What does it say about everyone believing Biden despite the mountain of evidence to the contrary? It's more important to pay attention to the walk than the talk.
People want to believe the best of their leaders, especially the ones that they themselves voted for. Part of that is the conditioned behavior we have towards authority -- I don't know how else to explain part of what we're seeing, the blindness and the willingness to find ways to excuse and ignore what's on display. Confirmation bias, self-deception, groupthink -- it's a witches' cauldron.
It’s painful and yet the silence of it all makes it even more painful that the evidence of this current genocide, in which Biden is responsible for, leave us with two presidential candidates, who both support what Israel is doing, gives us the two worst choices of our times.
It's a sticky wicket, this dilemma. My main point, as a lifelong Democrat, is that I refuse to be coerced into voting one way or the other. If that happens, then my choice is not free. Right now, my conscience causes me to wait to see if the Democrats will release me (and many others) from this dilemma to where we can make an affirmative choice.
I said back in January that I felt Biden should step aside from the 2024 contest (not resign from his post early, as some had suggested at the time -- way too extreme of an idea, though I recognize that even stepping aside is a drastic move that would render Biden a lame duck). The main complaint from people who are dissatisfied with the choices this year is that we've seen this contest before. There's no juice. Now, I'm not one to vote for the flashiest person -- I voted very dutifully in 2016 -- but I do think that a fresh candidate without the taint of genocide would not only shake up the race but inject much-needed energy and enthusiasm into the Democratic side, both in terms of the current constituency as well as those looking for an ideological home. Right now, none of that exists. Everything is drab. If this continues, prospects are dismal come autumn.
I have huge respect for the white hot rage directed at Biden. I never liked Biden. And I think with Netanyahu, Uncle Joe has overestimated his personal connection and charm the same way he trusted Dubya too much in 2002 ("He looked me in the eyes..."). Also see Tim Kaine at The Guardian about how Bibi "played" Uncle Joe.
My thoughts on voting:
0) Our system of voting is always a huge disappointment. I write that though I treasure the many hours I volunteered in Obama Chicago HQ from March 2007 until the Iowa primary.
1) Voting involves life and death choices among multiple issues. We vote for the most probable chance for good and least likely chance of evil. (I think that lesser-evilism is designed to produce apathy, not moral choices.)
2) Voting is based on moral consequences, not intentions. The Green party with that great platform has never held a seat in federal government so was never in position to disappoint.
3) The three choices (simply put) are Team Blue, Team Red and abdicating one's voting responsibility. No one likes that, but it is what it is. As we know from the last 100+ years of federal election history, all congressfolk will caucus with one of the two parties.
4) The time when major progressive progress can be made is with a Team Blue trifecta. There have been only three Dem trifectas among the 22 congresses after Pres. Carter's term. Each trifecta was cut short by GOP attacks on democratic norms and functions (Gingrich 1994, gerrymandering with REDMAP and racism 2010, denying election results and more gerrymandering 2022)
Awhile ago -- maybe three weeks? -- I saw a post on twitter that said that Jill Stein was in a three way race with the other two in some of the polling.
If I was American, I'd be voting Green. Trump is horrible and Biden who actively supports genocide is just unacceptable.
A woman president and a third party? That would be amazing!
If you could remember what polling outfit put out that info, that would be quite helpful. I really have not been looking at the horserace aspect of the contest. Honestly, it’s a circus this year.
As for whom people vote, everyone’s decision is their own. It’s a secret ballot for a reason.
I hope voters will not forget how Biden and his Democratic party have supported and enabled this genocide. America will never be rid of this rotten uniparty system if they keep voting Democrat or Republican over and over and expecting anything at all to change.
Hi Austin! Or, as I would say once upon a time, hail and well met.
I see a lot of writers here on Substack go on about the "uniparty," and I must state that I do not use this terminology as I don't believe it captures the state of affairs. Yes, we need a multi-party system as we see in other Western countries, such as Canada or the UK (though the latter seems to be dominated by two parties at the moment as well). I think many people in both US parties are resistant to change because the system is so calcified that they know how to anticipate what curveballs may come their way during any given election system. People like predictable things.
I personally would like to see nationwide ranked-choice voting. I think this is especially necessary for primaries. I don't know how much momentum exists for that push. There's additionally the movement to abolish the Electoral College, which I support in spirit but acknowledge that it's probably the hardest hill to climb, as the EC is built into our very superstructure of government.
Another reason I resist that formulation of "uniparty" is that it elides the very real differences in how the two parties nominate their candidates, as well as how prospective up-and-comers are groomed within each party (along with their media apparatuses). It's very different, the way that Republicans and Democrats promote their talent and exercise power. So, that's just a term I can't get to -- it's too far away from reality.
Well met and seven blessings to you, as they say in Westeros 😉. That's fair. I suppose when I use the term 'uniparty' I'm referring to the cross party support for the war machine and corporate agendas. I understand there are differences in other ways. I'm English myself, so not an expert on the US system. We suffer from a similar problem in the UK because we have the first past the post electoral system instead of proportional representation. So it's the same two parties elected ever single time and there's very little significant difference between them when it comes to important issues such as foreign policy.
Regarding US foreign policy... Have you ever heard of The Blob? It was coined by an Obama admin official to describe the entrenched convention of policy throughout post WWII years. This is a decent article but it errs by conflating Obama and Trump a bit. Obama actually had some IR chops with intellect and experience well suited to distrust The Blob with all foreign policy. Trump was just babbling of course.
The Nayirah testimony was false testimony given before the United States Congressional Human Rights Caucus on October 10, 1990, by a 15-year-old Kuwaiti girl who was publicly identified only as Nayirah at the time. In her testimony, which took place two months after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, she claimed to have witnessed Iraqi soldiers taking babies out of incubators at a Kuwaiti hospital before looting the incubators and leaving the babies to die on the floor. Nayirah's statements were widely publicized and cited numerous times in the United States Senate and by American president George H. W. Bush to contribute to the rationale for pursuing military action against Iraq.
Then later:
In 1992, it was revealed that Nayirah's last name was al-Ṣabaḥ (Arabic: نيرة الصباح) and that she was the daughter of Saud Nasser Al-Saud Al-Sabah, the erstwhile Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States. Furthermore, it was revealed that her testimony was organized as part of a wider public relations campaign conducted by the Kuwaiti government-in-exile's Citizens for a Free Kuwait, which sought to encourage American military involvement against Iraq's occupation of Kuwait through coordination with the American public relations firm Hill & Knowlton. In the aftermath of the Gulf War, the Nayirah testimony came to be regarded as a classic example of modern atrocity propaganda.
Thanks for this! I was just thinking about this testimony and how it was used cynically by the Bush administration, but I couldn't quite come up with the girl's name. At the time, I was unaware of the testimony and its impact -- in fact, I learned of it just last year -- but it's representative of how emotional perspectives can drive narratives that power even such dry issues as foreign policy.
Nayirah's testimony has the underlying message of, "What savages!" (I cannot help but contrast that to the PR that surrounded the IDF's storming of al-Shifa Hospital, where premature babies were left to die in incubators, despite their stunt to bring more into the facility.)
You’re talking about Biden. Knowing his political career there’s nothing surprising about Biden’s behavior. There’s no “Lesser than two evils” with Biden. He’s always been evil.
Hi Danny, thanks for the comment. I am not one, personally, to assign the label "evil" to anyone, because all that label means is "utterly not like me / us" and forecloses a point of relation or understanding. There have been instances that I have marveled at Biden's humanity. When he would speak to parents who had lost children, he had an uncanny ability to offer moments of true healing. It's a remarkable talent.
But now that he's in warmonger mode, he has lost that touch. I don't know who... that is right now. Biden seems to have lost himself. And he wonders why he's having so much trouble and struggling with his approval numbers now. This is not what Democrats signed up for.
What does it say about everyone believing Biden despite the mountain of evidence to the contrary? It's more important to pay attention to the walk than the talk.
People want to believe the best of their leaders, especially the ones that they themselves voted for. Part of that is the conditioned behavior we have towards authority -- I don't know how else to explain part of what we're seeing, the blindness and the willingness to find ways to excuse and ignore what's on display. Confirmation bias, self-deception, groupthink -- it's a witches' cauldron.
And a nasty brew at that. Genocide should never be ignored and excused.
It’s painful and yet the silence of it all makes it even more painful that the evidence of this current genocide, in which Biden is responsible for, leave us with two presidential candidates, who both support what Israel is doing, gives us the two worst choices of our times.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCEKjnb3Hfk
It's a sticky wicket, this dilemma. My main point, as a lifelong Democrat, is that I refuse to be coerced into voting one way or the other. If that happens, then my choice is not free. Right now, my conscience causes me to wait to see if the Democrats will release me (and many others) from this dilemma to where we can make an affirmative choice.
I said back in January that I felt Biden should step aside from the 2024 contest (not resign from his post early, as some had suggested at the time -- way too extreme of an idea, though I recognize that even stepping aside is a drastic move that would render Biden a lame duck). The main complaint from people who are dissatisfied with the choices this year is that we've seen this contest before. There's no juice. Now, I'm not one to vote for the flashiest person -- I voted very dutifully in 2016 -- but I do think that a fresh candidate without the taint of genocide would not only shake up the race but inject much-needed energy and enthusiasm into the Democratic side, both in terms of the current constituency as well as those looking for an ideological home. Right now, none of that exists. Everything is drab. If this continues, prospects are dismal come autumn.
I have huge respect for the white hot rage directed at Biden. I never liked Biden. And I think with Netanyahu, Uncle Joe has overestimated his personal connection and charm the same way he trusted Dubya too much in 2002 ("He looked me in the eyes..."). Also see Tim Kaine at The Guardian about how Bibi "played" Uncle Joe.
My thoughts on voting:
0) Our system of voting is always a huge disappointment. I write that though I treasure the many hours I volunteered in Obama Chicago HQ from March 2007 until the Iowa primary.
1) Voting involves life and death choices among multiple issues. We vote for the most probable chance for good and least likely chance of evil. (I think that lesser-evilism is designed to produce apathy, not moral choices.)
2) Voting is based on moral consequences, not intentions. The Green party with that great platform has never held a seat in federal government so was never in position to disappoint.
3) The three choices (simply put) are Team Blue, Team Red and abdicating one's voting responsibility. No one likes that, but it is what it is. As we know from the last 100+ years of federal election history, all congressfolk will caucus with one of the two parties.
4) The time when major progressive progress can be made is with a Team Blue trifecta. There have been only three Dem trifectas among the 22 congresses after Pres. Carter's term. Each trifecta was cut short by GOP attacks on democratic norms and functions (Gingrich 1994, gerrymandering with REDMAP and racism 2010, denying election results and more gerrymandering 2022)
Awhile ago -- maybe three weeks? -- I saw a post on twitter that said that Jill Stein was in a three way race with the other two in some of the polling.
If I was American, I'd be voting Green. Trump is horrible and Biden who actively supports genocide is just unacceptable.
A woman president and a third party? That would be amazing!
If you could remember what polling outfit put out that info, that would be quite helpful. I really have not been looking at the horserace aspect of the contest. Honestly, it’s a circus this year.
As for whom people vote, everyone’s decision is their own. It’s a secret ballot for a reason.
Jill Stein posted the information on her twitter feed, if that's helpful.
Awesome! Thanks.
I hope voters will not forget how Biden and his Democratic party have supported and enabled this genocide. America will never be rid of this rotten uniparty system if they keep voting Democrat or Republican over and over and expecting anything at all to change.
Hi Austin! Or, as I would say once upon a time, hail and well met.
I see a lot of writers here on Substack go on about the "uniparty," and I must state that I do not use this terminology as I don't believe it captures the state of affairs. Yes, we need a multi-party system as we see in other Western countries, such as Canada or the UK (though the latter seems to be dominated by two parties at the moment as well). I think many people in both US parties are resistant to change because the system is so calcified that they know how to anticipate what curveballs may come their way during any given election system. People like predictable things.
I personally would like to see nationwide ranked-choice voting. I think this is especially necessary for primaries. I don't know how much momentum exists for that push. There's additionally the movement to abolish the Electoral College, which I support in spirit but acknowledge that it's probably the hardest hill to climb, as the EC is built into our very superstructure of government.
Another reason I resist that formulation of "uniparty" is that it elides the very real differences in how the two parties nominate their candidates, as well as how prospective up-and-comers are groomed within each party (along with their media apparatuses). It's very different, the way that Republicans and Democrats promote their talent and exercise power. So, that's just a term I can't get to -- it's too far away from reality.
Well met and seven blessings to you, as they say in Westeros 😉. That's fair. I suppose when I use the term 'uniparty' I'm referring to the cross party support for the war machine and corporate agendas. I understand there are differences in other ways. I'm English myself, so not an expert on the US system. We suffer from a similar problem in the UK because we have the first past the post electoral system instead of proportional representation. So it's the same two parties elected ever single time and there's very little significant difference between them when it comes to important issues such as foreign policy.
Regarding US foreign policy... Have you ever heard of The Blob? It was coined by an Obama admin official to describe the entrenched convention of policy throughout post WWII years. This is a decent article but it errs by conflating Obama and Trump a bit. Obama actually had some IR chops with intellect and experience well suited to distrust The Blob with all foreign policy. Trump was just babbling of course.
https://www.vox.com/22153765/joe-biden-foreign-policy-team-revenge-blob
The original interview with Rhodes is pretty good too.
It’s not the American people who choose whom gets to be president. Democracy is one of the biggest lies ever written. Have a read.
https://observer.com/2017/08/court-admits-dnc-and-debbie-wasserman-schulz-rigged-primaries-against-sanders/
https://www.drmikekatz.com/the_dnc_and_rnc_are_private_corporations
And again (from wiki):
The Nayirah testimony was false testimony given before the United States Congressional Human Rights Caucus on October 10, 1990, by a 15-year-old Kuwaiti girl who was publicly identified only as Nayirah at the time. In her testimony, which took place two months after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, she claimed to have witnessed Iraqi soldiers taking babies out of incubators at a Kuwaiti hospital before looting the incubators and leaving the babies to die on the floor. Nayirah's statements were widely publicized and cited numerous times in the United States Senate and by American president George H. W. Bush to contribute to the rationale for pursuing military action against Iraq.
Then later:
In 1992, it was revealed that Nayirah's last name was al-Ṣabaḥ (Arabic: نيرة الصباح) and that she was the daughter of Saud Nasser Al-Saud Al-Sabah, the erstwhile Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States. Furthermore, it was revealed that her testimony was organized as part of a wider public relations campaign conducted by the Kuwaiti government-in-exile's Citizens for a Free Kuwait, which sought to encourage American military involvement against Iraq's occupation of Kuwait through coordination with the American public relations firm Hill & Knowlton. In the aftermath of the Gulf War, the Nayirah testimony came to be regarded as a classic example of modern atrocity propaganda.
Thanks for this! I was just thinking about this testimony and how it was used cynically by the Bush administration, but I couldn't quite come up with the girl's name. At the time, I was unaware of the testimony and its impact -- in fact, I learned of it just last year -- but it's representative of how emotional perspectives can drive narratives that power even such dry issues as foreign policy.
Nayirah's testimony has the underlying message of, "What savages!" (I cannot help but contrast that to the PR that surrounded the IDF's storming of al-Shifa Hospital, where premature babies were left to die in incubators, despite their stunt to bring more into the facility.)
You’re talking about Biden. Knowing his political career there’s nothing surprising about Biden’s behavior. There’s no “Lesser than two evils” with Biden. He’s always been evil.
Hi Danny, thanks for the comment. I am not one, personally, to assign the label "evil" to anyone, because all that label means is "utterly not like me / us" and forecloses a point of relation or understanding. There have been instances that I have marveled at Biden's humanity. When he would speak to parents who had lost children, he had an uncanny ability to offer moments of true healing. It's a remarkable talent.
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2022/12/8/2140768/-I-want-to-share-something-I-learned-about-Joe-Biden-yesterday
But now that he's in warmonger mode, he has lost that touch. I don't know who... that is right now. Biden seems to have lost himself. And he wonders why he's having so much trouble and struggling with his approval numbers now. This is not what Democrats signed up for.
Thank you for your reply. Although knowing Biden’s political history, I respect your views, and look forward to reading your contribution to Substack.
I appreciate your comment! I look forward to getting to know your views.