Yeah, both sides amiright?
Let’s be real. The Zionists in charge are Nazis and there was never a path out of genocide in these elections.
It’s also part of the evangelical grifter prophecy that the Jews be in control of all of old Isreal before the apocalypse starts.
Trump will dismantle this country and the Christians will cheer it on as society circles the drain because the version of their book that was rewritten in the 70s says so.
It will at least be funny to see them all realize that the “rapture” probably already happened and they’re all still here XD
Let’s be discerning: there was the potential for a better path out of this, but people decided on the definitely-worst-case-for-everything option on this binary choice, to ensure everyone suffers as much as possible in every situation, most assuredly during the belligerent invasion by Israel.
It was explained over and over; you need more time?
Well, to all the folks arguing with me on how voting for Harris was bad because of Gaza: CONGRATULATIONS! You REALLY made a point there. The Palestinians had a chance under Harris. Instead of voting for a chance for the Palestinians, you did nothing or voted for genocide. You did it from the other side of the world, where you won’t have to suffer the consequences.
“A vOTe fOR hARriS iS a VoTE FoR gENociDe”
Fucking morons
Fucking Russians. Fixed it for you.
“BlUe MaGa”
It’s pretty obvious that the Gaza protesters were given disproportionate media coverage because Russia paid for it to be pushed as a wedge issue.
Even this article is just anti leftist propaganda.
The actual amount of people that protest voted was a non factor this election. The exact same ratios of Muslims, Jews, and young people voter the same this time as in 2020.
The turnout of Democratic voters was lower than previous elections. There are too many variables at play to claim anything definitively, but it’s safe to assume that the number of voters who abstained due to the issue was more than zero.
If a conclusion is going to be drawn about whether the whole genocide topic had a tangible effect on the outcome, it’s important to consider those as well as the protest votes.
It’s not genocide if they aren’t people.
–Trump, Probably
deleted by creator
The Palestinians had a chance under Harris.
Doubtful: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/nov/15/biden-israel-gaza-palestine
One mention of Harris to say she’s not taking over for Biden
There is no reason to think Harris would’ve been any different than Biden on this issue. She repeatedly said she was in agreement with Biden on this, i don’t care if it was during an election people need more to go on than the hope that she really feels different inside
Thanks, Uncommitted Assholes.
I loved having people arguing with me and saying “At least my conscience is clear.”
How’s your conscience now??? Still feeling good about your decision?
They think they get to wipe their hands of it because they “didn’t participate”, refusing to concede that said choice still counts as their participation. Through ignorance, cruelty, and/or privilege, they’ll blame everyone else for the state of the world while refusing to do their part.
It was the Harris campaign that made the decision to not break from Biden on Israel, at the cost of at least a +6 points gain. Those votes were entirely up for grabs. That’s the fault of the campaign’s calculations to ignore those voters, take them for granted, and instead run to the right with having the most lethal Military and unwaivering support for Israel a year into this genocide. That single policy change would have secured her the swing states needed to win the election. Biden is a Christian Zionist, the genocide and de juro annexation of Palestine is exactly what he wants.
I voted for Harris and told others to do the same. It’s still on the campaign to earn votes to win. If they took this election seriously, they would have been going after those votes. Blaming voters is just sowing division when we need unity and solidarity to fight against Fascism.
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.
The United States Administration is the one enabling Israel unconditionally. Support for this genocide is bipartisan.
Your take is absolutely idiotic.
How? What does blaming voters accomplish exactly?
If the Democratic Party is genuinely democratic, then they would respond to public pressure. If the Democratic party is not and instead only beholden to Donor interests, then we all have a much bigger problem where the interests of the American public is not represented.
Removed by mod
I have no clue what you’re trying to say here
Why would I expect people who care about ending the genocide to stop caring about that?
the donors of the Democrats/Republicans are doing a good job keeping the citizens divided and pointing fingers at each other
Yeah, no.
After months of alleged “Genocide Joe” bullshit, they don’t get to shirk themselves of this.
They were told this was going to happen. They didn’t want to listen.
But hey, they’ve gone from not complicit, to extremely complicit.
Democrats always have a scapegoat to explain the bad performance away too
Nothing alleged about Genocide Joe.
Any vote for Harris or trump was still a vote for the war crimes to continue. The American people never had a say on this issue.
And yet, this very article we’re commenting on is about war crimes getting worse.
Almost like when your options are “bad” or “worse” you shouldn’t vote for “worse.”
No. That’s not a thing.
Don’t leave out the Harris campaign with the Cheneys and the DNC
giving putin a free pass at ukraine will be after lunch, then?
Putin isn’t waiting, he apparently started amassing troops within a day of the election.
He’s not sure, he’s still waiting on orders from Putin.
Time for the 2nd stage of FAaFO for all those that fucked around.
No both sides were not equally bad choices for trying to stop the slaughter of non-combatants.
Non-combatants have been getting slaughtered none stop for over a year now with the help of the Biden/Harris admin.
If they were the better choice they could have demonstrated that, with actions not words.
Bidens 30 day deadline came and went and nothing changed because Biden doesn’t care about innocent life and the dem leadership are all in the pocket of aipac https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2024/11/biden-israel-palestine-gaza-aid-30-day-warnings-blinken-toothless/
Not going to debate what Biden (since as VP Harris has no actual power to do anything) has done or not done nor your opinions of what he’s done or not done. I do take issue that you think he doesn’t care, at a human level I just don’t think that’s true. What he’s done to express that humanity given geopolitical realities is the real issue.
But anyone who actually thinks Trump cares at all about innocent life, or anyone’s life but his own, or cares about the legacy he leaves behind may find themselves rethinking that opinion in the coming year.
Now that the election is over, I truly do hope something good gets done. We of course won’t know what Harris could have accomplished, but we’ll certainly know if Trump tries and if he succeeds. Keeping fingers crossed.
ETA: I’ll just drop this here https://www.reuters.com/world/us/muslims-who-voted-trump-upset-by-his-pro-israel-cabinet-picks-2024-11-15/
I do take issue that you think he doesn’t care, at a human level I just don’t think that’s true.
How would you have any read on his personal feelings at all? And why would you care that they’re being besmirched? His actions are what matter to the world and the only path by which any of us has to judge him.
You’re right I have no more intimate knowledge of his internal feelings than you do. I have however seen enough humanity in him to believe he has more empathy than Trump who has a very well documented history of narcissism bordering on psychopathy.
As for my “care” of his humanity being besmirched, I don’t actually. My issue was with your questionable assertion that he doesn’t care and the implication that maybe (but maybe not) you actually think Trump cares more.
As for his actions as the president of the united states, who has the full weight of international geopolitics, national politics, and an election to consider, I’d say the job is no where near as simple as you’d like it to seem and as much as I hate (or don’t hate but am resigned) to admit it, there is a limit to what the United States can actually do to make a difference in Gaza that might not have other undesirable results.
First, I’m not the guy you were replying to.
Second, there may be a limit to what the United States can do in Gaza, but we know for sure Biden didn’t ever even try to reach it. It’s a much more strained interpretation to believe a highly empathic person cared deeply about the harm he was causing and did practically nothing to reduce it than to believe someone who has spent their entire life pursuing greater personal power, including multiple times where he supported wars in the Middle East, might be a bit of a sociopath. Making the former work requires inventing these unobservable stresses and reasons to explain why a seemingly immoral response is in fact secretly moral, while the latter lines up with our general understanding of people at the highest levels of power and the plain observations. The morality of a genocide is not complex.
Lots of monochrome in this thread.
If you took pretty much all of the finger-pointing positions to which individuals are stubbornly clinging to the exclusion of any and all other positions and strung them together with "and"s, you’d have the closest approximation yet to the reality.
Wait, the ~14,000 dead children complied with American restrictions? The damaging or destruction of over 80% of all structures in Gaza was within restrictions? Interesting. It’s honestly going to be tough for the victims of genocide to tell the difference. It actually may benefit Israel’s victims since America is likely to massively lose influence in the world with the clown car pulling into Washington. Many nations who likely want to push back against the genocide are under huge American pressure to stay silent and complicit, hopefully as America loses influence that could change.
Not saying that will occur, just an opinion.
What restrictions?, the article doesnt mention any, Bidens ultimatum came and went with no action.
Both sides were for unconditional aid to Israel, kamala may have added some laments about loss of life but she repeatedly said restrictions on military were off the table. Until someone can point to me a concrete policy that kamala had in her platform that was different from trump then yeah both sides are equally bad on this issue. Trump is worse on a lot of others but to a Palestinian they are both bad.
The article has a vague statement trying to make it sound like there were lots of restrictions, but I think it’s just the 2000 lb. bombs, and maybe some sort of guidance system (IIRC). Because it’s a fucking Fox News article for some reason.
Currently, U.S. restrictions include an embargo on a certain weapons shipment and limitations on various combat-related equipment, even if they do not involve explosive ordnance.
Allowing them is definitely more bad, but it’s going from like 95% of maximum complicity to 100%.
what a tool
