The measure received 14 votes in favour, with the US the sole member to reject it. However, because the US is a permanent member of the council, it has the ability to veto any resolution brought forward
Unlike several previous resolutions regarding a ceasefire in Gaza, Wednesday’s measure was brought forward by all 10 elected members of the Security Council.
The US has vetoed four previous attempts at calling for a ceasefire in Gaza, on most occasions being the lone vote against the measures.
You do realize that there is more than one election? Like every four years there is an election. Treating every election like it is the only one and never looking past the immediate effects for the next year is what brought this mess in the first place.
This is also why this comparison is bad. You can not only loose at this election, but the next one and the one after that amd the one after that. In fact one could argue Americans have been loosong every election to the neoliberals since a few decades. And why? Because you never made a point of getting one party to stop being neoliberals.
This election made me realize that political affiliation in the states for a lot of people is like being in a cult. Rather than accepting that your side has issues and needs a change, people just try to justify it by pointing how bad the other side can be worse. Like 90% of lemmy democrats don’t get that I’m not motivated to vote for being waist-deep in shit vs chest-deep in shit. Yes, one is worse than another, but I prefer to vote so I don’t have to be in shit at all. But all they will say back is hurr durr trump bad.
I feel like we need to normalize that demanding more from representatives is OK and necessary for a functioning democracy. The party needs to respond to the demands of those they are supposed to represent. This election made it clear that they only care about the demands of the donors and that needs to change
Like 90% of lemmy democrats don’t get that I’m not motivated to vote for being waist-deep in shit vs chest-deep in shit. Yes, one is worse than another, but I prefer to vote so I don’t have to be in shit at all.
The reason people keep trying to say the same thing over and over is because your vote to “not be in shit at all” results in all of us being chest-deep. I want the Dems to change too but it isn’t going to happen as a result of folks withholding their votes while we’re in a two party system with FPTP voting. So since I would rather be knee deep than chest deep, I voted knee deep.
I’m not going to shame anyone for their voting choices, but let’s not try to deny - not voting results in chest deep shit, not no shit, and we’ll all get an object lesson in this every single day for about (at least) four years starting in January.
If you are going to proudly stand by your principled choice (which I support), at least be honest about the effects.
You have this perspective that “we can show them” if we just let the Republicans win, but there’s no evidence to support that. Every time the Republicans have won, the Democrats have moved to the right, not the left.
If you want a third party to emerge, you can advocate for that, but a truly leftist third party isn’t possible if we lose all our limbs.
EVEN NOW they are blaming progressives, not her nonsensical attempt to woo Republicans while moving right so fast it left vapor trails behind her after announcing her candidacy.
I thought this was going to be a great article. The title made me think it was going to be all about getting tough with Republicans and actually fighting.
https://www.salon.com/2024/11/19/how-democrats-can-move-past-low-dominance-messaging/
SURELY, Salon of all places will rightly criticize her for deciding to run as a Republican. BUT NO:
Harris also failed to bear down on her hard-edged prosecutor-versus-felon narrative, which figured prominently during the early, effective stages of her campaign. Maybe she yielded to the far left, which admonished her for stigmatizing felons. That’s what she did in her bid for the Democratic nomination in 2019-2020, which helps explain why her first campaign folded before she could even get it off the ground.
YIELDED to the far left? With Cheneys on stage at the DNC, more talk about her glock than about climate, no movement on palestine, and not even a willingness to let a pro-Palestine speaker have 30 secs of podium time at the event?
In what fucking way did she “Yield” to the far left with a campaign very clearly and transparently designed to woo Republicans into voting Democrat?
M. Steven Fish is a professor of political science at the University of California, Berkeley.
I have to question your grip on reality, Professor Steven Fish of UC Berkeley, if you think what you saw in recent months was Kamala “yielding” a damn thing to the left.
