Augie Ray"I'm so angry at Biden over Isreal/Gaza that I'm going to help Trump destroy democracy, weaponize the Justice system, send millions to deportation camps, lower the taxes on the wealthy and shift the burden to the middle class, cut Social Security, track and prosecute women having abortions, pardon the people who violently attacked Capitol police, dismantle NATO, help Russia, AND ON TOP OF ALL THAT do even more harm to Palestinians" is a take--it's just a really awful take, IMO.
MFennVT has moved@augieray Yes, it is.
Evan Prodromou"I support this war so much that I'm going to ignore the position of the vast majority of my constituents and party members even though it endangers our chances of re-election in the Fall" is also a take.
@evan I find that glib. Biden does not "love war." And I suspect you're mature and smart enough to understand he's between a rock and a hard place over support for Israel and Gaza. So, in the end, the choice is yours: You can be really, really angry at Biden and not vote, or you can do more to help the world and make Gaza safer by voting for Biden. Elections are not love affairs--you're selecting between flawed choices, not getting everything you want in a candidate.
Seb@augieray @evan And if a leader was supporting a regime killing your children you’d still vote for them as the lesser of two evils? I mean I get it - I’m as terrified of Trump 2 as anyone, but this isn’t an easy decision for anyone so a little bit of empathy does help rather than “you’re stoopid if you don’t vote”.
@seb321 @evan If it was a choice between one man who CLEARLY is doing his best to limit the violence while balancing sensitive political demands versus the man who thinks bombing people of color and Muslims is the answer, then yes, I'd vote the first guy. That's because I'm a mature voter who recognizes the way the world works and knows that I pick the candidate who is best, not the one who is perfect.
@seb321 @evan I said people who think like that have a bad take. I did not criticize them. I'm focused on the ideas and outcomes, not on criticizing people.
If I were to say the people who care about reproductive rights shouldn't avoid voting for Biden just because he has failed to get those rights passed into law, would that be criticizing people, or would that be addressing an illogical assessment?
Dodgy Theories
Adlangx@seb321 @evan @augieray I think you’ve misjudged the positions. The person who recommends voting for Biden over Trump when neither option satisfies their beliefs on the conflict is akin to being the woman choosing the bear over the man. Neither choice is great, but they choose the better of the two options. You are the man of this story telling us why we’re wrong to prefer the bear.
@ClickyMcTicker @evan @augieray I’ve not posted any opinion on how anyone should vote. I’ve not even criticised anyone’s opinion on how anyone should vote. I’m questioning tactics.
ceolnI rather disagree with the idea that Biden "CLEARLY is doing his best to limit the violence"; he is doing a little, but he could do a lot more.
It's likely that the reason he isn't doing a lot more is that he's afraid of losing votes on the pro-Likud side if he does.
He might therefore do more to limit the violence if he had evidence that he should be afraid of losing votes on the anti-genocide side if he doesn't.
It's not like the choice is between two fixed and static positions, Biden-as-given and Trump-as-given. If Biden believes that genocide opponents will stay home if he keeps fully funding the genocide, there's a greater chance he'll stop doing that. His need for votes can change his behavior.
There's a whole issue about whether the anti-genocide people are actually bluffing of course, and whether they'd actually risk a Trump presidency by staying home if he doesn't do more for Palestine. And I think it's frankly best if he can't assume it's just a bluff.
@seb321 @augieray @evan so, given the exact circumstances you are describing, you would vote for the person who has explicitly advocated genocide over the person who is merely doing an insufficient amount to stop it?
Or alternately, you would stay at home, not willing to vote for the person who has done an insufficient amount to stop it, knowing that meant increasing the likelihood that the person who explicitly advocated genocide would get into power.
That doesn't make sense to me.
ManVsXerox: Resistful DingusVoting is not fixing everything, it's more like repair and maintenance work, it's not gonna fix your car, but it will keep it running and maybe even improve it a little. You have to keep doing it or the car will fall apart, even if you don't like doing oil changes.
In a choice between the lesser of two evils most philosophers would agree that choosing the lesser evil is the more moral choice, evil is not black and white, it's a spectrum ffs.
@augieray I do not think my reply was significantly more glib than your original post.
There is a lot that can be done to win back voters who are turned off of Biden because of the war. For example, emphasizing the leadership role the US has played in the ceasefire process. Getting food and medicine into Gaza. Conditioning aid.
Blaming people who oppose ethnic cleansing for the return of Trump isn't it, though.
I wish you good luck with your effort!
@evan Thanks. I'd suggest you stop worrying so much about "blame" and instead worry about how to make the entire world--including Gaza--safer. The way to do so is NOT to help the guy Netanyahu wants to win.
@augieray I don't think there is a worse possible outcome than the Kahanist goal of eradication of Palestinians from Gaza.
mav 
I don't want to minimize that because it is horrific.
That said, this is what Trump's stated goals are:
The eradication of the Palestinian people from Gaza,, plus the end of Ukraine as an independent nation (which could directly lead to open war in Europe,) the extermination of trans people in the US, end of most US social programs, countrywide ban on abortion, the end of public education... and these are only Trump's stated goals.
Now, I'll grant you, there's a very real possibility we will get some of those things _anyway_, no matter what we do, but there's a significant difference IMO between trying to prevent something and encouraging it.
@augieray Opposition to genocide is a peremptory norm or jus cogens. We don't get to opt out and say there are more important priorities. It's the highest priority.
@evan So you want to help the guy who actively supports genocide instead of the guy who is working to limit the war in Gaza? Make that make sense.
@augieray @evan How exactly is Biden working to limit it? All I see is him enabling and accelerating the genocide against Palestinians, whilst doing a bit of performative finger wagging at Netanyahu and Israel. We all know Trump is worse, but pretending Biden and the Democratic Party aren't also guilty of a lot of what you are accusing Trump of?
Texty the Bard@Pickle @augieray @evan Why are you pretending that there are more than two choices? There aren't. One of them will be POTUS. That's reality, whether you like it or not. Also reality: one of those men is 1,000 times worse for everyone on the planet, *especially* Palestinians.
I get wishing there were other choices. But there aren't. If that makes you feel like giving into nihilism, fine. Just don't drag literally the entire world down with you.
@textualdeviance @augieray @evan I am not pretending anything of the sort, simply questioning the truth of what someone else is claiming.
I really don't like being this guy but the risk analyst in me won't stop. Sorry.
The United States does not fully comply with this idea by and of itself, inside its own borders, on our own citizens; we openly use both torture and slavery in prisons, and additionally refoulement is fairly commonplace.
Just sayin': the US is not a good place.
isma rodríguez@augieray @evan down that road, in 8 years, you'll have to choose between Trump and the literal reincarnation of Hitler. Good luck with that.
I think getting and forcing Biden and the whole political spectrum to do better is a better path. That includes threatening not to vote for him if he keeps on supporting a genocide just because now the perpetrator is an ally. Isn't that how democracy works anyway?
I think getting and forcing Biden and the whole political spectrum to do better is a better path. That includes threatening not to vote for him if he keeps on supporting a genocide just because now the perpetrator is an ally. Isn't that how democracy works anyway?
Mast0b1t
Matt 
@textualdeviance @augieray @Amoshias who said that? I'm just saying, having lived through some hawkish administrations, I don't think that a Trump administration is as likely to find reasons to go to war as, say, the first Bush administration. You make a good point that a less engaged US may result in more wars between other parties, though.
@Amoshias @textualdeviance @augieray whew. Not sure. He was really bad, but we survived as a country, which I wasn't always confident of. I'd say, he was not quite as bad as my worst fears, but he got close.
@evan @textualdeviance @augieray So based on that... "We survived as a country"...
You are willing to assume that Trump's not going to start any wars.
That's...
Interesting.
Meanwhile, I and every other Jew I know are making plans to flee the country, so I certainly hope that your assumption that Trump won't start any wars, based - as it is - on absolute nothing, is correct.
@Amoshias @textualdeviance @augieray Wow, that sounds terrible, to be chased out of your own country.
@evan @textualdeviance @augieray you say that like you think you are making some incredible point :-)
@evan @Amoshias @augieray I have extended family who had to evacuate *Israel* because of shit going down. The majority of Israelis don't want Bibi in office, much less doing what he's doing (have you seen the scale of the protests?) But they also don't want to be targets for Hamas, Iran or any of the other hostile entities in the region. The whole area is an absolute mess, all because assholes are fighting over who's entitled to own all of it. And Biden can't change that. No one can.
@evan @Amoshias @augieray "We" survived? And the million-plus COVID deaths due to completely fucked up handling of the pandemic are meaningless, I guess?
Also, I'll remind you that had Democrats not taken the House in 2018, things would have been much, much worse. He won't make that mistake again. Believe him when he tells you he wants to go full dictator.
@textualdeviance @augieray So, @Amoshias asked if Trump has lived up to my expectations. I thought about it sincerely, and tried to think back to 2016, and about how bad I expected things to get under Trump, and that they didn't quite get as bad as I was worried they would.
I am not trying to say that Trump was not very, very terrible and that he did, and continues to do, extreme damage to the USA and the rest of the world.
@evan @augieray Let me guess: You're a cishet guy. Probably white. Yes? Because if you don't think loading up SCOTUS with a bunch of theocrats and laying waste to the legal principle of the right to privacy is dire, then it's clearly because you don't think you've lost anything, nor stand to lose more.
Wonder if you'll still feel the same when they ban porn.
In 2016, I was worried he was going to use nukes.
He didn't.
That's why it wasn't as bad as I was worried about.
That doesn't mean it wasn't very bad.
"Not as bad as I was worried about" is a pretty low bar here.
@evan @augieray The only reason he didn't is because he didn't have Congress on his side to let him do it. There's a much, much bigger chance of that happening next time. Having SCOTUS in his pocket--especially if they grant him immunity, as expected--will give him free rein to do some unimaginably bad shit. He'll make Putin look like an amateur. The stakes for the entire planet--especially wrt the climate crisis--are the highest they've been in generations. We as a species are fucked if he wins
Jérôme@jerome @evan @augieray even that, I don't think is completely clear - if you recall, the last president got in a spot of trouble for not sending out aid that Congress had authorized. But I think it's legitimately debatable and a very arguable point.
What people are actually saying - what I'm responding to- is so ridiculous and over the top that it deserves nothing but sarcasm.
@jerome @evan @augieray yes, you are absolutely right. The proper response to me saying "I think there are nuanced points to be made and discussed here, but the ridiculous, over the top nonsense being spouted by idiots who are happy to accept fascism as long as they get to yell at people along the way" is... ridiculous, over the top nonsense.
Well played.
@evan @augieray I don't think that's really the case though, especially at the high level; if Biden openly defies Israel, a huge amount of party support and international community support will vanish.
I guess what I'm trying to say is, this problem is very high level. You can't oppose Israel and win swing states, and you can't oppose Israel and continue to get funding. That's the level this problem is at.
Isaac Freeman@mav I don't think he needs to shift position very much, because defying Netanyahu is not the same thing as defying Israel. He can maintain a basically Zionist position and still say that Netanyahu has betrayed the values of Israel, that he will not support a genocide in its name, and so on. I don't think it's that hard when the alternative is another Trump presidency.
@evan @augieray
@evan @augieray