The measure received 14 votes in favour, with the US the sole member to reject it. However, because the US is a permanent member of the council, it has the ability to veto any resolution brought forward
Unlike several previous resolutions regarding a ceasefire in Gaza, Wednesday’s measure was brought forward by all 10 elected members of the Security Council.
The US has vetoed four previous attempts at calling for a ceasefire in Gaza, on most occasions being the lone vote against the measures.
As long as you keep voting limb cutters, they have no motivation to stop cutting limbs. Not voting for limb cutters is the only way to make non limb cutting get on the ballot
deleted by creator
Now imagine next election one person is threatening to kill 4 children and the other team 6. Well obviously we should save 4! Then next election, we have to kill 6, so we don’t vote for the person killing 8. And so on. That’s how we got in this predicament.
deleted by creator
harris had never gotten even thousand votes in the primaries where 10 million people vote. she only got to become vp by sucking up to superpacs who didn’t want a progressive like warren as vp
and since 2016 dnc uses primaries more for just pissing on its members.
the problem is not the voters but dnc which today is run by lobbyists.
Removed by mod
That is a valid position if you intend to use that time to make it so that children don’t need to burn every election.
“Two limbs is just as bad as 4 limbs, so I choose 4 limbs!”
You do realize that there is more than one election? Like every four years there is an election. Treating every election like it is the only one and never looking past the immediate effects for the next year is what brought this mess in the first place.
This is also why this comparison is bad. You can not only loose at this election, but the next one and the one after that amd the one after that. In fact one could argue Americans have been loosong every election to the neoliberals since a few decades. And why? Because you never made a point of getting one party to stop being neoliberals.
This election made me realize that political affiliation in the states for a lot of people is like being in a cult. Rather than accepting that your side has issues and needs a change, people just try to justify it by pointing how bad the other side can be worse. Like 90% of lemmy democrats don’t get that I’m not motivated to vote for being waist-deep in shit vs chest-deep in shit. Yes, one is worse than another, but I prefer to vote so I don’t have to be in shit at all. But all they will say back is hurr durr trump bad.
I feel like we need to normalize that demanding more from representatives is OK and necessary for a functioning democracy. The party needs to respond to the demands of those they are supposed to represent. This election made it clear that they only care about the demands of the donors and that needs to change
But given a fundamentally broken system such as FPTP, voting is going to do very little to fix the flaws. There is the winner and everyone else, and that everyone else may be the majority. So fi d a better tool for the job. This one clearly isn’t working.
Yeah, FPTP is inherently undemocratic and naturally trends to a two-party system. Especially when both parties operate within neoliberalism, intentionally racheting American politics to the right at the behest of capital interests.
I’m all for approval or STAR voting, but I will support any ranked choice ballot measure as any are better than FPTP. Right now it’s only possible to enact new voting systems at a local level
The reason people keep trying to say the same thing over and over is because your vote to “not be in shit at all” results in all of us being chest-deep. I want the Dems to change too but it isn’t going to happen as a result of folks withholding their votes while we’re in a two party system with FPTP voting. So since I would rather be knee deep than chest deep, I voted knee deep.
I’m not going to shame anyone for their voting choices, but let’s not try to deny - not voting results in chest deep shit, not no shit, and we’ll all get an object lesson in this every single day for about (at least) four years starting in January.
If you are going to proudly stand by your principled choice (which I support), at least be honest about the effects.
So far.
You have this perspective that “we can show them” if we just let the Republicans win, but there’s no evidence to support that. Every time the Republicans have won, the Democrats have moved to the right, not the left.
If you want a third party to emerge, you can advocate for that, but a truly leftist third party isn’t possible if we lose all our limbs.
EVEN NOW they are blaming progressives, not her nonsensical attempt to woo Republicans while moving right so fast it left vapor trails behind her after announcing her candidacy.
I thought this was going to be a great article. The title made me think it was going to be all about getting tough with Republicans and actually fighting.
https://www.salon.com/2024/11/19/how-democrats-can-move-past-low-dominance-messaging/
SURELY, Salon of all places will rightly criticize her for deciding to run as a Republican. BUT NO:
YIELDED to the far left? With Cheneys on stage at the DNC, more talk about her glock than about climate, no movement on palestine, and not even a willingness to let a pro-Palestine speaker have 30 secs of podium time at the event?
In what fucking way did she “Yield” to the far left with a campaign very clearly and transparently designed to woo Republicans into voting Democrat?
I have to question your grip on reality, Professor Steven Fish of UC Berkeley, if you think what you saw in recent months was Kamala “yielding” a damn thing to the left.
Not for nothing, but where is this two limb option? All I see is four limb options except one is grinning and clapping the other is just wearing a false look of commiseration.