539
Pieces
(lemmy.nz)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2026
539 points (98.4% liked)
Political Memes
2645 readers
1105 users here now
Non political memes: !memes@sopuli.xyz
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
It's a good thing Kamala didn't compromise on supporting genocide. Otherwise she might have won and fewer dead children would have been a real problem.
Let's cut the BS. People like you no doubt would have simply found some other way to attack her...
She spent lose because of Israel. She lost because of people like you
Trump had already done so many disgusting things already at that point that were well beyond israel
Yeah, because she was a monster for multiple reasons. She could have catered to the voters and at least pretended she wasn't evil. But that was a bridge too far for her.
Because of 1 issue.. Israel (and yeah, we'll ignore the fact she was a public prosecutor that fought to put shitty people behind bars)
Trump?
If Trump was in the military, he would be committing war crimes (oh wait, he's doing that now), and raping civilians (he did that too)
Whereas, at least Kamala spent her life as a public prosecutor. It could be argued she did a lot of good too. Trump has ALWAYS been evil, and has never done anything that helped anyone except himself
Even if you include Israel, Trump was still infinitely worse at that point, and it was CLEAR you'd be voting in a rapist if you didn't vote against him
Also, I can't remember if he was suspected of being a pedo too before the election.. But, I recall that it was already strongly suspected at that point, as they were friends. And, he had claimed he'd "release the files" (everyone suspected he was in them)
Oh yeah, he had already said that he would rape children as young as 13, and he was known for hanging out with human traffickers. It was pretty easy to put two and two together.
I like how not voting for genocide is supporting a rapist, but voting for kamala isn't support for a genocide.
Most of USA is doing nothing serious to oust Trump, does that mean you support Trump? No?
It's mighty convenient when you use others inaction to justify hate against them, but it doesn't work the same way for your own inactions, isn't it?
The few protestors are keeping some shred of hope in humanity alive in the area. But everyone would have been against it in the future and they'll claim it as "American values" like the majority of people weren't spineless people stealing valor.
You people are a lost cause and the faux morality rhetoric you bring up defend your side no matter what, is what led to evil vs worse evil scenario.
And you'll always be dumb founded to figure how it got there.
I'm not here to say don't vote, VOTE. Voting is the most basic thing a person needs to do, but when the whole system you've propped up is rotten and without consequences, don't act offended when the whole world sees you for the war criminals and genocide apologists you are.
https://web.archive.org/web/20260918064030/https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/sep/11/george-w-bush-torture-9-11-trump
No amount of mental gymnastics is going to change that.
No, for plenty of issues:
Harris openly sold people out, lied, and betrayed the people who supported her. I never said Trump wasn't bad, so I dunno where you got that from, but Harris was also bad. He's not "infinitely" worse, he's slightly worse.
And yes, it was clear that you'd be voting for a rapist if you didn't vote against him. But it was also clear that you'd be supporting a rapist if you supported Biden, and she had no problem doing that.
OH really.. Which rapist?
Also: https://www.aclu.org/harris-on-lgbtq-rights https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2024/oct/19/election-harris-marijuana-legalization
Pro Torture?
I'm lost here.. Completely...
The rapist Joe Biden
She promised a lot, but that's what politicans do: They lie. When later asked about Trans people, she said that she would "follow the law". She had a chance to support trans people, but, when given the opportunity, she backed down.
Yes, pro torture. She supported ICE, DHS, and cops. She said that she was going to be tougher than Trump on the border. She proudly stood behind Biden when he tortured people.
Yes, I can see that you are lost. Paying attention helps keep that from happening.
So she had to support genocide because otherwise people like me would have found some other way to attack her? Do you have any basis for that assertion? Again, you don't know how I voted.
I only posted because your post shows you think thousands of dead children is trivial compared to Trump putting his name on a monument.
And what are you claiming that Trump done at that point that was beyond that Israel?
I'd argue that a guy who was determined to be a rapist by courts, convicted of tax fraud, suspected of being a pedophile, attempted to overthrow the government is worse. It doesn't even matter where you stand on the israel issue. This guy preys on women. Kamala was wrong for supporting israel imho, but, the two aren't even remotely in the same ballpark. Trump is pure evil and has always been
If he qualified for the military, he'd be the first to commit war crimes (which he's now doing), and attacking civilians (which he did do)
You didn't answer my first point at all.
And your list still pales in comparison to what Israel had already done by that point.
Of course Trump is far worse, I've never said otherwise. At least you agree that Kamala was wrong to supporting Israel, which is very different than your original post.
If she went hard against Israel, she'd have lost a lot of voters. This was before most people recognized that Israel really went off the deep end. And she would have lost a ton of funding that was needed for advertising to combat all the right wing bs and foreign interference that effectively got the likes of you to vote against her.
Who said anything about "going hard against Israel"? And it's not like there's a report that contradicts your claim, right?
You have no idea how I voted. Op suggested that people didn't vote for her for trivial reasons, which trivialises the real documented reason of expressly supporting a genocide.
We can make an educated guess. Thank goodness for Gazans (and Lebanese) that Harris didn't become president. That would have been a disaster!
Yes, it would have been. That's why the anti-genocidists were against her. But the Democrats decided they'd rather lose to Trump, than stop supporting genocide.
I guarantee you're wrong about how I voted. And why are you moving the goal posts? Harris stated clearly that she wouldn't change anything when dealing with Israel and she wanted to make Israel the most violent army in the world, so it's very likely that the situation in Gaza and Lebanon would be very similar. It was already a disaster when Biden was president.
lmao. People don't take you seriously because you say shit like this.
You're right about that one phrase, I mixed it up with something else. She did state that she would continue to support arming Israel unconditionally.
Everything else I said still stands, and you haven't addressed any of it.
OK well Harris sucks but there were only two horsies in the race. Did you vote strategically for the objectively better candidate?
There were more than two horses, but Liberals refuse to understand the concept of "not voting for genocide", so that only left two candidates for them.
Yes.
Look, we had pretty much a textbook trolley problem where it was objectively correct* to pick the track with fewer casualties. But now that the train has gone, we need to lay responsibility squarely with those who tied the casualties to the tracks in the first place.
(*One reason for choosing the other track was to give the democrats their own trolley problem, choosing between getting elected or leaving casualties on their track. And they chose the latter. Now we're seeing more progressive candidates emerge so arguably it worked. Was it worth the cost? That's harder to decide since we'd have to estimate the long term costs of a hypothetical scenario.)
But regardless of what the objectively correct choice was, belittling those who disagreed by trivialising their reasons or absolving the architects of the dilemma of responsibility is just wrong.
We're not going to know if the accelerationist strategy of making the Democrats powerless to encourage people to elect Dem Socs will work for years. What I know is that fractally corrupt fascists are in power now, ICE gestapo are in my streets now, we are at war with Iran now, and Israel has accelerated its ethnic cleansing of Gaza and Lebanon now. Am I happy DSA candidates are winning? Sure! Was it worth it? Nah. New York could have tolerated another round with Cuomo, but can America withstand four more years of Trump? We've lost so much in 18 months, and he has another two years and change. (At least.)
I'm not trivializing people's reasons for not voting for Harris. Those reasons, set across from the alternative, were objectively trivial. If your key issue was Gaza, Trump is worse. If your key issue is the economy, Trump is worse. If your key issue is privacy, government overreach, persecution of whistleblowers, freedom of the press. Name any issue and Trump is worse, and it was obvious he is worse from the first go 'round. It's hard to treat someone's reasons for voting MAGA or not voting at all as legitimate or informed when the alternative is voting for the worse option or declaring that both options are equally bad. I'm honestly more angry with the self-righteous abstainers than I am with MAGA dolts. MAGA is a cult. I don't expect those people to know better or make good choices. The people who are chronically online following every political scandal? They knew better and they failed to do their duty as citizens.
She expressly supported a genocide - really? Got a link for that?
Look, I voted for Kamala because lesser evil > greater evil. That being said, she did express support for Israel through maintaining arms sales and military assistance.
Like, everyone recognizes that Kamala would have been marginally better than Trump. She still would have been a bad president, just not a bad president responsible for fucking the economy. Status quo and all that.
Yes she did express support for Isreal - but not for Isreal to commit genocide. You might think it was a genocide happening at the time, but most people then saw it as them fighting Hammas without taking enough care about civilians.
It was after Trump encouraged Netanyahu to wipe out all Palestinians, that things got significantly worse. I don't think Harris would have encouraged genocide. I think she would have even pushed back somewhat against human right violations eventually.
She would have pushed back when it was politically convenient, if it became politically convenient.
I worked for the DoJ under her. The corruption was there before her and got worse under her. She is not the saint you, for some reason, think she is. An important thing to keep in mind is that simply because they've been demonized by the right does not somehow make them a good person.
Case in point: Gavin Newsom.
No, most people saw it as genocide. She just pretended it wasn't happening because it was inconvenient for her.
Biden never did, in fact, he openly supported it. Why would she be any different? Since when has Democratic leadership cared about human-right violations?
Well, she didn't have to go "hard against Israel". She could have just gone hard against genocide, which was the popular position at the time. Also, how helpful did that funding end up being in the end? Doesn't seem like it was worth it.
I'm pretty sure she was against genocide - she just didn't apply that term to what was happening in Israel at the time.
Clearly the funding wasn't enough. So instead we got the orange moron who encouraged Netanyahu to flatten Gaza and put up trump casinos. yay for that win, I guess.
If she was against genocide, why didn't she say that? There were a lot of people asking her to. In fact, she lied about Biden trying to stop the genocide, and never spoke out against it when she had the chance.
she was part of the Biden-Harris administration when it issued a formal genocide determination regarding conflicts In Africa. She's spoken against war crimes and human rights abuses.
But I suspect you're not actually asking about that - you're asking about specifically if she condemned Israel's actions a genocide, and she did not. She stated that she wished the ceasefire would hold, and acknowledged that there was terrible pain in Gaza. At the time of the election, she, along with many others did not view the actions by Israel as a genocide. It was seen as an overtly unbalanced counter to the Oct attacks. One where Israel was allowing too many civilians deaths for targeting low value military targets. There was pushback starting, not enough, and not enough to risk losing Jewish votes and funding. Whether a Harris government would have limited the rampant escalation of Israeli violence that Trump allowed and encouraged, we'll never know. Probably it would have been less bad with Harris, since Trump has acted just about as bad as it could possibly be - and if that's what you effectively voted for, you are responsible for that.
So, when it cost her nothing, and it was easy, said it was bad. But when she had the power to actually stop it, and stand against it, she immediately backed down. Wow, what a hero!
Yes she did. Everyone saw it, but she refused to acknowledge it, because she cared more about making sure Israel could continue bombing kids, than she cared about winning the election against Trump.
Yes, there was enough. She just didn't care. The money and risk of Jewish votes wasn't enough especially considering that she didn't win anyway. She knew it was a losing issue, and stuck with it. The polling was clear at the time, which is why everyone was begging her to call it out.
We don't know if it would have been less bad with Harris. In fact, all evidence points to her being just as bad. I am not responsible for that, because I voted against that. The Republicans are responsible for that, and the Democratic leadership is responsible for that, since they chose letting Trump win, over stopping an easily stoppable genocide.
Everyone did not see it. Hamas was firing rockets daily at Isreali civilians. If someone was firing rockets at my family, I'd want my government to try to stop them. War is horrible, it was war.
It was only after Trump actively encouraged Netanyahu to 'wipe out the Palestinians' that it got much worse and clearly genocidal.
But if you are happy with that, you do you, I guess.
And why was that? I think that was bad, but libs always seem to ignore the part where Israel tortured, enslaved, raped, killed, colonialized, and stole the land from the Palestinians.
So yes, everyone saw it, but many chose to ignore it.
No, it was like that before. Yes, it got worse under Trump, just like it would have gotten worse under Harris, based on the evidence that she herself provided.
I'm not happy with it, which is why I fought, and still fight, against it. But here you are, defending the genocide, and the people who support it. I wonder why that is....
And that's where you fuck it up. No I'm not supporting genocide. I'm telling you that at the time of the election, many people still supported Isreal defending itself while condemning genocide. When you purposefully confuse the genuinely fucked up actions of Israel but in the context of a decades long struggle with rockets, suicide bombers, etc; with the present day actual genocide - you are both diminishing the current atrocities and also rewriting history on how we got here. There was a clear choice to lessen the harm that came to the Palestinian people during the last election, and if you failed to make that choice then no, you didn't fight for Palestinians, you fucked them over. Own it.
Well, if you support the people, and the party who support genocide, can you tell why some might think you are supporting genocide?
Yeah, and today many people still do. It didn't make them the majority then, and it doesn't make them the majority now. It was obvious to see, but neither Biden nor Harris cared, and they went to great lengths to make that super clear.
Israel has been clear about their goals for a long time. I'm not diminishing the atrocites, you are. You are the one defending the genociders who raped, pillaged, stole and murderd.
I would own that, if I had done that, just like I own that I voted for child-murdering Obama on his first campaign. But I learned my lesson then.
I made the right choice, the "lets not bomb kids" choice, but neither the Democrats or Republicans were running that as an option.
Of course, something tells me that, if you voted for Harris, you won't own up to the fact that you voted for genocide, because that would require introspection.