Nothing but his own internal monologue and no interaction with the rest of the world? That’s basically a campaign rally for him. He’d love it.

The only way this gig is ethically justifiable is if the support act is a guillotine.

A fair point.

The popular vote matters, proof that we’re not a democracy matters. Not a lot, probably not at all but maybe in the future it might form part of an argument for making things better.

Given the stakes I’m still going to put in the small effort for a likely doomed longshot. That’s about the most we can hope to achieve with electoral politics, but I still think it’s worth doing.

I’ve seen a number of polls that reiterate how strongly youth and democrats oppose israel’s actions and call it genocide. I don’t think it’s an echo chamber effect.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/642695/majority-disapprove-israeli-action-gaza.aspx

This poll from March shows 55/36 disapprove/approve.

Moreover, democrats disapprove at 75% vs 18% approve and independents disapprove at 60% to 29% approve. Sure, republicans approve at 64%, but ain’t no republicans switching to biden over gaza.

Those numbers are brutal for democrats, and getting worse. More obvious genocide from the israelis and feeble lies from biden isn’t going to reverse that trend.

I personally don’t think that fear of assassination is what’s driving biden and the democrats policy on this.

Given that netanyahu and gvir were almost certainly involved in killing yitzhak rabin I’m sure they’re capable, I just think the risk/reward is off. They can affect US policy without the risks inherent in killing an allied head of state.

I didn’t downvote. I don’t see you having any down votes. I don’t disagree with you, I just don’t feel that your comment addressed the specific point I was making.

I don’t disagree that states are devoid of any ethical capabilities, but they’re not cartoon supervillains. When states are cruel, it’s for specific reasons to achieve specific aims.

I don’t understand what the democrats think they are getting or avoiding with this. To me it looks lose/lose for them.

States just aren’t moral entities - there’s no reasonable moral ground for most anything an imperial power does. It’s almost always just about securing more power.

But I don’t understand how this makes sense for the democrats from even a realpolitik perspective.

When the genocide is this obvious, and the ongoing consequences for the democrats and democracy this serious, it really makes me wonder what’s the political calculus behind it.

Is AIPAC really that big of a threat? Is netanyahu that important to our imperial interests in the middle east? Why choose full on putinesque post-truth politics over this?

I’ve never had much faith in the democrats, but I honestly just don’t understand what’s driving such terrible decision making.

That would be the structural issue. The candidate who won the election by a light but comfortable margin (48 v 46) didn’t win power.

Possibly timing played a role, sure. But both those candidates are men, so it could just be more proof of her point.

That’s not true at all though. Plenty of lefties talk about the left. Like all the time.

Is there a trolling angle I’m missing or something?

The d&d game summoning the devil was always my favorite. Always love a d&d episode.

Also any one where the pope is shown in league with someone unlikely - communists, jews, muslims, etc.

Reading beyond the headline, I kind of agree that she faced a sexist double standard where she suffered electorally for things that wouldn’t have impacted a male candidate as strongly.

Being a slimy, self-entitled political creature is pretty acceptable for a male politician.

Then again she did win the election by 2 percentage points. So as much as I dislike her, it’s probably more of a structural issue than either sexism or candidate quality.

I always took them all whenever I found them - horrible things, I love them covers it perfectly.

But also, I wouldn’t just leave a kitchen knife lying in public. Most people can be trusted to safely avoid the danger. But what if a child, or someone intent on harm found it?

The responsible thing to do is to remove the threat from the environment.

Are people not familiar with Chick Tracts? These comics are the product of the prodigous paranoid right wing evangelical conspiracy theorist Jack Chick (1924-2016).

I think these comics are best understood as the work of an outsider artist, like Henry Darger or a painting elephant. His work allows you to glimpse a mind outside the normal human experience.

His work focuses on who is going to hell - everyone who’s not a right wing american protestant, and many who are. It shows a strong pornographic influence - many end in a blissful face dowsed in a baptismal money-shot.

It’s meant to be used as a legitimate tool to evangelize. The worst christian lunatics leave these things in public, earnestly believing that after reading you’ll realize the divinely ordained truth that freemasons will all burn in hell along with blood-drinking rothschilds and D&D players.

Bauxite is the obvious one. Bringing bauxite to Australia. How could you forget about bauxite?

That headline really is a thing of beauty. It’s like finding out that your trash is piling up because the city retasked all the sanitation workers to lie in fields of filth and create a heavenly host of garbage angels.

Being angry at voters and calling them idiots over choices the democratic party made doesn’t help defeat trump.

Anyone not voting for Biden because of Gaza is a fucking idiot.

The democracts insist on maintaining this position despite the mountain of evidence that it’s driving down turn out in their base, and does not represent the wishes of the electorate.

Why is it that voters have to swallow genocide, and not that democrats have to stop perpetuating electorally unpopular genocide?

Of course trump will be worse and i’ll be holding my nose and voting for biden but it makes no sense to blame voters for the inevitable and foreseeable consequences of the imperial cowardice of the democratic party.