Based. Imagine voting for Genocide.
No one is saying Harris is perfect. We don’t vote for perfect: we vote for better. Do you need a primer on evolution?
This both-sides/but-her-emails[sic] nonsense only resembles the Russian bot themes accidentally, right?
Does the democratic party hold no responsibility here in your eyes? It’s obvious democrats understand the flaws of First past the post voting, longer then ive been alive!
So why hasn’t the states they control switched to a voting system like Ranked Choice voting where there is no spoiler effect?
You don’t get to harp on people voting outside the two party system and then do nothing to resolve the issues you bring up.
From NPR’s article:
“At this time, our movement 1) cannot endorse > Vice President Harris; 2) opposes a Donald Trump presidency, whose agenda includes plans to accelerate the killing in Gaza while intensifying the suppression of anti-war organizing; and 3) is not recommending a third-party vote in the Presidential election, especially as third party votes in key swing states could help inadvertently deliver a Trump presidency given our country’s broken electoral college system,”
I’m glad to see they’re not advocating for Trump or a third-party candidate that would help him win the election.
- opposes a Donald Trump presidency, whose agenda includes plans to accelerate the killing in Gaza while intensifying the suppression of anti-war organizing;
No they fucking don’t. They’re sitting on their fucking hands.
I’m confused by your statement. As far as I know, Trump has advocated for escalating violence in Gaza and everywhere else.
Do you have a quote? The only thing I’ve heard Trump say about it is A) the Oct. 7 attack wouldn’t have happened if he were president (lol) and B) he would tell Netanyahu to “end it”. He refuses to elaborate.
Whether Harris or Trump is president, it won’t matter for the situation in Gaza.
They don’t need to endorse her, but the only smart move is to vote for her.
Could it be because she said, ‘Israel has a right to defend itself’? Using the language of an apartheid state and genocide defender. I’ve read her books, she’s a classic example of someone who wants to appear progressive, while trying to stay within the boundaries of the establishment.
When she first became the candidate, I listened to a podcast covering her entire career. The sad thing is that she used to stand for progressive principles, even when it was politically dangerous to do so. Over time, though, she’s become more and more conservative. For example, she used to be against the death penalty; now she’s for it.
