The UN is not meant to be a world government. It’s meant to be a forum that allows all countries to maintain a bare minimum of diplomatic relations. The overarching goal is to prevent nuclear war and prevent WWIII.
It’s predecessor, the League of Nations, was meant to prevent WWII and had some teeth to help enforce their decisions. The result was that it collapsed quickly and did very little to prevent another global conflict.
Trump is a clear supporter of the genocide. He wants Israel to destroy Palestine and he wants the US to do more to help them accomplish this. Harris is nowhere near as bad as this. She’s not going to withdraw support for Israel, but she’s at least going to try to rein them in and return to the pre-war status. Not great, but realistically the best that we can hope for with how supportive our politicians are of Israel in general.
These are the only two people that have a chance at the White House. If you don’t want to support the genocide, don’t waste your vote on somebody that is absolutely, without a doubt, going to lose. Instead, use it to vote for the one candidate that is possibly able to win over the person that is explicitly, unequivocally supportive of the genocide.
In my eyes, not voting for Harris is supporting the genocide. Anything that allows Trump into office is supporting the genocide.
Looking at a map with the current polls (and focusing on the toss-ups), it seems that the most viable path to victory for Harris is to pick up PA, MI, and WI. If she drops PA, she’d need MI, NV, WI or AZ, and GA or NC, but that seems like a big ask. If she wins PA, she could lose WI if she picks up AZ, GA, or NC and she could lose MI if she wins GA, NC, or AZ and NV. But winning PA and losing both WI and MI would require winning AZ and either GA or NC.
So there are a few paths to a Harris win, and a few don’t seem very farfetched, but none of them seem likely enough for comfort. Definitely not how I was hoping to be feeling at this point in the election.
I can see his attractiveness to some extent, but I think it’s mostly that he’s an average looking dude of relative youth in comparison to his colleagues in the Senate. Put most men in a well-tailored suit and you’ll set at least some hearts aflutter. Give him time and his lich core will take over.
And yeah, she looks like your typical Fox News broadcaster who has been chosen primarily due to their pretty face and ability to spread vitriol with reckless abandon.
In case anybody is curious about the claim that October 23 is too late, I updated the Wikipedia page listing the past debates to include the date.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_debates
In general, the first debate takes place in late September or early October, and the final debate occurs in mid to late October with two or three debates being the norm. The first debate occurring in June is new this year as the debates normally start after the nominations are complete.
So, unsurprisingly, Trump’s argument has no historical basis and complaining that the debate is too close to the election is nonsense.
And following (or preceding) that, there is: preantepenultimate and propreantepenultimate.
deleted by creator