Many voters believe, with good reason, that none of this would have happened without Biden’s assent. Biden has continued to speak of Israel’s attack on Palestinian civilians using the absurd language of “self-defense”. He has insulted Jewish Americans and the memory of the Holocaust by invoking them to justify the slaughter. And though his White House repeatedly leaks that he is “privately” dismayed by Israel’s conduct of the war, he has done little to stop the flow of US money and guns that support it.
Even after the US state department issued a vexed and mealy-mouthed report on Israel’s conduct, which nevertheless concluded that it was reasonable to assess that Israel was in violation of international humanitarian law, the Biden administration has continued to fund these violations. That state department report was published on 10 May. The Biden administration told Congress that it intends to move forward with a $1bn arms sale to Israel. “OK, [Israel] likely broke the law, but not enough to change policy,” is how one reporter summarized the administration’s judgment. “So, what is the point of the report? I mean, in the simplest terms, what’s the point?”
Meanwhile, Biden has expressed public disdain for the Americans – many of whom he needs to vote for him – who have taken to protest on behalf of Palestinian lives. Speaking with evident approval of the violent police crackdowns against anti-genocide student demonstrations, he said coolly: “Dissent must never lead to disorder.”
Obediently voting for the least worst option means you eventually run out of good options. <- we are here
The conundrum is working out how you force those options to get better without accelerationists getting to test out their theories for real (again).
I would respectifully suggest that “shut the fuck up and vote” does not cut it.
I don’t think anyone is saying that. Don’t shut up, but do vote!
Third party for the win!
Ok, but how?
Is there an option on the ballot for President that would allow me to vote without violating my conscience?
There’s not now, nor will there ever be a perfect choice. Fact is that all US presidents have, to some extent, blood on their hands. Is the choice this year bad? Yes. But all previous presidents in recent times supplied arms to regimes like Saudi Arabia, Israel etc. In the past the US itself committed its own genocide on native Americans, interned Japanese, killed hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese, invaded Iraq and Afghanistan etc etc. And with all these atrocities, voting the lesser evil helped (a bit). Perfect is not for sale this year, nor will it ever be.
I’m not even asking for “perfect”.
I’d be entirely satisfied by “tolerable”, and genocide is nowhere near that.
Never again meant Never Again
Associating Joe Biden so closely with genocide demonstrates a lack of capacity for understanding nuance. Supporting Israel doesn’t automatically equate to supporting Netanyahu’s genocide in Gaza, but it does indicate support for the Israeli (and by extension, Jewish) right to exist. One can simultaneously protest the genocide in Gaza and support a friendly, cooperative Israel.
The United States is committing genocide against the Palestinian people in the same way that you would be committing murder if you hired a hitman to kill someone
We are knowingly providing Israel with the funds and arms to commit genocide. Therefore, we are committing genocide. Therefore, Biden is committing genocide.
Trump is worse. But Biden is the worst president since Nixon, and possibly since the Native American Genocides successfully ended.
He is a monster. No matter how much student debt he forgives or how many roads he claims to build
By sending them weapons to continue the genocidal actions?
Spotted the Zionist.
Demanding that people vote for the least worst option without any content other than sneering at them for apparently not realising that one of the options is worse, is doing exactly that.
It’s straw-manning the arguments of people who want (and desperately need) the Democrats to be better and are putting serious thought, time and energy into how that is possible in a world controlled by billionaires who unleash fascism the moment their power is threatened.
And they’re doing it with a lazy, cynical, Bill Maher-wannabe take because apparently they think this is a good look?
They’ll be the death of us all.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Because they’re going to change if you keep voting for them?
Einstein had something to say about that
I’m voting against trump by voting 3rd party. Care to join?
deleted by creator
If you want a third party candidate to have a chance of winning or even influencing politics then you have to actually vote third party. My comment was no more in bad faith than the people who dogmatically shout “vote blue no matter who.” or “A vote for third party is a vote for trump.” or some other condescending remark. The point is that people like to try to brow-beat others into voting for candidates that they also claim don’t represent them. I’ve long been tired of making fear-based political decisions just so I can elect someone who doesn’t represent me. If it’s truly only a choice between some guy I don’t like and some guy who will end democracy, then you have no real choice and Democracy has already ended -if it ever began. I will likely be voting for Cornel West or Green Party (as I did during the last General Election) because I actually like and agree with their proposed policy, not because I’m scared of someone else winning. So yes we could really use your vote even if it’s just to get us to 5%. If you choose not to then that is your choice, and at least we are offering you that.
deleted by creator
What are your feelings on voting in the primaries?
I thought Uncommitted was a smart use of the primaries.
More generally, obviously much more critical than in the election itself. But getting the right candidates in the primary, and pushing all candidates to be better in all the usual ways. They’re never going to chase us to the left like they chase to the right, so we have to do the work and set the boundaries.
Can you please suggest one candidate other than Biden who has a realistic chance of winning against Trump?
Name one single candidate running right now
The Democrats do not have a realistic chance of winning against Trump because the Democrats are entirely incapable of challenging power. It’s the fundamental contradiction of liberalism. They won’t do anything for the people they need to vote for them because if they do the people who fund them will stop funding them.
Obama and Sanders both excelled at small-dollar donations, of course. Sadly, Obama was a silver-tongued coward and the Clinton Democrats made sure she didn’t repeat the mistakes of 2008 in 2016 by not bothering to sign up voters in case they killed her in the primaries again.
They dig their own grave and they do so willingly because it makes them exceedingly rich.