this post was submitted on 25 Sep 2025
334 points (95.1% liked)

News

36618 readers
1669 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] hark@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Harris has only tried to do the right thing if it was politically convenient. Remember in the debate when she called out the racist history of Biden? Magically she dropped all that when she became his VP. Similarly, she was willing to run with the genocide platform because she thought it would help her chances at the presidency. Yes, she's the better choice, but even the better choice is not good enough. Neither candidate was willing to do something about the genocide and I think that's something important to recognize.

It doesn't mean I think she wasn't the better candidate and it doesn't mean I think people shouldn't have voted for her, but when we've come to the point where genocide is being actively supported with Biden sending billions of dollars in weapons to the cause and Harris hitching her trailer to that dumpster fire (and this is supposed to be the "good" party) then the situation is just absolutely fucked.

[–] timmy_dean_sausage@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I'm not sure what your argument is meant to accomplish. I'm not a Kamala Harris supporter. I don't think she's actually a good person. I'm fully aware of how broken the democratic establishment is.. Thanks for agreeing with the point I was making, I guess...

[–] hark@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

You said:

If your goal was to stop the genocide, you should’ve voted for the person that values human lives

I said:

Neither of the top two candidates qualify.

Then you disagreed citing isolated examples of caring about human lives while ignoring the platform of genocide she hitched her wagon to. I pointed out how her examples of "caring" were out of political convenience. If you acknowledge that she's not a good person, then you agreed with me from the beginning but decided to try to defend her anyway.

[–] timmy_dean_sausage@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I'm not defending her. I'm trying to make the point that she has, and will respond if there's enough political pressure. That's all I've been saying. Yes, she has demonstrated that she wants the public to believe that she values human lives. I would take a politician that does that over one that does nothing but create chaos. I never said she's actually a good person. Stop putting words in my mouth and try to understand what I'm saying before you respond.

[–] hark@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The people protesting the genocide weren't enough political pressure? She essentially told them to shut up and then ignored them. Tell me, how would she be more willing to listen to them after she didn't need their votes?

[–] timmy_dean_sausage@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago

No, unfortunately, the amount of people protesting during the election wasn't enough. If we had protests like the anti-ice/no-kings protests, with a Harris administration at the helm, it might make a difference. The real pressure, however, would come from the recent gathering at the UN and the (very late) release of the UN's independent commission that found that Isreal is, in fact, committing genocide in Palestine. UK and Spain formally recognizing Palestine's statehood would've likely had a huge impact, especially now that 145 countries have joined them. There would also be considerable pressure being applied by democratic congressmen/congresswomen because every single one of them would be in danger of losing their seats if there's no action on the progressing genocide. Things are a little more complicated for the people leading the governments of the world. Unfortunately, We The People, have to work a little harder to get want we want from our government, and that's not going to change overnight. IMO, the people who sat out the election don't get to call themselves the "pro-palestine" movement. By not voting, they may have made their voices heard, but in the worst way possible, given that the result was Trump winning the election. That outcome is objectively worse for everyone affected by the genocide in Palestine, and every minority in the US.

You may not want to acknowledge that you (if you didn't vote for Harris) contributed to Trump getting back into office. But, it doesn't matter how you feel. Your feelings don't change the way political machinations work. Longterm strategy and effort is what changes that. Everyone that didn't vote chose the short-term, shortsighted strategy, and look where it got us.