I’m not sure who you think you arguing with or what you think you are arguing about. I didn’t say there was an antizionist candidate running nationally among Democrats. Although I think it’s interesting that you would project that argument. I think there should be and while it’s early, it’s also obvious that Newsom and Pritzker will be running. And evidentiarilly, we seen that progressive grassroots campaigns are far more effective if the begin running very early, with often double the standard run time to get going as a traditional campaign.
Who, nationally, do you think would run, as a Democrat in this lane? It’s been difficult to get any popular Democrats to be unabashedly anti Zionist, largely because of Jefferies, Schumer, and AIPAC. Just ask Corey Bush or Jamaal Bowman about that.
But who would you suggest? One name I can think of is Jon Stewart, although I don’t think they would consider themselves explicitly an anti Zionist.
I mean, I answered that in your first response. Its very, very clear, that when it comes election day, voters aren’t interested in BAU, AIPAC, corporate candidates and haven’t been since the failures of the Obama era.
If Democrats aren’t putting fighting for space in this lane, i’d say they’re underwater at this point.
Its the entire comment. I said "Whomever takes the anti-Zionist lane in 2028 will win:
You asked:
What make you so sure about this?
There are a multitude of reasons. The Democrats losing the upper Midwest based on their support for Zionism in 2024 (it was obvious that they would lose if they kept supporting Israel as early as 2023). Zohran Mamdani running as an unabashed anti-zionist, defeating both the Republican and Democratic establishment in the process. And before our very eyes, even Tucker Carlson sees the writing on the wall with regards to how unpopular Israel/ Zionism are.
As a political agent, we should trust the Tucker Carlsons of the world to operate in their own best interest, which is precisely why we should appreciate what we’re seeing in this manner. The Tucker Carlsons (on the right, I put Candice Owens, Charlie Kirk, Bannon, and even Trump in this same camp, and on the left Bernie, Mamdani, maybe Pritzker, Sam Seder, maybe I can think of some more from the left-wing commentariate) of the world have proven to be incredibly robust against political wind. The point is that they’ve got a very good read on where things are at and where things will go. You don’t have to agree with them to recognize that they excel at reading the on the ground situation in politics.
Tucker has basically been anti-Trump for as long as Trump’s been around. And they’ve been able to withstand the counter pressure. This is because, even if you and I disagree with them, their ability to read the tea-leaves, again, for their own cynical self interest, is actually quite good. These agents are good at predicting where voters are at, where voters will go, and what needs to be said to get them to come along with you.
This is one of many legs of support, but since this is more relevant to the post, I’m keeping it focused on this. However you could make the same argument based on recent elections, the 2024 election, polling, what content is being generated. Its very obvious how things are shaping up.
Whomever takes the anti-zionist lane in 2028 will win the election. I’m confident because of the aforementioned reasons and reasoning. I have other arguments I could make (based around polling or data), but since this post was originally about Tucker clearly triangulating around the same position, which is qualitative, I kept my reasons and analysis qualitative.
You didn’t say Whomever takes the anti-Zionist lane in 2028 will win you said the anti-Zionist lane in 2028 will win but you admitted that the most likely to be in the race is Gavin Newsom who is not anti-israel. Zohran already softened his position on Israel and refused to endorse people like him like Chi Osse .
Also the sour fact is that Harris lost because she did a bad job at addressing the issue of affordability and protecting the border.
admitted that the most likely to be in the race is Gavin Newsom
I didnt say that. I didn’t endorse Newsom or Prtiztker or Carlson or Owens or any one. You want me to be arguing in favor of a candidate a and I think its very clear you are desperately trying to find a way to have a disagreement some specific argument I’m not making. I hold no quarter for any of those candidates. You seem physically incapable of distinguishing between liking or wanting a candidate to win, and recognizing if tactic or strategy is working.
In other words, you are the common clay of the modern political voice.
Two things. Spend the next 12 years reading to develop the reading comprehension necessary to have conversations in a text based format, because right now, you wasting peoples time. I’m offering a nuanced read of the moment and its like I’m having a conversation with a pidgeon only interested in pushing the chess pieces of the board. No ability to understand a point, desperately trying to make something into a weird a parasocial team identity fight, total inability to distinguish between how things are and how we wish they would be.
Second, more than willing to argue with you. But you actually have to argue against the points I’m making, or at least have the ability to understand them, which you haven’t shown the ability to do. If you don’t have the reading comprehension to do so, just don’t.
I’m not sure who you think you arguing with or what you think you are arguing about. I didn’t say there was an antizionist candidate running nationally among Democrats. Although I think it’s interesting that you would project that argument. I think there should be and while it’s early, it’s also obvious that Newsom and Pritzker will be running. And evidentiarilly, we seen that progressive grassroots campaigns are far more effective if the begin running very early, with often double the standard run time to get going as a traditional campaign.
Who, nationally, do you think would run, as a Democrat in this lane? It’s been difficult to get any popular Democrats to be unabashedly anti Zionist, largely because of Jefferies, Schumer, and AIPAC. Just ask Corey Bush or Jamaal Bowman about that.
But who would you suggest? One name I can think of is Jon Stewart, although I don’t think they would consider themselves explicitly an anti Zionist.
What do you mean by the antizionist ticket will win in2028 then?
I mean, I answered that in your first response. Its very, very clear, that when it comes election day, voters aren’t interested in BAU, AIPAC, corporate candidates and haven’t been since the failures of the Obama era.
If Democrats aren’t putting fighting for space in this lane, i’d say they’re underwater at this point.
Can you please tag the exact section you think answered my question? Because I read your previous comment and don’t see it
Its the entire comment. I said "Whomever takes the anti-Zionist lane in 2028 will win: You asked:
Whomever takes the anti-zionist lane in 2028 will win the election. I’m confident because of the aforementioned reasons and reasoning. I have other arguments I could make (based around polling or data), but since this post was originally about Tucker clearly triangulating around the same position, which is qualitative, I kept my reasons and analysis qualitative.
deleted by creator
You didn’t say Whomever takes the anti-Zionist lane in 2028 will win you said the anti-Zionist lane in 2028 will win but you admitted that the most likely to be in the race is Gavin Newsom who is not anti-israel. Zohran already softened his position on Israel and refused to endorse people like him like Chi Osse .
Also the sour fact is that Harris lost because she did a bad job at addressing the issue of affordability and protecting the border.
I didnt say that. I didn’t endorse Newsom or Prtiztker or Carlson or Owens or any one. You want me to be arguing in favor of a candidate a and I think its very clear you are desperately trying to find a way to have a disagreement some specific argument I’m not making. I hold no quarter for any of those candidates. You seem physically incapable of distinguishing between liking or wanting a candidate to win, and recognizing if tactic or strategy is working.
In other words, you are the common clay of the modern political voice.
Two things. Spend the next 12 years reading to develop the reading comprehension necessary to have conversations in a text based format, because right now, you wasting peoples time. I’m offering a nuanced read of the moment and its like I’m having a conversation with a pidgeon only interested in pushing the chess pieces of the board. No ability to understand a point, desperately trying to make something into a weird a parasocial team identity fight, total inability to distinguish between how things are and how we wish they would be.
Second, more than willing to argue with you. But you actually have to argue against the points I’m making, or at least have the ability to understand them, which you haven’t shown the ability to do. If you don’t have the reading comprehension to do so, just don’t.
If it helps, you’re absolutely right on and this thread was maddening to read lol.