The US primaries and the general election are two different things. Voting uncommitted in the primary expresses support for the Palestinian plight and does not give Republicans any ground.
The uncommitted movement presents a safe and effective avenue for voters to voice dissatisfaction with President Biden’s policies, particularly with the Israel-Hamas conflict. By doing so in the primary, voters can signal discontent without risking a Republican victory in the general election. The purpose is to send a wake-up call to the Biden administration that it is failing to address issues and effectively engage with the party, vis a vis that Biden is enabling a genocide.
That being said, anyone who calls for an uncommitted or third-party vote in the general election i will personally kick in the gender neutral balls (in Minecraft).
So if you get that, then why are you blatantly misrepresenting the discussion?
you have it backwards. here is a list of comments which were blatantly misrepresenting the uncommitted movement. i am seeking to correct that misrepresentation.
Do you have context for those comments to show they are misrepresenting the uncommitted movement?
All of those comments appear to be talking about the general.
the post was removed by mods and was a meme showcasing the percent of voters who had voted “uncommitted” in the primaries. unfortunately i didn’t get a local copy of the meme before it was taken down.
So even though the comments are obviously talking about the general, since the primary clearly doesn’t determine who becomes president, we’re just supposed to believe that they’re actually talking about the primary?
Interesting.
no exactly! those comments failed to understand how the primaries work. and were attacking people who voted uncommitted in the primary, because they wrongly thought the meme was about the general.
this entire deal stemmed out of people not understanding the system and then knee-jerk calling people fascist for doing their best.
i hope this makes sense.
Even if that’s true, your meme doesn’t represent it as people misinterpreting voters in the primary as talking about the general.
Like, not even close.
it is :) proof
certainly true. my meme is intentionally simplifying the situation. i won’t contest that. memes are bad for nuance anyway. the real nuance is in the paragraph i posted directly below the meme.
i hope that’s enough and i welcome any criticism or feedback on that text.
But again, people aren’t talking about the primary, at best they misunderstood people as talking about the general in one thread (which I really just don’t believe at face-value based on the misrepresentation here)
Your text doesn’t elaborate on that at all, and your meme totally misreprents the whole argument.
Sure it’s a meme, but it’s pretty deliberately dishonest.