Skip Navigation

Muslim Americans in swing states launch anti-Biden campaign

"We recognize that, in the next four years, our decision may cause us to have an even more difficult time. But we believe that this will give us a chance to recalibrate, and the Democrats will have to consider whether they want our votes or not."

That's gotta be one of the strangest reasonings I've heard in a while.

You're viewing part of a thread.

Show Context
496 comments
  • It is that black and white. We live in a two party system, that's reality. It's not twisting words, it's math. If one candidate doesn't win, the other candidate does. Republicans are overrepresented by the electoral college, not voting helps them win. The support may be inadvertent, but it's still support. They can say they don't support Trump all they want. If they don't vote for Biden, they are supporting Trump.

    • The support may be inadvertent, but it’s still support.

      Using this tortured logic, if one doesn't move to a swing state, even if they support and vote for Biden, their non action inadvertently helps trump get elected, so they actually support Trump.

      It's painfully dumb.

      • Republicans typically represent rural communities with low populations and high surface area. The electoral college votes are allocated to states based on the number of senators and representatives. Both of these are in turn skewed in favor of Republicans as each state gets two senators no matter what and the total number of house seats is capped at 435. Since neither chamber is properly apportioned by population, Republicans are overrepresented in both chambers.

        Using this tortured logic, if one doesn’t move to a swing state, even if they support and vote for Biden, their non action inadvertently helps trump get elected, so they actually support Trump.

        No one knows for sure which states are swing states until it's too late. Remember the blue wall in 2016? Not enough democrat voters showed up and what were supposedly blue states went to Trump.

        If a person doesn't vote in an election then they are helping Republicans. If a person doesn't vote for Biden then they are helping Trump.

        A person doesn't have to declare their undying loyalty to a candidate in order to support them. Making the other guy lose the election is sufficient. Your argument is splitting hairs.

        • No one knows for sure which states are swing states until it’s too late. Remember the blue wall in 2016? Not enough democrat voters showed up and what were supposedly blue states went to Trump.

          Trump didn't win any blue states, he won most of the swing states. And we also knew these were the close states, and we know which states are likely to be close again. This idea that "well, we plumb just don't know what will be close states" is pretty much nonsense.

          This is a dumb argument used to totally miss the point.

          If a person doesn’t vote in an election then they are helping Republicans.

          What if that person had voted, they would have voted for Trump? That voter is now hurting Trump's chances, but according to this big-brain logic, that voter is actually helping Trump! lol.

          And a person who doesn't vote in a swing state is also helping Trump, despite the fact that they might have even voted for Biden. So, again, according to your logic, you can support and vote for Biden and still be a Trump supporter.

          Your argument is splitting hairs.

          You literally just argued "well, we don't know for sure which are going to be swing states!" in an attempt to take down my point, and you're accusing me of splitting hairs by pointing out that not supporting Biden does not mean you support Trump. Holy shit, this is hilarious. Do you even think about what you write down?

          • Trump didn’t win any blue states, he won most of the swing states. And we also knew these were the close states, and we know which states are likely to be close again. This idea that “well, we plumb just don’t know what will be close states” is pretty much nonsense.

            This is a dumb argument used to totally miss the point.

            We didn't know they were swing states at the time. Some people suspected, but most people were surprised when the blue wall fell. It's not missing the point. If enough Democratic voters don't vote in any state, Republicans win, because Republicans win with low voter turn out. Apathy is how fascism wins.

            Also, these people are planning on not voting in states that they believe are swing states, so your argument's tangent misses the point.

            Muslim Americans in swing states launch anti-Biden campaign

            What if that person had voted, they would have voted for Trump? That voter is now hurting Trump’s chances, but according to this big-brain logic, that voter is actually helping Trump! lol.

            Again.

            Muslim Americans in swing states launch anti-Biden campaign

            Muslim Americans have already been targeted as scapegoats with Trump's travel ban which targeted Middle Eastern countries. So they probably weren't planning on voting Trump. Regardless, if a hard core Trump supporter doesn't vote then that is a detriment to Trump. But hard core Trump voters aren't typical voters. While this is a generalization, people living in cities tend to vote blue and the majority of people live in or near cities. So if more people voted, Democrats should do better in elections.

            You literally just argued “well, we don’t know for sure which are going to be swing states!” in an attempt to take down my point, and you’re accusing me of splitting hairs by pointing out that not supporting Biden does not mean you support Trump. Holy shit, this is hilarious. Do you even think about what you write down?

            We never know the results of elections before hand, so we don't know which states will be swing states in future elections. We know which states were swings states before, but voter turn out has been the greatest deciding factor in the last two presidential elections. So we need to call out the people who are threatening not to vote in historic swing states. But we also need to call out voters in historic non-swing states because those states could become swing states in the next election.

            ...not supporting Biden does not mean you support Trump.

            We live in a two party system. If Biden loses then Trump wins. By not supporting Biden, they are supporting Trump.

            Do you even think about what you write down?

            I am not relevant to the topic of discussion.

            • We didn’t know they were swing states at the time.

              Of course we know they were swing states. It was the almost the same set of states in 2016 that were going to be close that they were from the election before that, and 2020 was similar too. We have pretty decent polling that shows which states are harder to call than others.

              but most people were surprised when the blue wall fell.

              I don't know what the "blue wall" is, but people were surprised that Clinton lost. This has absolutely no bearing on the fact that there were 11 battleground states in 2016, Trump won 5 of them. He didn't win any democratic strong-holds, as you seem to be claiming. They were all states that could have reasonably gone either way, and they went Trump's way.

              So using your own logic, that their inaction of not-supporting Biden makes them Trump supporters, if you live in a non-swing state and don't move to a swing state, your inaction is helping Trump win thus you are a Trump supporter. It's really that simple. Accept this use of your logic or accept that the logic is broken. Remember, two party system, so if you don't do what you can to get Biden elected, then you are actually supporting Trump.

              We never know the results of elections before hand

              Swing state doesn't mean "it's going to go from one party to another" it means "the outcome is reasonably uncertain." Basically, polling is close enough that a lot more votes need to come in before someone can reasonably call the election a win for one candidate or another. Like for CA, not hard to call it's going to go blue within the first few hours of voting. PA, however, is really hard to tell before counting almost all of the votes. If you remember 2020, Trump was ahead until they counted all the votes and Biden ended up winning

              So we need to call out the people who are threatening not to vote in historic swing states.

              You know who else won't vote in swing states? People who don't live there. Again, your logic, if you don't move to a swing state, you are helping Trump.

              By not supporting Biden, they are supporting Trump.

              But they are also not supporting Trump so using this busted-ass logic, they are also Biden supporters. It's mind-boggling it's still being argued.

              I am not relevant to the topic of discussion.

              I didn't say you were, I just pointed out how little critical thought seemed to be going into the argument that I was "splitting hairs" when, in reality, it is you splitting hairs.

              • I don’t know what the “blue wall” is

                https://web.archive.org/web/20150322214945/http://rare.us/story/democrats-say-a-2016-electoral-college-blue-wall-means-republicans-cant-win-wrong/

                As I said, some people suspected the blue wall theory was wrong, but the Democratic party pushed the idea that these states were solid blue strong holds which turned out to be wrong. The point is a person could reasonably believe their state is not a swing state before an election, so they assume their vote doesn't matter, and then be in for a rude awakening after the election. Hindsight is 20/20.

                So using your own logic, that their inaction of not-supporting Biden makes them Trump supporters

                Mathematically speaking that is the case, since we live in two party system. If a group of people makes Biden lose with low voter turnout they are supporting Trump, since one of the two candidates has to win.

                if you live in a non-swing state

                Again this is not relevant as the group of people we are discussing are planning on not voting, in historic swing states. I will point out there is no source that can verify with 100% certainty which of the 50 states with be swing states in 2024. There are of course some good guesses backed up with statistics, but statistics are not guarantees. If enough people decide to not vote, any state is more likely to swing Republican as the system disproportionality benefits low population areas that tend to go Republican.

                Swing state doesn’t mean “it’s going to go from one party to another” it means “the outcome is reasonably uncertain.”

                Yes. For example, the results in Florida used to be considered reasonably uncertain, with either party having a chance to win, but now they are a solid red state that consistently votes Republican. Our focus is in on swing states that might turn red for the presidential race because of low voter turn out in 2024.

                You know who else won’t vote in swing states? People who don’t live there. Again, your logic, if you don’t move to a swing state, you are helping Trump.

                This tangent isn't helping your argument. Again, we don't know for certain which states will be swing states in the next election. But regardless of that it isn't relevant because these people are threatening to not vote, in historic swing states.

                But they are also not supporting Trump so using this busted-ass logic, they are also Biden supporters. It’s mind-boggling it’s still being argued.

                It is not the case that a typical voter in this country is completely random. While it is a generalization, the Democrats represent people in and around high population cities, where as Republicans represent low populations in rural areas. More people in America are represented by the Democratic party. A minority of people are hard core Trump supporters. If enough people voted, Democrats would dominate in elections across the country. But again, this tangent isn't relevant. We are talking about a specific group of people in historic swing states, that are threatening not to vote.

                I didn’t say you were, I just pointed out how little critical thought seemed to be going into the argument that I was “splitting hairs” when, in reality, it is you splitting hairs.

                This sentence from your argument references me and not my argument. My thoughts have no bearing on this conversation. But since you asked, my argument is not particularly complicated as it relies on the fact we live in a two party system where Republicans win with low voter turn out. People threatening to not vote for Biden are supporting Trump. As I wrote before, it is your argument splitting hairs over the word support.

                • blue wall theory was wrong

                  Only one of the states listed in there among the Democrats list of blue wall states went to trump, which is MI, but it was recognized as a battleground early in the election. Whether democrats thought this was a solid state is besides the point, polling showed that it was definitely one that could reasonably go either wau. Your own link kind of supports my point.

                  Mathematically speaking that is the case, since we live in two party system.

                  But they also don't support trump. They don't support either. So in this crazy math land, they actually support both candidates. Trying to make it a dichotomy, because our system tends towards two parties, doesn't reflect reality.

                  Again this is not relevant

                  Absolutely relevant because you are claiming that non action that helps trump win is support from trump, even with pretty explicit lack of support for trump. Repeating that "we don't know for sure" it will help him win, thus it doesn't count, is a double-edge sword for you because these people pulling their support for Biden might lead to other people to support him, thus it helps him. So we can't know for certain this will hurt him, thus dismantling your own point too.

                  If you want to go on what we can reasonably believe to be true, then my point holds as well. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

                  the results in Florida used to be considered reasonably uncertain

                  The fact that swing states are not static is irrelevant. We have a good idea what are going to be battleground states and which will not be in the upcoming election. People have been discussing Florida's shift to the right for the past 2 decades. It's not like it was a surprise it went to trump the last two elections.

                  We are talking about a specific group of people in historic swing states, that are threatening not to vote.

                  Yes because they, explicitly, support neither candidate. Yet this is support for one candidate to you, because we live in a two party system.

                  my argument is not particularly complicated

                  No one thinks your argument is complicated, it's just based on ridiculously thoughtless logic that is often, if not always, self contradictory. To accuse me of splitting hairs is the same "making it about me" that you are whining about here.

                  • Your own link kind of supports my point.

                    No, there were people that were lead to believe that these states were not swing states when they were in fact swing states. Thus countering your argument's point that a person can be absolutely certain if their state is a swing state.

                    Trying to make it a dichotomy, because our system tends towards two parties, doesn’t reflect reality.

                    It does reflect reality. We live in a two party system. An argument that relies on denying this fact is not compelling.

                    Absolutely relevant because you are claiming that non action that helps trump win is support from trump, even with pretty explicit lack of support for trump. Repeating that “we don’t know for sure” it will help him win, thus it doesn’t count, is a double-edge sword for you because these people pulling their support for Biden might lead to other people to support him, thus it helps him. So we can’t know for certain this will hurt him, thus dismantling your own point too.

                    We know for sure that low voter turn out helps Republicans and thus Trump. People not voting for Biden reduces the number of votes he will get. There is no measurable effect that demonstrates more people will vote for a candidate if other people say they won't vote for them. This is baseless speculation.

                    You can’t have your cake and eat it too.

                    Watch me.

                    The fact that swing states are not static is irrelevant.

                    This is the core part of what we are discussing. These voters are planning on not voting, in historic swing states. This will drive those states further to the right in the presidential election.

                    Yes because they, explicitly, support neither candidate. Yet this is support for one candidate to you, because we live in a two party system

                    It's math. If Trump gets more votes, because Biden got fewer votes, Trump wins. The people who withhold their votes from Biden will have supported Trump. Saying they don't support Trump while actively helping him win doesn't hold any water.

                    No one thinks your argument is complicated, it’s just based on ridiculously thoughtless logic that is often, if not always, self contradictory. To accuse me of splitting hairs is the same “making it about me” that you are whining about here.

                    The reason my argument isn't complicated is because it relies on facts and logic. Your arguments rests on dogging around the word support to conflate supporting Trump in the election with being a MAGA Trump supporter. I have been addressing your argument. These statements about my thoughts are directed at me. edit: typo

496 comments