Omar says Israel policy divisions won’t stop her from supporting Biden in November
Omar says Israel policy divisions won’t stop her from supporting Biden in November
Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) said policy differences toward Israel between her and President Biden won’t stop her from supporting him in the November general election. “Of course,” Omar said Tuesday, …
Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) said policy differences toward Israel between her and President Biden won’t stop her from supporting him in the November general election.
“Of course,” Omar said Tuesday, when asked by CNN’s Abby Phillip on “NewsNight” whether she would vote for Biden if the election were held that day, in a clip highlighted by Mediaite. “Democracy is on the line, we are facing down fascism.”
“And I personally know what my life felt like having Trump as the president of this country, and I know what it felt like for my constituents, and for people around this country and around the world,” Omar continued. “We have to do everything that we can to make sure that does not happen to our country again.”
You're viewing part of a thread.
Fucking lulz.
Leftists don't actually have to be against capitalism as a concept. Some of us do support european-esque capitalism because of easier access to healthcare and education.
And that's the bare minimum, but the most impactful, and the most realistic. You, the 3rd party voter, can't even cite when they have ever made a dent in the nation-wide scale, and you very well know that you can't convince educated leftists to split their vote to give it to Trump. But, do try, and I'll be laughing at the attempts.
>Leftists don’t actually have to be against capitalism
there is a cure for political illiteracy
Note that capitalism is everywhere, and politicians that do not want to change their economic system to socialism are still counted to left for strong support toward welfare, healthcare, etc. Heavily regulated capitalism is left to the center. Do you have an argument against this?
>you very well know that you can’t convince educated leftists to split their vote to give it to Trump
leftists certainly wouldn't give their vote to trump
Yeah, if they were leftists, they vote left on downballot and vote for realistic options that is closest to left on general. That means, third parties are out unless ranked choice is a thing.
>That means, third parties are out unless ranked choice is a thing.
why would a leftist vote for a conservative politician? they wouldn't
In context of Biden, it's to have him on the white house to get some benefits possible, and he is the most realistic option because of Duverger's Law. Which goes back to my point of there is no good answer as to when was the last time third party has made a huge dent electorally.
if you're a leftist, and you are voting for biden, don't pretend it's because he's a leftist or will help leftists. he's not and he won't.
Let's see. Student debt cleared to some degree. Pay raise for low wage workers. Yes, there were some.
Also, love that you ignored the issue of Duverger's Law.
>you ignored the issue of Duverger’s Law.
just as i would have if you'd raised the book of revelation. lots of people believe it predicts the future, but it doesn't.
One is observed, and the other is guess work. Nice try, anyway.
both have equal predictive power
>Fucking lulz.
this is an appeal to ridicule.
>You, the 3rd party voter, can’t even cite when they have ever made a dent in the nation-wide voter
you never asked, and, frankly, there is a cure for historical illiteracy, too
Sure, try arguing when was the last time third party has made a dent, and by what percentage. Cure my supposed historical illiteracy please.
>Sure, try arguing when was the last time third party has made a dent
the prohibition party got an amendment passed
Ooh, wow, a party no one heard of, and are you talking about 1919? And this has nothing to do with vote percentage?
Color me shocked and amazed by your argument.
this is called a "horse laugh" fallacy or, formally, an appeal to ridicule
Did you know that I pointed out issues with your arguments? So, address them.
>Did you know that I pointed out issues with your arguments?
no. you raised irrelevant objections.
Then, explain it if that's the case.
what's the point?
i don't believe you're open to learning anything here. anyone who is reading this conversation can easily make up their own mind about who's right.
Other people reading the room is precisely why I am with you in the room now. I'm not doing this to change your mind.