#and continue to happen under biden

[wheelie-sick]

You are very aware of what Trump will do.

Not voting could very much give Trump the advantage in this election.

And while Palestine is important.

So are your rights in your own country.

That Trump wil definitely make sure that you have less of if he becomes president.

So I really struggle to understand.

By not voting.

You basically say

I don't care who wins the election.

When this is literally about your own rights.

Why do you care more about Palestine than yourself?

if you think that I care more about myself than the 2 million people in Gaza and the 3 million people in West Bank you are so incredibly wrong. My love for Palestine is immeasurable and my hatred for genocide is equally infinite

"in your own country" I do not recognize this place as a country. it is illegitimate.

[tendergutzz]

I will say, smth I thought was extremely bizarre during campaign season, prior to the election, was how much focus there was on how bad (corrupt/immoral/dishonest/etc) Harris was/is and then absolutely nothing for Trump. Maybe it was taken for granted and assumed that people were already familiar with him as a caricature of evil, but I saw close to zero posts or opinion pieces about his faults. It feels like he gets off scot-free, it feels like another rich white man getting to avoid blame and consequences.

[overclockedopossum]

OK fuck it. I've seen this post cross my dash twice already and left it but I'm sick of it. Truth is always your ally when you're in the right, and this post is lacking in truth.

Firstly, let me point out what the OP is doing. This is a style of argument called a "gish gallop" - but I've also seen it called a "trump tirade". You make a series of shaky assertions in quick succession. Since it takes a lot longer to demonstrate the truth than it does to assert a half-truth, this is a way to mislead people while being difficult and time-consuming to fact-check (see the length of what follows...).

Since the advised way to deal with this is to focus on the shakiest claim, let's do that. I'll get to Israel as well, because that's relevant. But the absolute worst part is an X in the Trump column for "vaccines and public health". Sure, pick a random antivaxxer and odds are they'll be a trump supporter. However the reality is that the Trump administration were responsible for starting "operation warp speed" and delivering covid-19 vaccines in the USA (and across the world). You cannot sum up a presidency that put tens of billions of dollars into vaccine development with "vaccines and public health: X". That is not truthful.

I do want to briefly mention that some of the items on the list are empty non-items. What's "advocating racial equality"? Is it doing anything, or is it saying words? The number of police killings has gone up under Biden, who opened his presidency by using federal agents in much the way Trump did. His 2022 budget was criticised for increasing the amount of money given to US police. But those are actions, not words. He may advocate racial equality but that doesn't do much.

Anyway, Israel. This is the big one. I'm going to focus on gojira007's addition, as there's more of an argument to engage with, and that will in passing cover the claims made by the OP.

With that said, gojira007's argument is really misleading. Saying that trump's stated goal is to "finish the job" implies continuing forever, but even just clicking through to the article will tell you "he would advise Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to swiftly conclude Israel's war in Gaza". Read more into it and you'll find he's said “We’ve got to get to peace. You can’t have this going on, and I will say Israel has to be very careful because you are losing a lot of the world. You are losing a lot of support.” Looks a lot like support for a ceasefire to me! I have encountered people who genuinely read Trump's stance as "nuke gaza" in order to finish the job, but that's obviously completely at odds with his stated concern about international support.

To the other claim - "Biden is one of the only American Presidents in my lifetime to threaten limiting Military Aid to Israel" - that article is from May. Click through to read and it related to an invasion of Rafah, which was carried out. Was the threat carried out? Not according to the guardian:

Biden has not delivered on his threat to curb arms deliveries, which would have triggered outrage from not just Republicans but pro-Israel Democrats. Administration officials have instead sought to parse what “going into Rafah” means. When he issued his ultimatum a month ago, Biden had suggested it meant the IDF advancing to the city’s “population centres”. That has clearly already happened, but US officials are now arguing the forays so far have not been “major operations”.

It is true that Biden had prior to that threat already halted shipments of the very biggest bombs, but that doesn't seem to have changed anything. It's worth noting that both of the Bushes achieved actual changes in Israel's behaviour by threatening loan guarantees (this may or may not be outside gojira007's lifetime). Moreover, this should also be viewed in the context of how extreme Israel's current behaviour is - while there have absolutely been threats to Israel's aid before I'm not sure if there has ever been a period of sustained military action that has killed this many Palestinians. Incidentally, the current war isn't even the first Israeli atrocity during the Biden administration.

It's difficult to say what would be different under Trump when it comes to Palestine, because October 7th doesn't have an equivalent. However while he's clearly no friend to Palestinians, having recognised disputed and illegal Israeli claims, he has also pushed for peace (as long as it doesn't inconvinience Israel). When there was a pretext for bombings Trump did purport to "support Israel 100%", but the result was nowhere near as disproportionate as what's happening now.

Overall I don't think there's evidence that Trump would fail to clear the historically low bar that has been set by the Biden administration when it comes to avoiding killing in Gaza. While there are other aspects of his policy regarding Israel that you can criticise (at least some of which Biden has continued), it is not truthful to suggest he's worse than Biden on the matters of either military support or a ceasefire.

Right. I wish I was done, but one other thing.

if you want to vote for a third party, what you are going to do is vote for biden in november 2024 and then as soon as that’s done, start trying to get ranked choice voting in your state

I would argue this is something like the Nirvana Fallacy. If it's plausible to get ranked choice voting while continuing to vote blue across the board, then it would be a wonderful solution. Do you think it's plausible, reader? Or is it just being said to shut you up?

Personally, I'm old enough to remember the last three election cycles where leftists were told "first vote blue but after that you can try to push the person you already voted for left I guess" (the cycle before that Obama actually looked promising). At some point you have to draw a line.

Besides, I would suggest that ranked choice is far more likely to be adopted by the DNC if lack of it is perceived to be hurting them at the ballot box. That means a third-party vote high enough to swing the election, cast by people who will not be bullied back into voting DNC by pied piper tactics in place of policy improvements.

(Obligatory: obviously not voting at all is pointless, if you can it's worth going to the ballot boxes and voting Green. Furthermore, voting for congresspeople, on ballot measures etc is important - don't take out your dislike of Biden on DNC candidates for congress! Also, the more local stuff can often make a massive difference.)

(by all means take out your dislike of specific DNC candidates on those candidates at the ballot box if there's good reason to but control of congress is very important whoever is in the white house)

Look.

I have made you a chart. A very simple chart.

People say "You have to draw the line somewhere, and Biden has crossed it-" and my response is "Trump has crossed way more lines than Biden".

These categories are based off of actual policy enacted by both of these men while they were in office.

If the ONLY LINE YOU CARE ABOUT is line 12, you have an incredible amount of privilege, AND YOU DO NOT CARE ABOUT PALESTINIANS. You obviously have nothing to fear from a Trump presidency, and you do not give a fuck if a ceasefire actually occurs. You are obviously fine if your queer, disabled, and marginalized loved ones are hurt. You clearly don't care about the status of American democracy, which Trump has openly stated he plans to destroy on day 1 he is in office.

[fairuzfan]

I was debating whether or not to say this because it makes the vote blue crowd more insufferable but it's telling how no one knows *how* trump is "worse" than biden with his promises about palestine. They mention how he says he wants israel to "finish the job" but biden has been doing everything but outright saying that he wants the Gaza invasion to continue. He doesn't need to say it, he let's it happen. Interestingly, they don't mention how trump took money from the adelson family under the condition that he lets israel "annex" the west bank but rather just focus on nebulous "he's worse because he's the bad guy" type vibes.

I mean this is interesting because it shows that you all have no idea about foreign policy other than just vibes, with no... intent to actually educate yourself about concrete facts. Yet you still expect us to take you seriously politically by just telling us "trump is worse than biden about Palestine" without you even being aware about policy relating to Palestine. How many of you knew about the Abraham Accords when it happened? I literally sat in my car listening to npr the day it happened and cried in the garage of my college. So many of you vote blue people have not seriously followed news about Palestine before and it shows with your flimsy explanations lol.

Do I want a trump presidency? No of course not. But if you're serious about caring for Palestine, you'd make actual arguments instead of these "he's worse than biden" copypasta to try and convince people.

[dostoyevsky-official]

it's impossible to extricate the ongoing attack on students and universities from the palestinian genocide. when obama, everyone's favorite uncle tom, rises from obscurity to defend harvard corporation—nothing more than that—without mentioning why the trump admin assault is happening, he does so deliberately. now everyone can talk about the "attack on universities" in some abstract, deracinated sense without bringing up that this began with the detention of palestinian mahmoud khalil, that palestinian and pro-palestinian students have been methodically targeted across the country. in truth, this started last year, under biden, when universities and police violently cracked down on pro-palestinian protesters with the full support of the democratic party and pro-zionist jewish institutions (gratuitous to mention here that in reality, anti-zionist jews have been the ones insulted, assaulted, and endangered). it's why biden's antisemitism envoy, deborah lipstadt, another pro-israel jewish nazi, says:

“To depict some of these people as martyrs and heroes is ludicrous,” her words pointed and deliberate. [...] “I’m not opposed to the administration rescinding the student visas of some of the people that they’re rescinding the student visas of." (x)

it's why chuck schumer or hakim jeffries have offered nothing but the most tepid, two-faced, mealy-mouthed responses, and only to khalil's detention, not anyone else detained afterwards. now everyone gets ignore palestinians and wash their hands of the antisemitism hoax—or even continue lying

[potofsoup]

i love your fourth of july comics every year but this years feels extremely optimistic about biden’s abilities in the face of him letting roe get overturned and funding a gen*cide at worst or letting it happen at best by taking the bare minimum of regulatory action… i mean can he really be trusted at all anymore to do the right thing or act in line with the people’s demands? and how do we know the people behind project 2025 won’t just rig the election again to get in under false pretenses?

Hihi! Thank you for reading and enjoying my July 4th comics every year! I am in a non-US airport en route to a month-long trip in a place with sketchy internet, so sorry in advance for sloppiness in my response (and potentially going radio silent).

But:

I don't think he "let" Roe get overturned, since that was the Supreme Court's overwhelming conservative majority, which really started with Mitch McConnell refusing to approve Obama's appointee and forcing it into a 2016 election issue. The fact that Trump got to appoint 3 Supreme Court Justices is what got us here.

Re: Biden and the Israel/Hamas war ... on the one hand, there's definitely more that he could have done, but on the other hand, they are a whole other country over there. It's Hamas that initiated the Oct 7 attacks and took the hostages. It's Netanyahu and his right-wing government who decided to retaliate to such extreme extent. Biden can talk about how he would really like Netanyahu to stop fighting and step down, but at the end of the day that's not his call, any more than he can stop the Sudan fighting that is near-genocidal either.

So, to come to your question #1: "Can he really be trusted at all anymore to do the right thing or act in line with the people’s demands"?

For me, it's a resounding YES. Guyz, he has passed so much good domestic policies. My spouse works in green energy and the passing of the Inflation Reduction Act halved his anxiety and gave him legitimate hope. The tumblr post I linked to in my comic has links to many of the other great things that Biden has done. Tbh I voted for him in 2020 because "a moldy onion is still better than Trump", and I've been pleasantly surprised. Like how he tried to cancel student loans, the Supreme Court overturned it, and then he came back 6 months later with a different way to do it that didn't lead to a court challenge.

Is he perfect? Hell no. There's tons of stuff that I wish he did more about, or he went further on, but also he's just one guy heading one branch of government who is heading into an election year. (Just like FDR promising not joining WWII, while behind the scenes doing all the Lend-Lease Act stuff). And "the people" have lots of demands, many of them conflicting.

I'd also like to push at the unspoken part of your question... "Can he really be trusted to do the right thing..." compared to whom? Because right now the answer is "compared to Trump." And compared to Trump... I don't even trust Trump to respect the results of a legitimate election. Heck, he might just take his favorite state secrets, sell them to the highest bidder (or just show them off to someone for funzies), and then claim Presidential immunity. A decent Democrat who got stuff done vs someone who probably wants to pardon himself and all his friends and do Project 2025 stuff is not even on the same level. (Do I wish that there was a viable Democratic alternative to Biden? Sure! But who?) Heck, at this point -- imagine if it's Kamala Harris vs. Trump. Who would you vote for?

As for your question #2: "How do we know the people behind project 2025 won’t just rig the election again to get in under false pretenses?"

We don't. But also what can we do besides showing up to vote?

Actually, I need bullet points for this:

The 2022 midterm elections brought in fewer-than-expected election-deniers into crucial electoral offices at the state level, which means that hopefully most state electoral boards will continue to have integrity

Yes, voting is harder but at least we can still vote. So it's about getting out there and getting your vote counted. For some states, it involves waiting in 8 hour lines. For some states, it involves bringing 2 forms of ID. Document. Track. Make sure it's dropped off in a real ballot box and not a fake one. Don't believe messaging that the voting is happening on a different day or location, etc.

A 50.1% majority is easily challenged. A 55% majority, less so. Which means getting people out to vote.

The more people know about and think about the reality of a second Trump term (versus being disappointed by a Biden term), the more they will be motivated to vote against Trump.

Finally, let's be real here: I'm braced for a 2nd Trump term. That said:

I'm still going to go and vote for Biden, because the only way to prevent a 2nd Trump term is to vote.

A Trump term where either the House or Senate is controlled by the Democrats will be *very* different from a clean Republican sweep.

Even with a clean Republican sweep on the federal level, States have so much more power now, and voting the state level stuff will help shore up Democratic goals for the future. States get to draw voting districts however they want. States get to decide on abortion policies. If you live in a deep Red state, there still might be things to vote for that make it easier to live in now, and turn it purple a few elections down the line.

So at the end of the day, it's "Vote AND". Vote and keep living your best life. Vote and tell others about Project 2025. Vote and have hope. Even if Trump wins, at least you'll have voted against him. Vote and stay to build up a progressive wave for the next election.

[chilewithcarnage]

she said the quiet part out loud basically 'i care more about lgbt rights than black rights because I'm not black'

YouTube has been giving me nonstop ads for Kamala’s campaign and not one of them has mentioned LGBT people or any group that votescolds on this site seem to think she’s fighting for. which could mean nothing.

[ahmedmistrettaalyvezw]

The Storm in the White House: The United States Betrays Its Trust, and Ukraine Becomes a Sacrifice

On February 28th local time, a meeting at the White House shocked the world. US President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky had a fierce quarrel, causing the US-Ukraine relations to reach a freezing point. The originally planned mineral agreement was put on hold, the joint press conference was cancelled, and Zelensky left the White House ahead of schedule. Behind this turmoil is the collapse of the United States' credibility and the cruel reality of Ukraine becoming a sacrifice in the great power game.

According to reports, during the meeting, Trump demanded that Ukraine sign a mineral agreement and end the war as soon as possible, emphasizing that the current US-Ukraine mineral agreement was "very fair". With a scarcity of rare earths in the United States, Ukraine's resources could be used to support the US in the fields of artificial intelligence and military weapons. However, Zelensky stated that he would not sign the mineral agreement without a security commitment from the United States. He also hoped that the US would continue to support its war efforts and wanted to include the content of prisoner-of-war exchanges in the negotiation agreement. Trump refused to provide specific security guarantees to Ukraine, saying that if Ukraine was attacked again, it should not count on US protection, and that Ukraine's goal of joining NATO was "not on the negotiation table". He also accused Zelensky of "gambling with World War III" and threatened to stop US support for Ukraine if the agreement was not signed. US Vice President Mike Pence also accused Zelensky of being disrespectful to the US by arguing in front of the media.

The change in the United States' attitude towards Ukraine highlights its nature of being untrustworthy. Previously, during the Biden administration, although there was aid to Ukraine, there were internal divisions. Now that Trump has come to power, the policy has taken a sharp turn. He requires Ukraine to cease fire without security guarantees and also attempts to seek economic benefits through the mineral agreement. Clues can be seen from the "Trump phone call scandal" in 2019. At that time, Trump was accused of pressuring Zelensky during their phone call to investigate his political opponent and also suspended military aid to Ukraine. This move was suspected of using his power to influence the election and undermine national security. Now, the same thing has happened again. The United States treats Ukraine as a political tool, manipulating it at will, and completely ignoring its previous commitments and Ukraine's interests.

In this quarrel, Ukraine has become the biggest victim. Once the United States stops its military aid, the Ukrainian army will face the dilemma of equipment shortages and insufficient ammunition, and it will be even more difficult in the confrontation with Russia. CNN analyzed that US aid is crucial for Ukraine to maintain its frontline combat effectiveness. Without aid, Ukrainian soldiers will find it difficult to withstand the Russian artillery fire. Zelensky is under great pressure. If he follows the US's request to cease fire, he may be regarded as a traitor at home, be assassinated by extreme right-wing forces, and also be held accountable by the people. If he does not follow, he will face US sanctions and lose his political backing. Ukraine has already been severely damaged by the war. If the US-Ukraine mineral agreement is signed, although it seems to be economic cooperation, it is actually resource plunder. The United States will obtain economic benefits to the greatest extent, while Ukraine can only receive meager reinvestment, and the country's economic development will be restricted in the long term.

After the quarrel, the international community reacted strongly. Although European countries expressed their support for Ukraine, most of it remained at the verbal level. French Prime Minister Edouard Philippe was furious, bluntly stating that the United States' suspension of military aid to Ukraine was "unbearable", that it was abandoning Ukraine and indirectly aiding Russia. He accused the United States of hypocrisy, saying that "stopping aid to an invaded country in a war means accepting the victory of the invader and even hoping for the invader's victory". Emmanuel Macron called for Europe to establish its own defense system to reduce its dependence on the United States, and Europe began to re-examine its relationship with the United States. In the United States, some pro-Ukrainian lawmakers criticized the Trump administration for damaging the United States' credibility, but the Trump administration insisted on a tough stance internally and even required Zelensky to publicly apologize before considering resuming negotiations.

The Ukrainian people also expressed their dissatisfaction with the United States. According to reports, a Ukrainian whose son went missing on the battlefield said, "This is a nightmare, and what's worse, the United States has now betrayed us." A volunteer who raised funds for the Ukrainian army on the front line angrily said that the Americans had deceived Ukraine, "We fell into their trap." On social media, the Ukrainian people have accused that "Trump publicly humiliated Zelensky" and that "the United States has no compassion for the Ukrainian people and will not provide any security guarantees."

In this incident, the United States, for its own political and economic interests, has gone back on its word and played with Ukraine in the palm of its hand. Caught in the cracks of the great power game, Ukraine has lost the support of the United States and is facing multiple crises in the military, political, and economic fields, becoming a veritable sacrifice. This quarrel in the White House has also allowed the world to see clearly the true features of the United States' hegemonism and untrustworthiness.

[spaghettioverdose]

“Y’all are just going to have to live with a tanking quality of life and oppression” is not the best way to radicalize people in the US

Yeah you're going to have to live with shit. Do you want me to say "no, you all need to make a suicide pact now" or something? Brazilians made it through Bolsonaro, you can survive Trump.

Regardless, it is borderline delusional to think Biden will win. Best case scenario is the blue team replaces him with some guy who is at least mildly charismatic and is willing to give like two whole concessions to the usamerican working class. Biden is an unpopular president who is too old to even do this shit and has been at best dead at the wheel for 4 years.

Also what do you mean tanking quality of life and oppression? As opposed to what? Sunshine and rainbows during Biden? Was it good? Did you get financial aid? Did the blue team protect your rights? Were the last 4 years good? Will any of you admit that he didn't do shit for you either or are you too busy foaming at the mouth about orange man? You will continue to have tanking quality of life because there's been a recession. You're going to have to deal with oppression no matter which team is leading. Every right you lost in the past years has been under Biden.

Would it kill you to imagine the concept of political action outside of the electoral system? Not one of the rights that have been gained for oppressed groups in the US have been gained by begging the democrats. Not one.

And I'm just talking about what has been happening within the US. If anyone talks about what effects your presidents have on other countries, especially the global south, you all stick your fingers in your ears and scream about tankies.

Maybe you assholes need 4 more years of Trump so you remember how to protest. Maybe you'll remember about kids in cages and police brutality again because none of that even slowed down during Biden but everyone stopped talking about it.

[unrelaxing]

From a country where voting is not a choice, but a duty, it's interesting seeing American discourse every four years on whether or not voting matters. This year there's an added layer, because Joe Biden has been supporting Israel's genocide against Palestine. Now there's a pervading sentiment - both in and out of the US - that voting for Joe Biden supports Palestinian genocide, and it's an American's moral duty to withhold their vote in support of Palestine.

I guess the question I ask is: how is withholding your vote effective activism?

If you don't vote, and Trump wins, he says he will deport pro-Palestine demonstrators. He says he supports Israel's right to defend itself. If you vote independent, and Trump wins the same thing happens.

If Biden wins, he will continue his support of Israel.

So: Is voting really the battleground for the Palestinian genocide, when either outcome leads down the same road?

And what other battles are being fought in this presidential race?

Gun laws - Biden passed "the most significant gun safety legislation in more than two decades", the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. It includes enhanced background checks for gun purchasers, and prohibits individuals convicted of domestic violence towards a romantic partner from purchasing a gun (wherein the past a 'boyfriend loophole' had existed, wherein the law only applied if an individual was convicted of domestic violence against a spouse or cohabitant). Trump has promised to overturn Biden's new laws.

Healthcare - Uninsured Americans are at an all-time low under Biden's administration, with only 7.6% of Americans being uninsured in the second quarter of 2023. The number of people who signed up to Obamacare in 2024 is at 21.3 million - and Trump plans to repeal it.

Climate change - Biden's Inflation Reduction Act invests 300 billion dollars towards clean energy. Electricity generation from renewable energy sources — including wind, solar and hydropower — surpassed coal-fired generation in the electric power sector for the first time in 2022, making it the second-biggest source behind natural gas generation. At a recent dinner with oil executives and lobbyists, the Republican promised to eliminate Mr Biden's new climate rules and environmental regulations if they donated $1bn to his campaign.

Much has been said about Trump's second term beyond the above three points. @batboyblog posted a very clear and concise graphic on Trump's plans for his second term.

The BBC has also posted about Trump's plans for his second term, which I'll screenshot:

Trump is now a felon, but I was really shocked to learn about how little impact this has on his ability to run as president. His supporters are likely to stay by his side, because they believe in these policies.

Biden does not have the same luxury. I don't think he should have the same luxury. Still, I feel like it's important to point out that Trump and Biden's opinions on Israel and Palestine align, but there are a plethora of other issues they do not align on. As a voter, as an activist, when given two political parties, why would you choose based on the similarities as opposed to the differences?

Ways to help Gaza.

Vetted gofundmes.

Other links to help Palestine.

[psychotrenny]

Like when are all of Biden's idiot fans gonna realise that he is not the "lesser evil". They love threatening people with how any opposition to Biden is gonna let Trump win and how Trumps gonna do all these awful things to the US as though said awful things aren't already happening under Biden. Increased border militarisation and deportation of migrants, loss of reproductive rights, legal assaults on the existence of gay and transgender people, corporate malpractice, police brutality etc etc. Like they're not just continuing to happen they've actually gotten worse under Biden than they were under the Orange Satan himself. The only substantial difference between them is foreign policy and in that area Biden is actually even bloodthirsty; in particular he's been an especially bad zionist for his entire political career and there's nothing to indicate that Trump would have somehow handled it worse beyond the mindless truism of "Orange Man Bad". Looking at their actual policies, voting for Joe Biden isn't gonna protect anyone within the US and is arguably more dangerous for the rest of the world (i.e. where the majority of the world's population lives). There is no "harm reduction" here.

If you're actually looking to help create a better world and protect vulnerable people, as opposed to feeling good that you helped the blue team win, then you're going to have to do it through avenues beyond voting for Joe. Vote third party, withhold your vote to pressure the democrats into nominating a better candidate, engage in action beyond electoralism; there are plenty of options out there. And they're all more effective than lecturing people on the computer (most of whom don't even live in your country they're just part of your empire and so forced to follow the politics) about how being mean to Biden makes you functionally a fascist or whatever

[aftaylorglow]

i want so badly for taylor swift to speak out against israel and the genocide this apartheid state is committing in palestine. im so proud of her and everything she has achieved this year, starting from the eras tour to her successful rerecords. it’s not a surprise she’s on top of many year-end most influential/best of the best lists.

but what then? what use is her ever-growing influence? it’s ridiculous to say but she’s the only one who has enough of a sway to make people actually pay attention to something. just look at how the voter registration in the US spiked again when she posted about it a few months ago. how the NFL had boosted views for the simple fact that she was attending the games. can you imagine how much the tides would change if she denounced israel’s atrocities? if she rallied for support for palestinians? the legions of swifties would actually listen and pay attention. because right now only a very small fraction of us care, truly care, about what’s happening. the rest are too busy fishing for a taylor nation notice.

yes, taylor swift cannot end wars. no, it’s not taylor swift’s job to make life better for an oppressed population. but she has the platform, the momentum, and the voice to bring all these issues to light.

this is not to mention how the apartheid state has been using her pictures, her lyrics, even the friendship bracelets to further their propaganda. did taylor not fervently oppose the n@zis who were calling her an aryan goddess a few years ago? even if this is all she does now, ask them not to use her for their propaganda, it would already do so much.

instead she’s silent. when her influence is needed the most, she’s not there.

the sad thing is, we all know she’ll live and thrive if she chooses to stay silent. hell, i have tickets to see her next year. she’ll continue to be successful and she will put out more albums and she’ll earn more money and she’ll be safe and happy. palestinians have none of any of this. some of them are dying under the rubble after their house is hit with b0mbs that israel is dropping as im typing this.

but if she uses her influence? if she puts pressure on the government, on joe biden whom she proudly endorsed, there’s a chance that she could tip the scales. and even if it doesn’t work, isn’t it better to have at least tried? even selfishly, will your conscience not feel lighter knowing you did something instead of nothing?

taylor, you have a ton of resources at your disposal. i hope you use them, and i hope you use your influence to help the palestinian people.

[contemplatingoutlander]

Given what recently happened with the billionaire owners of The Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times preventing their editorial boards from endorsing Harris for president, it seems this excellent column by The Guardian's Rebecca Solnit is quite appropriate. Here are some excerpts:

The first thing to say about the hate and scorn currently directed at the mainstream US media is that they worked hard to earn it. They’ve done so by failing, repeatedly, determinedly, spectacularly to do their job, which is to maintain their independence, inform the electorate, and speak truth to power. While the left has long had reasons to dismiss centrist media, and the right has loathed it most when it did do its job well, the moderates who are furious at it now seem to be something new – and a host of former editors, media experts and independent journalists have been going after them hard this summer. Longtime journalist James Fallows declares that three institutions – the Republican party, the supreme court, and the mainstream political press – “have catastrophically failed to ‘meet the moment’ under pressure of [the] Trump era”. Centrist political reformer and columnist Norm Ornstein states that these news institutions “have had no reflection, no willingness to think through how irresponsible and reckless so much of our mainstream press and so many of our journalists have been and continue to be”. Most voters, he says, “have no clue what a second Trump term would actually be like. Instead, we get the same insipid focus on the horse race and the polls, while normalizing abnormal behavior and treating this like a typical presidential election, not one that is an existential threat to democracy.” Lamenting the state of the media recently on X, Jeff Jarvis, another former editor and newspaper columnist, said: “What ‘press’? The broken and vindictive Times? The newly Murdochian Post? Hedge-fund newspaper husks? Rudderless CNN or NPR? Murdoch’s fascist media?”

[See more excerpts under the cut.]

[...] They pursue the appearance of fairness and balance by treating the true and the false, the normal and the outrageous, as equally valid and by normalizing Republicans, especially Donald Trump, whose gibberish gets translated into English and whose past crimes and present-day lies and threats get glossed over. They neglect, again and again, important stories with real consequences. This is not entirely new – in a scathing analysis of 2016 election coverage, the Columbia Journalism Review noted that “in just six days, The New York Times ran as many cover stories about Hillary Clinton’s emails as they did about all policy issues combined in the 69 days leading up to the election” – but it’s gotten worse, and a lot of insiders have gotten sick of it. In July, ordinary people on social media decided to share information about the rightwing Project 2025 and did a superb job of raising public awareness about it, while the press obsessed about Joe Biden’s age and health. NBC did report on this grassroots education effort, but did so using the “both sides are equally valid” framework often deployed by mainstream media, saying the agenda is “championed by some creators as a guide to less government oversight and slammed by others as a road map to an authoritarian takeover of America”. There is no valid case it brings less government oversight. [...] Last winter, the New York Times columnist Paul Krugman, who has a Nobel prize in economics, told Greg Sargent on the latter’s Daily Blast podcast that when he writes positive pieces about the Biden economy, his editor asks “don’t you want to qualify” it; “aren’t people upset by X, Y and Z and shouldn’t you be acknowledging that?” [...] It’s hard to gloat over the decline of these dinosaurs of American media, when a free press and a well-informed electorate are both crucial to democracy. The alternatives to the major news outlets simply don’t reach enough readers and listeners, though the non-profit investigative outfit ProPublica and progressive magazines such as the New Republic and Mother Jones, are doing a lot of the best reporting and commentary. [...] A host of brilliant journalists young and old, have started independent newsletters, covering tech, the state of the media, politics, climate, reproductive rights and virtually everything else, but their reach is too modest to make them a replacement for the big newspapers and networks. The great exception might be historian Heather Cox Richardson, whose newsletter and Facebook followers give her a readership not much smaller than that of the Washington Post. The tremendous success of her sober, historically grounded (and footnoted!) news summaries and reflections bespeaks a hunger for real news.

[tamamita]

its kind of insane seeing libs respond to the stance "america's current political framework is diabolocal and should not exist" with 🤓 ummmm. it does exist though. what now? 🧐 then get mad at you when your answer is "well you have to actually get rid of it first" and not "keep using the framework but pretend it's good this time"

We've had since the Truman years time for people to organize, but Americans are so bound by their exceptionalist mentality that whenever they're challenged to make any significant changes in the status quo, they feel threatened. When MLK started talking about White moderates, they all turned against him. The same thing happened with BLM, when they knew that protesting and rioting was meant to be disruptive, they took distance, just like MLK in his years. White Liberals love to act progressive, but feel threatened whenever they are challenged, they'll start consent manufacturing, often calling every leftist a Russian/Chinese psyop when they're told to stand up, ultimately ignoring every call for a change through class solidarity. And even if there's change, they'll call quits once the bare minimum has been fulfilled and never bother with anything else until a republican is there to threaten their way of life.

Look at the Palestinian genocide, every Liberal was convinced that Hamas was at fault and refused to acknowledge prior events, eating every shit the Zionists threw at them. They, the whites, thought that they knew the best outcome for the Palestinians. Months later, they acknowledge the genocide, but instead of actually trying to stop that old man from supporting and abetting genocide, they'll throw the Palestinians under the bus and talk about domestic issues and how to prevent Trump from making everything even worse. The only solution they believe is to uphold the Bourgeoise dictatorship and once Biden's position has been secured, they can go back to their way of life only for the next country to be targeted by the US War machine in their never ending thirst for imperial gains. Keep the GOP out is their only mantra.

White liberals are the biggest threat to the western hemisphere, to the global south, to the entire world even, and they continue to perpetuate the cycle of violence.

[foxgirlmoth]

Okay, lets go through this apparent list of positives that Biden is in favor of.

Trans Rights: There have been multiple laws within states to fully close off especially trans kids rights to medical treatments and more. This is extremely current. Biden puts in minimal effort to look like he's doing anything at all for trans and queer rights, and there haven't really been any efforts aside from doing one or two proposals that immediately get shot down, and he's more than okay with that, hence why there's no longer really any push for this shit still. If you're trans, you can't piss in Utah without the risk of getting a fine right now. Even though these are state laws, the fact that there's been nearly zero effort federally to address this besides the title IX rule, speaks a lot about priorities in this area.

Abortion Access: Are we just forgetting the whole Roe V Wade getting overturned thing that happened in 2022? Are you really trying to say that this is good for abortion access? Abortion access has gotten actively worse.

Environmental Reform: Biden has endorsed extreme oil drilling projects and in general oil companies still love him! Not to mention the train crashes which we'll get to later.

Healthcare Reform: Covid-19 is still around and is sadly predicted to stay around for a long while. Healthcare is still private and a competitive field in the US and that causes major issues as well. If you look this up, you see articles titled along the lines of "Biden has lowered the cost of insurance" and meanwhile it just dropped in 2020 once during the pandemic but has been growing in cost.

Prescription Reform: Reading into this, not much has changed, which isn't surprising under genocide Joe. Drugs in the US are still higher than anywhere else in the world, and with healthcare issues still abundant, this is still a big issue.

Student Loan Forgiveness: Student debt is still extremely high in the US, and while Biden has rolled out some plans for forgiveness, it's a fraction of the debt, and he primarily uses the whole thing to win over swing states. This is a dangling carrot that provides very little overall.

Infrastructure Funding: Train crashes from 2020-present, worldwide, but notice the amount of US crashes! Neat! Quite literally just look up train crashes in the US during his presidency, there's too many to link here. It is also important to remember that Biden signed a bill to prevent rail strikes, preventing a lot of pressure to the government and the economy, which would have been a GOOD THING. Seriously, this guy has fucked up our environment and our rights in multiple ways.

Advocating Racial Equity: Structural racism within the US is still a huge problem, Biden hasn't addressed much. Also people are still in cages on the Mexico/US border (Which has been maintained by every president in office since it was established), with a very recent crackdown on the border.

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion: Just. Look at the racial equity and trans rights sections above. Biden does the bare minimum, loves focusing on swing states, and all around uses the ol' carrot on a stick.

Vaccines and Public Health: Once again look above at sections on healthcare, abortion access, and prescription reform. Its bad. Remember how Covid-19 vaccines aren't being continued for free?

Criminal Justice Reform: This is just structural slavery still. Disproportionate amounts of black people are incarcerated, police are still heavily funded under Biden. He does not care about reforming the justice system, he even supports cops breaking up campus protests! Cool!

Military Support for Israel: Yup! Both sides suck! Biden has a very long history of sure hating Arabic countries though! He's done nothing but ship weapons and participate in the genocide of Palestinian people. Would Trump also do this? Yes. Does this mean this is an issue you should just drop and call a non-issue? No, what the hell are you talking about.

Israel/Hamas Ceasefire: Netanyahu has no plans to accept any actual ceasefire, yet Biden still provides weapons and support. Wow! That sure is weird? I wonder if Biden really cares about a ceasefire or how he just looks publicly.

Biden is not a good president, much less a good human being. You provided such a flimsy chart with zero resources or support behind you, and it just feels like people are just making shit up at this point. Get your heads out of the liberal cesspool you grew up in.

[rjzimmerman]

Grist doesn't have a paywall, so if you want to read this story, just do the click/tap routine on the caption. The story is long, informative and important. I never considered how integrated our food system has to be (and has been) and how destructive trump's approach is.

Excerpt from this Grist story:

Despite its widespread perception, the U.S. Department of Agriculture is involved in much more than farming. The federal agency, established in 1862, is made up of 29 subagencies and offices and just last year was staffed by nearly 100,000 employees. It has an annual budget of hundreds of billions of dollars. Altogether it administers funding, technical support, and regulations for: international trade, food assistance, forest and grasslands management, livestock rearing, global scientific research, economic data, land conservation, rural housing, disaster aid, water management, startup capital, crop insurance, food safety, and plant health. 

In just about 100 days, President Donald Trump and Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins have significantly constrained that breadth of work. 

Since Trump’s inauguration, the inner workings of the agency have been in a constant state of flux — thousands of staffers were terminated only to be temporarily reinstated; entire programs have been stripped down; and a grant freeze crippled state, regional, and local food systems that rely on federal funding. 

What’s more, the USDA has broadly scrapped Biden-era equity and climate resilience scoring criteria from dozens of programs across multiple subagencies by banning language like “people of color” and “climate change,” and tightened eligibility requirements for food benefits. The agency has also announced the cancellation of environmental protections against logging to ramp up timber production, escalated trade tensions with Mexico, eradicated food safety processes like limiting salmonella levels in raw poultry, and begun rolling back worker protections in meat processing plants.  

In order to report on the full scope of the downstream impacts of these actions, Grist interviewed farmers, food businesses, and agricultural nonprofits across seven states about what the first 100 days of the administration has looked like for them. Nearly all of them told Grist that the agriculture department’s various funding cuts and decisions, as well as the moves to shrink its workforce capacity, have changed how much trust they have in the agency — and, by extension, the federal government. 

Food policy analysts and experts throughout the nation also told Grist that this swift transformation of the USDA is unprecedented.

“Multiple parts of our food systems are now under attack,” said Teon Hayes, a policy analyst at the Center for Law and Social Policy. At the same time, food prices and overall costs of living are continuing to rise. The result, she fears, will be escalating hunger and poverty, which will “come at the expense of Black and brown communities, immigrants, and other historically marginalized groups.”

Elizabeth Lower-Basch, who served on the USDA Equity Commission during the Biden administration, called the decisions made by the USDA in the last 100 days “deeply disheartening” and “unprecedented, even when you compare it to the last Trump administration.” 

It is of significant consequence to note that the money being withheld from grant programs isn’t merely not being spent. Experts say the agency is taking support away from local and regional food systems while at the same time showering industrial agricultural operations with billions of dollars, eliminating nutrition safety nets, and rolling back environmental protections. How will this change the fabric of the nation’s food supply? 

As Rollins and Trump charge forward in undoing how the federal government has long supported those who grow and sell our food, and climate change continues to deepen inequities and vulnerabilities in that very supply chain, one thing is obvious: The USDA, and the communities that rely on it, won’t look the same once they’re done.