this post was submitted on 16 Oct 2024
521 points (97.3% liked)
The Onion
4584 readers
787 users here now
The Onion
A place to share and discuss stories from The Onion, Clickhole, and other satire.
Great Satire Writing:
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
To the quotes from Trump about Kamala working tirelessly on a ceasefire... He's lying. No she isn't. If she somehow has been she has been both utterly ineffective and for some reason totally silent on her efforts. Trump lies all the time. If she was doing that it would be good but Trump is lying.
He's also not specific about what additional support it is he'd give Israel. I don't really believe he could give them more than Biden and Harris are. What, materially, could he do for them that Biden would refuse to? He didn't offer specifics atleast.
Democrats, including Kamala, have insinuated that Pro Gaza protesters are terrorists and called them antisemitic. Under Biden police brutalized and allowed the brutalizing of protestors by right wing mobs. Again this is Trump more or less agreeing with the Democrats. He's not offering specifics about how he'd be worse. He's promising to be but that's just because he wants to talk to his base.
And as to the last point regarding US troops... Well Biden is currently sending a THAAD missle defense system that necessarily requires American troops to operate. So looks like we heading there under the Democrats for sure.
So you're expecting restraint from the guy behind an attempted coup? The guy who had to be talked out of wanting to nuke North Korea? Listen, I'm not expecting to change anyone's mind - we're obviously coming at this from different perspectives. It's not just "both sides bad", it's that all sides are bad, or at least imperfect, and you need to make a choice.
I prefer the deeply problematic former law enforcement politician who will never be exactly what I want versus the nearly-octogenarian lying, cheating, clearly insane guy who I believe would be the biggest step towards a civil war, World War III, or both.
I want Palestinian lives to be saved, I want Ukrainian lives to be saved, I want American lives to be saved. I want clean air and water for the generations to come. I want everyone, not just Americans, to have a chance at a better life and control over their own lives and bodies. Chances are I may not get any of those things, but my best shot at getting any of them is to vote for the person who seems the most sane. It's the only choice I have.
Harris is going to continue Biden's policy of calling Bibi an asshole behind closed doors and sending billions of dollars of bombs while structuring shipments to avoid congressional oversight.
Harris is going to continue sending billions of dollars of support to Ukraine so more Ukrainians can be fed into the meat grinder, because it's good for the military industrial complex, and the less of Ukraine there is left standing, the more can be sold for pennies to privatization interests. Russia has been offering peace for a long time and Ukraine has been made continuously to reject it by Western nations because it's in their interest to burn Russian military assets and sell Western ones.
Harris does not support universal healthcare and talks about wanting the deadliest army on Earth, a thing that you cannot have without killing people.
Harris supports bailing out crypto investors. If she gave a shit about the environment she wouldn't subsidize the Planet Burning Funny Money. She'd also perhaps distance herself from Biden, who has signed more oil & gas leases than Trump did.
The American Hegemony is one in which millions must starve to death every year and billions live in substandard conditions to support the excess of a few million privileged consuming monsters. If Harris cared to improve lives she wouldn't support the continued wars in Israel and Ukraine, she'd support M4A, she'd break with the neoliberal doctrine she's run with her whole life, she'd name and reject the neocolonialism that keeps America floating on top of the broken bodies of the global south. She will never do these things, but she will put a Republican in her cabinet.
Harris is further right than Biden. Trump is an uncontrolled rabid ape, correct, but Harris will be no less vile or murderous a leader, just less openly rude. Her border plan is more extreme than Trump's was.
History has showed us that voting for the lesser evil doesn't work. There is no righting of the ship, just more and more steps towards greater evil. The Democrats serve capital, just as the Republicans do. They didn't grant abortion, a Supreme Court decision did. They didn't legalize gay marriage, a Supreme Court decision did. They never enshrined them in law, but stole credit for the work of radical activists when polling told them it would boost their voter count.
Are the Dems less repugnant than the GOP? Yes and no. They don't want to ban abortion federally, great, but they're not going to legalize it either, and they're not going to stop the GOP from banning it state by state. That's how they are on every issue.
You speak of voting between 100% Hitler and 99% Hitler as the only choice you have. I reject that framing. Local political action is vastly more effective than voting for President unless you're one of the lucky 100,000 that live in the right swing districts. Join the DSA or the PSL. Go to school board meetings and tell the book burners driving cross-county to try and ban transgender students to fuck off. Read revolutionary theory and discuss it with others.
I do not expect restraint from him but I also see no restraint from the current administration.
I hope you will realize you do in fact have more choices than voting for genocidal candidate A or B.
I'm not the voting police I don't care how you rationalize voting or not but regardless be clear eyed and realize what you are doing. If a genocide is an acceptable amount of baggage for a candidate to have that can be a choice you make but make no mistake about what you are accepting.
So in this situation, are you suggesting Stein, de la Cruz, West, or Fruit? Because other than as a "protest" vote that hands it to Trump, what does that do exactly? Let's say air traffic controllers are busy with all the flying pigs, and somehow Stein wins. She's woefully under-qualified and she's literally the leading third-party candidate. What exactly do you think she or any one of them would be able to do? They're not serious candidates, and are more likely to setback efforts at building third parties than advancing them.
Protest votes can be useful in primaries but are pointless in general elections. No serious candidates have been building a party with a chance at knocking off the Dems and GOP for the past 4+ years, and instead they only come out every presidential cycle to fundraise and maybe grab a few headlines. The last mildly "successful" third party candidate for President was Perot, and (thank god) he did nothing to shift the national conversation. No one remembers the protest votes, they only remember who won.
I've been voting since 1988 and active in community and political organizing the whole time, and pretty much every candidate I've backed in the presidential primaries has lost. Every election has been a somewhat dissatisfying choice that has lead to a few policy wins and many more disappointing loses. But absent a magical unicorn national third party that builds a grassroots movement that can actually affect change, I'm left with choosing what I believe is the only option with a hope of something better and against the option that would definitely bring me and my loved ones harm, as he would bring harm to literally millions of others. You can say I'm selling out my principles, but I say any other choice is selling out my fellow humans around the world and in the US.