cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/21289050

An inconvenient truth for Jill Stein, the Green Party protest candidate for president, is that there are only two candidates who can win the presidency on Nov. 5, and she isn’t one of them.

The other inconvenient truth for her and her avowed progressive supporters is that every protest vote from the left against Vice President Kamala Harris is a vote for former President Donald Trump.

  • kitnaht@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    So the material concerns of billionaires is all that matters.

    Yeah, nobody said that at all, but glad to see you took the mask off.

    They get their complexities heard and sorted into the choice of two candidates.

    In a first past the post voting system…yes. Sorry. The world isn’t perfect. Vote first. THEN protest.

    • apfelwoiSchoppen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      4 days ago

      Thanks for reducing me too bud. Mask off. JFC, you can’t handle a little debate without resorting to conspiratorial name calling. Bye.

          • kitnaht@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            I’m a Bernie guy, but you’ve gotta be pragmatic when the literal alternative is the end of America as a democracy.

            We can go back to debating when our nation isn’t at stake.

            • Cleggory@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              2 days ago

              Who said fascists lack pragmatism?

              Which supposed election cycle was the country not at stake?

              Why do you believe democracy is healthy and functioning in America?

              • kitnaht@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                2 days ago

                Which supposed election cycle was the country not at stake?

                Basically every single one prior to 2016. If you’re too young to remember those, then you’re operating on a window of time that’s too small. The Obama era was fine, and nobody said the country was at stake. Civility was still part of politics. Prior to that, the Clinton, and Bush eras were also just fine - Nobody claimed the country was at stake during those elections either. How is it that you don’t see the massive difference between those time periods?

                Why do you believe democracy is healthy and functioning in America?

                It isn’t, currently - because of the Supreme Court appointees. The only way to fix this is to vote D enough times that they can appoint some of their own Supreme court justices so that the system balances back again.

                IF the votes are close enough for Republicans to finally pull off enough bullshit to hand themselves the election - they’ll do it from now until civil war. You won’t have the ABILITY to vote again. The only way to correct the current problem of the real fascists (Republicans) being able to push the system completely over, is to remove their positions of power. I’ve already voted straight D down the ticket. I’ve done my part.

                The only counter to a heavily skewed Republican supreme court is a heavily skewed Democrat Congress. That’s the whole point of checks and balances in this country.

                And the fact of the matter is, regardless of this genocide, both parties right now are supporting it. With one, you get to continue pushing your voice - the other one has promised to arrest and/or kill protesters and has instances of praising Putin for his way of maintaining control; by killing his defectors.

                So it’s clear, that if you want your voice to be heard in the long term, that you’ll vote for the side that keeps American democracy alive.

                • Cleggory@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 days ago

                  Basically every single one prior to 2016. If you’re too young to remember those, then you’re operating on a window of time that’s too small.

                  You’re definitely a white man to believe anything was better for average black Americans and women.

                  Civility was still part of politics.

                  In the 60-80s when political violence and assassination was rampant?? What is your age exactly? *Obama didn’t experience rampant racism in his run and tenure?

                  It isn’t,

                  Pretty big flip flop, but I appreciate your admission nonetheless. It’s too difficult to take you seriously given the circumstances of your wildly ignorant framework of understanding.

                  • kitnaht@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    2 days ago

                    I love how you gloss over the biggest part of my reply. Thanks for taking the mask off. This is a big tell for you guys. Drop to racial division, ignore voting as an important tool for changing things. It’s always racial division; I guess that’s in part of your guidebook on how to sew division. Every single one of you operatives jump to that no matter how the discussion is going.

                    Nothing that you’ve said gives anyone any reason why they shouldn’t vote for Kamala. Racism against Obama? I’m a white man? Sounds like a perfect reason to vote Kamala. Thanks for playing, psyop.