And "if you're a third party presidential candidate voter, you're doing more to harm Palestinians than if you vote for either genocidal candidate." *The level of gaslighting defies credibility; yet here we all are.

*Quotation marks added for clarity.

[–] ShimmeringKoi@hexbear.net 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

glasses-off

And if you're a third party presidential candidate voter, you're doing more to harm Palestinians than if you vote for either genocidal candidate. The level of gaslighting defies credibility; yet here we all are.

glasses-on

VOTE for Genocide!

~~Lol no, get fucked nazi.~~

Edit: Turns out I was replying to sarcasm, unfortunately hard to tell these days

[–] Maeve@midwest.social 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

I don't think it's worth bothering arguing with them, anymore, since it tends to deflect from both major parties being the beneficiaries and at least sideline architects of genocide. I'm voting Claudia. I said what I said, nothing to argue about. Let them shadowbox.

Eta: didn't think I'd need the sarcasm tag, in my original comment. But I will add quotation marks.

[–] ShimmeringKoi@hexbear.net 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Oh my B, I'll edit too

[–] Maeve@midwest.social 2 points 2 months ago

No worries. I understand the confusion. Thanks though.

[–] Maeve@midwest.social 3 points 2 months ago

Edit: Turns out I was replying to sarcasm, unfortunately hard to tell these days

It sure is! It's my fault too. And it's sad that we can't tell anymore.

[–] averyminya@beehaw.org 1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

When the third party candidate admits that their campaign is solely to siphon away votes from Democrats? And the Republican alternative has actively stated Palestine should be wiped out by Israel?

Can't vote Democrat because support of Israel. That means you also can't support Republicans, because they support the full extent of the genocide even more. And that means you can't support (most) 3rd party candidates, because the Green Party is primarily funded by Republican donors and, quote,

"Trump, has embraced Kennedy as an ally, has previously spoken fondly of both Stein and West.

"Cornel West, he's one of my favorite candidates," Trump said during a campaign rally in Philadelphia in June. "I like her also, Jill Stein, I like her very much. You know why? She takes 100% from them. He takes 100%."

So that leaves us with... A candidate who at least is saying a 2 state solution, and one who told Israel to finish the job. Plus you know, all of the American focused policies, such as education.

With this in mind, and with how the events of 2016's election turned out, you can understand why people are suspicious about 3rd party voting, right?

[–] Dragonstaff@leminal.space 5 points 2 months ago

By "How 2016 turned out" you mean the Democrats ran a conservative, establishment Democrat when literally everyone was saying we want change? Then she was beaten by an "outsider" and the Democrats went all 'shocked Pikachu face' and blamed progressives for their choices?

Dems think that we owe them our votes while they refuse to represent us. That is not democracy.

[–] Maeve@midwest.social 1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Wrong.

[–] averyminya@beehaw.org -1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

You know, reasons why are a lot more engaging than just outright dismissal, but whatever I guess.

[–] Count042@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Two responses.

One just says wrong.

The other actually engages with you on the topic.

Yet you respond only to the one that just says "wrong" complaining that they didn't engage you on the topic.

Self righteous smugness is a hell of a drug, isn't it?

[–] averyminya@beehaw.org 0 points 2 months ago

What you don't realize is that I did write up a response to the other one. Then I got distracted, the app closed, I lost my response and I moved on.

But sure, insult me more. Good discussion.

[–] Tiltinyall@beehaw.org -2 points 2 months ago

Nuh-uh