Cornel West NATO comment, which is not mis or disinformation. Disinfo campaigns are a global problem, absolutely. One that the US pays for and has for a long time. 

I'm glad, like I said, to hear that you're interested in alternatives! That rules, and I hope you keep at it. 💖

 

Though I do think third-party candidates are a vote for Republicans, I wouldn't shame anyone for voting that way, not anymore. Doing that creates division and helps tear each other down. You've explained why you would vote third-party, and I've explained why I wouldn't. People aren't a monolith, we don't have to agree on every single thing, and focusing on our differences helps perpetuate the problems we see because it's the antithesis to unity and love.

 

I consider myself to be progressive, actually, and have been consistently sorry Bernie Sanders didn't get the nomination. I just wish more people would do what we do: talk about our opinions, keep it civil, and keep going.

 

I hope you stay active as well. We have to be the change we want to see.

[dracornithologist]

5 minutes ago, purpledragonclaw said:

 

You've explained why you would vote third-party, and I've explained why I wouldn't.

 

I'm sorry to keep pushing the point, but I feel I keep being misunderstood - this is *not* what I'm doing. My only recommended actions have been to locally organize, pressure Biden and representatives for ceasefire, and mutual aid. I have said I am interested in candidates like Cornel West (and Jasmine Sherman), but I have never said I would vote for him. I have repeatedly been just asking that we don't perpetuate a narrative that elides blame from Biden. 

[purpledragonclaw]

12 minutes ago, dracornithologist said:

 

I'm sorry to keep pushing the point, but I feel I keep being misunderstood - this is *not* what I'm doing. My only recommended actions have been to locally organize, pressure Biden and representatives for ceasefire, and mutual aid. I have said I am interested in candidates like Cornel West (and Jasmine Sherman), but I have never said I would vote for him. I have repeatedly been just asking that we don't perpetuate a narrative that elides blame from Biden. 

 

Ah, my apologies! I had thought from the way you talked about those who vote third-party are derided by Democrats that you did. That's my mistake.

[dracornithologist]

11 minutes ago, purpledragonclaw said:

 

Ah, my apologies! I had thought from the way you talked about those who vote third-party are derided by Democrats that you did. That's my mistake.

 

Thank you, I appreciate it. I have been trying to be as clear as possible about my intentions, opinions, and analysis, so clarifying is an important process for me. The fact that it is easy to misplace intention is part of what I've been saying about how alienating it is that the mainstream narrative continues to be that people who don't want to vote for Biden (not the same thing as third party voters) are at fault for Biden's failures. 

[Astreya]

The problem is that protest voting most often leads to incredible damage.  I'm from Germany and for now we will be only saved by the representative voting system we have as we have a large part of the population who are discontent with the leading parties in the parliament(s) and thus let them be swayed by populist ideas to vote a party that harbours clear fascist ideas and people. If you look closely at the party manifests, you will find that there are clear ideas about damaging democracy and everything and still people are drawn to vote for them. I really thought that with GHerman history, people would see the dangers.

 

In the US and also the UK I observe that the dismantling of democracy by the further right parties (Republicans and Tories - and yes, I consider the Tories far right by now as they took in most of UKIP's ideas and also work on dismantling the judiciary in parts plus add more laws that go against protesters and neuter the BBC etc) has continued for quite a while.

 

If protest voters don't vote the smaller evil (Democrats at the moment) and thus allow the Republicans to get into power again, they will likely find that the current election was the last mostly free election they had. If you mess up this you will become really powerless, while a second presidency of Biden could allow you to put pressure on him to enact changes after all. If he is not in power anymore, there will be no change to the better for quite a while.

 

You are aware that Biden - however bad he might be for some of his policies - at least doesn't want to take down the US democracy and even the Constitution as Trump already threatened. In putting his sycophants into the Supreme Court, the US Constitution can be warped into something very sinister and the checks and balances will be neutered. Add to this that he already has his own militias, you will live in an authoritarian fascist state in no time.

 

Please read up on German history of the 1930es:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_Germany#History

Then reflect what Trump already set in motion that could lead to a similar development.

 

So please consider voting tactical, but not in protest. Do what you can do to keep out the Republicans to protect your democracy. In the US 2-party-state, this means not to split the votes against the wannabe totalitarians.

Edited May 25 by Astreya

[dracornithologist]

2 hours ago, Astreya said:

If protest voters don't vote the smaller evil (Democrats at the moment) and thus allow the Republicans to get into power again, they will likely find that the current election was the last mostly free election they had. If you mess up this you will become really powerless, while a second presidency of Biden could allow you to put pressure on him to enact changes after all. If he is not in power anymore, there will be no change to the better for quite a while.

 

So please consider voting tactical, but not in protest. Do what you can do to keep out the Republicans to protect your democracy. In the US 2-party-state, this means not to split the votes against the wannabe totalitarians.

 

Okay, did you read or have any thoughts on the extensive discussion on how no one has proven that Biden is the "lesser evil"? Because all the same harms keep happening, just in a blue package?

 

German history is incredibly important to me; quite a few of my loved ones are Jewish and students of history, and the parallels between the Holocaust and the current global situation scares them. It is easy to see the parallels between a country that ended up voting in fascism because of the intense utilization of xenophobia, and our country which is doing the same - because Biden's America is still a fascist America, it's just one that's a little more well spoken in public than Trump. 

 

You assert that I should vote for Biden to preserve democracy and the constitution. Putting aside that I have very little interest in a moral document written by men who enslaved people, what has Biden done to preserve democracy and the a constitution? He oversaw almost 900 restrictive voter laws happen across the nation, leading to huge barriers to vote, especially for marginalized people (the kind of people who don't vote for him - i.e. he oversaw and did nothing about the rights of his potential political opponents, on purpose. Democracy where?), as well as the rise of the criminalization of protest. Not to mention the genocide, which everyone wants to brush under the rug despite the fact of the matter being that the democratic voice of America has asked for a ceasefire and Biden continues to ignore it. So what have you seen that Biden has done to preserve democracy?

 

You say now is not the time to protest; did you read any of my previous posts where I talk about this really trivializing and minimizing response, where I've said quite clearly that this is exactly what I was told the last time I voted for Biden? That many people told me "We can't risk Trump, vote now and hold him accountable later?" I'll ask again because I haven't gotten a response - how do you plan to do that, if even the threat of using an individual's only political power, their vote, triggers you into not fully engaging with the argument in front of you, and instead leads you into blaming a person for wanting political change? What did you do to hold Biden accountable the first time? And what do you plan to do this time? Because the first time didn't work!

 

If anyone else is going to respond to only one part of my posts in order to repeat what people keep repeating, ("You can't let Trump in!"), I'm going to repeat my ask: how will a second Trump presidency "irreparably" harm me in a way that a Biden presidency doesn't? As I've said, surviving both has made me realize that electoral politics are not our savior, and to me, it seems like counter productive wheels spinning and hang wringing to pretend otherwise. The narrative you describe of Germany needing to vote out fascism is not possible; fascism is fought by empowering people, not governments. 

[Rosedamai]

Again, 

4 hours ago, Astreya said:

for now we will be only saved by the representative voting system we have as we have a large part of the population who are discontent with the leading parties in the parliament(s) and thus let them be swayed by populist ideas to vote a party that harbours clear fascist ideas and people.

Then your liberal party or leftist party or what have you NEED to be BETTER. Instead of holding voters who have legitimate grievances hostage by saying 'well otherwise we're going to have a fascist government' you need to actually address these concerns, instead of saying that you can hold said party accountable later. 

 

33 minutes ago, dracornithologist said:

That many people told me "We can't risk Trump, vote now and hold him accountable later?" I'll ask again because I haven't gotten a response - how do you plan to do that, if even the threat of using an individual's only political power, their vote, triggers you into not fully engaging with the argument in front of you, and instead leads you into blaming a person for wanting political change? What did you do to hold Biden accountable the first time? And what do you plan to do this time? Because the first time didn't work!

I really couldn't have said it better, I live in a country where we currently have a very messed up president who thinks he can do whatever he wants, so our only hope was to get enough seats in the congress to stop him. I am sorry to say that I heard this exact same rhetoric from our 'less conservative' party followers. "We need you to vote for us so we can stop the evil party please vote for us" and then they didn't get enough seats, they needed like 7 more seats to take up 2/3rds of the congress, and then it was like "you didn't vote for us so suffer under the weight of the evil president" excuse you, I voted for you and most of my friends did too. Maybe you all should have worked harder instead of threatening us with 'oh no you wouldn't be so stupid as to vote for the evil party would you' when you know full well that there are demographics-mostly the elderly and Christians-who would never vote for you but you go to them and pander to them saying the most insane bigoted stuff, and then turn around on marginalize groups with that thinly-veiled threat. All this while their internal bickering cost us the last presidency, seriously is this a trend with so-called 'lesser of the two evils' parties around the world? 

Edited May 25 by Rosedamai

[Long_Before_Sunrise]

Trump thinks NATO is like a mob protection racket where our allies pay the US to protect them with nuclear weapons. He went to Russia in the 1980s to real estate shop and came back with a bunch of Russian propaganda implanted in his head and it's still there and he still repeating it.  Once he's committed himself to a certain viewpoint, he stands by it for life because he will never admit he was wrong ever. That's his thing. His narcissist personality disorder. He won't ever admit he was wrong about anything. The closest he'll come is saying "we" like "We didn't win, but we'll see about that." 

[dracornithologist]

Yep, I think a lot of us are agreed Trump is an evil man who has used his money and power to great harm. 

 

Again the talking point of Russian propaganda; it makes me feel like we're somehow still in the Cold War. All we have to do is mention the spectre of Communism, and anything the Democrats do becomes excusable in comparison. Without, it seems, even needing to provide any analysis or real sources on comparing the tangible harms or impact! Yes, Trump may be in the pocket of some of Russia's oligarchs. Are the American oligarchs that Biden is in the pockets of any better and how? 

 

You assert Trump must have narcissistic personality disorder. I think that's a generous read of the situation. His evil can't be blamed on mental illness or trauma (trauma being the driving catalyst in most personality disorders) - instead, it is based way more in reason: we live in a white supremacist, misogynistic world that rewards already powerful white men for abusing power, so people who abuse power become quite good at it, as Trump has. He is in control of his decisions, and his decisions are evil. 

 

I think it's interesting that part of your evidence of Trump's narcissism is that he can't take accountability or admit he did something wrong. When has Biden admitted he was wrong? He has admitted to making mistakes a few times, but he usually brushes it under the rug with that characteristic charm and smile that seems to work on people who want to Believe that Biden is better than Trump. But he has done way more to hide his horrible record and lie about his actions - this article, written right before the 2020 elections, does a good job detailing the history of Biden's career and the severe lapses in accountability, especially the many, many times he's lied to make himself look better. How is that not narcissism? What makes that okay when Biden does it?

 

(A note on the article; a weakness in it is that it proposes that Biden might not win, which obviously didn't happen. I think it's still a useful article for its sources on Biden's history, and especially useful in the context of the other prediction of the author - that Biden in office would mean him pandering to ultra right wingers and the financial elite, with basically zero advancement of progressive policies.)

 

Maybe I should make a bingo card for this talking in circles and refusing to engage with any of the analysis I'm bringing about the measurable differences the two candidates that I guess we'll keep pretending are the only two options. Maybe we'll get to a point of conversation where it's not a minority on this board asking for and introducing nuance. Maybe I should keep repeating that global fascism is on the rise, and that Biden is part of it (voting restrictions, protest restrictions, the GENOCIDE), and maybe! Someone will read it.

[Fuzzbucket]

The awful thing is - that just as the UK today - the CRUCIAL thing is to get the more deranged one out, and deal with trying to get a better system afterwards. The thinking behind this article about our not quite as bad situation is relevant to the state of affairs in the US situation.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/may/26/it-is-foolish-and-self-indulgent-for-the-anti-starmer-left-to-split-the-labour-vote

 

I'm not keen on voting Labour right now (I am even a member of another party entirely) but I shall vote tactically to oust my current Tory MP, Because our current government is beyond corrupt, beyond incompetent, and beyond even common decency.

 

Whatever you may think of Biden, Trump is without question far more dangerous for your country - and indeed for ours. I still recall the year Nader stood because he wasn't OK with the democrats - and in the end you got Bush - way further right than the party Nader was trying to influence.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_Nader_2000_presidential_campaign

 

In these ghastly two party systems you and we have, it is almost impossible for a third party to make any significant headway, especially when you also have the electoral college to deal with. I live in hope of PR in the UK, but in the US, with your constitution, that isn't remotely likely. Given that whatever vote you cast, you will end up with either Biden or Trump, and given that fervent MAGA supporters aren't about to switch to a third option - a vote for anyone but Biden WILL get you Trump. If that's what you want - fine. If it isn't - think very hard before going that route. I don't happen to think Biden is a fascist - but I am certain sure that Trump is a thoroughly dangerous loose cannon, and by a very long  distance, the worse option.

 

ETA there's a campaign over here for tactical voting against the Tories. It has a slogan: "Yes we are lending you our vote this time, but next time you have to earn it."

 

I think that's rather good.

 

 

Edited May 27 by Fuzzbucket

[dracornithologist]

36 minutes ago, Fuzzbucket said:

The awful thing is - that just as the UK today - the CRUCIAL thing is to get the more deranged one out, and deal with trying to get a better system afterwards. The thinking behind this article about our not quite as bad situation is relevant to the state of affairs in the US situation.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/may/26/it-is-foolish-and-self-indulgent-for-the-anti-starmer-left-to-split-the-labour-vote

 

I'm not keen on voting Labour right now (I am even a member of another party entirely) but I shall vote tactically to oust my current Tory MP, Because our current government is beyond corrupt, beyond incompetent, and beyond even common decency.

 

Whatever you may think of Biden, Trump is without question far more dangerous for your country - and indeed for ours. I still recall the year Nader stood because he wasn't OK with the democrats - and in the end you got Bush - way further right than the party Nader was trying to influence.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_Nader_2000_presidential_campaign

 

In these ghastly two party systems you and we have, it is almost impossible for a third party to make any significant headway, especially when you also have the electoral college to deal with. I live in hope of PR in the UK, but in the US, with your constitution, that isn't remotely likely. Given that whatever vote you cast, you will end up with either Biden or Trump, and given that fervent MAGA supporters aren't about to switch to a third option - a vote for anyone but Biden WILL get you Trump. If that's what you want - fine. If it isn't - think very hard before going that route. I don't happen to think Biden is a fascist - but I am certain sure that Trump is a thoroughly dangerous loose cannon, and by a very long  distance, the worse option.

 

ETA there's a campaign over here for tactical voting against the Tories. It has a slogan: "Yes we are lending you our vote this time, but next time you have to earn it."

 

I think that's rather good.

 

 

 

"We are lending you our vote this time, but next time you have to earn it" - again, everyone keeps ignoring the meat of my arguments. This is the next time Biden was supposed to earn, and he didn't.

You don't explain what makes Biden not fascist, given his long history of profiting off of power and doing whatever he can to stay in power.

You also continue to assume that I'm advocating for third party voting, when no one in recent months on this thread that I've seen has advocated for third party voting - the only thing I've advocated for is local organizing, pressuring representatives by letting them know how many people are put off voting by the lack of action, and mutual aid. People seem to keep missing that, so this time it's in bold.

But sure, let's keep repeating "Trump is the worse option" without anything to back it up. Your wikipedia page about Ralph Nader is not helpful information - it ignores the fact that what actually gave the country to Bush was the inability of privileged voters to connect with and build solidarity with marginalized voters.

"So why hasn't there been 16 years of hand-wringing over the thirteen percent of voting Florida Democrats going turncoat for the Republican nominee? What about the traditionally Democratic-voting bases of white women and seniors who both went for Bush, or lower-income voters, who mostly tilted for Gore but nearly forty percent of whom voted for Bush?

Why is Ralph Nader the boogeyman of the left and not Al Gore himself who (despite being a VP in a popular administration which had the dumb-luck of presiding over a booming economy) was unable to win his home state of Tennessee, a state with enough electoral votes to send him to the White House even without Florida?

 

Simple. Nader must be vilified because of the popular notion that the two major parties are entitled to your votes, and if you have any agency at all it's to prevent the more terrible of the two from taking the reins of power. That's how Gore, despite running an uninspiring campaign where he benched uber-campaigner Bill Clinton and chose the hawkish and moralistic Joe Lieberman as his running mate (thus turning off a great many off the liberals whose votes many feel were Gore's birthright as the Democratic nominee), gets let off the hook, as do the hundreds of thousands of Republican-voting Democrats (in Florida alone), while "Ralph Nader" becomes shorthand for the folly of idealism."

 

I'll keep repeating it: electoral politics won't save us, shaming voters who want to be represented by their vote won't save us, and if you're so scared that Biden needs to stay in power but isn't winning, I think you would be better served by pressuring your representatives NOW to make a real change so that people will vote for Biden in November. I had to survive a Trump presidency and it prepared me for now, as I am surviving a Biden presidency. We need a different strategy than voting for Biden and hoping for the best while he smiles and nods at rising global fascism. 

[Fuzzbucket]

I am not arguing whether or not Biden is fascist. I am not arguing with ANY of the points you are making. But what I am saying is that with the current voting system available, Americans have the choice between someone you see as borderline fascist and a lunatic. Those are, realistically, your ONLY presidential options. Make of that what you will. I feel for you; I would love to think you could influence anything at all by voting for the people you really believe in . I'm so old that I remember the days where you could vote for the person, not the party. I am in the UK; I would like to vote for the party I belong to. I even might. But I know, sadly, that it would be a wasted vote. Because there is no possible way that even if everyone who wanted a different option voted for it, one of the two main parties wouldn't still be the one which would hold the presidency - or in the case of the UK, would be the largest party and lead the government. And I can't contact my Representative - I'm not in the US, But I watch it all unfold there with horror. (And over here I have contacted my MP on several issues; He used to be OK - he is now a party puppet and useless. All you get back is the party line on fancy notepaper.) I realise you aren't suggesting voting outside the main parties - but if representatives don't listen - and it seems they don't, from all my American friends - you will all have to vote for one of them in the end.... or abstain and have NO say in who wins.

 

As to who is the worst option for your president - Biden may or may not be dire. But he would never suggest that injecting bleach could cure covid. It's not the Republican party I refer to here - it is Trump himself. Show me any compelling evidence that the man is sane. And that he doesn't routinely peddle misinformation.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_or_misleading_statements_by_Donald_Trump

Edited May 27 by Fuzzbucket

[dracornithologist]

 

6 minutes ago, Fuzzbucket said:

I am not arguing whether or not Biden is fascist. I am not arguing with ANY of the points you are making. But what I am saying is that with the current voting system available, Americans have the choice between someone you see as borderline fascist and a lunatic. Those are, realistically, your ONLY presidential options. Make of that what you will. I feel for you; I would love to think you could influence anything at all by voting for the people you really believe in . I'm so old that I remember the days where you could vote for the person, not the party. I would like to vote for the party I belong to. I even might. But I know, sadly, that it would be a wasted vote. Because there is no possible way that even if everyone who wanted a different option voted for it, one of the two main parties wouldn't still be the ones which would hold the presidency.

 

As to who is the worst option - Biden may or may not be dire. But he would never suggest that injecting bleach could cure covid. It's not the Republicans I refer to here - it is Trump himself. Show me any compelling evidence that the man is sane. And that he doesn't routinely peddle misinformation.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_or_misleading_statements_by_Donald_Trump

 

It's nice of you to say that you feel for me, but it is really tiring that people don't really engage with anything I'm saying. Biden spreads just as many lies as Trump, for his own purposes. Did you read the post before last, the one right before you commented earlier, where I linked to this article about the many egregious lies Biden has peddled over his extensive career? He has shown just as much proclivity towards profiting off of his power; he just didn't post on Twitter about it.

To put it directly, this is a microcosm of the problem - the willingness to excuse Biden's harms because they're not as loud or obtrusive as Trump's, even though he is causing similar harms. Biden didn't suggest injecting bleach could cure covid, but he did tell a 6 year old girl, as he was rushing the country to reopen US schools (a move that has personally harmed my own family; my mother, chronically ill and made further ill by covid infections, had to retire early from teaching), that she didn't have to worry about getting covid or giving it to her family because she was "unlikely" to get it. From that same article, he also oversaw administrative misinformation, like asserting there was evidence spread was manageable in schools with proper preparations, and then reopened schools without proper preparations, like any standards at all for ventilation. Or, from the same article, relying on studies that said children weren't likely to spread that only tested symptomatic children - even though children were much more likely to be asymptomatic while spreading covid. From that same article, he also painted a picture of a vaccinated America solving covid (and hurrying people 'back to work'), even though even then, many experts knew it was too early to be so optimistic about vaccination's ability to halt spread (and the result of vaccination being combined with back to work prioritization - spread through asymptomatic cases, which were more likely with vaccination). This is the sort of misinformation that, while on its face is kinder than the type Trump spews, has the same effect - mass deaths (deaths which I mentioned in a previous post - we reached 400,000 covid deaths by the end of Trump's administration, and now, we're at over 1,000,000 covid deaths in the US, and Biden has 'misremembered' his own record on this publicly), money in their pockets, and looking good for their base of voters (bigoted extremists for Trump, status quo clingers for Biden). 

I don't have compelling evidence that Trump is sane because not only is that not relevant to the conversation (you can't, for example, prove to me that Biden is sane, and I wouldn't ask you to), but it is impossible to; we aren't his doctors. All we can do is evaluate the speech and actions of the politicians in front of us. So think on why, when I ask for a complex and nuanced conversation on why Biden is leading the same harms Trump leads to, and why holding him accountable needs to be now, not after he's won for the maximum amount he's allowed to win for and he loses the tiny shreds of motivation he had to do anything for his voters that aren't the wealthy companies funding him, maybe think on why the response - over and over - is just "Trump is crazy!" It's easy to believe evil people are evil because of some intrinsic bad thing in their brain that makes them do evil stuff, but that is not how it works - everyone has autonomy over their choices, and every person making evil decisions is making a million evil decisions that have a million intervention points that could turn it into a good decision instead. But if we have a narrative that instead, intrinsic nature is what makes us good and evil, sane and insane, then we get to give ourselves a pass on the hard work of examining our own decisions for accidental harm we may be causing others - because we're "good" so the things we're doing must be "good," right? Mental illness doesn't cause someone to be racist, misogynistic, predatory, or abusive - access to power, and rewards for abusing power, is what makes someone a person who abuses power. And Biden has all of those conditions as well.

I keep saying, "you can't just say this thing about Trump, tell people to vote for Biden, and then not answer the question of what about all the things that Biden does exactly the same." Why don't people want to engage with that? The fact of the matter is, if you don't understand why people keep responding to your claims of "We have to vote for Biden, otherwise Trump will win" with, "my life is horrible under both of those awful men, so you need to give me a different reason", that just keeping giving the same reason ... doesn't work!