Gender Critical opinion and advice: I don’t want Trump to win

submitted by [deleted] from self.GenderCritical

I don’t want Trump to win. I’m not right leaning in the slightest so I don’t want him to win. He’s vindictive and abhorrent towards gays, supports blocking of gay adoption, and wants to have Amy Coney Barrett as a seat in Supreme Court so she can roll back gay marriage. But I also don’t feel comfortable with Biden. As I am in a swing state, I feel pressured to vote one or the other. You go on Biden’s website and besides getting bombarded by pleas of leaving a donation, you see under his gay agenda that it’s all for transgender ideals. The entire page only once actually had a sentence listing lesbian, gay, and bisexual without the T tacked on. Everything he plans to do is about helping TRAs get more bold and more protected, which places women and children gay or straight in further danger. I feel like voting third party however would just let Trump win, and I can’t have that. Biden however plans to reduce Covid destruction and ease gun violence, but if he’s serious about fracking and the TRA nonsense, we’d be screwed. Has anyone had much thought to this?

all 23 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]MarkTwainiac 15 insightful - 1 fun15 insightful - 0 fun16 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

I don't agree with Jimmy Dore on everything, but I think his points about Biden vs Trump have merit. He says the idea that Biden is the lesser of two evils is BS - Biden is just another kind of evil. The Dems and Republicans nowadays are not opposite poles - they are two sides of the same venal, corrupt corporatist coin.

I have voted in every POTUS election since 1972. I would never vote for Trump, but I can't vote for Biden. I have never been so despairing, depressed and pessimistic about the politics of the US - and about girls and women's rights in this country.

https://youtu.be/gFL9y1NzvBI

https://youtu.be/zkJKOT1FNhA

https://youtu.be/ObR8TiAHIh0

https://youtu.be/vV2mBhQR3r4

https://youtu.be/xZy0rnXSpnw

https://youtu.be/fBh47sIdkQs

[–][deleted] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Thank you for your comment. I’ve never heard of Jimmy Dore before, but the videos were certainly helpful. Considering what else I’ve heard about Biden it falls suit, and fills the holes. In that regard, I too am very scared, cause I know deep down that maybe change won’t happen if I vote third party

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Voting third party in a plurality election dominated by two major parties is literally throwing away your vote. It's unfortunate, but true, and is why plurality voting is so, so stupid. Short of a massive event that results in the dissolution of the Democrats or Republicans and allows either the Green or Libertarians to fill the void (or actual election system reform to a competent system), the Democrats and the Republicans will always be the 2 major parties in charge. Events that unseat a major party out of 2 party dominance are exceedingly rare in plurality systems once 2 major parties cement their power.

The options are:

a) Vote for one of the two major parties currently in power, even if you hate both for varying reasons. On the plus side you at least get to vote for the lesser of two evils, but on the downside you're forced to vote for the lesser of two evils.

b) Vote honestly for your preferred candidate, even if they're a third party candidate. This hurts your ability to make a decision about the parties in charge since your vote won't have a real impact on the election outcome unless the third party happens to be close enough in votes to threaten one other party (in which case they're likely a spoiler party).

c) Officially reject your ballot. Some places allow you to record this, many do not or will record it as "did not vote" or merely "wasted ballot".

The problem with b) and c) is that the parties in charge generally don't give a shit about third party voters or people who rejected the ballot. They don't see a reason to reach out to either group, because the voting system promotes absolute dominance, rather than compromise and good representation. Indeed, the media and pundits generally look at third party voting as wasted votes, a mere curiosity at best, and because of how rejected ballots are not recorded, rejecting the ballot altogether would get recorded the same way people who did not vote are recorded.

Our current election system is shit and is one of the worst possible election systems you could choose to use. It's terrifying how widespread plurality voting is.

I don't like Biden much either, and I hate how electing him legitimizes the Democrats basically carrying on as usual without pushing for real electoral reform, but the alternative of letting Trump win is unacceptable. The best move I can see in this election is to tolerate a Biden win and then campaign hard for permanent election reform using Trump's election as a cautionary tale to get a movement going. There's various small groups such as https://electionscience.org and https://www.counted.vote/ pushing for voting reform with score voting based methods, but unfortunately it's hard to get real demand for it unless we can get actual government officials onboard with reform and talking about it publicly.

Assume Trump is allowed back into power because people are unwilling to vote for Biden: the Republicans absolutely will carry on business as usual, as they have demonstrated their will to do so in the impeachment hearing when they had the chance to hold Trump accountable. Allowing Trump back into power as a "piss people off to drive reform" is a wildly risky and bad move that is unlikely to work or be worth the additional years of chaos he'd bring, whereas it's still possible to campaign for reforms even under Biden, since you could easily press for reforms to prevent a Trump scenario from happening again.

[–]jelliknight 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

b) Vote honestly for your preferred candidate, even if they're a third party candidate. This hurts your ability to make a decision about the parties in charge since your vote won't have a real impact on the election outcome unless the third party happens to be close enough in votes to threaten one other party (in which case they're likely a spoiler party).

Since in the USA almost half of the voting population don't turn out to vote, and these are the least inspiring candidates of all time, i don't really get the idea that voting for a 3rd party is a 'waste'. Each political party gets about 25% of the overall vote while 50% don't vote at all, there's actually a lot of potential to get a third party in. Unfortunately none of them have done anything to mobilize support as far as I can see.

Maybe the solution is to vote for a conservative spoiler party and encourage other people to do that too?

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

In theory, a 3rd party vote would be great! Government's supposed to govern as a collective body, working together for the common good, and if they see a lot of people voting for a separate party they'd want to try and represent everyone's interests as much as possible when you're sending the message that you don't care for either of the two main parties in power.

In practice, the two parties are so entrenched that they just laugh at, and proceed to ignore third party vote data. They only care about a) people who are fence sitters, and b) getting people to vote (or in the Republican case, doing everything possible to prevent their enemies from voting).

You'd have to actually build up a second conservative party from scratch to the point where it can legitimately threaten the Republican party as a spoiler candidate. Much easier said than done, and doesn't fix the underlying cause of the problems in the first place, since a conservative could then do the same thing with a more liberal party as a front. The real solution is to use a system that is immune to spoiler parties (also referred to as clone candidates, candidates similar to one another that they pull votes away from each other in a plurality system).

[–]lefterfield 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I feel this. I wish I knew the solution.

[–]zephyranthes 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

He’s vindictive and abhorrent towards gays

How?

supports blocking of gay adoption

He allows existing religious adoption agencies to turn away gay couples. Which may be bad of them, but you know what? The state's record on child safeguarding, particularly deciding who makes a good parent, isn't great either. See: James Younger. Unless the state can come up with and enforce better mandatory criteria, religious (and other) agencies should be allowed to use their own.

wants to have Amy Coney Barrett as a seat in Supreme Court so she can roll back gay marriage

Gay marriage is safe. Abortion is in danger, but women's health in general and, even more broadly, women's rights are more in danger from Biden. Not every woman will have an unwanted pregnancy. Every woman needs to pee outside of home. The loss of equitable opportunities, job security and personal safety that comes with adopting genderist doctrine will damage access to abortion more than any ban ACB can reasonably try to push through from the bench.

[–]BEB 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think once women, gay men and men who love the women in their life, get the full scope of the Equality Act there's going to be hell to pay in the US.

On right wing sites, men are already talking abut the usurption of women's spaces and sports, but these men are waiting for feminists to speak out. But lib fems have taken over women's organziations, which are now also receiving money from the gender lobby, so, to the general population organized feminism seems to be onboard with transwomen are women.

That's why it's so important for those of us who are aware of the gender madness to speak out as much as we can in real life. I am lucky in that the majority of my friends, if they knew about the Equality Act, would agree with me, so I do speak out.

But others, please try to do as much as you are comfortable with - an anonymous Twitter account? Using a corporation's contact form with a fake email address?

We are going to lose our rights if we don't immediately start to make other Americans, especially liberal women, aware.

[–]our_team_is_winning 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Gay marriage is safe. Abortion is in danger, but women's health in general and, even more broadly, women's rights are more in danger from Biden. Not every woman will have an unwanted pregnancy. Every woman needs to pee outside of home.

Largely agree. I don't think abortion is in the danger the fear-mongers want you to believe. Maybe late-term abortion is, but abortion doesn't affect every woman. All women are hurt by having men push us out of work opportunities, invade our private spaces, legally shut us up for stating reality ("You are a MAN!") -- and transing children as the norm? That terrifies me daily and it's only going to grow. They're already enshrining TWAW in law with "gender identity" replacing or being put alongside "sex" under discrimination.

And it's probably only a matter of time before nearly all politicians are on board with TWAW. It's not just Biden. They're all for sale.

[–]Finnegan7921 11 insightful - 2 fun11 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Biden has no plan to reduce Covid destruction, none whatsoever. He never lays out nay specifics other then "listen to the scientists", which is like listening to the wind b/c they keep changing their minds. It isn't airborne, now it is, maybe it isn't. Masks help, they don't help, wear the damn mask, they're not all that effective if they aren't medical grade, etc. It spreads on surfaces, no it doesn't, yeah it does, etc.

Listen to the scientists sounds great, but in reality they'll just shut the country down again and economically we can't survive that.

As for gun violence, he isn't going to stop it b/c his entire party is actively shitting on the one group of people whose job it is to stop the violence. You think Joe Biden is going to get hard on crime in Chicago, NYC, Baltimore, etc. No way in hell b/c he'd instantly be called racist. Do anything that is tough on crime and you get hit with that label.

Once the equality act is passed, women are screwed for a long long time, and there won't be any way out of it b/c anyone against it will be labelled a racist/bigot/phobe .

[–]our_team_is_winning 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

He never lays out nay specifics other then "listen to the scientists", which is like listening to the wind b/c they keep changing their minds.

Thank you for saying that and saying it so well. I hear everyone accusing others and pointing fingers but it's not like they had or have an answer. I am sure for the right amount of money, you can find a scientist who will say anything you want. I mean you could say "I listen to doctors," but we have doctors eager to chop off health body parts and create "neovaginas" ffs. A lot of people have paper credentials and still aren't any wiser.

[–]MinisterOfTerfery 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm not American but it's obvious to anyone with common sense that neither of these choices are a win. Trump is Trump and Biden doesn't even know where he is or what he's running for (he claimed to be running for the senate lol) and he is planning on eradicating women's rights. I have no doubt that Biden getting elected will have devastating consequences for women if he is serious about the trans stuff, and it seems like he is since he said trans rights are the civil rights issue of our time.

We are looking at a future where all the female sports scholarships are won by men, all the gold medals in women's sports are won by men, women losing on job opportunities because employers can just tick the equality box by hiring a man who identifies as a woman, women's award categories populated by men, women in prisons across the country suffering rape and abuse from the hands of male prisoners and there will be NOTHING that can be done about it because the law will be protecting these men.

I can't believe I'm saying this but if I was American I would be voting for Trump. I just could not live with myself knowing I will be participating in complete erasure of women's safety, dignity, sports etc.

[–][deleted] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

The problem lies with the current election system. Under plurality voting (which many countries unfortunately use) you're told to pick one candidate and shut up. It's a system that's rife with issues and is shown to lead to consistently poor leaders being chosen, 2 party dominance as opposed to proportional and diverse representation, and also is easily manipulated by political candidates. For instance, the Republicans have at times paid third party candidate (the Green Party), often by quietly funneling money to the campaign, in order to run a spoiler candidate who'd steal votes from their Democratic Party opponent.

Because of America's fundamentally broken election system, you're forced to pick between a mediocre but unappealing candidate in the form of Biden, whose voting history leaves much to be desired, or a literal psychopath who views fascist dictators with the utmost adulation in the form of Trump, and for whom objective reality is merely optional. Picking a third party is wasting your vote, and there is literally no alternative left-leaning party that cares about progressive reform but isn't entirely subjugated by trans activism. There's no room for any nuance in your choice due to the election system.

Serious reform requires changing our election system to something like Score Voting, which is far more resilient to manipulation, allows you to express an opinion about all candidates, does not have spoiler candidates, and gets far better election results.

As an interesting bit of reading: Hillary Clinton was the spoiler candidate in her own election. Had anyone other than her run in her place, Trump would not have been elected: https://www.rangevoting.org/USA2016retro.html

Unfortunately, because election reform would threaten the 2 parties in power, it will be difficult from a practical standpoint to get change. The closest you might be able to do is convince one party or both to use a much better voting system in the primaries, thus improving the quality of the candidates (i.e. we almost certainly would not have seen Trump as a frontrunner, who directly benefited and was probably elected due to the many pathological behaviors plurality/first-past-the-post voting displays).

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

But how would you be able to convince candidates to do so during primaries if it’s against their benefit?

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's only the presidential elections where they would strategically benefit from maintaining the current, badly flawed system. It would actually directly and significantly benefit both parties to use score voting during the primaries, by greatly increasing the quality of their elected frontrunner candidates and therefore giving them a better shot at winning the presidential election. Even if they refuse to reform the presidential election as a way of keeping themselves in power (by refusing to overturn the system that gives them 2 party dominance), by using an improved voting method in the primaries they'd give themselves a very big advantage in the quality of candidates elected that would hopefully carry through to the presidential election, and we'd get improved presidential choices (i.e. no Donald Trumps).

For instance, if one party used score voting in their primaries while the other did not, there's a very good chance the party that reformed its primaries would immediately gain a large power advantage by electing truly popular candidates chosen without any of the vote splitting problems of plurality voting.

Now, they'd hopefully see the benefit for the country as a whole after using it in primaries and want to reform the presidential/senate/governor elections and so on to use the same, but there's no guarantee of that.

Pleas to both parties to at least use score voting in their primaries and the arguments why are detailed here for both Republicans and Democrats: https://rangevoting.org/ForReps.html / https://rangevoting.org/ForDems.html

[–]Omina_Sentenziosa 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Not American, but I am in a similar situation every time I vote. I don't want right wingers to win, but our leftist parties are batshit crazy (not specifically for trans issues yet, but for other things).

I can't bring myself to vote for the left anymore, they are showing that they are completely unable to think and a level of hipocrisy, arrogance and general hatred towards the category they claim to defend (and in fact are exploiting) that I can't ignore.

I don't think making them win is a good strategy if you want them to change their tune. That said, I don't think they are even able to change their tune because they are so far up their own asses that they wouldn't admit they are wrong even if truth clubbed them on the head. So basically, I simply do not want to be responsible of putting them in power and of what they will do during their mandate.

If I were American, I wouldn't vote for Trump, but I wouldn't vote for Biden either: I wouldn't want to feel responsible if a TIM gets access to a rape shelter or prison and assaults one of the women there and then witness official organizations telling those women that they must respect their rapists by calling them ladies, I wouldn't want to feel responsible of girls losing their scholarships and privacy and be attacked for transphobia, and if things are going the way I think, I also wouldn't want to feel responsible for all the children who will be transed in the next 4/8 years.

[–]FlippyKing 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

The biggest issues that will be decided this election, as I see it, are the following:

1) passing the "equality" act where Democrats will do to women what their passing of the GOP's NAFTA and MFN for China and GATT did to unions, wages, and holding corporations to work-place and environmental protections.

2) the resurrection of trade deals like TPP and TTIP which I'm glad stopped being pushed by Trump's surprising election win 4 years ago.

3) When, if ever, the Dems might nominate someone who will end our endless wars renegotiate or end our existing exploitative trade deals, hold wall street and war criminals accountable, and not veto M4All. If Biden wins it may be twenty years before we can even try to topple the corporate control of the Democrats, judging by how long it has taken to fight the Wall St take over of the party in the 90s. He's all for fracking, locking up pot smokers who aren't named Hunter or Kamala, transing kids, endless wars, bad trade deals, eliminating sex-based rights, and vetoing M4All.

I lost this election long ago, just as I lost the 2016 election long before November of 2016. I voted for Jill Stein in 2012 and 2016 as I've voted Green most elections since Nafta passed. To see Dems scream about ending the Electoral college, the body that frees me to vote Green in my sadly Wall St Dem run state, really angers me. The Dems have "lesser eviled" themselves to a point where they simply are not the lesser evil, especially when we must consider that this comes down to 4 more years of one verses 8 or more years of them. If forced to choose between Trump or Biden, the choice for me is obivious. Biden winning will be a disaster. We will only get to fight this fight again if Biden loses. My only question is if I can vote Green again or not.

I have hated Trump since I first became aware of him, and growing up around New York, it is a lot longer than most people. But his presidency has not been as bad as we were told it would be, his uncouthness not withstanding. Russia Gate has been shown by Aaron Mate to be all lies, and the promise that his tax returns would show his fealty to Russian oligarchs has been admitted to be false by the same outlets who made the promise. They just buried that in the depths of the articles about his tax returns. The treatment of minors held in custody over immigration is a scandal our entire governmental apparatus should be shamed and impeached over. Judges seated above children and treating them as if they are their own competent representation, literal caging of children by both the Obama and Trump administration, and lawyers arguing against allowing children to even brush their teeth, shows that anarchists are right about government and the nature of law and authority much more than it says anything about the supposed differences between trump or obama or clinton or biden.

ACB will probably be bad on women's and worker's rights, but no nominee from Biden can be expected to be better. Biden has been willing to let Row v Wade be erased because he was willing to let it be up to the states-- that was the major aspect of what Row v Wade decided. The Dems really do not stand for anything good any more, and if they ever will it will only be if Biden loses. Maybe it is time, if he court really will be in the majority against women's reproductive rights, to fight that much harder for protections and resources for pre-natal care and for mothers and families. If we can fight for such protections and resources, maybe the "conservatives" will suddenly see the light on reproductive freedom. But this is now way of track from Biden v Trump

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

But his presidency has not been as bad as we were told it would be

It has literally been the worst presidency in America's history, according to most historians. Have you not been paying attention?

[–]FlippyKing 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

"most historians" is obvious hyperbole, and what would they be judging it on? One would have to look at what and why they, each because there's no way the are saying it collectively when they can't agree on anything collectively, are saying specifically about why they make such an absurd statement. And it is absurd.

Trump pushed for and passed a criminal justice reform that everyone agrees was surprisingly progressive. Compare that to Bill Clinton who Michelle Alexander details how bad his presidency was on criminal justice. Trump has not invaded any new countries, making his presidency better of foreign policy than both Clinton-- who invented "humanitarian bombing"-- and Bush who literally lied us into a war in Iraq which: destabilized the entire region, created a refugee crisis that is still reverberating in Europe and the middle east, destroyed historical treasures directly and indirectly, and sent oil prices through the roof for like a year where some people couldn't afford to even drive to work. Like it or not Trump's presidency is better than Bush's and Clinton's already both on criminal justice and on war. Obama expanded Bush's wars, and all credible evidence points to his funding of ISIS and ISIS-renamed groups to over-throw Syria and wage a war along with Turkey to stomp out Rojava. Trump had an early bombing campaign which was applauded by the media, where they literally called it being "presidential", but critics ie war-mongers complained it was intentionally ineffective and too limited to serve their purposes-- which are clearly centered around creating one specific pipeline through Syria that profits our oil companies while blocking another specific one that would profit Russia. If you want to cheer for our oil companies there, that's on you just be sure to enlist.

Trump was pushed to invade Iran, which would be a disaster, but instead he played stupid games with false-flag operations and let it all peter out into nothing, for now. Both Hillary and McCain talked about bombing Iran and Hillary even said she's willing to nuke them. We, as in the world, seriously dodged a bullet in 2016. Trump's overthrow of Bolivia most be compared to Obama's overthrow of Honduras, which Hillary took credit for. Honduras is still run by a military dictatorship and was a major source of the so-called caravan of immigrants or refugees walking through Mexico to bum-rush the border. Thanks, Obama. Bolivia by comparison just had a peaceful election where the CIA's puppet just congratulated the former finance minister who served under Evo Morales and who apparently was the mastermind of Bolivia's peaceful take over of their own natural resources. It remains to be seen if he will honor the contracts signed by the CIA's temporary president. On "monroe doctrine" related issues, Trump is clearly better than Obama.

On trade it is obvious: Trump is vastly superior to every president since perhaps Johnson, not because he's been great but because so many have been disasters. TPP and TTIP were both stopped dead in their tracks by his win. He is the first to even try to renegotiate NAFTA, something Clinton promised as he signed it even though all critics of NAFTA pointed out that he could just NEGOTIATE it better before pusing it through congress and signing it. He just simply lied to his party base about his intentions in the hopes they would not fight against it so hard.

Clinton was horrible on trade, but he was on different on it than GHW Bush would have been. GHW Bush tried to get "MFN" for China which the Democrats opposed and stopped. Senator Bill Bradley (D-NJ) went on PBS explaining how you don't reward human rights violators with trade deals. Then a year later and barely into Clinton's presidency he went back on PBS to explain how trade would lead to a more democratized China with better human rights. I think that was after Tienanmen Square. But the crack down on Hong Kong and the Uhygar enslavement and harvesting of organs has shown that was a bunch of lies meant to put money in the pockets of Wall St while killing our unions and allowing companies to just opt out of our environmental and labor protections by moving production. NAFTA created the mess in Juarez and the enviromental distruction along the boarder there. The damage done to Mexico by NAFTA is well documented. The Bushes and the Clintons and both party establishments share the blame for that.

GATT and WTO has also been a disaster. Country of origin labelings have been ruled in violation of the treaty, not by our courts but by a court created and maintained by corporations specifically to shoot down a country's attempt to regulate commerce in their own country. That you do not have a right any more to know what country your meat comes from, and thus what drugs kept the critter alive while he was living in probably piles of its own feces with no hope of an inspector even fining the operation, or that it is profitable to raise chickens here but ship them to China for "processing" and ship them back for sale, are just a couple of the absurdities of trade deals given to us by Clinton and proposed by Bush. Obama and GW Bush also passed similarly bad trade deals, but for our economy and for our industry and for our communities that need a tax base to pay for infrastructure upgrades, it was just kicking a dead man. Obama was pushing for TPP and TTIP, and Hillary would have passed them, and Biden will likely resurrect them. Trump is much better on trade than any of them.

Finally, the Equality Act will do, as I said above and you didn't counter at all, to women and girls what exploitative trade deals did to our manufacturing and to the global enviroment and to worker's rights.

Four more years is very little to pay to protect us from more of the same or any return to the "normalcy", described above, the Dems on the upper east or west side of Manhattan want to go back to. If Biden wins, you can see AOC, Jamal Bowman, and all the "squad" primaried and replaced well-behaved Wall St servants. If Biden wins you will never see a fair primary run by the Dems, which anyone fairly looking at the last two will admit is already a concept buried in the dust-bin of history. And you will elevate Harris, who might be worse than Joe much like Hillary's choosing Tim Kaine was meant to elevate yet another Wall St (in Virginia of all places) Dem who was against women's reproductive rights.

So, your idea that Trump is the worst in history is just silly. Russiagate? Aaron Mate showed it all to be lies. Crowd Strike themselves who pointed the finger at Russia had to admit that they had no actual evidence or reason to suspect Russia did anything to the DNC's servers. The tax returns just showed a charlatan like every rich bastard when we were promised it would show he was firmly in some unnamed Russian's pocket. Trump has done horrible things. That the Dems focus on none of them and make up lies shows you more about them than him.

The only sane choice is to vote Green or vote Trump and make the Dems come back in four years. The only reason we got to debate the Dems love for wars (thanks Tulsi), or their love for locking up pot-heads, or trade, or M4All is because the Dems lost. That's the big lesson from 2016: hand dems defeats and make them quit their addition to Wall St and war cold turkey. Four more years and a chance to do it all again is much better than handing Biden a win and perhaps never getting a chance fight for what is important. We already know what Biden will fight for, and it will make the song "Dude looks like a Lady" transphobic because under the law it will be "Bearded Lady looks like a Lady"

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

"most historians" is obvious hyperbole, and what would they be judging it on?

I can think of 221,000 things they could judge it on.

[–]jelliknight 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I never understood people who don't vote before. Or worse people in Australia who do a Donkey Vote (because we have compulsory voting they go to the polling place, wait in line, get a ballot, go into the booth, and then just draw a dick and balls on it). Now i get it. I honestly don't see how I could either vote for biden or not vote against trump.

Have you considered getting blackout drunk and then voting so you don't have to remember exactly what you did?

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

No I haven’t considered getting black out drunk. The ballot however does give me severe anxiety however. I think I know who I’m voting for and then I second guess myself again on whether my choice was right.

[–]LeyMio 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It really sucks that American women are forced to vote between two old white dudes. Trump is garbage in so many ways and there is no doubt about that. But Biden is just another form of evil politician and misogynist who will definitely do lots of harm to women.