No worries for the late reply, and I haven’t watched the debate or even followed any of the coverage. To be honest, I’ve mostly checked out of the election since it’s become a fait accompli.

I’ll do my research on the local candidates when my ballot comes in the mail but I’ll be leaving the choice for president blank. Harris will win the election anyway.

The issue is much, much larger than what Israel is doing to Gaza.

Agreed.

If you fail to vote for Harris, you allow Trump to win.

Since my vote is now the deciding factor, I have some demands that the Democrats will finally have to listen to if they don’t want Trump to win.

1. Stop financing genocide.

Did I say “some demands”? I meant “just do the bare minimum”, Jesus…

To be clear here, if Harris does not win, Trump will. Those are your two choices. You can choose to vote for Harris or you court disaster. There is no viable 3rd choice.

Precisely. Democrats know they’re the only game in town so they have no incentive to offer better policy. All demands for them to show some basic humanity can be deflected with cries of “But Trump!!1!”.

“We’ve gotta vote blue to save Democracy! No dissent will be tolerated!”

You’re unbelievable.

I’m autistic.

Do whatever stupid political moves you think work, just do it silently so you don’t drag others down with you.

The liberal mask slips, revealing the fascism that was there all along.

I’m not wasting any more time with your callousness.

Says the person who literally just told me to sit down and shut up.

Anyone reading, ignore this armchair anarchist. This election is important, both sides are not the same. Use your vote, use your voice, ignore the shills.

“Just politics”?

This is a matter of life and death, and you’re on the side that’s teaming up with Republicans to make sure the bombs keep flowing:

This isn’t just Internet arguments. Innocent people are dying. Stop this.

That’s what I keep begging for, but instead I keep getting shouted at by Democrat sycophants who want me to vote now and fix the party never.

Of poll respondents. There’s a large overlap between people who don’t care, and people who don’t answer polls.

“Of voters. There’s a large overlap between people who don’t care and people who don’t vote.”

If you’re going to argue that polling isn’t an effective means of determining public sentiment then you probably shouldn’t pretend to care about voting.

And oh yeah, Harris has been calling for a ceasefire

Wake me up when there’s some action behind those words.

And disregarding AIPAC is stupid. Picking up the single issue voters by overtly pissing off AIPAC during the election will unleash a multimillion dollar ad campaign. Look at what happened to the squad

Indeed, look at what this foreign influence campaign did to our precious American democracy. But hey, we’re not ready to talk about it because the parties want to have their cake and eat it too.

There’s no good reason to do that now. A smart candidate would stay relatively quiet until the election, and then go full bore on the offensive.

You said “smart” but you appear to have meant “complicit”.

Especially since, y’know, the vice president doesn’t even have authority here so it’s stupid to blame it on her.

Since when did they abolish the bully pulpit? A lack of authority only means she couldn’t change national policy unilaterally, it doesn’t mean she can’t actively work against arms deals and for an embargo.

Especially when the other candidate is actively sabotaging ceasefire negotiations.

Thus, the obvious move is to make the ceasefire negotiations a fait accompli by refusing to reload the aggressor’s weapons. Even Trump can’t sabotage a ceasefire if there’s no fire left to be ceased.

Unfortunately, I don’t think that’s the majority. I think the majority either support Israel without really thinking about it, or don’t care.

Unfortunately, I don’t think you know what you’re talking about. Polls show an overwhelming majority of Democrats disapprove of Israel’s military adventurism in Gaza:

https://news.gallup.com/poll/642695/majority-disapprove-israeli-action-gaza.aspx

It’s not just the Gallup polling about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict but also surveys that ask about what’s going on in Gaza today showing this sea change. In a May Data for Progress survey, 83 percent of Democrats supported a “permanent cease-fire and de-escalation of violence” in Gaza. A March Gallup poll found that a clear majority of all respondents, as well as 75 percent of Democrats and 63 percent of independents, now oppose Israeli military action in Gaza, although those numbers were a little bit lower in the most recent survey. Gallup polling also found that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s net favorability among all respondents in July was down 10 points, with just 12 percent of Democrats saying they support him. And in a March Pew study, 44 percent of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents opposed U.S. military aid for Israel, with just 25 percent in favor.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2024/08/kamala-harris-dnc-israel-palestine-polls-voters-ceasefire-arms.html

Genocide isn’t in my best interests.

If there is no option on the ballot to stop sponsoring genocide then I’m not getting what I want regardless of how I vote.

If the Democrats feel that Trump is a threatening-enough stick that they don’t need to offer a carrot, then that’s their problem.

A party with a comfortable margin can embrace less centrist policies when their voters ask for them (write to your representatives everyone). A party with an uncertain margin has to calculate their platform to target the largest demographics.

They must have a very comfortable margin if they can ignore the majority of Americans and instead embrace less centrist policies like helping Israel bomb schools and hospitals.

Using your vote + using your voice = representation.

You should be happy, you can safely ignore my vote and my voice because the Democrats will be winning this election regardless.

How, precisely, does a promise that you won’t vote for them unless they alienate a larger demographic entice them into anything?

The segment of Americans that oppose genocide are the majority, the smaller group that the Democrats are trying not to alienate is AIPAC. The only things that could entice them to change are an even larger quantity of campaign financing, or electoral consequences.

All the more reason to entice them further left now so that the future landscape, in the good timeline, rests further left. I’m all for that future, and want it to start off as far left as possible.

And how, precisely, is a promise that they don’t have to move further left to earn your vote supposed to entice them into anything?

do you think that if enough people don’t vote that the government will say “Shucks, guess we have to redo the election with better candidates”?

I wish. A sane electoral system would declare a redo if the abstains win. No, I simply don’t consider how other people will be voting to be a factor. I’ll base my decision not on the promises they make, but the ones they have already fulfilled.

You gain absolutely nothing by not voting, all you’re doing is shifting power to those who disagree with you the most.

What I gain from not-voting is a clear conscience.

And if I’m the deciding vote in my solid-blue state then power has already shifted so far that my one vote won’t hold it back for long.

This is just plain idiotic.

The only idiotic part is how much time you’re wasting trying to convince a disillusioned old anarchist to pick between the negative peace that is a false promise of a “reasonable” politician and an increasingly demented madman who stands out as the greatest living example for why the management of our lives can’t be trusted to a political party.

They need enough votes. If they think pandering to your demographic will cost them other demographics, they will not pander to you.

Then they should stop pretending that they’re on my side. They aren’t “the left”, they’re liberals who can abide by genocide so long as it’s happening somewhere else. Scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds.

Despite your claims, America is a democratic republic, granted with it’s own peculiarities in determining electoral votes. The candidate who wins the most votes wins the state. You will be left in the dust as irrelevant noise in the flood of people who know how to use their vote, and you will get zero representation. Congratulations.

Make up your mind, is it “democratic” or does everyone’s vote not count?

Abstinence has no effect, and in fact will probably push the party farther right to scoop moderates because they actually vote. Congratulations.

Of course, they were going to do that anyway, especially if we live in the good timeline where the Republican party collapses under the weight of its impending electoral failure. Democrats will keep triangulating towards the right to pick up the mythical “moderate” and become the new right-wing party while some new group starts to pick up the pieces on the Left. Probably the greens.

It’s not about who represents you most, they aren’t on the ballot.

I already know America is not a democracy, that’s why I don’t feel the need to vote in support of a corrupt system.

What incentive does the party have to sabotage their races (AIPAC influence is real) to court an uninformed bloc that’s unlikely to vote in the first place?

Depends, do they need our votes to win the election or not?

If they need our votes, they should start acting like they’re trying to earn them.

If they don’t think they need our votes, then they don’t have to represent us. And since they don’t represent us, we shouldn’t vote for them.

Totally irrational. Your abstinence is not incentive, no logic whatsoever.

It’s perfectly logical, you just don’t like the conclusion that the logic points towards, because it betrays the party leadership as being self-interested, cynical, and willing to aid and abet genocide to preserve their bloody campaign funding.

Sorry I don’t feel represented by a political party that aids and abets genocide. Democrats have a chance to earn my vote and continue to squander it.

The logic is that if the party doesn’t have an incentive to change then it won’t.

The community has four years to put pressure on Harris right from day one.

You can’t try and pressure the Democrats after the election, don’t you know that defeating the Republicans in 2028 is more important? /s

Long term, the best strategy is voting Dem and applying pressure immediately after the election, when they can safely take action.

Actually, the best strategy is to tell people you won’t vote for genocide before the election. Whether you do end up voting or not is immaterial to the pressure that can be applied when the party is at its most influencable, but telling people to wait until after the election to try and move the party is telling them to wait until their influence is at its minimum.

sad trombone noises

First off, the only one asking for fealty is the republicans.

Incorrect. Democrats have been the only ones demanding my vote. Republicans don’t bother trying to convince a “commie queer” like myself.

Second, trump already said “finish the job” so obviously he’s not in favor of a cease fire.

Likewise, the Democrats who pretend to support a ceasefire but keep authorizing weapons shipments anyway.

Now we’re right back to voting against your own interests. A not vote for Kamala is a vote for Trump(in a tight race like this)…. who supports the genocide fully… “finish the job”

There’s those demands for fealty again.

How are you going to not be ignored?

Like this. You’re failing to ignore me right now.

“If these people won’t do exactly I want then I’m going to make sure I get exactly what I don’t want!” - that’s you, that’s how you sound

“If these people don’t stop asking the Democrats to represent their interests then I’m going to blame them for Trump’s second term” - that’s you, that’s how you sound.

It’s as if you’ve already given up on this election and are looking for some “other” to blame so you don’t have to accept the fact that the DNC would rather lose an election than to stop arming Israel.

Even the poll you just posted shows dems are more in favor of a mutually beneficial outcome, as opposed to(not to beat a dead horse but) “finish the job.

And yet, the Democrats would rather stay the course than to do the thing that would net them more votes. By your own logic, the party is not doing everything it can to maximize its chances in the election.

You want to be seen and heard? get out and protest and vote for your best interests.

I’m doing exactly that. You’re responding to my protest now. We have an opportunity for productive dialogue and you risk squandering it with manipulative rhetoric. It is not possible to guilt a single-issue anti-genocide voter into tolerating genocide, but it might be possible to convince your political party that it needs to take a more principled stance on the topic.

You want to be ignored? Don’t vote.

Telling people I’m not going to vote has resulted in far more productive and nuanced conversations like this than a promise to vote ever has.

Not voting gives you literally no skin in the game to complain later

On the contrary, voters are the ones with no standing to complain, because they voted for it. Only the non-voting majority of Americans can claim that they are not represented by the political establishment.

Of course, the only thing that could get me to vote for Trump would be if he somehow managed to convince everyone that his administration would stop assisting Israel in the commission of genocide.

Sadly, the same applies to the Democrats. They are taking a big risk with their bet that they can win the election without the enthusiastic support of anti-genocide voters, but it’s their election campaign and they’re entitled to conduct it as they wish. Any success or failure at the ballot box is on them, and these attempts to project responsibility onto the voters are entirely transparent.

If they opposed the commission of such crimes against humanity, then they would not assist in their perpetuation.