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.

  • juliebean@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    28 days ago

    it’s like people forget that trump was already president before. the Israel/Palestine conflict is not new. i’m pretty sure every US president since Israel was founded has supported Israel in every form the conflict has taken. there’s more gas on the fire now, but it’s not like trump wasn’t stoking the flames when he was president last time, and it’s weird to think he wouldn’t actually contine the bipartisan US policy of providing material aid to Israel, regardless of what fucked up shit they do.

    both candidates will support genocide, so at that point you can either not vote, and just let the chips fall where they may, vote for a third party candidate who won’t support genocide (because they won’t get elected), or choose between the two genocidal options based on other factors, and try and minimize the damage in other arenas.

    • Grapho@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      Español
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      28 days ago

      “We should vote for Strasser instead of Hitler because they’ll both kill the Jews anyway, but Stresser would be better for us”

      Man, Americans really are way too comfortable supporting a genocide as long as they don’t have to be reminded too often.

    • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      27 days ago

      JFK suggested for a moment that Zionist lobbyists should register as foreign agents, and called Israeli leadership SOBs. Very soon after he was shot, and LBJ shelved the idea.

      • Grapho@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        Español
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        27 days ago

        He was also very concerned about how completely unhinged the CIA was and how it operated with total impunity. No such concerns from any president since, somehow.