364
Seven more sentenced to prison over protest outside Texas detention center
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 01 Jul 2026
364 points (99.5% liked)
News
38247 readers
2219 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Instead of blaming millions of people, isn't it easier and more productive to blame the democrat who lost to trump?
No? I'm not sure what your argument is. Kamala losing was a group effort.
The answer is yes. You seem confused.
Oh, you were serious. And kind of rude.
You're allowed to be rude on the internet, dunno if you knew that.
Kamala losing was Kamalas choice. She ran a campaign aimed at republicans and centrists, instead of, you know, her actual base of support.
it was also biden's fault. If he knew he wasn't going to run again, he should have stepped down and let Kamala show how capable she is or isn't.
He said in 2020 when he won that he would just do the single term and then retire.
For sure.
It's literally the first rule of this community to not be a dick. Dunno if you knew that.
Kamala took her base for granted, which is true. But those voters still chose to not show up just as they did with Hillary. It took a lot of people's apathy to get where we are now. It wasn't all just one person.
Right, if my 2 choices were for genocide, I'm voting 3rd party. Many many people feel the same way, and Kamala knew that, and decided to continue support for genocide, and try and appeal to republicans.
The blame lies squarely on her and the Dem establishments shoulders.
Not only did she continue to support genocide but then also spent half her campaign trail parading around with the Cheneys.
I hope you are satisfied with the consequences of your vote.
I didn't get one, despite the fact that there are global consequences to her failure as a candidate. I hope you're satisfied having voted to further fund, support and continue a genocide.
Ah, your naive view of national politics in the US makes a lot more sense. As a presidential race goes on, candidates drop out and the pool shrinks until there are two viable choices.
Your comforting scenario of rejecting this premise and voting for a third party has the potential to work on local and regional elections, as seen with recent DSA victories, but not for the POTUS. It's sudden death, winner takes all. Americans had a choice between Kamala and Trump. The third option was not to vote and here we are now.
Can you list the pool of Democrats that we had to choose from in the 2024 presidential election since we're so naive and you're so enlightened? Who did you choose in the primary? Oh wait, there was no primary and we didn't get to choose.
The thing that I find worth remembering is that if she had won, we still wouldn't get primaries in 2028 because you know she's arrogant enough to run twice had she won the first time she ran. Just like Biden.
I for one am glad that there is now a real shot at having primaries in 2028
You could make the case that Kamala was indirectly endorsed as if Biden had a stroke and died she would have became president, but you are right in that there wasn't a primary. Though, that is besides my point.
Primaries and by-elections are precisely when voters should push for and elect third-party candidates. General elections are when people have to suck it up and vote for the least worst option. When people went to vote in the 2024 presidential election they had a choice between Kamala or Trump. Some people were just too prideful or spiteful and couldn't do it.
Was the outcome of that election better for the long-term health of the country? Was foiling a DNC plot to avoid a primary worth losing the election? I don't have those answers. I can only say that I am displeased with the current state of affairs.
Was the outcome of the 2020 election better for the long term health of the country considering how things are currently? It seems pretty clear that regardless of which of these two worthless parties wins, things always get worse in the end as they only work for themselves and their donors.
By continuing to offer support to either party, you're just continuing the status quo. Democrats don't need to do jack shit to earn anyone's vote when they're confident you have no other choice except "the boogeyman," and Republicans play the exact same game. People who think we need to "vote blue no matter who" would gladly elect a Democratic version of Trump because they're playing a team sport and it doesnt matter how bad of a leader or how big of a piece of shit they elect just so long as their team 'wins' the contest. The result of this is visible in every aspect of our crumbling nation. None of them are willing to do the job of actually repairing the damage done when they can just virtue signal over hot button issues and win your vote off that alone.
Continually "sucking it up" and electing a piece of shit because the other guy is a bigger piece of shit is precisely why we're in the mess that we're in because you're ensuring that a piece of shit is always the one winning.
I think the four years without Trump was great. Had Trump not won a second term, justice would have continued to be served to Trump and his conspirators. That's mostly all gone now.
I get that Biden was not a lot of voters' favorite choice, but I take issue with the way you infer that things would be just as bad had either won. I don't think I need to cite any sources to say Trump's administrations have done great harm to the people living in the US as well as those around the world.
I also take issue with saying "vote blue" voters would elect a "Democrat Trump." What even would that be? I think that's leaning into the "both sides bad" type of argument that attempts to paint spineless DNC ghouls just as bad as terrible RNC monsters.
You make a note of pandering to hot-button issues, but you don't pay heed to the multi-decade effort of conservative think tanks creating and weaponizing wedge issues. That's literally a political strategy that the RNC has used to great success.
People cite the ratchet effect as a reason for why things keep shifting to the right. I counter by saying with no anchor on left, the whole window drifts to the right. By abandoning DNC candidates during a presidential election you are purposefully pulling up your anchor to let it all drift away.
It's a waste of time to argue with the ml gpt bots. Just block em and move on, and learn to spot the sock puppets they make in other instances to bypass the instance block.
That's how it works until it isn't. Good luck with it.