170
this post was submitted on 19 Oct 2024
170 points (90.5% liked)
No Stupid Questions
35712 readers
2455 users here now
No such thing. Ask away!
!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Credits
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
No, we’re seeing the same thing on the inside too. The fact that Trump actually has another chance in hell, or that he likely would’ve beat Biden, is a sign of how far gone this country already is. Do people not remember the absolute shitshow that was Trump’s 1st term?
Weekly, sometimes daily, WTF moments where I was just wondering where any of the adults were. Constant, blatant corruption and incompetence on full display. And we had to hear everything he fucking said over and over because everybody had to repeat the same news over and over again.
It’s been relatively good during Biden’s tenure, I would hear/read about him about as much as a normal president. Like, the president is the president, but I don’t want to hear everything going on with the president unless it’s important. So for us to go from that absolute shit show to relative peace (as peaceful as all this can be considered), I don’t understand how anybody would want to go back.
If Trump wins, all these idiots that voted for him because "thuh conomee was better" are going to act all shocked when he actually does all the really insane stuff he's promising to do and tried to do in his first term but the handful of rational Republicans around him stopped him from doing.
I saw interviews with voters recently that basically showed people don't believe he'll do all the crazy stuff he's promising, that it's just a negotiation tactic or to "keep the base onboard" or to "generate attention."
When things really go to shit, I guarantee the people that voted for him will take no responsibility for it.
Why would you delete that true statement?
is this kamala also at least half as decent as she appears?
I’ve warmed up to her and think she’ll make a good president, but I honestly haven’t liked Kamala for the past 4 or so years. I had actually hoped she would’ve disappeared off the face of the earth when she lost the democratic primaries, then Biden picked her up as VP and she’s been one of the most inconsequential VPs in modern US history. Considering how important/influential the VP has been since Dick Cheney seemingly redefined the role, Harris just hasn’t brought much, which is in keeping with how the role has been traditionally seen. I dreaded her stepping up for president, but she seems to have exceeded my expectations and I’ve come around to her.
As for Harris’ qualifications/positions, they seem like average middle of the road Democrat positions, nothing too exciting, but it would be nice to get a younger face in there who had some understanding of some modern technology.
She's the only candidate on the ballot who is actively presiding over a genocide. That should be disqualifying, but I guess some people define decency differently.
I've seen the occasional post here on lemmy making this point. I don't see anything factually wrong in saying she'd likely keep status quo or even make it worse. But when I see this said the one thing that I always wonder is never addressed:
How would the outcome be better if you voted against her?
Like, I have to imagine that someone making this argument thinks Trump would improve the situation. Because if that isn't the case, then this is not a decision I'm making at the voting booth, so saying she'd continue genocide as a reason to vote against her falls flat (and, if you're wondering, is why people are quick to downvote this argument). Is the hope that Trump will see the artillery shells sent to isreal as "librul policy" and axe it on that basis? Or that he'll do such a bad job that he'll get assassinated/arrested/overthrown? Something else entirely?
Enlighten me, because I can't envision Trump making anything better.
Who's saying that? It's not about making the situation better or worse at this point. Neither candidate wants the genocide to stop and it's debatable that it could be worsened. However, Harris is guilty of actively and materially supporting this genocide, which is more damning and disqualifying than any of allegations against Trump. Apart from that, losing the election is the closest that Harris and her party will get to actually being held accountable. Maybe this kind of feedback will get the Democrats to change their strategy. Maybe not. At least I won't be cosigning genocide.
More damning? I would think trying to overthrow the government and trying to install himself as a dictator would be just as bad.
Worse
What an incredibly deranged response. Over nine hundred families have officially been exterminated in Gaza. Realistic estimates put the death toll there over the past year well above 100,000. How many people were actually killed on January 6th?
Oh fun, please explain how she’s presiding over the genocide when she’s not the president?
Biden reiterated in his ONLY press conference that she has been in agreement with every policy decision. She has repeatedly said she wouldn't change a thing. And that $5m in AIPAC money comes with strings attached.
Apart from trying to sell the genocide every chance she gets, Harris is part of Biden's cabinet. Ostensibly, she's leading the team that's making the genocide happen. Or are you implying that Harris has had a do-nothing job for the past three years? Not exactly a shining qualification for the presidency, but I suppose that would make her a little less complicit to genocide if it were true.
Do you understand the difference between president and vice president? She’s also not on the cabinet. That’s for cabinet members. My point is she’s not presiding over anything. Biden is in charge. And your claim moments seem to be repeating propaganda nonsense.
If you're going to damn your soul by endorsing an ongoing genocide, at least get some basic facts right. The vice president serves on the cabinet by statute.