Not today they don’t. Kids are SUPER aware it’s happening. It’s not the kids driving us off a cliff though
I think the post title is misleading. The image itself ends with “Look around, friends.” which is far more accurate.
And half of voters are voting for it.
I just listened to a “undecided voters deliberate” and I want to pull my fucking hair out.
(The only redeeming point is these weren’t undecided as in they change their vote all the time, they were lifelong Republican voters who are now undecided. Still bad.)
But that’s still huge. Theyve likely grown up surrounded by conservatives their whole lives. Conservative talk radio, then fox news, oreily factor every night, Sean hannity, glen beck, and now modern social media and YouTube has them getting pumped with ridiculous echo chamber bs.
The fact they are “undecided” is pretty fucking damning for Republicans and conservatives.
They are stepping back from an entire world view and even an “identity” they’ve had their whole life. That’s huge.
It’s fine to be frustrated by it but it’s still a good thing.
Edit: the good thing is that they are now undecided. Not that half of voters are still voting for the orange turd.
And half of voters are voting for it.
Yes, they’re called Democrats.
This post is about the genocide in Gaza, which is being funded and armed by Joe Biden’s administration, and which Joe Biden could stop at any time simply by telling his Ambassador to the UN to stop vetoing UN resolutions about Israel.
The fact that you want to blame Republicans for this instead of accepting what your own “side” is doing is a good example of why it’s still happening.
We’re stuck with the lesser of two evils, but until we get something like ranked choice voting, that’s what we have to work with. For now our choices are:
Choice A) a party with some generally decent ideas for improving the quality of living for the majority of Americans. Seeks to help and protect civil rights and marginalized groups, end racism & sexism, and help the middle class. Tools of billionaires and corporations. Has a weird desire to support a genocidal power, with some limp-wristed finger wagging, despite the majority of their constituents being against genocide.
Choice B) a party apparently filled to the brim with religious fruitcakes, grifters, racists, foreign assets, and pedophiles who generally work to make life shittier for everybody not rich, white, and male. Actively committed to ending democracy and installing a religious fascist government. Tools of billionaires and corporations. They will wholeheartedly support genocide and will likely increase aid to make it happen quicker.
Choice C) various parties with some potentially interesting ideas that are getting pushed by one of the two main political parties in an attempt to peel away votes from their opposition party. Used as tools of the major political parties. They don’t support genocide, but because they’ll never get into power in the current system, they’re as powerless as anybody else to do anything about it.
Yeah. None of the choices are good.
I can’t bring myself in good conscience to vote for Choice A. I wish I could, but I can’t. Not unless Harris commits to action on Israel, which is looking increasingly unlikely. I understand we’re all dealing with bad options and I understand why some people will still go with Choice A, but I can’t. Genocide is a red line for me.
I’m aware this increases the chances that we end up in Gilead.
I’m aware this increases the chances that we end up in Gilead.
(Actually, it doesn’t, because I’m not in a swing state.)
And “side” is in quotes because they’re not really on your side. They serve the billionaire corporate class, just like the Republicans.
I would argue that 99% of voters are voting for it.
A good example is Democrats’ response to Roe vs Wade repeal. That is to say, except for fundraising, there wasn’t one. They raked in a cool $80 million though: https://apnews.com/article/abortion-us-supreme-court-elections-campaigns-8a6e3db27082cc212e9e5183b25e7c32.
When one side actively perpetrates fascism and the other side does nothing to stop it, the difference in rhetoric means absolutely nothing to me.
That’s oversimplification. Just because you vote Democrat doesn’t mean you support all of the policies. There are many practical reasons that come into play.
And your response to Roe is inaccurate. There has been a tremendous amount of pressure in the aftermath of Roe v. Wade. I suppose that many Republicans who lose will do so largely because of Roe. I recall the Dems floating a plan to revise how SCOTUS is staffed, too. It probably won’t pass, but it’s exactly the kind of thing you are overlooking.
Most Americans support ranker choice voting, universal healthcare, paid maternity leave, freedom of choice, etc.
The people aren’t the problem, the system is. Our corrupt 2 party system is destroying the US. The only way to save this country is to replace it with a modern multi-party proportional representation system like the system we helped the Germans create after ww2.
What are you on about, she said she wants Roe back. This just reeks of b b b but dems bad!!
So did Joe Biden.
The problem is he did nothing meaningful to restore it. My point is simple: It doesn’t matter what you say if you’re not going to use the power you have in order to make the change.
It essentially wasn’t overturned until he lost the House of Reps. They need House majority, senate majority, presidency, and get rid of the filibuster (which wasn’t going to happen with Manchin). All 4 to pass that legislation. It’s going to be tough to get them all.
But you don’t care about any of that. Your
pointmisinformation is simple: B b b b b but Dems bad!1!!The ACA and the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act were both passed with a simple majority.
Put simply, you are incorrect. Hard things are possible if a president is willing to work for the; Sadly, Biden was not.
Other things took simple majority, therefore this would take a simple majority too? Outstanding logic. By that logic no one has every filibustered anything, right? If Dobbs was something the GOP wanted, they would have filibustered it.
lol so thanks for exposing your goal of misinformation. I see no point in continuing to rebut your mental gymnastics, so ciao.
*ACA was passed 60-39, supermajority.
Unlike you, I won’t accept that it’s okay to do nothing because something is challenging.
Related: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Third_Wave_(experiment)
Takes 4 days to get it started.
That’s crazy it was in high school and not college. I can’t imagine high school teachers and admin allowing all of that.
Really great lesson though.
I highly recommend reading the book “The Wave” (fictional but based on that experiment)
We never learn, do we?
The fact that Israel is doing what it’s doing, Germany is doing what it’s doing(its far right is on the rise again as well), and we’re doing what we’re doing despite being the first human lifespan where we have literal video and photographic records and testimony of past atrocities really gives me disdain for my own species.
As a species, We seem to either be incapable of or refuse to retain the lessons of history beyond a single human lifespan. That’s quite limiting.
A human life can be both terribly long and tragically short. But our lifespans are fairly insignificant to the wheels of time.
That being said, we can and should do better.
300 thousand years of human existence and we act like we climbed out of the trees yesterday.
To be fair, our brains are basically the same as our 300k y/o ancestor’s. We just have some more technology, but that’s it.
It’s not like we have evolutionary pressure to improve our stupid monkey brains to be more tolerant. If anything it’s the other way around.
To be accurate, we spent about 95% of that wandering around in the dirt before it occurred to some of us that we could stay in one place and maybe grow stuff there.
For me, that reality provides necessary context for why we are the way we are. En masse, we are not nearly as intelligent or impressive as we believe we are. IMHO even the best of us only have glimmers of sapience.
Time is a flat circle, you know the destination but do you know how to get off?
We agree to try something different. The agreement is always the challenge.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
iirc its some kind of dog whistle but I forget what it means.
Downvoted but technically correct. “Dogwhistle” doesn’t mean “only republicans can use this” or it’d be a “republican whistle.” Being that it just means a symbol to quietly signal allegiance, this would technically be a dogwhistle for Palestinian support, coming from a legit dogwhistle invented when Israel banned the Palestinian flag.
“Dogwhistle” doesn’t mean “only republicans can use this”
But I never said it was that?
I believe ArcaneSlime was trying to explain to people down voting that you were correct with the term you used. Some people might have only heard it referring to racism instead of any coded message.
They mentioned downvotes but you’re up now, so I’m just guessing.
Tbf to the downvoters, the term has had its negative connotations so strongly for so long that it’s functionally changed its definition
The other reply by Notyou is correct.
Also, really, they didn’t. It’s just impossible to know or tell all the small ways people tried to make the situation better.
From Germany, to Poland, to Britain the era of Nazism is replete with stories of people who resisted in big and small ways. That’s the part of the story I like to focus on; how so many did small bits of good with their own two hands because it’s all they could do.
The irony is that the the Holocaust was actually hidden to much of the German populace and most of the heinous war crimes were only uncovered after the Genocide was over.
At least we now know that even with full knowledge of what happened in Germany most people would still have supported their “lesser evil” Fuhrer.
Please don’t use the passive voice when you’re talking about knowledge and accountability. Millions of people knew what was happening around the time it was happening.
Of course many other people didn’t know, or didn’t believe what they heard, if they heard anything. But you don’t get to put everyone in the latter group.
Germans knew there was something extremely shady going on with people being deported to “work camps”. But Germans had a weird notion of plausible deniability because they did not know for certain. They did not want to know either of course.
They even had a term for this: wir haben es nicht gewußt
Unadapted borrowing from German wir haben es nicht gewußt (“we did not know (it), we had no knowledge of it”).
It refers to the stereotypical defense said to have been used by Germans attempting to deflect accusations of not having done enough to stop Nazi crimes against humanity during the Second World War, especially the Holocaust.
they were forced to confront the reality though https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/film/german-civilians-forced-to-view-atrocities-committed-in-buchenwald
US forces liberated the Buchenwald concentration camp in Germany in April 1945. Here, US soldiers escort German civilians from the nearby town of Weimar through the Buchenwald camp. The American liberating troops had a policy of forcing German civilians to view the atrocities committed in the camps.
Indeed but it was after the Nazis already lost.
At least we know you who you want in the Whitehouse
