top of page


Cassie Sipe

Jun 10, 2024

As the 2024 presidential election approaches, the landscape is dominated by familiar faces and predictable policies. The candidates of the uni-party are deeply entrenched in the establishment, while independent candidates are shut out of the process, turning away voters seeking substantial change. Here’s a closer look at the key figures and their stances:

RFK Jr. and Jill Stein: Long-Shot, Third-Party Candidates

Robert Francis Kennedy Jr., while bringing a recognizable name and a controversial presence due to his positions on vaccination policies, doesn’t fully break from the capitalist establishment. Despite his critiques, RFK Jr. does not present a comprehensive anti-imperialist stance.

As a Zionist, he aligns with pro-Israel policies that support and enable the genocide of Palestinians. This makes him unlikely to challenge the military-industrial complex significantly, except regarding the Ukraine war. He argues that we should stop funding Ukraine and support Israel instead.

His recent revelation that doctors discovered a brain worm died inside his head while eating his brain, and his decision to fly on Jeffrey Epstein’s Lolita Express, are disqualifying factors for most voters. This, along with his inevitable lack of ballot access as an independent candidate, makes his candidacy nonviable.

Jill Stein, a Jewish anti-genocide candidate known for her anti-war and environmental activism, offers clear opposition to imperialist military interventions. Despite her recent resurgence in popularity due to her support for the pro-Palestine campus protests in which she was arrested, her candidacy is overshadowed by structural barriers. As a Green Party candidate, it’s highly unlikely for her to secure ballot access in all 50 states, making her a non-viable contender.

Furthermore, her overly supportive stance on COVID lockdowns, de-growth environmental policies, and the false allegations of her being a “Russian stooge” further diminish her appeal.

Trump, The False Prophet

Both candidates, prone to gaffes and representative of the geriatric elite class, do not break from the capitalist status quo. Despite their partisan differences, they share similarities in their approaches to the economy, foreign policy, COVID, and immigration, all of which prioritize the entrenched interests of our ruling class over the American working class.


Despite his "America First" rhetoric, Trump maintained high military budgets and a strong U.S. presence abroad. Although he didn't start any wars, he attacked Syria under false pretenses just 2 ½ months into office. He also escalated weapon shipments to Ukraine, sending $1.5 billion despite Russian objections.

Ironically, Trump was later impeached for pausing these shipments, which even Obama had refused to send, setting a precedent for Biden’s escalation before the Ukraine war.

Earlier this year, as a Republican Party leader, Trump helped pass a Ukraine aid bill by convincing Republican holdouts to support it, despite previously opposing Ukraine aid.

During his 2016 campaign, he called NATO “obsolete,” questioning its relevance and criticizing other members for not meeting defense spending obligations, insisting the U.S. unfairly bore most of the financial burden.

Now, he calls for increased NATO funding while the U.S. is the largest Ukraine aid donor among NATO countries. He reportedly plans to demand NATO countries increase their funding to 3% of GDP, excluding money for Ukraine. Trump has also doubled down on Biden’s hawkish stance on Ukraine and Taiwan, suggesting to donors that he “would have bombed” Russia had China invaded during his presidency.

Genocide Joe


Then there’s Joe Biden, who ironically said “we shouldn’t have gone into Ukraine” prior to his “Putin is losing the war in Iraq” remark, confusing Ukraine with Iraq, not dissimilar to how George W. Bush (responsible for the illegal invasion) condemned Putin's "wholly unjustified and brutal invasion of Iraq."

Biden's tenure has seen significant foreign policy challenges. Biden supporters will argue he isn’t the decision-maker in the White House; he’s just the figurehead. This is true, yet with people like the White House puppet master Antony Blinken, (responsible for shaping foreign policy including for Israel’s genocidal po licies), and Victoria Nuland (the architect of Project Ukraine, who has since resigned) running the show, it isn’t any better.

The Biden administration frequently engages in propaganda to distract from division within the administration and their foreign policy blunders. For example, the K-Pop band BTS was invited to the White House briefing room in an obvious publicity stunt aimed at millennials. Similarly, he invited pro-war Star Wars actor Mark Hamill to speak to the press. This, along with numerous cringe-worthy press briefings in which Biden officials doubled down on and excused Israel’s war crimes, are great examples of such propaganda attempts.

Trump and Biden: Two Cheeks of the Same Backside

It’s important to note that both Trump and Biden doubled down on authoritarian COVID-19 crackdowns and vaccine rollouts, thereby tanking the economy and assaulting the working class. Another similarity is how Biden, despite his woke and far-left policies, supported significant military spending and copied some of Trump’s immigration policies.

Unfortunately, regardless of who wins, the economy will only further deteriorate for American workers. This is due to several factors, such as sanctions against the multipolar world, the destruction of Palestine and the war in Ukraine, which cause instability in global markets.

Trump’s status as a convicted felon and Biden’s obvious struggles with dementia along with his son’s legal troubles further complicate their campaigns. One can understand the importance of keeping such people (who are better suited for a nursing home) out of the White House.

A Grim and Pointless Election

Most of the US doesn’t live in battleground states (states which could flip either way). Therefore, states in which the candidate's policies are in alignment with the views of their residents are unlikely to flip. For example, Biden is not going to win deep red Arkansas, and Trump will not win deep blue Washington state. In such states where the outcome is entirely predictable, it’s not necessary to vote at all, as the votes of battleground states matter more in determining the outcome, especially if they have a high amount of electoral college votes. 

Given such a bleak outlook, what’s the point in voting in this election at all? Especially when certain “election irregularities” which have been going on for decades are bound to resurface once again.

The 2024 presidential race offers limited options for voters. With RFK Jr. and Jill Stein unable to break through the barriers of the mainstream bourgeois politics, and Trump and Biden firmly dedicated to the policies of the donor class, the prospects for peace and significant change remain slim to none.

bottom of page