“Please vote for me! I will do anything but stop supporting genocide of people abroad who share your religion.”
Me watching a repeat of 2016
No.
Lol what’s that one rule where of there’s a question in the headline the answer is almost always no?
Betteridge’s rule of headlines.
Harris seriously needs to fire her campaign advisors. There are so many easy things she could do to easily win the presidency but for some reason she refuses to do them.
Taking a stand against genocide is just one of them and is so easy to do. She’d gain 10s of millions of Arab voters plus the 10s of millions of progressive voters she’s missing out on right now, and it would probably only cost her a few thousand moderate voters. Those voters probably aren’t even in swing states so who cares?
I don’t know why Harris is running such a stupid campaign or why she just doesn’t do the really easy thing that will absolutely guarantee that she easily wins the white house.
It absolutely blows my mind.
Harris seriously needs to fire her
campaign advisorsdonors.She can’t fire them because she works for them.
don’t know why Harris is running such a stupid campaign or why she just doesn’t do the really easy thing that will absolutely guarantee that she easily wins the white house.
It doesn’t make sense because you’re leaving out half of the equation: money.
There are lots of issues like this that poll overwhelmingly in the opposite direction that Democrats keep moving towards.
They only need 50% +1 of the EC delegates to win the election, anything more eats into their ability to fundraise, as what’s good for everyday Americans is bad for capitalists and ideologues. Pandering to voters is good but if they can get you in the booth on the threat of Trump alone then even better. That frees them up to fuck around and do whatever gets the most money out of their donors.
I’m curious if it’s because she has taken the Biden campaign advisors on board. Maybe his whole crew thinks like him, and are thus rabid Zionists.
Or maybe they determined that all the critics are in blue places and not swing states, so they don’t matter.
There is a chance she can lose Michigan just without Arab Americans vote so what Biden and Harris is doing is just stupid.
There’s so many things Kamala can do to guarantee she wins…
Taking a stand against genocide is just one of them, but she just keeps going to the right.
It’s the exact opposite of what voters want, but exactly what donors want and why they’re donating.
Shit won’t get better until we at least get dirty money out of our party.
The following are all true:
- Supporters of both Israel and Palestine are, by default, likely to vote Democrat
- Both of them also are likely to consider the conflict their one issue of primary importance, where they cannot imagine voting for someone who supports the other side.
- There is no way to please all of them.
This is simple logical arithmetic. The best strategy is to say nothing, and not piss anyone off. Because if you choose to piss off one side and support the other, you’ll end up making the other go to Trump or decide to stay home. And if that happens, it’ll be Miriam Adelson deciding the policy and that means Israel takes both Gaza and the West Bank and expels everyone they don’t like.
There is much evidence to show that is not true. Harris changing position on Gaza to support withholding weapons would only be a gain of voters. Polling shows as much as 6 points if not more, which is significant, especially with the race this close. And especially in swing states like Michigan.
Quote
Our first matchup tested a Democrat and a Republican who “both agree with Israel’s current approach to the conflict in Gaza”. In this case, the generic candidates tied 44–44. The second matchup saw the same Republican facing a Democrat supporting “an immediate ceasefire and a halt of military aid and arms sales to Israel”. Interestingly, the Democrat led 49–43, with Independents and 2020 non-voters driving the bulk of this shift.
- Split Ticket (July 2024)
Quotes
In Pennsylvania, 34% of respondents said they would be more likely to vote for the Democratic nominee if the nominee vowed to withhold weapons to Israel, compared to 7% who said they would be less likely. The rest said it would make no difference. In Arizona, 35% said they’d be more likely, while 5% would be less likely. And in Georgia, 39% said they’d be more likely, also compared to 5% who would be less likely.
- New Poll Suggests Gaza Ceasefire and Arms Embargo Would Help Dems with Swing State Voters (Full YouGov Report) (May 2024)
Quotes
- Data For Progress Poll (May 2024)
Quotes
Quotes
Majorities of Democrats (67%) and Independents (55%) believe the US should either end support for Israel’s war effort or make that support conditional on a ceasefire. Only 8% of Democrats but 42% of Republicans think the US must support Israel unconditionally.
Republicans and Independents most often point to immigration as one of Biden’s top foreign policy failures. Democrats most often select the US response to the war in Gaza.
These are all interesting polls and slightly more supportive of changing Israel policy than I would’ve expected, but they don’t really answer the key question: if Kamala came out and announced a key change to the relationship with Israel, like withholding military aid, would her numbers improve or get worse? The top poll doesn’t really answer it because the Biden administration clearly has been trying to make a ceasefire happen, without success. So 49% represents the current reality.
I’d also point out that in the second poll, 13% of Democratic voters support more weapons for Israel. If Kamala loses 13% of Democrats, or even a quarter of that number, this election is over.
Kamala came out and announced a key change to the relationship with Israel, like withholding military aid, would her numbers improve or get worse?
13% of Democratic voters support more weapons for Israel. If Kamala loses 13% of Democrats, or even a quarter of that number, this election is over.
You can always just shame them into voting for Kamala, like the demonstrably larger other side of the argument is being shamed now, since you guys seem to think that’s the strategy to beat them all.
The critical part of the first poll is the halt of arms sales to Israel, that is what gives the Democrats a +6 boost.
The third poll (which I think you meant) still shows that twice as many Democrats want to reduce weapons sent compared to those who do. Although, I’m not sure we can reasonably say those 13% of Democrats would no longer vote for Harris if she did change her policy on that. Would that also imply that those 28% of Republicans also switch to Harris? I don’t think that would be true either.
The second poll, which deals with swing states, shows that people are not deciding to not vote Democrat because of the current policy. To the extent that a change in policy would make ~35% of those swing state voters would be more likely to vote for the Dems compared to the ~5% that would be less likely.
The 4th poll shows a 5% increase from a chance in policy, similar to the first.
The 5th shows how Biden’s handling of the war, the calls of a ‘ceasefire’ that never materializes while the US continues to send more and more weapons, is one of his most unpopular positions.
There’s so many things Kamala can do to guarantee she wins…
In a world where a surprisingly high proportion of society are moderately to completely sure that the Government can control major weather events, I must say I am more than a little skeptical about the idea that anyone can convince a majority of the populace to make what is self-evidently the best decision based on factual information that they can process and compare against other statements until reaching a cohesive conclusion not based more or less entirely on self-serving and/or ideological biases.
That comment needs an editor.
Your comment needs to be interesting. Briefly checking your post history, this seems to a recurring issue.
It won’t. The Arabs are too angry. Minnesota literally has a Palestinian who lost 42 family members in a single airstrike by Israel and then their governor goes on a VP debate for election and the only thing he can say about the conflict is that he supports Israel’s right for expansion.
Yet I still see so many people blaming the voters who want an alternative to genocide, instead of the policies of the administration that give it unconditional military support.
Harris can easily earn so many votes, especially in swing states that she needs to win, with a pivot on Biden’s unpopular foreign policy on Israel. This race should not be this close. Trump is a uniquely unpopular candidate, to the extent that even two assassination attempts didn’t even move his approval rating.
Yet I still see so many people blaming the voters who want an alternative to genocide
Yes, and I don’t care about the opinions of such people any longer. They process the harms being done in the world into a sense of entitlement that everyone should deal with that in the way they do, which is principally by finding a way to rationalise those harms as inevitable.
Too many humans are going to keep killing other living beings, and then putting effort into rationalising how this is a good thing. In my lifetime we are going to see more of anthropogenic climate change killing people, and those who (think they) have profited from such climate change rationalising how ‘this is good because…’, or ‘they deserved it because…’.
In a world where immigrants (like myself) are treated with contempt, people who didn’t migrate from countries where climate change is deadly will be laughed at.
Fix that and I will care about political decisions. Until then, I remain unconvinced that pretending that we can maintain a status quo by just pandering to the right-wing enough is of any particular value.
Do you know what’s more important than profit? Life. I’d take fewer dead babies over arms merchants making money selling the means to kill more innocent people.
Martin Luther King Jr’s speech on Vietnam rang very true when I read it recently. It put me back about how similar today is to nearly 60 years ago.
It is with such activity in mind that the words of the late John F. Kennedy come back to haunt us. Five years ago he said, “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.” Increasingly, by choice or by accident, this is the role our nation has taken, the role of those who make peaceful revolution impossible by refusing to give up the privileges and the pleasures that come from the immense profits of overseas investments. I am convinced that if we are to get on the right side of the world revolution, we as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values. We must rapidly begin…we must rapidly begin the shift from a thing-oriented society to a person-oriented society. When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights, are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, extreme materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered.
https://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkatimetobreaksilence.htm
Yes, and I don’t care about the opinions of such people any longer. They process the harms being done in the world into a sense of entitlement that everyone should deal with that in the way they do, which is principally by finding a way to rationalise those harms as inevitable.
I don’t think Arabs in America care anymore. This past year has made it very evident US politicians don’t actually care about human rights or the lives of Arabs all too much. They’re just numb to it all.
he supports Israel’s right for expansion.
Israel seems to expand into areas they don’t control, breaking international law. And, while doing so, they bring settler violence (backed by the IDF) against innocent people, including children.
What ‘right’ is that? Would I have the ‘right’ to expand into my neighbour’s home if I was backed by a large number of people with guns?
I can understand a ‘might makes right’ sense of morality after societal collapse, because living beings are constrained by an inadequate sense of perception tied to the illusion of an enduring consciousness that prejudices them in favour of their survival. It’s concerning that we are practising these skills while society appears to be functioning to some extent, as if many people are excited about living in a post-apocalyptic world and are in training for dealing with it by swapping the lives of strangers for whatever imagined gain they think they will experience.
lol @ “right to defend themselves” somehow turning into “right for expansion” like they could just slip that by and no one would notice.
Moreover, Harris often stresses that her support for Israel is “unwavering”. She has been part of an administration that has overseen unconditional support for the brutal war on Gaza, and recently, she welcomed Israeli escalation in Lebanon.
When asked recently what she would have done differently from Biden, Harris said “not a thing that comes to mind”, stressing that she has been part of the decision-making process at the White House on most important issues.
Separate from the moral issue, this just speaks to her being a really poor campaigner. These are softball questions designed to allow her to create daylight with an unpopular president on her terms. Reminds me a lot of how much she fumbled her primary campaign.
But old guy picked her and old guy was old on camera, so I guess she’s our best option. Still better than the alternatives, both Biden and Trump, but just sort of sad from a nation of 330M people.
This is why I wanted them to do a primary, I doubt she would have made it past that since there are both really good candidates and also seasoned politicians who would at least campaign much better.
