fukhueson @ fukhueson @lemmy.world

Posts

268

Comments

485

Joined

2 yr. ago

And what part of Trump's policies, in comparison to Harris', made him the better candidate?

Remember, this has to be phrased in a way that purports to weigh Trump against Harris directly, not in a way that shows how people weren't jazzed enough to vote for Harris, otherwise my points stand.

"I've got concepts of a plan..."

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/republicans-celebrate-project-2025-trump-win-1235155322/

Once again proving my point that this is not a competition between Harris and Trump. Nothing I said had been proven wrong.

Inflation reduction act... Chips...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_presidential_election

The election saw the highest voter turnout by percentage since 1900. Biden received more than 81 million votes, the most votes ever cast for a candidate in a U.S. presidential election.

Just lies... Barely squeaked by...

But don't you see how Democrats were taught a lesson for not putting forth a candidate better than Trump? /s

https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2024/politics/2020-2016-exit-polls-2024-dg/

In 2020, about half of Americans said abortion should be legal in all or most cases. In 2024, it’s about two-thirds of Americans who say abortion should be legal in all or most cases. But they didn’t necessarily tie that support to their vote for president. Nearly half of people who say abortion should be legal in most cases supported Trump.

The median voter is a tangled mess of contradictions.

I never said leftist. I'm not engaging further. The anatomy of a straw man...

And talk about proving my point.. I guess "diet republican" (by whomever's fantastical standards) is worse than trump.

Edit: not engaging. Have a good day!

I happily voted for Harris because it was a better outcome for everyone. If Democratic voters were even slightly receptive to the fact that we swapped our candidate with about 3 months to spare so that age wasn't a concern, I think things would have gone differently. Evidently age was not the problem.

Biden was primaried along with Harris. Harris was the only choice after that, because picking any other candidate would be cramming someone forth that even fewer people agreed to support.

There is no excuse for this kind of behavior from Democratic voters. The above argument suggests Harris is not competing against Trump, but competing against the ideals of the Democratic voters. If this was really a matter of candidate vs candidate, on the issues, Trump would have lost. But this time Democratic voters fucked themselves because everything on their list wasn't met. And now nothing on their list is met.

There's quite literally nothing more Democrats could have done to differentiate themselves from a 34 count felon who tried to overthrow the election. It's an unfortunate double standard. Whatever the reason someone gives, like not knowing who Harris is to her stance on the economy, there was no reason to vote for Trump, and every reason not to let him back in office.

I reject any argument that tries to blame Democrats for not reaching some set of ideals, which led to us getting trump, thus leading to none of our ideals getting met. Something about perfection being the enemy of the good...

Voters were presented with a choice between a baloney sandwich and a literal pile of human shit, and enough people whined that the sandwich didn't have mayo.

Edit: I will not be engaging with you, as I've said before.

It was the headline that loaded when I put the URL in, if I can change the headline to what it currently says I will.

Done.

I Camembert the tragic loss.

I too was wondering at first, "jeez that sounds conspicuous, what kind of silenced forklifts did they use?"

K, with all that, the article still disagrees.

Apnews is a Zionist outlet?

This is objective misinformation.

K, the article disagrees.

Regional experts suggested that Israel’s relatively limited target list was intentionally calibrated to make it easier for Iran to back away from escalation.

As Yoel Guzansky, who formerly worked for Israel’s National Security Council and is now a researcher at the Tel Aviv-based Institute for National Security Studies, put it: Israel’s decision to focus on purely military targets allows Iran “to save face.”

Israel giving them the out.

The Guardian revealed earlier this year how Israel’s intelligence agencies ran a decade-long campaign against the ICC that included threats and attempts to smear senior staff. Against this backdrop, ICC officials close to Khan are strongly hinting the allegations may be part of a smear campaign by Israel.

However, in a months-long investigation into the allegations against Khan, the Guardian has found no evidence that Israel, or any other country, had any involvement in the underlying allegations – although there does appear to have been a subsequent effort by anonymous actors to brief journalists and post leaks online.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/dw-news/

Overall, we rate Deutsche Welle (DW) Left-Center biased based on editorial positions that slightly favor the left. We also rate them High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing and a clean fact check record. (8/15/2016) Updated (M. Huitsing 05/26/2024)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia%3AReliable_sources%2FPerennial_sources#Sources

Deutsche Welle is a German state-owned international broadcaster. It is considered generally reliable. Some editors consider that the quality of DW depends on the language edition.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutsche_Welle

Deutsche Welle (pronounced [ˈdɔʏtʃə ˈvɛlə] ⓘ; "German Wave"), commonly shortened to DW (pronounced [deːˈveː]), is a German public, state-owned international broadcaster funded by the German federal tax budget. The service is available in 32 languages. DW's satellite television service consists of channels in German, English, Spanish, Hindi, Persian, and Arabic. The work of DW is regulated by the Deutsche Welle Act, stating that content is intended to be independent of government influence. DW is a member of the European Broadcasting Union (EBU).

Additionally, dw.com has been posted here countless times before with no question. I see no reason to question it here as well.

https://lemmy.world/post/21283713 https://lemmy.world/post/21100258 https://lemmy.world/post/20702216 https://lemmy.world/post/18000853

Quite the privileged perspective, shaming Palestinians for trying to get what is arguably the best outcome for Gaza out of all the likely options. "Voting with your conscience" always seemed like a worse move than "voting with your brain."

https://www.commondreams.org/opinion/uncommitted-voting-kamala-harris

In what follows, I will further explain why many “Uncommitted” voters should consider voting for Harris-Walz, by distinguishing between different kinds of “Uncommitted” voters and the different sorts of moral and political commitments that might lead them to be electorally “uncommitted,” and that also might lead them to commit the singular act of casting a vote for Kamala Harris.

My hope is that this will persuade at least some readers that the defeat of Trumpism is an urgent moral and political imperative that should be important even to many who are understandably outraged by the Biden administration’s deafness to the demands of “Uncommitted” citizens.

In a way, what I am saying is very similar to what leaders of the “Uncommitted” initiative have themselves said, by publicly refusing to “endorse Harris” but declaring that their movement “opposes a Donald Trump presidency, and urging supporters “to vote against him and avoid third-party candidates that can inadvertently boost his changes.” Indeed, Ilhan Omar, one of the strongest pro-Palestinian advocates in the U.S. government, has even endorsed Harris, even as she continues to support “Uncommitted” demands. Those leaders obviously have more credibility than I do, and what they are saying strikes me as wise. In what follows I simply elaborate on some of the reasons why others might consider it wise.

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/satellite-photos-show-israel-hit-iran-missile-fuel-mixing-facilities-researchers-2024-10-26/

Commercial satellite imagery showed that Israeli airstrikes hit buildings during an attack on Saturday that Iran used for mixing solid fuel for ballistic missiles, according to separate assessments by two American researchers.

The judgments were reached by David Albright, a former U.N. weapons inspector who heads the Institute for Science and International Security research group, and Decker Eveleth, an associate research analyst at CNA, a Washington think tank.

Additional reporting: https://www.timesofisrael.com/unrwa-confirms-hamas-nukhba-force-commander-killed-in-idf-strike-was-a-staff-member/