Big Picture American Politics

[Psy-Fi]

Witnesses in Trump's hush money trial likely to include former members of his inner circle, sources say

[Lisnaholic]

I find it mildly amusing that a non-American is trying to convince an American that their protest vote isn't morally justifiable.

^ I do my best to remember that some people are talking about their own country in these threads, while I, for instance, am an outside observer who misses quite a lot of culturally significant details - which includes most of the process of primary elections, as well as this thing about "registered Republicans". Like, where is this registered, and what happened to the secrecy of the ballot box? In the UK many people guard the privacy of how they vote, afaik, because, albeit long ago, it was a hard-won privilege to be able to vote your conscience without coercion.

The only argument we ever hear is that Trump is worse. If you don't get why that's such an unsatisfying answer at this point, I don't know what to tell you. You can't have genocide on the one side of the equation and then still expect to get endless purchase from referring to "kids in cages" or "trans genocide" etc. Once you accept that a genocide is happening, you can't heighten the stakes any more than that by appealing back to how evil Trump is.

^ Well I think that the argument "Person B is worse" is a very powerful and convincing reason to vote for Person A. I don't see how that is "unsatisfying at this point".
I also don't follow the logic of the piece I put in bold. As others have mentioned, it's quite likely that Trump would take a similar line to Biden on Israel (let's not forget how he emboldened Israel's claims by shifting the US embassy to Jerusalem despite Palestinian opposition).
That being so the options are: (i) genocide overseas + democracy at home, vs. (ii) genocide overseas + effectively dismantle democracy at home.
We all agree that genocide is terrible, but that doesn't mean that "you can't heighten the stakes any more". But, yeah, on careful reading, I see that the "kids in cages" argument can now look weak and hypocritical.   

I'm not so convinced there was a winning move for Biden here vis a vis Israel, but the impression he has given is of someone who is just stuck in some unquestioning status quo logic of always supporting Israel. That logic was tolerable to more people before this recent war. As the body count rises that position is just becoming more and more untenable. But the Democrats are fucked both ways on this issue because the right has always weaponized the perception that the democrats were less loyal to Israel against them, to the largely sympathetic-to-Israel American public. But as the war potentially changes the level of sympathy people have, that changes that calculus. And Biden has just been slow to adjust.

^ Yep, I agree, especially with the bit in bold.
It's my hope that Biden will be adjusting, between now and November. Also, no one has suggested this possibility, afaik: that the pro-Gaza Dems who didn't vote Biden in the Primaries as a protest, will feel that they've sent Biden a  sufficiently strong message of disapproval over his attitude to Israel, and will ultimately support him again in Nov. Any takers for this theory?

I feel like Israel has, for a long time, had overwhelming support and sympathy from the western public because of the Holocaust. After October 7th, it feels like they've been given a lot of leeway and wiggle room as a result of that long-held sympathy (and of course, a long military alliance with the US). But in some ways, it feels like with what they're doing in Gaza, they're ready to completely cash that Holocaust ticket. Because after this, when people appeal back to the Holocaust in defense or sympathy-garnering for Jews/Israelis, people will respond with: "Well what about your genocide in Gaza?". Depending on how things go for Israel, the ticket might be worth cashing for them in the long run. But at some point, when they conduct themselves like they have been, that ticket isn't going to cash in the minds of the public anymore. But I agree that Biden is in a 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' kind of position.

^ That's a really great summary of how world attitudes to Israel have shifted, SGR

[DJChameleon]

^ I do my best to remember that some people are talking about their own country in these threads, while I, for instance, am an outside observer who misses quite a lot of culturally significant details - which includes most of the process of primary elections, as well as this thing about "registered Republicans". Like, where is this registered, and what happened to the secrecy of the ballot box? In the UK many people guard the privacy of how they vote, afaik, because, albeit long ago, it was a hard-won privilege to be able to vote your conscience without coercion.

So you register with a party so that you can vote in that party's primary. When it comes to the general election, you can end up voting anyway you want but it just shows that you have a history of aligning with a certain party. When you register for that party then elected officials know which doors to knock on to get support for their candidates in future elections. You can be register as a Republican but vote for a Democrat in the general election. The vote that you cast is private. So I take it that politicians don't do door knocking over in the UK to talk to their constituents?

^ Well I think that the argument "Person B is worse" is a very powerful and convincing reason to vote for Person A. I don't see how that is "unsatisfying at this point".
I also don't follow the logic of the piece I put in bold. As others have mentioned, it's quite likely that Trump would take a similar line to Biden on Israel (let's not forget how he emboldened Israel's claims by shifting the US embassy to Jerusalem despite Palestinian opposition).
That being so the options are: (i) genocide overseas + democracy at home, vs. (ii) genocide overseas + effectively dismantle democracy at home.
We all agree that genocide is terrible, but that doesn't mean that "you can't heighten the stakes any more". But, yeah, on careful reading, I see that the "kids in cages" argument can now look weak and hypocritical.

People are fed up with voting for the lesser of two evils. We did that with Biden in the first place. People weren't voting for Biden proudly they were just voting for Not Trump. That isn't going to work this time around. Just like jwb said he definitely needs to pivot fast and turn to the more Progressive legislators for advice on how to move forward to get that section back before November.

^ Yep, I agree, especially with the bit in bold.
It's my hope that Biden will be adjusting, between now and November. Also, no one has suggested this possibility, afaik: that the pro-Gaza Dems who didn't vote Biden in the Primaries as a protest, will feel that they've sent Biden a  sufficiently strong message of disapproval over his attitude to Israel, and will ultimately support him again in Nov. Any takers for this theory?

So the Democrat party is split into two at the moment. Progressives and corporate Dems. The Progressives are the ones that are a bit further left and are considered the Pro Palestinian segment of the Dem party. Right now there aren't enough Progressives to see that big of a change in how Dems in general vote. So the group that did the protest votes hoping that Biden would notice are either going to just end up staying home, holding their nose and voting for Biden or throwing away their vote to either Trump or writing in a candidate. They wouldn't cast a blank ballot for the general election because there will be other important local races to vote for.

[SGR]

So you register with a party so that you can vote in that party's primary. When it comes to the general election, you can end up voting anyway you want but it just shows that you have a history of aligning with a certain party. When you register for that party then elected officials know which doors to knock on to get support for their candidates in future elections. You can be register as a Republican but vote for a Democrat in the general election. The vote that you cast is private. So I take it that politicians don't do door knocking over in the UK to talk to their constituents?

Don't forget all the goddamn fucking political mail your 'registered party' will send you during primaries.

[DJChameleon]

Don't forget all the goddamn fucking political mail your 'registered party' will send you during primaries.

Oh yeah that's so annoying. I feel like it's ineffective but that's the way that candidates are used to doing things so they will continue using mailers as a way to get information out along with polling sites and the election dates.

[Jwb]

^ Well I think that the argument "Person B is worse" is a very powerful and convincing reason to vote for Person A. I don't see how that is "unsatisfying at this point".

Well maybe that's because you are approaching it strictly in the abstract, without consideration for the actual context of where we are at politically, right now. They (the Democrats) have been leaning hard  on the Trump boogeyman card for some time now, and it's the go to response anytime anyone finds a flaw in the Democratic candidate. The fact of the matter is that rhetorically speaking, you get diminishing returns with that kind of message. Whether that seems strictly logical to you or not.

As SGR and I were speaking about earlier, it's always been an issue for the democrats in recent history to motivate some of their younger and more progressive base. Because they aren't particularly inspired by the politics of the mainstream  Democrats. So the only argument the democrats typically use to bring them around is to point to how dangerous the other side is.

That argument has already been losing steam. But when you raise the stakes of the rhetoric so high by introducing genocide into the discussion, any sense of moral clarity you hope to gain by pointing back to Trumps misdeeds has been pretty thoroughly obfuscated. That's why I said if you are really looking to defend Biden rhetorically on that issue, biting the bullet on saying he's supporting a genocide is basically a poison pill.

It would be much more effective rhetorically to either deny there is a genocide or deny Biden is supporting it. Obviously that's immoral to do if you in fact believe that the contrary is true, but if you really do believe he's supporting a genocide and the other side would too, at what point does revolution start to not just be an option but a moral necessity? Like if we literally get to the point of voting for Hitler Vs Stalin, do we not at some point ditch the whole lesser of two evils analysis and instead force a third option through violence?

So hopefully that clarifies why I say it is such an unsatisfactory answer. Especially to this particular cohort of voters, many of whom have long been disillusioned with electoral politics in general and are tired of being beat over the head every 4 years to get in line and vote the party line and then go  back to being ignored for the next four years. Or hearing about how if you consider voting for a third party that's just a vote for the other side. So you have no options, and that is by definition unsatisfying. Especially if people believe there is a genocide going on. The idea that we live in a democracy where we're not only powerless to stop it, but also we have no choice but to keep funding and arming the offending party, is once again by definition an unsatisfying answer.

also don't follow the logic of the piece I put in bold. As others have mentioned, it's quite likely that Trump would take a similar line to Biden on Israel (let's not forget how he emboldened Israel's claims by shifting the US embassy to Jerusalem despite Palestinian opposition).
That being so the options are: (i) genocide overseas + democracy at home, vs. (ii) genocide overseas + effectively dismantle democracy at home.
We all agree that genocide is terrible, but that doesn't mean that "you can't heighten the stakes any more". But, yeah, on careful reading, I see that the "kids in cages" argument can now look weak and hypocritical. 

I already said that is basically my opinion as well, that Trump would be worse on other issues and probably very similar in his approach to Israel. I'm only explaining what I see as the rhetorical weakness of this response to convince anyone who isn't already convinced. That answer is basically preaching to the converted, and beyond that it's falling on deaf ears.

But maybe if nothing else we stumbled onto a good slogan for the Biden 24 ticket: Lesser of the Two Genocides. Get in line, peasants. Democracy needs you.

[Lisnaholic]

So you register with a party so that you can vote in that party's primary. When it comes to the general election, you can end up voting anyway you want but it just shows that you have a history of aligning with a certain party. When you register for that party then elected officials know which doors to knock on to get support for their candidates in future elections. You can be register as a Republican but vote for a Democrat in the general election. The vote that you cast is private. So I take it that politicians don't do door knocking over in the UK to talk to their constituents?

Thanks for that explanation, DJ: it's crystal clear to me now.
In the UK, there is a smaller group of people who are politically active for each party, and yes, they do some door-to-door petitioning for voters - but they have no idea in advance about the politics of the person whose door they are knocking on. They ask things like "Can we count on your vote in the election? Would you like to put this sticker/poster up in your window/ car to show support for our party?"
It must be a pretty thankless job, I imagine: like being a Jehovah's Witness.

So hopefully that clarifies why I say it is such an unsatisfactory answer.

^ Yes, you 've made a very persuasive argument to support what you said earlier. Thanks.

But maybe if nothing else we stumbled onto a good slogan for the Biden 24 ticket: Lesser of the Two Genocides. Get in line, peasants. Democracy needs you.

Yep, that slogan must surely be a winner !

[Lexi Darling]

I guess I would just hope most young left/progressive voters would understand that voting against Trump does not mean you support Biden's policies, it just means Trump has the same plus more bad policies. Of course it's unsatisfying, the fact that we live in such a system at all is unsatisfying. But the people I'm talking about aren't calling for violent revolution, they're sending a message to Biden that it seems pretty clear to me he won't listen to, and in the long run that will only help Trump.

And for the record I think the Democratic establishment and the mainstream media are being irresponsible by not talking more about the shit in that Project 2025 document and I think they are complicit in all of this too.

But in the end, if someone wants to throw away a vote that could have helped stop this country from being taken over by Christofascist thugs, that's their decision. I have nothing else left to say on this subject.

[Jwb]

No they're not calling for violent revolution, there still trying to apply political pressure to Biden to act differently on Israel. The objective isn't to get Trump elected. It's to change Biden's policy on Israel. And once again, once you raise the stakes of the rhetoric to genocide, it literally can't get any higher. So the idea that you can't apply this pressure because it might hurt Biden, who is weak to begin with and can hardly string a sentence together as it is, it's just not quite the threat you think it is to say Trump might get elected. He's probably going to get elected anyway tbh.

My point about violent revolution is my own. If you follow the lesser of two evils completely down the rabbit hole you reach a point where it's Hitler vs Stalin and suddenly the only just response is to force a third option at the point of a gun.

[Lexi Darling]

No they're not calling for violent revolution, there still trying to apply political pressure to Biden to act differently on Israel. The objective isn't to get Trump elected. It's to change Biden's policy on Israel. And once again, once you raise the stakes of the rhetoric to genocide, it literally can't get any higher. So the idea that you can't apply this pressure because it might hurt Biden, who is weak to begin with and can hardly string a sentence together as it is, it's just not quite the threat you think it is to say Trump might get elected. He's probably going to get elected anyway tbh.

My point about violent revolution is my own. If you follow the lesser of two evils completely down the rabbit hole you reach a point where it's Hitler vs Stalin and suddenly the only just response is to force a third option at the point of a gun.

As I said, I guess I'd be more onboard with applying pressure if it felt like it was actually going to accomplish its goal. Because right now I think it's fair to predict that Biden will continue to support Israel, November will come and the protest voters will be back at square one: Biden or Trump.

But I agree that it's all probably futile at this point. I can't hang any hope on a Biden victory anymore. It's getting hard to muster up hope at all honestly.

[Trollheart]

It's the same in Ireland: they knock at every door (often, if they don't get an answer right away they head to the next door, just shoving flyers tyhrough the letterbox) but it works quite well I believe, as you get a chance (if you want to) to air your grievances about Party A's policies, even if you vote for Party B or C, or don't really know which way you're going to vote. You can also be convinced to switch your allegiance if the candidate is convincing enough, especially on local issues. Also helps if they're friendly and personable, and young I guess. It also gives each candidate/party a more honest sense of feedback, rather than just knocking on doors you know will support you, which seems to me, as an outsider, akin to packing a hall full of your supporters and then going on about what a great reception you got.

In Ireland (as I assume is the case in the UK, though Lisna or JJ can set me straight if not) voting is strictly secret. You go into a booth and you're not even allowed take your phone because a while ago people were taking selfies with their ballot card, which sort of invalidates the whole idea of a secret and private vote. On exiting, you can tell reporters who ask you who you voted for, but you can just as easily tell them you don't want to say. That's your right.

Here, we get no party literature specific to how we vote: every party - including independents - send stuff to you, most of which goes in the bin, but it does give you a chance to compare what they're saying. They don't know they have your vote, so in that regard it's unbiased, though of course all the parties not in power will make a point of telling you what mistakes the one(s) in power are making, and how they would do things differently. Traditionally, families did vote along historical lines (father voted Fianna Fail, grandfather did, his father did so I do etc) but that doesn't always happen now. Like I say, mostly (as with, I assume, most people) it's what your local TD (member of parliament/congressman/whatever) can do for you and your area, and not always so much what they can do for the country, though that does come into it too.

Mind you, as I've noted elsewhere, if they don't get the result they want it seems they just do what they like now, so makes you wonder why you even bother to vote. 

[SGR]

My point about violent revolution is my own. If you follow the lesser of two evils completely down the rabbit hole you reach a point where it's Hitler vs Stalin and suddenly the only just response is to force a third option at the point of a gun.

Hmmm...I can't imagine why politicians want to take our guns away. 

[Trollheart]

Would it be any kind of policy to try to outlaw ammo? I mean, your 2nd Amendment doesn't say anything about ammo does it? You can have all the guns you like, America, but you're going to have to be happy hitting each other over the head with them!     
#VoteTrollheartTheInSaneChoice
#GunsWithoutAmmo2025
#We'reComing4URBullets&Shells

[jimmy jazz]

You're pretty much spot on I think Big T, except I vote by post

[SGR]

Would it be any kind of policy to try to outlaw ammo? I mean, your 2nd Amendment doesn't say anything about ammo does it? You can have all the guns you like, America, but you're going to have to be happy hitting each other over the head with them!     
#VoteTrollheartTheInSaneChoice
#GunsWithoutAmmo2025
#We'reComing4URBullets&Shells

Trollheart, that won't work. We're Americans. If you ban ammo, we'll just make our own and whoever can do it best and most efficiently will make the most money on the black market.