• ceoofanarchism@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    16 days ago

    Ignoring everything else here prosecutor is a net negative and “Felon” isn’t a bad thing necessarily. If you want to you can criticize Trump without propping up law enforcement.

    • sudo@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      Okay but in this case, felon is a bad thing because the crimes trump has been convicted of are serious offenses that should make him ineligible to even be president.

      trump wasn’t convicted on 1 or 2 charges that were pushed on him by racist fascist pigs. He is the racist fascist pig. Who was convicted of scores of felonies.

      It is a bad thing. Necessarily.

      • ceoofanarchism@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        16 days ago

        Yes trumps crimes were bad no argument from me. It’s just so many of these felon vs prosecutor memes and similar things really play into demonization of “felons” as a whole.

  • TheObviousSolution@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    16 days ago

    An ode to the increasingly large gap in education within the US. You reap what you sow, and that lack of worker rights and education along with the promotion and celebration of extreme competition is showing. Not that it isn’t costly, a good education doesn’t even seem to last a generation nowadays.

    • mycodesucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      16 days ago

      Say it with me now!

      CRITICIZING 👏 THE 👏 ISRAELI 👏 GOVERNMENT 👏 IS 👏 NOT 👏 CRITICIZING 👏THE 👏 JEWISH 👏 PEOPLE. THEY 👏 ARE 👏 NOT 👏 A 👏 BORG 👏 HIVEMIND.

      • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        14 days ago

        Yeah, well, I’ll stop calling out antisemitism when people stop being antisemitic. There are a lot of antisemitic tropes floating around right now where “Jew” is just subbed out for “Zionist”, and people seem oblivious to the nuances between Judaism and Zionism.

        Actual criticism of Zionism as a political philosophy is obviously more than welcome, but there are way too many “Zionists control the world and are subhuman” folks out there seemingly immune to criticism in left-leaning spaces because as long as they proxy their antisemitism through the lens of anti-Zionism, the left will reflexively defend them.

        The fact that, here on Lemmy, every non-Arab man, woman, and child living in Israel are regularly spoken of as if they are foreign invaders that need to be mass-deported or worse should be enough of a warning sign that at least some anti-Zionists don’t actually have their sites set on Zionism, but rather the destruction of Israel and the displacement/destruction of it’s people, representing 50% of the Jews on Earth.

            • Krauerking@lemy.lol
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              14 days ago

              They are just reactionary at this point and basically foaming at the mouth with the rabid thoughts of all the people that are wrong and easy to point at for being so, even if they are completely wrong and missing the point. Basically the same level of fear mongering but theirs is acceptable.

              • wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                14 days ago

                Perhaps, but they’ve been accusing everyone who fights again the genocide of being antisemitic for month on end now. Their position on the issue couldn’t be clearer, and it is the opposite of what y’all are claiming.

  • yarr@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    14 days ago

    Is there a person alive on this planet now with a so called “spotless” record? OP, are you of all the major decisions Kamala has made and you agree with them?

    • gi1242@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      14 days ago

      hmm. why am I voting for Harris. let me count the ways:

      • she’s got30 felonies less that what’s his face.

      • no bribery

      • no fraud

      • no racketeering,

      • no sexual assault

      • isnt Putin’s bitch

      • she trusts science

      • doesn’t mock disabled reporters on live TV

      • isn’t planning on appointing her unqualified family to the government

      • she isn’t running only to stay out of prison

      • she isn’t married to a Slovenian escort

      • she isn’t copying Hitler

      • her running mate never said she’s hitler

  • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    14 days ago

    She’s already said she will continue arming Israel, which is a felony at this point.

    Proudly proclaiming she will commit a felony day one is a good indication of how I expect the rest of her term to go.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      14 days ago

      My ballot had 3 options: Kamala Harris, Donald Trump and Robert Kennedy, Jr.

      Write-ins are not allowed in Indiana.

      Who should I have voted for?

    • auzy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      14 days ago

      What felony exactly? If that’s a felony, that would be great, because then we can finally hold gun manufacturers and owners who sell their firearms fully responsible.

      She’s not even president.

      Hey, never mind the fact though that Walz is feeding school kids, they’re getting tampons in bathrooms and plan to finally tax the rich more, help the poor and increase minimum wage

      Im sure people who are struggling to get dinner on their table are more concerned about foreign policy

        • auzy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          14 days ago

          The Leahy Laws or Leahy amendments are U.S. human rights laws that prohibit the U.S. Department of State and Department of Defense.

          So it’s actually applied against those 2 offices, not the executive branch.

          And again, she wants a ceasefire…

          You have no way of knowing what’s happening in the background, only what you read about in the news

          • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            14 days ago

            It doesn’t matter what she says she wants. If she authorizes more weapons sales, she’s in violation of both international and domestic law.

            • auzy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              14 days ago

              Which law again?

              As mentioned, Leahy’s law isn’t executive branch it seems according to Wikipedia. So you need to take it up with you Pentagon…

    • pezhore@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      I’ve read (not sure how true) that it’s not necessarily undecided between Harris and Trump - more undecided about even showing up to vote.

      I honestly don’t know what’s worse.

  • desktop_user@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    16 days ago

    not to be in support of trumb, but if someones records are spotless that is inherently suspicious to me. is she even allowed to run for president if she hasn’t visited a sex trafficker?

    • bl_r@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      Her record isn’t spotless, but when you compare someone to trump it might as well look spotless because the context of trump makes it look so clean

      I’m not fully knowledgeable about her record since I have more pressing things to worry about rather than researching harris, but as a queer person, I am aware of some of her shortcomings regarding queer rights.

      She has explicitly tried to prevent trans people from receiving gender affirming care when in prison and challenged a ruling in favor of a transwoman to do so.

      Source: (washington blade)

      She also supported trans women in men’s prisons which is an extra horrific experience for a trans person, since queer people are generally more likely to be assaulted, raped, and sexually assaulted in prison. Trans women in men’s prisons have it the worst.

      This happened in the past, but with her not explicitly making trans rights a campaign issue in the face of how much discrimination they are currently facing, it is concerning.

      • desktop_user@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        15 days ago

        thank you for pointing out some of her flaws, I find it appalling that she would not want people to continue medical treatment for a condition that is corelated with suicide while in prison. Where trans people should be located in prison is a difficult question, I think making gender neutral prisons that don’t have convenient places for rape to occur (make all bathrooms be unisex, increase surveillance of employees, eliminate for profit prisons) would probably be the best method, but idk. On the bright side she isn’t trump.

  • CazzoneArrapante@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    Italiano
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    14 days ago

    Her record is not spotless tbh.

    Anyway, easy solution to the problem: ban Trump and the GOP. Bam, fascism is no more.

  • Drusas@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    16 days ago

    He’s not a Nazi; he’s a fascist. Nazi refers to a specific political party. Fascist is more general.

    • Successful_Try543@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      16 days ago

      The main difference, as I understand, is that national socialism is inherently racist and puts the (Aryan) race on top of the ideology, everything else must submit to the benefit of the (Aryan) race, whereas fascism puts the benefit of the state on top.

      https://historyplex.com/difference-between-fascism-nazism

      Trump, as fas as I can judge from beyond the pond, is still claiming to put the state, or the United States of America, first, like a fascist would do. His hate speech against immigrants still serves the narrative of them being bad for the US, not of them being disadvantageous towards the benefit of the Aryan race.

    • lemonmelon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      14 days ago

      No, the term "Nazi Party"refers to the National Socialist German Workers’ Party. The term “Nazi” refers to an adherent to the ideology of Hitler Fascism. The NSDAP didn’t typically refer to themselves with that term.

      There’s also a square/rectangle situation in play: all Nazis are fascists but not all fascists are Nazis. In this case, though, he’s more on the square side of the comparison. The biggest departures from the ideology are the inclusion of religion and the lack of Lebensraum (at least at home; there’s an ironic argument to be made about how his belief that Bibi is moving too slowly in Gaza indicates that he has an eye towards creating living-space for certain groups at the expense of others).