421
submitted 1 month ago by throws_lemy@lemmy.nz to c/world@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Restaldt@lemmy.world 13 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Where are all the "But Kamala will be worse for Gaza" people at?

We are months away from them just setting up mobile crematoriums at the end of the exit hallway from an empty courtroom.

Whats that? They were pretty much all bots? Crazy.

[-] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

This is literally a situation where Kamala would do NOTHING AT ALL towards Israel different from what Trumps is doing - i.e. not doing anything about it.

Of all the possible scenarios you could use to point out that Lesser Evil is not Greater Evil, this is the worst one since Kamala would do the same toward Israel as Trump, but be more of an hypocrite about it (like saying some bullshit about "the US does not interfere with internal Israeli affairs" whilst sending them more bombs).

It would be way better to compare the actions of a possible non-Evil candidate that the Democracts should have fielded (but did not because the party is under the control of evil sociopaths) with those of Trump.

"What would Bernie have done?" sounds like a much better question to suggest here as the contrast with Trump would be huge.

Of course, pointing out that there are several Democrats who would act way differently from Trump or Kamala in this would bring up the point that a party which sidelined non-evil candidates in order to field a "as evil as possible but just shy of the other party's" Presidential candidate needs to change and that would be questioning the perfection of he tribe and the quality of its chiefs, a step too far for a tribalist party faithful parroting "those who didn't vote for Kamala 'voted' for Trump" DNC propaganda ...

[-] Restaldt@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Say what you want but Kamala would not have stuck her micropenis in the Iranian hornets nest

Trump did. Gaza has still been obliterated. The rest of the middle east is on fire. The global economy is turbofucked for probably the rest of our lives.

Also netanyahu doesn't have any tapes of Kamala from Jeffery.

¯\(ツ)

[-] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

So, Kamala would be less incompetent than Trump (such a low barrier that literally a stone I got out of my shoe the other day is less incompetent than Trump).

Meanwhile, Bernie would have stopped support of Israel when they started Genociding in Gaza.

The difference between Kamala and Trump is an inch, the difference between Bernie and Trump is a yard.

Strangelly the "Kamala beats Trump" parrots never seem to mention the alternatives to Kamala who could have been the Democrat Party candidate and are vastly better than BOTH Kamala and Trump.

[-] Soulg@ani.social 6 points 1 month ago

I suppose I forgot that Bernie was the Democrat candidate in 2024?

[-] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

One wonders why some relentlessly insist in treating the selection of a Democrat Party presidential candidate as a fait accomplit which should not be looked at, criticized or challenged, whilst treating the Presidential vote in a completelly different way.

The idea that the choice of candidate matters not implies that who the candidates are has no influence whatsoever in who gets elected, which is not at all consistent with the observed results of US Presidential elections over the years.

Surely anybody wanting that America is better led, rather than driven above all by party loyalty, when trying to figure out what went wrong in order to avoid a repetition of it, will look at the entire process rather than treating some of the choices that led to a Trump win and those who made them as "beyond question, it is as it is" whilst at the same time treating other choices and those who made it as "entirelly to blame for the outcome".

[-] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 weeks ago

n>ever seem to mention the alternatives to Kamala

So you're not even capable of discussing an either/or comparison without changing the subject?

[-] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 3 weeks ago

I thought the subject was about how NOT to have somebody like Trump in power, which naturally means examining EVERYTHING that led to somebody like Trump ending in power, which certainly includes looking at how and why did the other party in the power duopoly system in the US field such a horrible candidate that she lost against somebody as bad as Trump.

Of course if your "subject" is not "how best to beat/avoid a Trump president" and instead is "the electorate should be subservient to the choices of 'my Party's leadership'", I can see how it would seem to you that I changed subject by not going along with the whole "the choices of the DNC are above challenge by the riff-raff" view.

Party loyals never challenge the choices of those they see as their betters - the Party leadership - and instead blame the masses for not going along with them: it's never "how can we better make sure people want to vote for us" and always "people are horrible for not voting for us".

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (14 replies)
this post was submitted on 25 Mar 2026
421 points (98.4% liked)

World News

55702 readers
1865 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS