this post was submitted on 12 Jan 2026
847 points (96.0% liked)
Aged Like Milk
350 readers
122 users here now
A community dedicated to all those things in media and elsewhere that didn’t stand the test of time, at all.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Admin of db0: "yeah, well Kamala would have double sent the army"
She would not have forced either of the ceasefires Trump has. Trump is still supporting genocide and the genocide is continuing, but we have direct evidence that it is less than Biden-Harris. You can argue that Venezuelans and future Cubans, Greenlanders, etc. will outweigh that. But it is directly evident that the US president could have reigned in Israel at any time and if you can't not support genocide, there is no evil you will not support if it is the Blue Team doing it.
...what evidence do you have of what decisions Harris would have made differently in terms of being unable to force ceasefires? Biden did within his last couple months in office. She campaigned on backing a six week deal. It wasn't perfect, but I'm struggling to understand your argument.
Biden literally said that there is nothing he could do and all opposition to Israel being "behind closed doors he doesn't like Netanyahu and expresses disapproval, despite his public support" and Kamala repeatedly saying that she would do nothing different than Biden. What did Biden actually do to pursue ceasefire? The ceasefire came because Trump wanted it after his inauguration as one of his immediate accomplishments, so the Trump White House called Israel's Foreign Minister to make it happen, and when Netanyahu tried to deflect by saying that it was Shabbat, so he couldn't get to it until Monday, the Trump White House threatened them and said "I don't care that it is Shabbat, this is happening. Sign the ceasefire". Israel absolutely cannot continue without US support and bombs.
That is an insane misrepresentation of what happened.
Yeah ok
https://www.war.gov/News/News-Stories/Article/Article/4032622/biden-announces-ceasefire-deal-between-hamas-israel-in-farewell-address/#%3A%7E%3Atext=Copy+Link%2Crelease+of+all+remaining+hostages.%22
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/1/18/who-is-steve-witkoff-trumps-man-at-the-gaza-ceasefire-talks
Lol this article supports that Biden was part of the negotiations that Trump then just continued. I didn't know Biden also paused military aid at one point. So thank you for further weakening your claims I suppose.
This is a Trump administration classic. Always trying to take credit for the works of others. This recent Minnesota corruption scandal started back in Biden's DOJ. So it was already an ongoing investigation.
Even before that the local authorities were investigating. The Trump administration tries to make it out like it is some revelation they came up with.
Of course this administration needs some kind of anti-corruption win because they have never delivered their promise about reducing corruption. Instead, they have torn apart every agency that uncovers corruption.
Good thing we have more than two feasible options in first past the post voting so we can vote for.... Jill Stein, I guess. /s
Seriously, I hear a lot of bitching and moaning and hard lining, but no actual realistic solutions from people like you. I'd love to live in a world where I can draw all of my neat little ideological lines and have great candidates and have my vote actually matter. That's not our fucking world, though, and acting like other people are approving of genocide because they voted for the lesser evil when they didn't have any feasible better option doesn't endear people to your cause. It makes you look like an asshole that can't unbury your head from your own ideology enough to take a breath of the same putrid air that everyone else is having to breathe.
I am arguing the combination of "if your vote actually matters" then voting for the Democrats means that being that being pro-genocide and genocide supposedly, after the Holocaust, being the greatest crime amongst crimes means that there is nothing you will not approve of if it is the Democrats doing it.
I am not saying you are necessarily a bad person for voting for Democrats or that voting for Democrats is inherently wrong. It is just that being a lesser evil that wants to make all Repbulican policies bipartisan after the next election cycle and unwilling to fight against any evil means that voting for them isn't really opposing fascism or evil in any real way. And focusing on the Palestinian genocide is focusing on the one issue Trump is actually better than the Democrats, just by them making the bar so low.
It is having to acknowledge that there has to be other organizational efforts and expressions of politics than just voting for polite Republicans rather than normal Republicans. That is easier said than done, but those angry at opposition or criticism to polite Republicans ("Democrats") is wrong are contributing to the problem rather than offering real or serious solutions. That is why I point out that Biden made Trump Term 1 bipartisan and Schumer and Jeffries refusing to support reigning in ICE. They wont oppose fascism, they would like the fascism to fill out more paperwork. So, sure, voting Dem might slightly reduce fascism, in that they don't increase funding enough to offset the extra paperwork. But supporting Dems or carrying water for them against criticism is pro-fascism and not anti-fascism. You have to start thinking outside of just elections.