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
So our choices are:
It's really crazy that it's anywhere near a toss up.
Damn shame there isn't a "don't bomb Palestine into the ground candidate."
No. It is still nowhere "near a toss up".
One candidate is a violent racist who openly talks about how foreigners aren't humans, led a violent insurrection, and is campaigning on removing the basic human rights of half the country.
The other candidate has some REAL blind spots when it comes to "crime" and a hard-on for Israel but is otherwise good.
I could MAYBE understand a weird sense of ethics where "Well, women and LGBTQ folk deserve to suffer if we won't protect Palestine" but it isn't even like trump is going to protect Palestine either.
So get out of here with that "both sides" nonsense.
They're talking about the projected results, not their merits as candidates. Their whole point was that the main grievance against Biden also applies to all other candidates, yet only Biden is being dinged for it.
I didn't read this as a "both sides" comment. It looks to me like the "toss up" is about who is likely to win the election, rather than who deserves this commenter's vote. The reason it's close to a toss up is because there are enough violent racists willing to vote for the violent racist.
I'm not sure what you're upset about in my comment.
All of the candidates have faults, but I do have a strong preference for one and one of them is an objectively better candidate on basically all issues (including the issue that all candidates share the wrong stance on).
And it very much is a toss up. 2 candidates in particular are trading leading positions on different polls. There's probably gonna be less than half of eligible voters actually voting. And when they do, one candidate will almost definitely win the popular vote. And when they do it will once again be up to our antiquated electoral system to determine which of the candidates actually gets the seat. It's not 1932, Trump very well could win and that's bad.
If you think my critiques of Trump are the same as my recognition of success for Biden and that I'm somehow "both-sides-ing" I'm really not sure how to help you.
Biden shows no interest in personally bombing Gaza, unless it's with failed food packages.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/gaza-airdrop-aid-israel-hamas-war-mishap-kills-palestinians/
Supporting Israel and supporting Israel's attack on Gaza are two different things.
Trump on the othe hand wants Gaza wiped out AND wants to bring Israeli policies to the US/Mexico border. Surely nothing could go wrong.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-israel-gaza-finish-problem-rcna141905
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/donald-trump-mexico-military-cartels-war-on-drugs-1234705804/
Really? Bcz last I checked we gave Israel billions of dollars in military aid while they were indiscriminately bombing Gaza. He may not have pulled the trigger, but that doesn't make him innocent either.
I think if there was an alternative candidate to Trump and Biden that wasn't insane. It's safe to say almost everybody would vote for them.
Also crazy to think that, don't support genocide isn't the default stance of people right now. I feel like the last few years I've been taking crazy pills...
Or alternatively, it's all a simulation, and it's just broken, and someone needs to hit reset on it, but they're too lazy taking their lunch break to be bothered.