#the US presidential election situation

[anarcho-yorpism]

To all the communist transvestites, VOTE👏VON👏HINDENBURG👏

I'm just as radical as you; I'm a proud member of the great Social Democratic Party of Germany! I don't know what the crazy communists are telling you, but Paul von Hindenburg is our only hope to defeat the Nazis. After we elect him, then we can discuss other politics, but this is the BARE MINIMUM, and if you don't vote for him, you clearly have this crazy purity test that'll bring us all to fascism.

I know you might be worried about his "senility" and "failing health", and I know you may not like him because of his push to the right, and I know you may be worried about the brownshirts, and the recent persecution of Dr. Hirschfeld and his work, and maybe you STILL haven't gotten over the whole Rosa Luxemburg stuff,

but none of that really matters! We need to keep the SPD in power, or else Hitler will get in charge! This is the most important and most basic thing you could do to help Germany stay a democracy. In 6 years, then maybe we can find a better candidate, but no matter what you think about von Hindenburg, he's the best shot we have at keeping the fascists out of power. We can totally push him left!

Any vote against von Hindenburg is a vote for Hitler. #Hindenburg1932

[thegoodceai]

not gonna lie, i'm getting real tired of living in interesting times

[havegaysex]

Why are you telling people to vote for the guy committing genocide :/

because voting is not an endorsement it's harm reduction.

Trump is going to be at best doing the same as Biden and likely much worse for Palestinians and all the countries suffering from American Imperialism than Biden is.

Republicans want to bring back child labor and get rid of social security, medicare, Medicaid. As someone who is surviving on Medicaid and social security I don't want those taken away. The Republican majority house already put a lot of limits on food stamps in this past term and I don't think we'll still have food stamps if we get a republican Congress and a Republican president.

They've made it pretty clear that if they get a republican Congress and a Republican president they're going to enact project 2025 and call a conference of states and try and take our rights back to the days when only wealthy white men had any rights when women and racial minorities had no rights, they want to make it illegal for LGBT+ folks to safely exist in public and get lifesaving healthcare.

In short

Do I support every single thing Biden has done as president?

No.

Do I like him?

Not particularly. But I'm still voting for him because apathy is not a choice.

Do I think that Joe Biden having another term means that we can actually make more progress for labor rights, trans healthcare, abortion access, advancement of the rights and protections for disabled people and so much more?

Yes absolutely.

Do I think that the genocide in Gaza needs to end and the United States needs to stop sending weapons to israel?

Yes, I think that un restricted flow of humanitarian aid into Palestine needs to happen, the siege needs to stop, and the country of Israel and the United States need to be held accountable at an international level. I think that the soldiers of the IDF/IOF need to be held accountable for their war crimes and pillaging that they continuously post evidence of on social medias. I'm trying to put a read more here so ce I've put a few linked articles and quotes from them.

A quote from the article below:

"While our map focuses solely on high school aged youth (age 13-17), some states, such as Oklahoma, Texas, and South Carolina, have considered banning care for transgender people up to 26 years of age. "

I've seen lawmakers in some states try to make it felony punishable by life in prison to get your trans child healthcare to keep them alive because they want to make it illegal for us to exist and a legal for anyone who helps us exist.

some quotes from the article above:

"Led by the long-established Heritage Foundation think tank and fueled by former Trump administration officials, the far-reaching effort is essentially a government-in-waiting for the former president’s second term — or any candidate who aligns with their ideals and can defeat President Joe Biden in 2024. With a nearly 1,000-page “Project 2025” handbook and an “army” of Americans, the idea is to have the civic infrastructure in place on Day One to commandeer, reshape and do away with what Republicans deride as the “deep state” bureaucracy, in part by firing as many as 50,000 federal workers. “We need to flood the zone with conservatives,” said Paul Dans, director of the 2025 Presidential Transition Project and a former Trump administration official who speaks with historical flourish about the undertaking. “This is a clarion call to come to Washington,” he said. “People need to lay down their tools, and step aside from their professional life and say, ‘This is my lifetime moment to serve.’” The unprecedented effort is being orchestrated with dozens of right-flank organizations, many new to Washington, and represents a changed approach from conservatives, who traditionally have sought to limit the federal government by cutting federal taxes and slashing federal spending. Instead, Trump-era conservatives want to gut the “administrative state” from within, by ousting federal employees they believe are standing in the way of the president’s agenda and replacing them with like-minded officials more eager to fulfill a new executive’s approach to governing. The goal is to avoid the pitfalls of Trump’s first years in office, when the Republican president’s team was ill-prepared, his Cabinet nominees had trouble winning Senate confirmation and policies were met with resistance — by lawmakers, government workers and even Trump’s own appointees who refused to bend or break protocol, or in some cases violate laws, to achieve his goals. While many of the Project 2025 proposals are inspired by Trump, they are being echoed by GOP rivals Ron DeSantis and Vivek Ramaswamy and are gaining prominence among other Republicans. And if Trump wins a second term, the work from the Heritage coalition ensures the president will have the personnel to carry forward his unfinished White House business. “The president Day One will be a wrecking ball for the administrative state,” said Russ Vought, a former Trump administration official involved in the effort who is now president at the conservative Center for Renewing America. Much of the new president’s agenda would be accomplished by reinstating what’s called Schedule F — a Trump-era executive order that would reclassify tens of thousands of the 2 million federal employees as essentially at-will workers who could more easily be fired. Biden had rescinded the executive order upon taking office in 2021, but Trump — and other presidential hopefuls — now vow to reinstate it."

"There’s a “top to bottom overhaul” of the Department of Justice, particularly curbing its independence and ending FBI efforts to combat the spread of misinformation. It calls for stepped-up prosecution of anyone providing or distributing abortion pills by mail."

Personally I think that voting for Joe Biden is better than someone who wants to enact this stuff on day one. It's like they read handmaid's tale and want to make that the reality of this country.

"Chapter by chapter, the pages offer a how-to manual for the next president, similar to one Heritage produced 50 years ago, ahead of the Ronald Reagan administration. Authored by some of today’s most prominent thinkers in the conservative movement, it’s often sprinkled with apocalyptic language." Ronald Reagan is a big reason we have a lot of problems we have today with our economy and with a lot more things. The people that supported Ronald Reagan do not need another term in office.

A quote from the article linked below:

"Trump has given no indication that he would be more sympathetic to Palestinian claims, nor that he would place more pressure on Israel to agree to a ceasefire. “The approach of the United States would be that Israel needs to win this war, it was attacked brutally,” Trump’s ambassador to Israel, David Friedman, told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, describing how Trump would act. Friedman is now a campaign surrogate for Trump."

Personally I think Trump telling Israel to finish the job is indicators that another Trump presidency doesn't mean that weapons would stop being sent to Israel from United States

I fail to see how another term of Donald trump will be any better for the victims of the ongoing genocide in Palestine than President Joe Biden.

i think our system is absolutely messed up and broken but I don't think abstaining from voting is going to actually help.

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

No-win situation.

[cyarskaren52]

It was so wild to me watching Latinos at those rallies saying they had family members who were here illegally and that they would be fine with them being deported.

Latinos went on TV & declared yes deport my family.

WTF are black people supposed to do to fix that?

answer : Not a damn thing. They’re gonna have to learn on their own. You’d think seeing Latino babies put in cages would’ve been enough but here we are.

[honeyandpumpkins]

a lot of people are dropping premature (imo) post-mortems about “what the democrats did wrong” (which tend to be “they didnt have my exact ideological positions” whether it’s coming from someone on the left, right, or center), and i feel like this could very well be pure cope. like, to think that there was a universe where the campaign said just the right thing and people would magically want to vote for kamala. we know that the democrats ran a campaign that saw the sharpest raise in a candidates favorables in the history of US politics, and it still wasn’t even close. maybe it’s not the campaign, maybe this cultural shift was going to happen no matter what

[schmittymctitties]

Man… historians are gonna make so much fun of us if Trump’s presidency ends up terribly

[grenade-cephalopod]

The darkness does not have to swallow you up. Keep moving. Keep living. Keep fighting. Spite them every day by being happy and fulfilled and joyful and resistant and so very brave.

We can do it. We can survive. Shield the others and be shielded in turn.

Together we can make the best of a horrible situation.

[thefaeriefeatherdark]

Absolutely insane that the next American Presidential election is almost certainly going to be between a guy currently supporting a genocide and a guy who will state that the genocide wasn't genocidal enough.

[timesofocean]

Trump says world's 'biggest problem' is 'nuclear warming'

New Post has been published on https://www.timesofocean.com/trump-worlds-biggest-problem-is-nuclear-warming/

Trump says world's 'biggest problem' is 'nuclear warming'

Washington (The Times Groupe) – Former US President Donald Trump says the greatest threat to the world is nuclear warming, surpassing even global warming.

“Nobody talks about nuclear…the biggest problem we have in the whole world. It’s not global warming, it’s nuclear warming,” Trump told Fox News host Tucker Carlson in an interview that aired Tuesday night.

“And all it takes is one madman…and it’s only a matter of seconds. You don’t have to wait 200 to 300 years for it to happen,” Trump declared.

Trump also expressed concern about Russia’s nuclear weapons capability and its impact on Ukraine. He argued that while many people talked about Ukraine‘s situation, Russia is “sitting back.”

“First of all, Ukraine is being obliterated, but let’s not even talk nuclear. Let’s say it wasn’t. Let’s say they were doing better than anticipated. If he (Russian President Vladimir Putin) decided to use his second form of destruction, which is nuclear, that’s the end of that,” he added.

2024 presidential race

In addition, Trump was asked if he would withdraw from the 2024 presidential race if convicted of any charges, including those involving Stormy Daniels’ ongoing hush money case.

In response, he stated that he would never drop out.

“I’d never drop out. That’s not my thing. I wouldn’t do it,” he added.

He also claimed that police officers and courthouse employees were moved to tears upon seeing him appear for his arraignment in Manhattan. TIMES OF OCEAN US ELECTIONS

“People were crying, people that worked there, professionally work there, that have no problems putting in murderers and they see everybody,” he said.

Trump was charged last week with 34 counts for allegedly paying “hush money” to Daniels before the 2016 election by Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg.

[punk-in-metal-detector]

what it's like seeing that the us presidential elections won't be happening for another year yet american Tumblr users are starting to make it everyone's problem yet again

[trumpwillkillyourfuture]

People have been comparing Israel's atrocities in Gaza to slavery to explain why they're not voting for Kamala Harris ("her position on Gaza is so unacceptable that I can't vote for her even though her opponent is worse on nearly every other issue I care about"), so here's a relevant history lesson.

The 1844 presidential election was between Henry Clay and James Polk. Clay had what we would now consider an unacceptably moderate position on slavery: He thought that it should be allowed to continue where it was already legal but that it shouldn't be expanded to other parts of the country. Meanwhile, Polk wanted to see slavery both preserved and expanded.

To some abolitionists, Clay's position was effectively no better than Polk's, as the Missouri Compromise had set a policy on slavery west of the Mississippi River that prohibited it north of 36°30′ north latitude (with the exception of Missouri itself), and slavery was already legal in every state south of 36°30′. Many voters, unwilling to vote for either Clay or Polk, found someone to support in a third-party nominee: James Birney, representing the Liberty Party, who wanted slavery abolished entirely.

At the time, this position was outside of mainstream politics, and Birney was seen as a fringe candidate with no chance of victory. Sure enough, Birney came nowhere close to winning any state, but he did get 15,812 votes in his home state of New York. Incidentally, the entire election came down to New York, where Polk defeated Clay by just 5,106 votes. Had Birney's voters voted for Clay instead, he would have been elected the 11th president of the United States.

Instead, Polk went on to be the most pro-slavery president in American history, starting a war with Mexico to gain new land that would be open to slavery. A situation that Birney voters thought couldn't get any worse, Polk had found a way to make worse.

Now, 180 years later, people driven by fury at Harris's support for Israel and a belief that Donald Trump can't make things any worse for Palestinians are at risk of making the same mistake. Trump absolutely can make things worse, most clearly in the West Bank, which multiple members of the Israeli governing coalition would love nothing more than to annex completely, something Trump's biggest donor reportedly wants him to allow. Given Trump's transactional nature, it's likely that he would give Israel the go-ahead to fully annex the West Bank, which would destroy hopes of Palestinian statehood for the foreseeable future. Surely those who support the Palestinian cause can't countenance that happening by refusing to vote for Harris, the only candidate with a chance to defeat Trump?

As infuriating as it is that both major candidates are so unconditionally supportive of Israel's actions in Gaza, the fact is that either Kamala Harris or Donald Trump will be elected president in November. Benjamin Netanyahu and his extremist governing partners very much want Trump to win. It seems safe to say that the vast majority of Palestinians who happen to be paying attention to US politics want the opposite: a Harris victory. Please don't let them down.

[super-ultra-mega-deluxe]

earlier i was talking to a US liberal and they made the astounding analogy, "If I was going to be shot by a turbo bullet that hurts really bad, or a double turbo bullet that hurts even worse," regarding voting in the upcoming presidential election. it strikes me how, from a rhetorical perspective, this and related analogies are meant to create a false premise under which their position of the need to vote x is necessarily correct, but overwhelmingly it makes these people seem utterly childish and detached from any reality of the situation. just like an utterly idiotic thing to say. and liberals love these nonsensical analogies! they never fucking stop with them! they can't be bothered to interrogate their position in any real terms so they just say the dumbest shit that comes to mind and nod at each other because absolutely no one on earth that doesn't already have the same politics is going to read a statement like "turbo bullet that hurts really bad" as anything other than worthlessly stupid

[vyllea]

Romanian presidential elections are happening right now and our only big liberal candidate was in 2nd place, only 3 thousand votes above our classic conservative. In first place by a large margin we have a man who was so outspokenly far-right that he was kicked out of the far-right party.

If during the American elections Google searches spiked looking up what a tariff is, Romanians started looking up the meaning of "antisemitism", "russophile", "freemasonry", and several nationalist terms. He has been endorsed by Kremlin officials.

Not only are we about to have a Trump-Harris situation during our second vote, but the odds are severely against us. I trust that this country would go for the lesser evil between two conservatives but I'm afraid to trust them to vote between a fascist and a woman. The misogyny and homophobia I'm seeing is insane.

[umgeorge]

Press con questions that weren't shown:

Q: (Jenna Fryer – Associated Press) George, were you guys blindsided by this or have any idea that it was coming or under consideration, that a change in Race Director was coming? GR: No, no idea whatsoever. So, yeah, as I said, it was a bit of a bit of surprise.

Q: (Luke Smith – The Athletic) George, has there been any response from the FIA or the FIA president to what the GPDA put out? GR: No. Not at the moment, which I'm a little bit surprised about, to be fair. But maybe there'll be something to come. Who knows?

Q: (Ben Hunt – Autosport) It's obviously very disappointing to learn from you that there's no transparency at all from the FIA. Was there any response about where the money's going from for all these fines and all that sort of stuff? Because that's another key element which we would quite like to know as well. GR: No, I think ultimately for us, when we were hearing from the FIA a couple of years ago, when it came to the Presidential elections, they were talking about transparency, talking about where the money is going to be reinvested into grassroots racing, which we're all in favour for. And of course, when it comes to some of these large fines, there's a number of drivers on the grid who can comfortably afford these fines. There's maybe some rookies on the grid that if they're handed a $1 million fine, you know, they can't afford this. But if we know where that's being sort of reinvested and if it's going into grassroots or into some training programs, then we get it. As I said, I think we just want the transparency and understanding of what was promised from the beginning.

Q: (Kevin Scheuren – Motorsport-total.com) A question to George as well on that topic. Isn't it a bad sign that you need to open up a social media account to make your voices heard as a collective? Because it sometimes seems, looking from the outside, that the individual, if the individual has an opinion on stuff, he faces repercussions. Now you have to work as a collective. Are you more or less a pawn in this game? Do you drivers feel sometimes more or less as a pawn in this game, not taken serious? GR: I think we've probably learned from the past that whenever we have spoken up, let's say internally, it hasn't gone anywhere. And as I said, as drivers, we only want the best for the sport. We want to improve it, especially on safety grounds, but whenever it comes to, you know, decisions in the race, we only want to help. And it's been a couple of years now that not much has changed when we have sort of given some views forward. And I guess we all wanted to show that we are collectively united. And maybe that will show how seriously we feel as a whole on the subject.

Q: (Andrew Benson – BBC Sport) George, it's been seven years since the GPDA had put out a public statement of this kind about something they were concerned about. What level of confidence do the drivers have in the leadership of the FIA at the moment? GR: I mean, I'm not too sure to be honest. We recognise everybody's working as hard as they can to do the best job possible. There is obviously a huge amount of change within the FIA quite regularly, so it's clearly not the most stable of places. And maybe that's why it's been a bit challenging to get some of the changes that we've wanted implemented. Of course, everyone has their own side to their own story. But as I said, I think if we feel that we're being listened to and some of the changes that we are experiencing, requesting, are implemented, because ultimately we're only doing it for the benefit of the sport, then maybe our confidence will increase. But yeah, I think there's a number of drivers who feel probably a bit fed up with the whole situation. And it only seems to be going in, to a degree, the wrong direction.

Q: (Jordan Bianchi – The Athletic) For all three drivers: you returned to Vegas this year. A year ago, there was a lot of hype and excitement about this race. I'm curious, now that you come back here for a second time, what's the atmosphere like that you guys have kind of experienced so far? Kevin, let's start with you.

GR: Yeah, I mean, it definitely feels strange, this Grand Prix, just living in the night. And like Kevin says, the atmosphere builds up during the course of the weekend. So, yeah, let's see how it goes.

Q: (Anna Cordera – Momentum Racing) George, I'd like to ask you, you've been racing with Lewis for almost three years. What do you think is going to be different now you being the veteran of the team racing with Kimi, regarding the development of the car? GR: Yeah, I mean, ultimately, for most F1 teams, you have near on 1,000 people who are working towards building these two cars, yet you only have two drivers driving it. So, I think, let's say, in Lewis, in my case, it was never that Lewis had a stronger voice. The team listened to us both equally because both of our opinions were extremely important. And the same going into next year. You know, Kimi's new. He's fresh. And I'm sure he's going to have a lot of great ideas to bring to the table. So, you know, I am the more experienced of the two, but we will both get equal voices the same way, and we will both equally contribute towards the development the same way as it was with Lewis and I.

Q: (Ian Parkes – New York Times) Sorry, another question to you, George. George, is it that difficult to try and get a sit-down face-to-face meeting with the President of the FIA to discuss all these issues, that you have to go down the route that you did with that message? GR: It's definitely not difficult to get a sit down, but I think getting things to change or getting promises upheld seems slightly more challenging. So, it's maybe the FIA or the president didn't recognise how seriously we all felt. So I think that's why over the course of 20 races this year and also even last year we spoke about a number of topics, all of the drivers, we all feel pretty similar. We all know what we want from the sport and the direction it's been heading and we probably feel that we want to do a small U-turn on a number of topics and just want to work together with the FIA on this. And that's just what we've felt has not been happening at all, at least directly from the President.

[maaarine]

A new global gender divide is emerging (John Burn-Murdoch, Financial Times, Jan 26 2024)

"In the US, Gallup data shows that after decades where the sexes were each spread roughly equally across liberal and conservative world views, women aged 18 to 30 are now 30 percentage points more liberal than their male contemporaries.

That gap took just six years to open up.

Germany also now shows a 30-point gap between increasingly conservative young men and progressive female contemporaries, and in the UK the gap is 25 points.

In Poland last year, almost half of men aged 18-21 backed the hard-right Confederation party, compared to just a sixth of young women of the same age.

Outside the west, there are even more stark divisions.

In South Korea there is now a yawning chasm between young men and women, and it’s a similar situation in China.

In Africa, Tunisia shows the same pattern.

Notably, in every country this dramatic split is either exclusive to the younger generation or far more pronounced there than among men and women in their thirties and upwards.

The #MeToo movement was the key trigger, giving rise to fiercely feminist values among young women who felt empowered to speak out against long-running injustices.

That spark found especially dry tinder in South Korea, where gender inequality remains stark, and outright misogyny is common.

In the country’s 2022 presidential election, while older men and women voted in lockstep, young men swung heavily behind the right-wing People Power party, and young women backed the liberal Democratic party in almost equal and opposite numbers.

Korea’s is an extreme situation, but it serves as a warning to other countries of what can happen when young men and women part ways.

Its society is riven in two. Its marriage rate has plummeted, and birth rate has fallen precipitously, dropping to 0.78 births per woman in 2022, the lowest of any country in the world. (…)

It would be easy to say this is all a phase that will pass, but the ideology gaps are only growing, and data shows that people’s formative political experiences are hard to shake off.

All of this is exacerbated by the fact that the proliferation of smartphones and social media mean that young men and women now increasingly inhabit separate spaces and experience separate cultures.

Too often young people’s views are overlooked owing to their low rates of political participation, but this shift could leave ripples for generations to come, impacting far more than vote counts."