Well it looks like this one’s as good as any:
I’m voting party for socialism and liberation and you can too!
They’re running Claudia de la Cruz on a platform of Palestinian statehood and an end to arms shipments to Israel.
Psl is active outside of presidential elections, active outside of elections in general and is expanding!
I support third parties but I’d not vote for them because then the vote doesn’t count. Voting in local elections is another story though and especially in safe state elections. Third parties should force parties to the negotiating table for running as a coalition when they have enough support.
The votes count. I know because I worked elections and saw votes counted and then saw the tally released by my local election board that reflected those votes.
How exactly should third parties accumulate enough support to force the two main parties to the table if people don’t vote for them?
You do, just not during the presidency.
How come?
Oh yeah, you’re the guys throwing nails on the road outside my wife’s school once a month. Hard pass.
May I see the school and nails?
.worlders will really upvote anything as long as it’s shitting on people they don’t like. Exact same behavior as conservatives freaking out over that litter box story or any other made up bullshit.
This presidential election is not the time to be pushing the PSL party. Even if they were much more popular than they are now, they aren’t on enough states ballots to get to 270 even if they won every state they’re in.
Focus on getting PSL candidates into house and Senate seats and making them more mainstream, not taking votes away from Democrats when the alternative is still Trump.
If winning the presidential election was all that mattered you’d have a good point.
My vote for psl doesn’t take a vote away from democrats because I would not vote for the democrats.
In our electoral system, a vote for a third-party is a waste, and any resources dumped into them is a bigger waste.
A socialist is going to prefer Harris over Trump, but by voting a third party instead of Democrat they’re effectively supporting Trump. When the election comes down to the wire, they’ll be the ones responsible for a second Trump term.
This has already happened. People voting for the Green party over Al Gore are the reason we got 8 years of Bush.
My vote isn’t a waste. It is counted like any other.
My vote for psl isn’t support for trump. It doesn’t count towards trumps total. Would you say the people unwilling to vote democrat are more responsible for the events of a trump term than the people who didn’t vote at all? Than the democrat party for running a bad campaign? Than the administrative regime that puts its plans into action?
You are mistaken about bush v gore. The Supreme Court installed bush and the Florida recount wouldn’t have changed the result because it wasn’t the whole state recount needed to actually flip the electoral college. Gore won Florida but the recount wasn’t in enough precincts to show that. I have no love for the greens, but they’re not why we got bush.
By voting for a third party you’re worse than someone who doesn’t vote, because you use resources that could be directed to literally anything else and be more effective. Taking all that third party campaign to a casino money and betting it all on a double-zero is more responsible use of the money than spending it on a campaign that will serve no purpose but wasting resources and pulling voters from a candidate that may actually win.
The only excuses to support a third party candidate are being an idiot or a bad actor intentionally trying to spoil the vote. Which one are you?
What resource am I redirecting?
What isn’t effective about a third party vote?
How are third party resources a waste?
They have a literal zero percent chance of winning. Hell, most aren’t even on the ballots. Therefore any effort or resources used on their campaign is waste. A vote for them is a waste because it’s impossible for them to win, and that vote could be used to support the better of the 2 major party candidates.
I think you’d have a good point if winning was all that mattered in an American election.
Winning isn’t all that votes decide.
Poll turnout is used to decide ballot access, funding, event presence and of course for the two major parties policy triangulation.
That’s not even touching the amount of public awareness that will be built by a third party making a strong showing.
The most famous Democratic Socialist who does the most for the movement and achieves the most for the country is Bernie Sanders.
Note that he runs on the Democratic ticket in order to stay relevant even though he and the party aren’t always in alignment. And when he didn’t get nominated in 2020 he threw his support behind Biden even though he could have easily run third-party. He knew that running third-party would have guaranteed a Trump victory.
Ralph Nader ran for the Green party and spoiled the vote when Al Gore - the most famous environmentalist in Washington -was running and handed the election to Bush.
The GOP doesn’t actually want Trump, but they know 100% that he’d run third party without the nomination and kill the GOP, which is why they back him.
The spoiler effect is real and, until we have a better system, running or voting third-party is political malfeasance.
I don’t mind the odd asshole who refuses to play ball, so far up their own ass they think they’re so special and that the spoiler effect doesn’t apply to their vote.
If that is, they’re silent about it.
The second they start advocating for others to join them in their stupidity, they go from a harmless idiot to an active threat to democracy, exactly as bad as the MAGAt they likely are.
Maybe you can’t speak for what socialists prefer. It’s really odd to say it’s third party voters’ fault your preferred candidate didn’t win rather than your candidates fault they did not attract enough voters.
If everyone left of the Overton window promise to vote for the Democrats regardless of what policies the Democrats propose, what prevents the Democrats from moving to the right?
All the other elections every year. The party pays attention to the local and state elections. It matters tremendously. And in the mean time you are improving your local government that effects your everyday life.
Voting 3rd in the presidential election is a waste if the party hasn’t spent any time building support in existing government structures of power though.
Does a third party have some special avenue around an obstructionist house and senate that we all haven’t seen so far?
People can vote for the candidates they like locally even if they don’t like the top of the ticket. I didn’t say anything about down ballot elections.
And you still don’t have any answer for my question.
No… THAT is my answer. You asked what would prevent the Dems from sliding right and that was my answer. It’s the same thing that caused the Republicans to slide right.
You have the example in the Tea party movement to see how it effectively changes the party when down ballot voting shifts.
That’s how it’s done. There’s recent proof of it.
PS: You didn’t answer MY question.
Nobody said that a third party would win the presidency, so that’s a weird question. The answer is no, but you already knew that.
The tea party is a great example of Republicans listening to their base. Democrats should do the same. I don’t see anyone telling the far right they HAVE to vote for Republicans even if they run a liberal candidate. Democrats don’t own the votes of the Left either.
Voting for progressives down ballot is not a real way to influence the party, and I don’t believe you really think it is. Also, like I said, many progressives do that.
It’s just another line from the DNC to tell the progressives to shut up. When Dems start treating progressives like Republicans treat MAGA (worship, adoration, and fear) then you can expect that progressives will vote for Dems at the top of the ticket.
So you are knowingly throwing your vote away then. Ok. If your voice matters so little, no need to engage on a forum. Look in the mirror and ask what the point of wasting your moments literally telling everyone you don’t value your own vote.
Worthless…
I’d have a lot more respect if there was a third party candidate running for my district’s house seat.
That would mean they’re actually trying to build election infrastructure.
deleted by creator
Running for office costs lots of money and time. There are seats that go entirely uncontested, because the incumbent is too popular to challenge. I would love to see a 50-state Green strategy, too. I just don’t know who the 500+ candidates are supposed to be.
That would mean they’re actually trying to build election infrastructure.
I’m not sure where this “Greens never try to build anything” theory of politics came from. But if you think partisanship is savage at the national level, wait till you try and run as a Green candidate for municipal office. Talking about bike lanes in the wrong kind of county gets a certain kind of person shooting mad.
City elections are a mess on a good day, and a lot of it really boils down to which person the Mega-Church, the Millionaires, and the Morning Zoo Crew decide to endorse.
Oh I don’t mean they need to contest every seat that’s an unrealistic standard. But they certainly aren’t going to be a real choice until they have election infrastructure in every state. So we’re looking at about 100 elections of varying offices. And yeah, that takes time to build. Showing up in the last 6 months of the presidential campaign every 4 years is not how you get elected. AOC and others have shown that mainstream democrats are vulnerable in some of those seats that aren’t usually contested. And yeah you’re going to get gerrymandered out of seats a few times until you have a large enough group in the state legislature.
Saying it’s too much work to expect for a third party is just ridiculous. Nobody is going to just hand you a victory on the national stage.
But they certainly aren’t going to be a real choice until they have election infrastructure in every state.
Infrastructure costs money and manpower. Money tends to come from people looking to buy political favors. You can’t dole out political favors if you’re not in power. So power entrenches itself, with a single party dominating a particular seat by way of a patronage system.
And yeah, that takes time to build.
It has been built. Show me a state and I’ll show you a Green Party chapter. But it also decays without reinforcement. And it decays rapidly when the party becomes a scapegoat for deficiencies in one of the Big Two.
We see this with Libertarians as well. Every time the GOP loses, they take a big chunk of blame. People lose enthusiasm as they start getting yelled at by MAGA psychos accusing them of being Deep State agents of the Dem Party. Etc, etc. And eventually, they fold back into the GOP, rather than solidifying as their own party, when the GOP big dollar donors entice them into the tent again.
I suspect that’s what we’ll see with Greens. A mix of public shaming and private bribing will reincorporate them into the Dem Party where they can be more easily controlled.
To be fair the Greens have made a massive mistake with Jill Stein. They aren’t going to be the big third party that eventually breaks through unless they seriously reform. But no, a chapter in every state is not the infrastructure you need. Not beyond the most reductive meaning at any rate. You need to be a household name. You need to have been present in the state level political scene already. Election infrastructure is hundreds of people showing up every day to make millions of calls. Thousands of volunteers papering neighborhoods. Supporting PACs and local relationships to generate endorsements. A hundred members who meet once a month isn’t going to cut it.
deleted by creator
To be fair the Greens have made a massive mistake with Jill Stein.
She’s been the sacrificial lamb election cycle after election cycle because she’s willing to do the job. If Cornel West hadn’t withdrawn, I could have seen him as a better choice. But given the smearing every Green candidate since Nader has endured, I don’t really blame him for wanting to stay out of the mud.
You need to be a household name. You need to have been present in the state level political scene already.
You need billions of dollars to operate at that level. Hell, even the party primaries are these enormous luxurious affairs. So much of this really does just boil down to money, which comes from people looking to buy access to the candidates.
Supporting PACs and local relationships to generate endorsements.
Who are the local Green candidates going to get to form PACs on their behalf? You either have a die-hard ideologue like Perot who bankrolls the entire party out of his tech industry fortune, or you have a scattered amalgamation of independent activists who congeal around a third party banner.
When you’re getting enough house seats and state legislature seats you can start working on PACs, nobody is going to give you a PAC before you’ve done the work.
When you’re getting enough house seats and state legislature seats
Where do you get the money to build the organization to win these seats? States don’t just give them away. A house district can run north of 600,000 residents and cost more than half-a-million in donations to compete in. Even state legislative races are enormous, expensive affairs. And that’s before you get into the incumbency racket of gerrymandered seats and access journalism.
Local government is fucking awful. Think of an HOA and then make them accountable to the whiniest assholes in town. Just watch any footage of local meetings on YouTube to see what I mean.
Democrats brining up abortion and housing prices. Republicans lowering gas prices. It’s that time of the year.
That sounds too much like work and not enough like bitching.
Makes me wish we had some serious third parties in this country, and not two grifting perennial presidential-election also-rans
The lack of viable ones is less a result of effort on their part or desire for them among the electorate, and more to do with the nature of our voting system. Its hard to develop a viable third party when the system one is operating in mathematically guarantees that only two parties can be seriously competitive with eachother in nationally significant elections, and those parties are already established. They can be competitive in local elections that the larger ones dont put as much effort into, but the only times theyve ever gotten to the presidency have been the couple times when one of the two major parties basically collapses and gets replaced with a different one.
They can be competitive in local elections that the larger ones dont put as much effort into,
That’s my point, though. The two biggest third parties in this country aren’t competitive in local elections, because they put even less effort in local elections as the two major parties do. They make a performative shot at the presidency every four years, and that’s about fucking it. The Libertarians are slightly better (god, what a sentence to gag on) on this than the Greens, but not by much.
There are more than just two third-parties if that’s how you want to refer to them. There were three others you didn’t mention in my state, all different on policy. Third-party doesn’t by default mean green or libertarian.
They said “biggest”, not “only”.
Which I will admit is only partially accurate, the AIP (a paleoconservative party, far right) is the largest after the Libertarian Party (which is not even remotely libertarian in policy). Then Green (which doesn’t actually do anything on any of the ideologies they claim to support), followed by another christian nationalist party, and then parties so small they are a margin of error on the national stage at best, combined.
Single-state parties have no relevance nationally.
Still, a lot of people are seemingly treating all third parties the same as they do the Green party, which then affects all of them in public opinion.
At the national level, yes. The only thing they are is a spoiler party in federal elections. Hopefully that changes in the future, but to do that we need to get away from FPTP, and those 3rd parties need to go local first to get recognition.
Local level is an entirely different territory, and there are quite a few third parties in offices.
But in a federal election? Yeah, they are only a spoiler, nothing else.
But see you are doing exactly what I said, applying criticism of the Green party to all third parties. Its the green party that doesn’t participate in local elections. I don’t mind third parties trying different strategies. For better or for worse, whatever the green party is doing at least gets it talked about a ton, which has to be worth something.
Isn’t the AIP just part of the Constitution Party, which itself is, as a whole, smaller than the Greens?
Not really, there was a split in the AIP where some stayed with the Constitution Party (specifically in CA, not in UT), and others stayed purely AIP, then they went with a splinter name for those who didn’t stay with Constitution called America’s Party. Which is bonus funny, because a few decades before that there was another split with some becoming the American Party (northern conservatives).
In terms of membership though, the AIP still keeps all of them, making them the largest by membership IIRC. Its… weird. So AIP is technically larger, but its really split into a lot of factions. UT is still where the bulk of the membership is though I believe. Numbers wise though, if you shoved them all in one place, they still wouldn’t even make the top ten list of cities by population in the US. The Green Party membership numbers wouldn’t hit the top 100.
I’m going to double check though, its been a while since I looked in on those loonies…
EDIT:
Wikipedia numbers for quick checks, the LP actually has less members than I thought. As of 2022, 727k. Green has 211k, AIP has 919k members, and Constitution has 154k members.
In terms of votes in the 2020 presidential election, the LP got 1.8 million votes, green got 400k, an much to my surprise, the Working Families Party got 386k! Letitia James, btw, ran in the WFP ticket ~20 years ago or so. They still have some folks in office in Philly, and had previously won some state seats in CT. They make use of electoral fusion to support Democrats where they don’t have a chance to win or there is a risk from pulling from Democrats to a loss against republicans, and are, as far as I know, one of the better 3rd parties out there. Membership is still low though, looks like only 65k. I know they are in my state, though it looks like they don’t have ballot access yet. Hmm. Maybe worth seeing if they are trying for anything locally by me to see if I can support them.
EDIT 2: THEY DO! This is exciting, they have someone up for my district! I’m disappointed with myself for not seeing that, running under the Democrat ticket but a WFP party member - that is fantastic news.
Folks, this is the sort of third party you get behind. They work together against the far right, and have a defined focus on social democracy and progressive policy.
Daily reminder:
Do you think she started out earnest and got co-opted?
Has she been a willing accomplice since day one?To sit at a fancy gala dinner with the very definition of the what the hard right salivates to be, then to declare that both parties are the same… that is something… that takes some fucking chutzpah.
The hard right doesn’t want to be like Russia, they don’t want America involved in any country really.
This picture is also near meaningless, but feel free to debate that.
I see you didn’t watch the Tucker Carlson in Russia videos.
Jill disappears on November 6th and reappears 3 years and 10 months later. Like clockwork.
Jill disappears on November 6th and reappears 3 years and 10 months later
Good money in it. Russian rubles too.
Just because youre too lazy to pay attention to third parties on non election years does not mean theyre not working.
They’re the ones saying voting against Harris is the only power they have to change her policies.
Thats an objectively true statement.
Maybe, but it leaves out the other half of the equation, don’t you think?
Please tell me what they’ve been doing for the last 3 years.
Getting people elected to local seats.
Nice, which ones?
This is public information, you could have looked this up yourself at any point in the last 8 years instead of falling for Clinton propaganda. https://www.gpelections.org/greens-in-office/
That’s a pretty negative and aggressive response to someone inviting you show how hard the Green party has been working.
However, that’s a pretty poor showing for 8 years of work. no wonder everyone thinks the Green party does nothing besides run spoiler presidential candidates. You probably to need to find a hobby that doesn’t revolve around falling for Jill Stein propaganda.
Given half of their donations go to defending the right to run for office because the Dems sue every single chance they get in every single election where both a green and a dem theyve done pretty well. Maybe you need to find a hobby that doesn’t revolve around worshipping corporations and conservative cops.
lol sur
False equivalency. This is, in fact, an election year. And pushing a presidential spoiler hack backed by Russia isn’t a great look anyway.
Oh, they’re working, all right — but for who?
The American working class, besides PSL, they the only ones doing so politically.
What’s the last law the greens got passed with their tactics?
What’s the last progressive legislative win from the Dems that is not something Sweden had a better version of in 1976?
The ADA and recent infrastructure act
That was either bi partisan, or a child of Republicans, as it was introduced in 1986 by a bipartisan group, signed into law by hw Bush in 1990, and amended by a Republican Congress and w bush in 2008. There was never a dem push for the law or the amendment, and there really wouldn’t be as by far the majority of Americans with disabilities vote Republican.
I like how you just admitted that your stanning the greens isn’t born out of the dems not being progressive enough but out of having bought the republican line hook line and sinker that dems just bad for whatever reason and having to do more introspection than glomming onto the cool edgy people who swear they’re more progressive than makes your brain hurt too much.
All the political saviness of a midwestern white boomer who doesn’t know jack about their political interest other than that they think the dems are against them because reasons.
You really enjoy making up things in your head to argue against so you can actually win. Greens are the only center left party in the US, and the only third party on enought state ballots to what n the presidency. That’s why Dems have spent over 50 million in lawsuits against them, plus countless millions on the propaganda that informed your opinion. I personally like PSL way more, and would love the 50+ crowd to die off already so we can have a socialist in office again and actually make the country better. But we keep extending the lifespan of those brainwashed fucks, so instead, greens get my vote.
Right now the only way Dems could ever get my vote is steal the green party platform, cut off Israel entirely, and actually start to enact positive change.
Half the states don’t follow the ADA and multiple organizations are trying to get consent decrees to force them too. This is after theyve already had to take the ADA to Supreme court once to get states to follow it right. Its a 30 year old law only half the country follows. The ADA is a joke unless your in one of the states that has decided to follow it. There are no punishments for states who don’t.
I like the sentiment and suggest taking it a step further.
If they aren’t starting at the local level then they aren’t serious about the national level regardless of when they start discussing the next election.
If you give up and vote for Democrats or Republican’s: -you are voting for putting people in prison for marijuana. -You are voting for a party that will pretend to care only to watch key legislation die because 2 senators said “no”, despite being from the party that claimed to want the change. -You vote for 2 more years of a locked government. There is no solution to the problems the 2 parties have created by voting for either of them. Nothing ever gets permanently better under either Democrat or Republican. They are the problem. -Don’t use Geordi to support your ruling class. Geordi comes from a world that got rid of boomer parties and they run the freaking galaxy.
No, no, no! It’s not the systemic oppression of the poor and PoCs that’s the issue. Or that basic civil rights can be voted and legislated away by a fascist minority. It’s because a handful of people don’t personify the system’s problems into Trump’s facade.
you are voting for putting people in prison for marijuana.
Harris has made Cannabis legalization a campaign promise.
You are voting for a party that will pretend to care only to watch key legislation die because 2 senators said “no”, despite being from the party that claimed to want the change.
You are literally complaining about democracy here. If you want more “yes” votes, elect more Democrats.
You vote for 2 more years of a locked government. There is no solution to the problems the 2 parties have created by voting for either of them. Nothing ever gets permanently better under either Democrat or Republican. They are the problem.
Democrats bring progress, and Republicans bring regression. I don’t see how not voting is a solution to this problem. If you want progress, vote for the people who bring it.
Don’t use Geordi to support your ruling class. Geordi comes from a world that got rid of boomer parties and they run the freaking galaxy.
Star Trek isn’t real.
You are literally complaining about democracy here. If you want more “yes” votes, elect more Democrats.
The last 20 years prove otherwise. Not only could they not pass Bidens’ BBB agenda with both houses in 2021, but they couldn’t pass universal healthcare or codify Roe with a super-majority in 2009. The only major legislative achievement of the Democrats since the 90s was passing a Republican-designed healthcare plan. That’s not democracy, it’s disfunction.
Democrats bring progress, and Republicans bring regression.
LMAO, no. The social safety net is a fraction of the size it was 40 years ago, wealth inequality is at record highs, and housing is unaffordable for half of Americans. That’s not just from Democrats failure to bring change either; Bill Clinton did as much to gut welfare and deregulate Wallstreet as any Republican. At their best, the Democrats slow the rate of regression, and even that is far from a given.
If you can’t see daylight between the parties, and hold that they are identical rather than one being markedly less awful than the other (note: less awful, they still have are awful in their way), then you are as annoying as the people who were screaming back in 2021 that anyone who wasn’t voting Biden in 2024 is a monster (please, tell me again how criticizing Biden is the worst thing I can do to keep Trump out of office). Y’all are catastrophizing so hard that you’ve forgotten how to build political power, and are relying on big orgs to do it for you.
Your frustration with the system is valid, but you’re missing the point. The time to argue about the rules of the game is not in the middle of the game. Between rounds the rules should absolutely be examined, changed, and balanced for the better, but once the game has begun you can only play within what has already been established.
To be fair, Kamala is our third Presidential candidate this year. 😂
The “election cycle”
The long election cycle exists to purposefully reinforce the bipartisan duopoly by forcing candidates to campaign for 6+ months which is way too expensive for anyone that isn’t funded by billionaires. “Campaigning” shouldn’t take multiple months we all have tv and phones it doesn’t take long to tell us what you stand for and for us to make up our minds about that. Other countries don’t have this ridiculously long election cycle
Nah buddy, we always have been and always will advocate for abolition of this idiotic bipartisanship.
You just happen to notice it only when you are begging us to vote for these genocidal neoliberal freaks.
Or, running down ballot candidates to actually affect genuine policy change. But no, just run for president to make a small amount of noise and rake in that moron money.
STAR vote to make parties irrelevant except at the coalition building level!
Finally, yes! Anyone who wants to vote for a third party should instead spend their time and effort fighting for a different voting system (ranked choice, star, etc) that could mathematically allow a third party to actually succeed.
A group here in the Midwest tried. The duopoly collaborated to squash the effort. We need a third party to make it happen.
The problem is that there simply can’t be a third party. In our current system a third party is mathematically impossible. I would love for a majority of citizens to suddenly throw caution to the wind magically surge a third party into power. But it’s just not realistic. Again, the most a third party can do is cause a scare, but it’ll never come into power.
Also for what it’s worth there is an RCV bill for federal congressional elections in the House, which I think has a much better chance of passing than a similar bill in a deeply rural state like Missouri. Once established at a federal level I think it would simply be a matter of time until it made it’s way to even resistant states.
Right, both of these things can be true: Third parties are impossible in our system. Third parties are vital to save our system.
There’s no law of nature that says that our system must or will endure. We could just be fucked. No, wait, look at the polls for the current presidential election cycle; we’re definitely fucked.
Doesn’t mean we can’t make a doomed effort to save it, though.
“Fighting for” is leaving a lot up for interpretation here.
You’re right. In another reply I said that voting third party might move the needle for RCV, but it’s iffy.
In some perspectives, fighting for third parties does fight for a different voting system.
It does, but it’s just a big gamble. You’re attempting to scare one of the establishment parties into changing by causing them to lose an election heavily. So, if it works, you’ve necessarily made a material sacrifice in giving control of an office to the opposing party, allowing them to cause whatever real world damage they are capable of causing in that position. Then you have to hope that the message is received and that the party you spoiled actually changes in the way you want, and doesn’t just ignore you. And you also have to hope that they recognize and change quickly or else the damage compounds as more elections pass.
On top of that, this only works “once”. If the party starts ignoring you again you have to make these real consequential sacrifices again.
In conclusion, with voting third party the sacrifice is guaranteed, the reward is not.
I will admit it’s possible that spoiling/scaring is the only way to get RCV (or better) in the first place since the only group it’s not good for is sitting politicians, but I’m not convinced yet.
But I’m entirely convinced that without an improved voting system we don’t actually have a democracy.
And for anyone who’s reading this, if you’re a Missourian vote NO on Amendment 7!
Well if the outcome is so undecided as to not be able to logical choose a side, then I will almost always choose the side that is reforming what we have or creating something new, rather than sticking with what we have and just trying to do it right each time.
We know 100% that waiting for politicians to give away their own power isn’t working, so even a minuscule chance of something better has to be given at least some consideration.
STAR is good for the existence of ideas but not for actually getting third party candidates elected. It stands for Score Then Automatic Run off. The top two candidates advance to the Automatic Run off. That’s just the FPTP with a dressing that makes third party voters feel better.
RCP actually empowers third party voters, is easy to understand, and is already being adopted.
That’s my secret, I’m always talking about replacing First-past-the-post voting with Ranked Choice voting.
I’m voting for Jill because I want Trump to win. I’m so tired of you histrionic gas lighting liberals, I hope Trump jails you all.
You will die alone and forgotten, without a single friend to mourn you
No, because I actually understand how capitalism works and know that screaming at the most marginalized people to “VOTE BLUE NO MATTER WHO” won’t change anything even in the face of genocide.
No you don’t, eat my ass forum slider
Yes I do, now cry about how your moral universe will smite me while Kamala bombs kids.
Its just fucking wild watching the pro-gun lot declare Kamala and Joe Biden to be committing genocide when you know for a fact that they’d have a meltdown if you applied the exact same logic to Walmart or the owner of the gun the child shot the school up with.
Don’t get me wrong, America needs to stop selling Israel weapons, other than Iron dome related and very limited defence stuff. Thats the road map to peace in the middle east right there.
But I could watch them try and take the moral high ground over it all day. They literally have no idea they’re doing it either:
"No, clearly they know that, ultimately, many of those weapons will be used to commit atrocities, including killing children. A brief look at the numbers shows it to be inevitable. As such, any government that allows to sale of these things is also culpable and has to put an end to it.
Again, not idea they’re doing it, at all.
But hey, who knows, maybe the other guy, the one in bed with the gun-toting too psycho-christians, maybe he’ll “turn their back on Israel.”
Maybe i got you wrong and if so i apologise but i had to get that off my chest all the same.
Haha the audacity Western libs never ceases to amaze me. You’re comparing a genocide to a tragic but at all equivalent. American children are not endanger of being erased from existence. And most of the shootings are driven by the right wing fascism in your own government and society.
Change only happens when its convenient /s
I’ve been staring at this for two hours but I still don’t get it.
And it was only posted 8mins ago, impressive
Are you going to explain it or are you going to just keep making fun of my math skills?
Outside of the uses in math and physics, time can be seen as a recurring pattern of ages or cycles.
The first three panels state the obvious and the fourth doesn’t make sense to me.
You are being made fun of.
If you make fun of someone and they don’t get get it, did you really make fun of them?
and that’s ok
