311
Immigrants might be in camps, but at least you 3rd party/nonvoters have your sense of moral superiority!
(lemmy.world)
this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2025
311 points (69.6% liked)
Political Memes
8994 readers
2385 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
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
Gaza nonvoters alone managed to put Trump in office, and that's excluding the other 'left' issues
At the least, protest voters and nonvoters like the very loud folk on here were part of amplifying the propaganda which led people to, bizarrely, believe that letting the more Zionist candidate win was Good, Actually, for Palestine.
Ah, thank you, my search-fu did not provide me good numbers like that.
However, unless I am misreading them heavily, those numbers don't seem to lay out what you mention. They are exclusively about "Biden 2020 Voters Who Cast A Ballot For Someone Besides Harris". Again - I don't think that group is large enough, because even combined, all the left-of-Democrats third party votes seem to be negligible. That is "29% of voters nationally who voted for Biden in 2020 and cast a ballot for someone besides Kamala Harris in 2024". So, again, if I combine Jill Stein, Cornell West, and Claudia De la Cruz, that is 0.72% of the popular vote. Even with a naive calculation of taking all 29% of those that would then be commies like that, that seems like not enough to put Trump into office, unless highly concentrated in very embattled swing states.
EDIT: OK, I forgot, that means also people voting Trump, not just third party. So the influence could theoretically be more. But I doubt commie agitprop pushed a lot of people to outright voting Trump.
The data includes nonvoters, as mentioned in the two pdfs.
EDIT: Accidentally posted while still typing and reading, aaah, this is unfinished.
EDIT2: Okay, this is as done as I will do it, I also looked at the clock, and I won`t be awake for long now anyway.
EDIT3: Okay, this one is the last one, I really have to get to bed, because I am also noticing how diving into this is not good for my health. But turns out you can disregard the stuff I wrote below except for the last sentence, and me still thinking the data is more ambivalent narrative-wise. But while I still maintain the language was confusing, I finally noticed an unambivalent line from the survey: "Of the following issues, choose any that played a role in your [vote for presidential candidate/decision to not to vote for president]. Check all that apply." So, yes, this was indeed also non-voters.
I admit, now that I explicitly checked, that is also how I would interpret (from the PDF):
But it is also just ambivalent enough to create questions when combined with the language of the article: Since both the study and the article seem to be by the same institute, I doubt it's a miscommunication error. The language of the article is repeatedly so specific.
And then there are questions in the PDF like:
That seem to indicate that this indeed only targeted people that did vote.
So, colour me genuinely confused, it seems like such a specific and deliberate usage of language. And I have to admit, it feels weird to me, especially considering the IMEU has an interest in making Gaza the most important topic. Note that the same numbers of the survey could also be used to support different narratives, like: 68% said abortion access was important to them and influenced how they voted in 2024, vs 27% saying the same about violence in Gaza. Or Question 12 vs 13, showing that on a policy difference exclusively on Gaza, the people surveyed would still predominately support the Democrat, and only 8% mention not voting if the Democrat supports Israel unconditionally. So, this also does not fit the narrative neatly.
But if this does indeed represent non-voters as well, and one third of those truly did not vote because of Gaza, yes, that is indeed a large enough group to swing close results in battleground states.
CommonDreams reporting on it notes:
EDIT: Love the quoting data is getting downvoted. Guess the truthiness of it isn't enough for our brave Very Serious Leftists.
It makes me feel insane how many people here, who claim to be "leftists", just outright can't admit that they let nazis take over. I'd actually be okay if they would at the very least admit that their "protest" was a mistake, but that would require acknowledging being wrong.