Jill Stein leads Harris, Trump among some Muslim-American swing state voters, report shows
Jill Stein leads Harris, Trump among some Muslim-American swing state voters, report shows
A report from the Council on American Islamic Relations shows Green Party candidate Jill Stein leading among Muslim voters in swing states.
You're viewing a single thread.
Talk about voting against your own interests. Imagine if all this hype were true and Trump took Michigan, Wisconsin, and Arizona because of a Stein spoiler effect (or JFK jr or whatever other hypothetical). Can you imagine how dumb you'd feel as one of those voters, as you watched Trump rounding up "immigrants" in February 2025?
It's almost as if we should insist on RJK Jr being kept on the ballot so he can be a spoiler and take votes from the GOP candidate!
You just described their wet dream
They are free to vote for who they wish. Even if you don't like that person. They can make their own decisions about that. As can you. And me.
The problem is that if these people are voting for Jill Stein, then they are not actually voting for who they wish. Jill Stein is not the person who they think she is.
If she were to magically win the election, they'd by-and-large be extraordinarily disappointed in the result.
This is why misinformation and disinformation is so destructive in a democracy. The voters need to be properly informed.
Jill Stein is not the person who they think she is
So are you saying that Muslim-American's aren't smart enough to figure out for themselves who they should vote for and who they believe in?!
If she were to magically win the election, they’d by-and-large be extraordinarily disappointed in the result.
You don't know that. You THINK that, but that's your opinion.
This is why misinformation and disinformation is so destructive in a democracy. The voters need to be properly informed.
They are properly informed, because they have the same access to news that you do. There is nothing that you are doing and/or reading that they can't.
So YOU are smart enough to figure it out, but Muslim American's are not? Is that what you are implying?!
Muslim Americans are idiots. So are Christian Americans, and atheist Americans, and African Americans, and European Americans. Americans are either stupid and delusional, or burnt out and apathetic. Americans who are aware of the world around them and engaged enough to do something about it are incredibly few and far between.
I'd not go this far, but let's be frank. Anyone who votes for Jill Stein is an idiot. For all the reasons you articulated that the OP put words in your mouth for. Stein is a spoiler. Nothing more. And anyone who votes for her or any of the other distractors on the Left is making a bone-headed idiotic move that could see them rounded up by Trump goon squads next year.
Oh i didn't articulate those reasons, that was a different (and probably less cynical) person lol, but yes you are correct.
Not cool, friend. Saying that "Muslim Americans are idiots" is not the way to make your point. Ewww... Reported for civility.
See, mods? This is how this poster views our civility rules. A weapon to shut us down so it can spew its opinions unopposed.
And by "opinions" you must mean "lies"? Because all this fuck does day in and out is try to convince people that voting for Harris is bad and that voting third party is helpful in any capacity.
Yeah, we have to play nice because Rule 3 compels us. It sure seems like Rule 3 is cover and protection for these posters and a kugel to silence our criticisms of them. But the best wordsmiths among us can still call these posters out while staying in the letter of Rule 3, even if not the spirit. Thanks for calling out this poster's nonsense for what it is, lies designed to get Trump elected.
Having rules for this community isn’t about using them as a “weapon to shut us down,” but rather a way to foster genuine discussions, encourage diverse opinions, and prevent personal attacks or name-calling.
Friend, he called Muslim Americans "idiots." That's uncivil and not allowed. And I find it sad that you are defending a comment like that. Even tho you and I have our different opinions, I expected more from you.
So a way to do all the things you aren't doing? If this is a way to parody lib civility nonsense then you are doing a bang up job.
So a way to do all the things you aren’t doing?
I don't know what you mean.
If this is a way to parody lib civility nonsense then you are doing a bang up job.
I don't know what you mean by this either. Are you saying we shouldn't be civil and that namecalling should be allowed?!
Started posting very recently, only a single point of interaction outside of politics, posts only about a specific type of topic, aggressive but very fake personality, always comments in bad faith, gets even more aggressive when called out in your bullshit, nigh constant engagement.
Who's paying you? Guess that doesn't matter, let you friends know you suck at this job.
I don’t know what you mean by this either. Are you saying we shouldn’t be civil and that namecalling should be allowed?!
Can't speak for shani66, but I can speak for myself. The rule says we only have to treat other members with good faith and respect. I personally think this rule is flawed. Respect is earned, not compelled. 'Respect' that is compelled is not respect at all. I still hate your guts, even if I'm forced not to express it in the way I want to. I think you are dishonest. I think you're not here on good faith. And I know with certainty that there are bots and paid actors trawling these forums, spewing repeated nonsense to distract us and peel votes off our coalition so that their actual favoured candidate, Donald J. Trump, can win. Rule 3 says we can't call those users out, at least not directly, which harms this community and allows the alt-right to spew its bullshit. But those are the rules, and it helps keep people who have legitimate criticisms from being lumped in with the troll accounts and the bots and the other bad actors.
Note, however, that the rule EXPLICITLY ALLOWS disrespectful commentary towards subjects of the article.
It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative).
Translated for you, this means that yes, we can absolutely call Muslim Americans voting third parties or staying home because Biden and Harris weren't liberal enough for them a bunch of morons, because that is the subject of the article. I just can't call you an idiot and a moron for voting third party because...
It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members.
The biggest flaw of these two rules? It's OK for people like you to come in and collectively call us a bunch of murderers and genociders for supporting Biden as long as you don't individually call us out. And you're 100% here abusing every inch of that, while trying to literally muzzle us with the rules on topics you don't agree with.
Sorry, 'friend', we're not here for that. We're going to keep calling you on the BS you're spewing here until you hopefully disappear after election day, following the rules as closely as Jordon Lund requires us to to keep our comments visible.
Dude you called Muslim Americans "idiots," is that really the way to make your point? Come on, man...
Fortunately you're not a moderator and don't get to say what is and is not allowed. Rule 3 does allow us to say that Muslim Americans, or indeed anyone else, who votes Third Party or stays home as morons. We just can't call you (and you can't call us) morons directly.
Well, hey you are correct, I am not a mod. And you feel comfortable with someone saying "Muslim Americans are idiots" like that poster did, that's on you. I don't agree with it, but to your point, I'm not a mod.
I'm not sure why you have to call someone an idiot or a moron for anything, but that seems like something you are comfortable with. So you do you, friend.
They are smart enough, they are actively being misled by Russian interests.
They are properly informed, because they have the same access to news that you do.
I question if these two are the same. For any candidate. I also laugh at any group being called informed, because there definitely is disinformation out there everywhere, more and more.
This has nothing to do with the topic, only an overall observation that no one can claim any group is "properly informed". "Properly" also is a loaded word...I don't think you meant it nefariously, but it could be read that way.
For any candidate. I also laugh at any group being called informed
I can respect that view. Fair points!
They are free to vote for who they wish.
No shit. Thank you Captain Obvious.
Oh good, so you agree! Then no reason to be upset. They are voting for who they want to vote for. As are you. Democracy in action, friend. :)
They're voting for who they want. That doesn't mean that the vote is smart or actually does anything near what they want to achieve. In our current system, it is a stupid vote that helps the person they don't want to win.
Given the context of how current US elections work, they are therefore stupid to vote that way. They have a right to, that doesn't mean it's a smart decision.
And you don't think they are intelligent enough to know all of this. Are you saying that you don't think they are as smart as you when it comes to nuances of elections and voting?
I just wanna clarify, because I'm reading a lot of "Well I'm smart enough to know, but they aren't..." vibes into what you are writing. So I want to clarify.
If more people consistently voted for what they believed in instead of out of fear, the political landscape would begin to shift. Dismissing those votes as useless only perpetuates the problem of limited choice, and change is never achieved by sticking to the status quo.
I think calling someone’s vote “stupid” based on the current system overlooks the obvious fact that our political system itself is messed up.
Voting for a third party isn’t necessarily about immediate victory. It’s about challenging a broken duopoly that constantly limits our options.
If more people consistently voted for what they believed in instead of out of fear, the political landscape would begin to shift. Dismissing those votes as useless only perpetuates the problem of limited choice, and change is never achieved by sticking to the status quo.
Again, we're not friends.
Really? Because you seem so friendly towards me. I would have guessed we were friends.
Jill Stein does not know how many Representatives are in the US House. Care to comment?
I don't care. I'm not voting for Jill Stein.
But you do however want to make sure other people do. Enough to post every 19 minutes toward that goal.
The hate and false accusations I received here directly led to the creation of a new community where even more Republican and third-party views will now be discussed alongside democrat articles.
Isn’t that ironic? By trying to quiet me, you just made me speak up louder. Now the very views that you wanted to limit, are going be even more available. Well done!
Yes we all came into your home with a gun, pointed it at you, and ordered you post every 19 minutes.
I don't have to explain anything to you. And thanks for making me important since you like to keep stats on me. Be sure to update us too!
20 seconds of basic math might be hard for you, but that doesn't make you important for anyone else. It makes you obsessive and the explanation for the obsession is beyond obvious.
In our first past the post system, as it stands, that's the same as not voting or just throwing the vote away.
While the intention is there for every vote to count, the sad reality is that a third party vote is useless at best, and helping the person you don't want at worst.
Unless we remove FPTP, two directly opposite parties with little crossover is the inevitable outcome, given enough time.
The truth is that third parties are bad, period, in a FPTP system.
It doesn't matter who the third party is, or what they stand for. Three idiots voting for shiny distraction candidates in a 51/49 vote split from the 51 vote 'coalition' ensure that all 51 voters get whatever the 49 voters picked because 49 is better than 48 plus three third party votes. It's even MORE important when those three votes enable Agolf Twitler to be elected into office and round up all the gays, Muslims, minorities, and whoever else dares step out of line of the new Right-Wing Authoritarian Dictatorship detailed in Project 2025.
I disagree with what you are saying. But hey, you have a right to that opinion. I, and many others, don't share that opinion though.
I'm proudly voting third party. I have the bumper stickers and everything. Let's f'n go!!!
Reality does not care if you agree that it exists.
I like my presidential candidates to have the basic civics knowledge that I learned in elementary school.
I guess that's a tough ask for some...
I'm not voting for Jill Stein. And glad you are voting for who you want.
the sad reality is that a third party vote is useless at best, and helping the person you don’t want at worst.
And will continue to be as long as people refuse to vote third party out of fear.
Unless we remove FPTP
And neither the Democrats nor the Republicans want that to happen. So I'm voting third party. Proudly.
And will continue to be as long as people refuse to vote third party out of fear.
No it will be that way as long as our FPTP system and Electoral College remains as it is. A third party in our election system will be a spoiler candidate. They will always take votes from another more popular candidate, and given enough third party votes will result in the least popular candidate winning.
That is the system we have, like it or not. Sticking your head in the sand and being an idiot about it doesn't help change reality.
We need to implement ranked choice voting and remove the FPTP system to actually start seeing candidates that reflect our beliefs instead of having the same two football teams.
So I'm voting third party. Proudly.
Good for you. Throwing away your vote and actively working against reality isn't the win you seem to think it is. But you're free to be an idiot, this country is built on allowing everyone to be an idiot, and it's exactly what the leaders of both large parties want to have happen. You vote, but your vote means less almost every other vote because of the system it was cast in.
Congratulations for accomplishing nothing, at best. At least you feel superior to others for it.
Good for you.
Thank you! :)
By the way, voting based on principle isn’t “throwing away” a vote in my eyes; it’s exercising the right to stand for policies and candidates that truly reflect personal values.
By dismissing third-party voters as "idiots," you're ignoring the importance of challenging a flawed system that keeps voters stuck in a two-party stranglehold. Real change happens when people refuse to settle for less and push for a political landscape where every vote genuinely matters.
The Green Party isn't doing shit to try to fix the system, and is just as hypocritical as the bigger parties.
It's a throwaway vote whether you want to admit it or not.
It’s a throwaway vote whether you want to admit it or not.
Not to me. I feel that voting based on principle isn’t “throwing away” a vote; it’s exercising the right to stand for policies and candidates that truly reflect my personal values.
I support and respect your right to your opinion. I just don't agree with it.
No, you really don't support or respect anyone else's right to an opinion. Otherwise you wouldn't be shitting so hard on people's opinions on Lemmy, despite being downvoted on most of your opinions and called out repeatedly. You're here to force your opinion down our throat, and not for the purpose of enlightening us. There is another purpose here. One that has nothing to do with trying to convince an audience you stubbornly haven't read. I won't go further than that (thanks Rule 3) but I said what I said.
Funny you say that. Because actually, the hateful comments and attempts to silence me here just pushed me to create a new Lemmy community last night where even more diverse political opinions can be shared.
So, in a way, the hate and false accusations I received here directly led to the creation of a new community where even more Republican and third-party views will now be discussed.
Isn’t that ironic? By trying to quiet me, you just made me speak up louder. Now the very views that you wanted to limit, are going be even more available. Well done!
Guess ya should been a little nicer. :)
Good for you! Why don't you head over there. A little echo chamber of your own creation, waiting for you to diss the Dems as much as you want without me coming to fact-check you or call you out on your bullshit. And you're even welcoming to Republicans! Not that any of that was a surprise to me because you're busy doing the Republicans' jobs for them over here.
But know this. I'm not going to try to shut you down or shut you up here. I've like only reported a single post of your ilk over here, and that was for calling Dems murderers and genociders while getting my posts shut down. I'm just going to call you on your bullshit every time I see it. That's it. Have a nice day.
Voting for anyone other than Harris harms their own interests.
Given free rein, Trump will revoke their citizenship, detain them in concentration camps, and deport them.
https://www.acslaw.org/expertforum/trump-administration-seeks-to-strip-more-people-of-citizenship/
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce9z0lm48ngo
Nobody but Harris can prevent this because nobody other than Harris or Trump can win. You vote Harris or you support the above.
Don't tell other people what our interests are. Many of our are interests are no genocide. For many of us, our interests are getting rid of capitalism that's running our government. For many of us, it's getting rid of organizations like AIPAC that spent $100 million buying loyalty. For many of us, it's getting rid of the fascist police state that our country is headed into. Both red fascist and blue fascists are equally contributing to the demise of what Democrats say they're trying to protect.
To muddle our analysis by insisting that fascism is already here, or that the Democratic party is fascist, or that liberals are fascists or the midwives of fascism, or that Democratic party voters are voting for fascism, is to disarm ourselves against the fascist threat. It is defeatism to shrug our shoulders saying that both parties are fascist, and a disservice to the many antifascist militants in our own country who have been killed, injured, and locked away in prison while struggling against this extremely serious threat. To assume that January 6th was a hyped-up myth, or to belittle its gravity, is a dereliction of our most solemn duty as Communists and workers in the belly of the beast.
https://www.cpusa.org/article/the-united-states-is-not-a-fascist-country/
THANK YOU
Yeah. I have and still do call our elections out as a Donkey Pee vs. Elephant Dung contest. You're given two choices for what you're gonna eat -- a steaming mug of donkey pee, or an elephant shit sandwich. Pick well, because you don't get to decide what you alone eat. The entire community will be served the same meal. I'd rather neither, but my desire for ice cream won't matter because for some odd reason, this country prefers the excrement in an evenly divided line between the types of excrement.
Even in the best of times, I'd prefer the pee to the poo, because you can wash that out with a stiff alcoholic drink, but today, the elephant has gotten really sick, and your choice is basically donkey pee or a pile of diarrhea with two mouldy slices of bread buried in it, with a side of jackboots to your neck. You have to be an idiot to try to pick icecream in that situation, so I'm taking the donkey pee.
This horrific mental image brought to you by the Hidden Catboy. 🤣