As the title states I am confused on this matter. The way I see it, the USA has a two party system and in the next few weeks they’re either going to have Trump or Harris as president, come inauguration day. With this in mind doesn’t it make sense to vote for the person least likely to escalate the situation even more.

Giving your vote to an independent or worse not voting at all, just gives more of a chance for Trump to win the election and then who knows what crazy stuff he will allow, or encourage, Israel to get away with.

I really don’t get the logic. As sure nobody wants to vote for a party allowing these heinous crimes to be committed, but given you’re getting one of them shouldn’t you be voting for the one that will be the least horrible of the two.

Please don’t come at me with pro-Israeli rhetoric as this isn’t the post for that, I’m asking about why people would make such choices and I’m not up for debate on the Middle East, on this post, you can DM me for that.

Edit: Bedtime here now so will respond to incoming comments in the morning, love starting the day with an inbox full 😊.

Edit 2: This blew up, it’s a little overwhelming right now but I do intent on replying to everybody that took the time to comment. Just need to get in the right headspace.

  • Gammelfisch@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    The Pro-Palestinians fail to understand it does not matter who is the US President because the key advisors within the cabinet are usually Pro-Israeli and many have dual US and Israeli citizenship. No matter what, Israel has the USA by the balls and they will continue to receive billions of dollars of free money. and weapons.

  • nednobbins@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    2 reasons jump to mind.

    1. When I listen to people who personally identify with the people of Gaza, it goes way beyond logic. They have a completely emotional reaction. Their choices are almost completely driven by the question of, “Who is doing what, right now?” Questions of, “Who will do what 6 months from now?” take a distant back seat.

    2. Every time the topic comes up, Democrats dogpile on them and call them morons. People will often respond with something like, “Yeah but that’s OK because they ARE morons.” I won’t argue if that’s true or not but it’s pretty obvious that line of reasoning won’t win a lot of converts.

  • Sodium_nitride@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    My logic (I don’t live in the us but for the sake of argument, let’s pretend I do) is that if a politician can commit a livestreamed genocide, and they win the election, it signals to politicians that there is no line they can cross that will make their campaign enviable.

    It would be more ideal if the Democrats could have been punished for their war mongering years ago, but you never punish your representatives for crossing even the most egregious possible line, then you truly don’t have any power over them and have fundamentally given up.

    If to.morow, even 10% of the dems indicated in polls that they would not vote for kamala because of gaza, it would force the DNC to take a stronger stance on the issue because the race is too tight. If this had happened many months ago, the Democrats could have been forced in giving concessions. But the Democrat voter base has made sure that the demmocrat party has no need to give concessions. They have used themselves as meat waves to ensure that the genocide can continue smoothly.

  • bitwolf@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    I feel it’s bot accounts implying that belief in hopes of swaying actual voters.

  • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Because I live in one of the many many states were my vote doesn’t matter at all.

    What’s the point of casting a worthless vote in favor of genocide?

    People here act like we live in some kind of actual democracy lol.

  • boredtortoise@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    The US needs to fix their voting system before they can start voting third party. It’s probably even more difficult with Trump

  • This was where I was at 6 months ago. They even had the gall to say, “things will shape up as we get closer.” This is an attack vector and no, it will only go away after the election. People who defend the stance who aren’t foreign actors are useful idiots.

  • US Elections are decided when they do redistricting and manipulate the voting districts to ensure the results they want and isn’t a real democracy. The US is run by oligarchs who run their enterprise corporations and the power is concentrated there, not in the government.

  • Colour_me_triggered@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    The USA has several legally binding treaties etc promising military cooperation with Israel. Harris isn’t allowed to break them legally. Any change to this would have to be passed by the house and senate. So it genuinely doesn’t matter what Harris or anyone else wants.

  • iAvicenna@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    people dont seem to see the difference between ending up with a party for which a good chunk of their supporters think that what Israel is doing is a genocide vs ending up with a party for which all of their supporters think not only that what Israel is doing justified but should also do the same to all middle eastern countries (together with direct USA involvement).

    I think there are two major subgroups within this group.

    First one is immigrants whose families are from the middle east/Palestine who are rightfully very angry at all the world doing jack shit about Israel committing genocide. What they have to realize is there are unfortunately only two options going ahead: 1- as it is now, maybe somewhat better in future, or 2- much worse. There is no third option that is going to come out of these elections but only one there is potential for change (potential coming from the supporters mentioned above) vs %100 chance of things going for the worse. Note that I am not talking at all about the candidates themselves at all, just the demographic that generally votes for them.

    The second group is probably Chinese or Russian fans who just want to see America suffer by getting Trump elected. These are very short sighted people with whom you cannot really have a coherent conversation with.