• @jumperalex
    link
    English
    -21 month ago

    I don’t agree that 11% undecided in the primary is a “fairly significant public statement”, I mean, literally 11% is like, you know, small. Nor does a lack of policy change during the election cycle (which has a lot more factors than just Gaza to consider) immediately mean Kamala wouldn’t be open to changing tactics post election. But we’ll never know because, like I said, Trump won and now we get to find out if voting for him was net good or net bad for the Gaza cause.

    But I can appreciate the emotional investment you have in “both sides-ing” this and ignoring the material differences between a narcissist that is already talking about lifting arms restrictions to Israel and Kamala.

    Weather you agree with me or not is immaterial. On the issue of both parties being the same, you’re wrong. See how easy that is to say and it means nothing to an actual debate?

    -Cheers

    • @AgentDalePoopster
      link
      English
      2
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      11% is like, you know, small

      How many swing states lost by 11%?

      • @jumperalex
        link
        English
        11 month ago

        Not an apples to apples comparison of primary elections and general election. Regardless that isn’t an argument against my point that an 11% undecided vote is hardly a “fairly significant public statement”. The point you’re addressing is if I said 11% hardly made a difference. Which I didn’t.

        • @AgentDalePoopster
          link
          English
          11 month ago

          Well apparently it is significant enough, isn’t it? How close was Michigan? You’re just arguing semantics in order to ignore the fact that Kamala shot herself, and all of us, in the foot by ignoring the uncommitted movement.

          • @jumperalex
            link
            English
            11 month ago

            Hmmm perhaps I wasn’t totally clear. I have never claimed Kamala ran a great campaign. Or that her and the Dems did a great job engaging a very vocal part of the party concerned with what’s happening in Gaza or the US’s policy in Gaza.

            I have however been attempting to consistently argue that 1) they had a LOT of other constituencies to court so it was never as simple as “Gaza policy bad = lost election; Gaza policy good = win election”, 2) the general election protest vote (or abstention) is going to find out here fairly soon if their protest was worth it once Trump takes office and 3) That so far, Trumps rhetoric SINCE THE ELECTION, and his appointment choices are not giving great indications that he intends to do anything to stop the dying of innocents.

            But we might just find out that the most recent developments concerning a cease fire agreement preempts us all Finding Out just what Trump might do in Gaza.

    • FlashMobOfOne
      link
      English
      1
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      I don’t agree

      Well, they were significant enough, clearly. Probably wish you had those votes now.

      See how easy that is to say and it means nothing to an actual debate?

      It’s easy to say because I’m right. It doesn’t matter what Democrats say they’re going to do when they have exactly the same position as the other party.

      • @jumperalex
        link
        English
        -11 month ago

        Sure I wish we had those votes, though I don’t think “the gaza protest vote” would have won the election for Kamala if it went the other way. Way too many other reasons she lost.

        I also hope you don’t find yourself wishing you had those votes go to Kamala as well. Which is to say, I hope you don’t realize the leopard has eaten your face, because that would mean the incoming administration actually enacting policy that moves the needle in the direction of less violence in Gaza.

        We’ll both find out the answer in the coming months if it was really worth it or not.