- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
from #NewYorkTimes #NYT
[Bias alert - #NYT usually favors Israel]
By Hiba Yazbek, Abu Bakr Bashir, and Lara Jakes
Jan. 8, 2025 Updated 1:19 p.m. ET
We tried to warn you that continuing to support genocide would be too much for some voters. You wanted genocide so badly that you screamed that anyone who tried to warn you was a Russian.
You’re getting the policy you refused to abandon, and you’re blaming your left.
So tell us, what was the realistic option that would have halted the genocide?
If we cannot count on democrats to stand against genocide, which should be the easiest thing to be against, then what makes you think democrats would stand for the people in other ways that conflict with what those in power want?
The only realistic option halting the genocide was putting pressure on the democrats and the only way to apply pressure to a politician for the non-rich is by threatening to withhold a vote for them.
If politicians refuse to listen to voters during an election, which is a most critical time, then clearly they will refuse to listen to voters outside of an election where you can’t even threaten to vote them out.
Has a lesson been demonstrably taught and learnt?
Let’s find out. Should Democrats have sold weapons that they knew were going to be used for genocide?
You can’t teach those who don’t want to learn.
Leading by example, I see.
Biden should have abided by the Leahy law. No democrat has any business supplying a genocide.
Whether or not it would have stopped the genocide, who knows? We didn’t need to be complicit.
So handing the presidency to Trump is an improvement?
Of course trump isn’t. That’s why I voted for Harris.
So you can excuse genocide because the other guy also supports it?
So you just can’t help putting words on other people’s mouths?
You, same thread:
Like where you wrote as if people were claiming trump would be an improvement?
Actions speak louder than words.
Like when Biden said he wanted a ceasefire but kept sending Israel weapons anyway?
crickets
Some of us have things to do in addition to entertaining entitled genocide supporters on lemmy. I’m not sorry that I didn’t respond within your timetable of checks comment times one hour.
But you still haven’t answered the question, who is the realistic non-genocise candidate we should have all voted for to prevent this? You’re so adamant that anyone who voted Harris loves genocide so much, so who was the non-genocide candidate that you, in your wisdom, voted for?
That wasn’t the question, and this comes off as gloating that both major candidates agreed with you that we should have kept funding genocide.
The question was:
Which I answered. Biden should have adhered to the Leahy Law. That was a realistic option. I don’t know if it would have stopped the genocide, but we would no longer be complicit.
They can’t say the simple obvious answer. 🤣
They literally did, stop being a redditor who expects an instant reply for you to post on your basement corkboard of “internet arguments won 19374, arguments lost 0”.
You didn’t get a reply in an hour and thought you won? Touch some grass.
They literally did not. They were asked about who to vote for and dodged like leftists always do when asked that question. It’s not being principled - it’s being stupid.
Removed by mod