The “Uncommitted” movement seeking a change in the Democratic Party’s approach to the war in Gaza on Thursday announced it is not ready to support Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris — while urging voters not to back Republican nominee Donald Trump or third-party candidates who could help Trump win the November election.
The “Uncommitted” group “opposes a Donald Trump presidency, whose agenda includes plans to accelerate the killing in Gaza while intensifying the suppression of anti-war organizing,” the statement continues. Additionally, the group is “not recommending a third-party vote in the Presidential election, especially as third party votes in key swing states could help inadvertently deliver a Trump presidency given our country’s broken electoral college system.”
I’m honestly doubtful Trump would make any additional difference considering Biden didn’t do anything to reduce Israel’s insanity. He’d still have to let congress pass the big stuff, and Biden approved every single smaller sale bar holding up one shipment temporarily.
Everyone keeps saying “yeah but Trump would be worse for Gaza” just because he did the whole embassy thing, but this really looks as if it’s maxed out.
Even from a purely utilitarian perspective assuming this is true, I’d rather take my final stand and be wiped out than to be continuously subjected to essentially warcrime torture for the remainder of my life.
Harris already made it clear that her policy with Israel won’t change. Her campaign decided that the amount of votes in this group do not matter (which I completely disagree with), which is why she barred them from talking at the DNC, despite the fact that they were offering to endorse her. She went all in on the AIPAC funding and lobby though.
This is basically their last desperate call to get the DNC to change their minds (probably won’t happen), so I guess I’ll see you all in r------- red Michigan this year.
Everyone keeps saying “yeah but Trump would be worse for Gaza” just because he did the whole embassy thing, but this really looks as if it’s maxed out.
It’s a lot more than that. Trump also gave a Medal of Freedom, the highest civilian honor, to Miriam Adelson, a billionaire heiress who is actually more extremist even than Netanyahu. She openly opposes Palestinian statehood, wants Israel to annex the West Bank, and wrote an op-ed saying critics of Israel are “our enemies” and “dead to us”. She gave Trump money, so she owns him. The US can do a lot more than send a few weapons to Israel, and this rabid extremist billionaire will ask Trump for everything she can get. And he will do what she says.
“Well, let’s cross our fingers and hope the Democrats can get out the vote despite our virtue signalling.”
This announcement is just pointless.
At least we’re not getting the ‘vote third party’ spiel. I’ll never hold a person’s opinions on the Dems against them. I just don’t want anything done or suggested that will help Trump and his merry band of assholes.
It’s good to get that out explicitly, because it has been the focus of a lot of misinformation out there.
The cause of Palestinians is not served by a second Trump presidency. Preventing it should be a major aim of any pro-Palestinian advocate.
That it’s the advocacy group trying to hold Biden and Harris accountable for the continuation of the atrocities in Palestine saying this should make it clear. The actual people on the ground may feel strongly about Palestinian civil rights, they know where their bread is buttered and that the other realistic alternative in this election is “Orange Hitler”, to use another poster’s euphemism, is just plain horrible.
Well, duh. Anyone who didn’t know this hasn’t been paying attention. He’s (Trump) said as much, himself.
And his advisor on, and ambassador to, Israel literally wrote a book promoting a one state solution where he said that the US has a Biblical obligation to help Israel win. His ultimate plan is to set up an apartheid state where Palestinians do not have the same rights as Israelis.
Completely feckless. Effectively an endorsement of Harris despite getting absolutely nothing in return. The people who want the genocide to continue (like Harris) were just proven to be strategically correct in writing off this movement because they knew they could and they’d just come crawling back to the lesser evil. What’s worse is that this spinelessness discredits any future movements or protests on the issue.
Somehow telling people to vote for Harris is “not an endorsement,” because liberals think you can do the exact same action and it’s meaningfully different if you feel kinda bad while doing it.
What exactly is your ideal outcome? They successfully prevent Harris from being elected, Trump gets in, funds the construction of the Israeli version of Auschwitz, and the Palestinians getting thrown into gas chambers will think “at least the Americans voted on principle”?
My ideal outcome is that Harris caves and stops the Israeli version of Auschwitz which is already happening. Failing that, my ideal outcome would be that the protesters establish a credible threat going forward that supporting genocide will result in tangible political consequences. Establishing such a threat is far more important is far more important than any one election, especially when both people are pro-genocide.
The moment you commit yourself to the ideology of lesser-evilism, you have sacrificed every ounce of bargaining power you might have wielded. The concerns of reliable voters don’t factor into any politician’s calculus. I can’t figure out whether liberals just have terrible instincts regarding wielding power, or if it’s just that they don’t care to wield it because they’re satisfied with the status quo.
My ideal outcome is that Harris caves and stops the Israeli version of Auschwitz which is already happening.
the correct strategy here would be to push for full support on harris, under the pretense that “she will do something for palestine” and then after she gets into office (assuming she does) when the “inevitable” nothing gets done for palestine you can then rally support while in office in order to drum up what is more than likely going to be more effective support. Bargaining for something that currently exists in front of you is simply going to be much easier.
Though this still doesn’t solve the whole problem of shooting yourself in the foot and ending up giving the republican congress more say, or just doing nothing at all, instead of something minor that would’ve been impactful.
That’s nonsense. Why on earth would she listen to me once she’s already secured my vote and the presidency? She knows that she can do nothing and that I’ll just “pretend” that she will next time too. Of course, I find the idea of acting based on an obviously false “pretense” that’s based on nothing but imagination to be completely ridiculous.
This is just, “You have to give them everything they want while asking nothing in return” with extra, nonsensical steps. You’re telling me I’m supposed to wait until I have less bargaining power to try to bargain. Of course, there’s already been widespread protests during an election year and the democrats not only did not give an inch, but forcibly suppressed them. So how exactly do you envision people gaining enough leverage for them to actually change?
mid terms are a pretty common swing point for an unpopular candidate. Between the late term push for legislation to increase the chances of re-election, and the initial push after getting into office to appease the voter base, the midterms are the biggest impact in a governmental term. Plus further down ballot votes can harm the institution as well.
regardless, even ignoring this, if you don’t think this is going to help. It’s going to be a net positive over somebody like trump winning, so it’s basically what you’re left with here if this problem is so important to you.
This is just, “You have to give them everything they want while asking nothing in return” with extra, nonsensical steps.
no this is “you have to give them your vote, and only vote, in the hopes that you can push them later down the lines, to be more useful to your ideals. And considering that the other option is going to be worse, might as well try for this one”
Of course, there’s already been widespread protests during an election year and the democrats not only did not give an inch, but forcibly suppressed them.
protests over what? I haven’t heard about any, but i guess i also haven’t been paying much attention. Unless you mean the vote protest, in which case nobody cares. It’s not going to be a significant percent of the voter base anyway.
mid terms are a pretty common swing point for an unpopular candidate. Between the late term push for legislation to increase the chances of re-election, and the initial push after getting into office to appease the voter base, the midterms are the biggest impact in a governmental term. Plus further down ballot votes can harm the institution as well.
Oh, ok. So when mid terms come around, and Kamala’s done nothing I want, then you’ll be fine with me withholding my vote, right? Or are you going to be telling me the exact same thing you’re telling me now? If you’re genuinely alright with me withholding my vote during the midterms, what’s the difference between then and now?
in the hopes that you can push them later down the lines
How? What method do you expect me to use to push her? And why should I have any confidence in that method working when it’s not working during an election year, when she most needs people’s votes and support?
protests over what? I haven’t heard about any, but i guess i also haven’t been paying much attention.
There was a major wave of campus protests this year over the genocide in Gaza, all over the country.
Again, you just want me to give them everything they want while asking nothing in return and you’re trying to pretend otherwise without offering any sort of coherent strategy. If that’s not what’s happening, walk me through what you expect me to do and when.
Oh, ok. So when mid terms come around, and Kamala’s done nothing I want, then you’ll be fine with me withholding my vote, right? Or are you going to be telling me the exact same thing you’re telling me now? If you’re genuinely alright with me withholding my vote during the midterms, what’s the difference between then and now?
yeah no fucking go for it. Do whatever the fuck you want, you can even do it now if you feel like it. Especially if you’re protest voting for that specific issue, i think that would be a warranted mid term activity to partake it. I mean i might make fun of you for grenading the ability of the government to solve problems, but that’s something we’re both going to do anyway lmao. That parts free real estate.
The difference between then and now, is that voting now has the substantial potential to prevent trump from being elected which is obviously going to have very negative consequences in this case. Whereas not voting in the midterms, or even changing your vote in the mid terms is going to have a much less significant effect as it’s only really going to slow/lessen the ability for the federal government to create and push legislation, although probably specifically with the IP thing. Depends on how that goes.
How? What method do you expect me to use to push her? And why should I have any confidence in that method working when it’s not working during an election year, when she most needs people’s votes and support?
the same way you’re doing it now, just then, signal discontent over certain policy. There’s no reason to have any confidence in anything, but in this case it’s just basic strategic leverage. If kamala losses, and trump wins, it wasn’t your fault, and you didn’t have anything to do with it. If kamala wins, and you don’t get the IP thing you wanted, then you at least didn’t get trump, and you had your part in that. And if kamala wins, and you do get the thing you want, then obviously you’re going to get most of everything that you wanted.
As opposed to the current line of thinking where you’re more likely to put trump into office, or if kamala wins, do nothing midterms because you’ve stopped caring by that point. Or maybe you would, but that would be up to chance more than anything.
We take the wins we can get, and we line ourselves up to get the best shots that we can, that’s the name of the game.
There was a major wave of campus protests this year over the genocide in Gaza, all over the country.
i know there have been a large number throughout the year, i’m curious about the last 3 or so specifically. Or have those pretty much died down. I know they were all over the place for a few months a while back though.
Again, you just want me to give them everything they want while asking nothing in return and you’re trying to pretend otherwise without offering any sort of coherent strategy. If that’s not what’s happening, walk me through what you expect me to do and when.
i mean you can view it like that, i guess, but ultimately that’s not really how it works, politics is mostly a take game for the civilian. We don’t really give them much, aside from tax dollars, but they give us legislation and policies that reflect our ideals. If your ideals don’t match at all you’ve either got a failure of ideals, or a failure of government, which one probably depends on which one is at a larger scale.
as for the last bit, see previous.
Your words would have more weight if you weren’t in full support of the Uyghur genocide in China.
Oh yeah, just look at all that genociding going on!
No, it’s people like you refusing to accept reality but rather willfully hiding in your racist propagandized little bubble who can’t be taken seriously.
Everyone, don’t bother. I have made every reasonable argument against this silly narrative that I could think of since it began and not a single time has any one of these folks gone, “Yeah, Trump/GOP has promised worse” or anything remotely similar. You will receive one of a couple canned responses, which I’ll paraphrase below:
- “So you support the genocide?!”
- “You BlueMAGA are all the same. You support the genocide?!”
- “If you don’t support the genocide you will vote third party!”
They will not listen to things like how you don’t support the genocide, don’t support war, know things like genocides are horrible, any explanation about how it will get worse, or anything similar.
Just trying to save you some time.
liberals think you can do the exact same action and it’s meaningfully different if you feel kinda bad while doing it.
They will not listen to things like how you don’t support the genocide, don’t support war, know things like genocides are horrible, any explanation about how it will get worse, or anything similar.
Literally the exact thing I just described. If your actions are indistinguishable from someone who supports genocide, then nobody gives a shit what’s going on inside your head regarding it, least of all politicians.
Centrists want to support genocide but not be judged for their support for genocide.
Just assume everyone making those arguments are just Maga trolls trying to siphon votes away from democrats. Saves your sanity
I’m fine with the arguments fundamentally. Like yeah, it’s fucking horrible what’s happening. Though also for the last 30 years there has always been a conflict, or voter issue, or something that divides the Center and Left and drives voters away. Now we also have a very real threat to our way of life, or what’s left of it. So it’s frustrating considering how these people may affect even a single person’s willingness to vote, even if they are arguing in good faith.
There is no way to distinguish those arguing in good faith vs those who are trolling or arguing in bad faith, because all those parties use the same flawed arguments.
i got banned for a rather unfortunate string of comments regarding IP, though i will say, it was my fault.
IP people are in my experience entirely single issues voters. They do not care about anything else, and cannot be made to care about anything else. It’s pretty par for the course as far as issues voters go.
So you want Trump to win and you want Gaza eradicated, then.
So you want to reestablish the Third Reich then, got it.
People who are uncommitted because of Gaza are fools to think that their reticence won’t have any consequences in the country.
Having said that there is no hope for Gazans from US since both the parties are bought and paid for by the Israelis.
Russia take note - US only lets those foreign countries to influence the election who are willing to buy both the parties.
Having said that there is no hope for Gazans from US since both the parties are bought and paid for by the Israelis.
American political parties are not in charge of Israel. Believe it or not, Israel has their own elections and elects their own parties.
Maybe it’s not that both parties are paid off, but that stopping a still-young and flawed democracy from being swallowed up by a far right religious dictatorship sworn to kill every Jew in the middle east in the name of a new Islamic Caliphate, is an issue with resounding bipartisan support.
Oh, you know what else it could be, has a lot of bipartisan support? Not stabbing our allies in the back, just on principle.
Huh, maybe not everything you find revulsive is a Jewish conspiracy to control on the world.
Anything said against Israel is not anti Semitic. It is just realistic.
Instead of being swallowed by islamic caliphate, the ethnostate of Israel is controlled by a far right, islamophobic government.
Preventing world recognized genocide is not stabbing allies in the back.
swallowed up by a far right religious dictatorship sworn to kill every Jew in the middle east in the name of a new Islamic Caliphate
oof, that’s quite the Islamophobic take there
Nothing of substance to say so call me a racist, couldn’t be farther from the truth.
Do you have a more accurate description for the Iranian leadership?
Why would I entertain your a-historical reactionary bullshit with a substantive response? If I said ‘Hezbollah was justified in firing missiles into Tel Aviv everyday because Israel is a blood-thirsty religious apartheid state dead-set on killing every Muslim in the middle east in the name of a ‘Judeo-Christian crusade’’, would you see it as an honest attempt at good-faith debate?
Of course not.
Nobody is claiming that and you’re attacking a strawman.
The problem is we don’t want to reward politicians for their bad behavior “because Trump is worse” or get blood on our own hands by voting for someone who will continue the same deadly failed policies. Have you ever heard of the Trolley Problem? It’s not as straightforward as you think.
The article is about the group publicly saying it is important to vote with the intention of keeping Donald out even while they cannot endorse Harris. Maybe you should join them?
This trolley problem has a large number of the same people across two tracks, but one of the tracks has a large number of additional people that the other track bypasses. It is not a complicated trolley problem to solve.
“A philosophy problem that has existed for thousands of years can be easily solved by me!”
That tells me all I need to know about you.
If you want to try some reading comprehension you’ll see I disagree it is a trolley problem at all. Pretending it is despite having the difference pointed out does tell us a lot about you.
I think on this issue I’ll consider the thoughts of the group in the article, instead of someone dead set on describing the issue as something it is not.
The Trolley Problem is all about how there’s frequently no good options in a scenario. People are gonna die whether or not you make a decision, and you’d be right to walk away from that lever if there were equal amounts of death on each track. But there frequently are not equal situations. Six people versus one person. A kid versus an old man. 7 Nuns versus 10 Lawyers. The person you love the most in the world versus the person you hate the most in the world.
Sure, you have to be discerning and look for any tracks that don’t have something tied to them. That’s why I mention that self-driving cars, thanks to their sensors, don’t have to hit the bus full of school children or the SUV full of nuns – they’ve seen the bus and the SUV and the idiot merging into traffic and the idiot on their phone and everything else due to their 27 different cameras and their LADAR and RADAR and so on, and to the advanced AI computer that can pay attention to all those sensors at once, and have calculated a path to escape to the track that doesn’t have anyone being killed in the phony concocted examples of why AI cars are bad.
But in regards to the Presidency, there literally is a Trolley Problem here, and it IS as straight forward as you say it isn’t. Come January of next year, one of two people will take the Oath of Office.
- Kamala Harris, who you say is a genocidal maniac who will enable the mass murder and enslavement of Gaza by the Israelis…
- Donald Trump, who himself has said is a genocidal maniac who will not only enable but accelerate the mass murder and enslavement of Gaza by the Israelis, and who plans on bringing that treatment right back to home for LGBTQ+, minorities, non-Christians, and women.
Jill Stein, Cornel West, Chase Oliver (seriously, I had to go look this guy up!), and whoever else promises you they can fix a Broken Washington won’t be elected to that office. Period. End of line. All they’ll accomplish is taking votes away from the major party candidate closest aligned to your positions, and ensure the other guy gets into office. The track of no genocide is an illusion, a mirage that fades the moment you look at it too hard. I know. It sucks. We all want more options for people to represent us. But those are the rules, and have been the rules for literally this country’s entire existence. It sucks, but denying reality won’t help. Come January, one of two people will take the oath of office: a Republican and a Democrat, just like it has been for the past 150 years, and even before, albeit with Federalist vs. Anti-Federalist or Democratic-Republican vs. Whig.
I’m going to vote for the person who will do the least harm to those I care about. I’m going to push and push hard for everyone else to join me in voting for her. I’m going to constantly call out this ‘but third party!’ stuff. Because for everything you have accused Harris of allowing, Trump will not only do that, but a dozen other hateful things.
All that talk and you still missed the point. Why do you think it’s so hard for others to pull the lever for Harris despite that? If you can’t see why, I can’t help you.
Because Russia has a long history of propping up third party distractors, especially those who are friendly to Russia’s causes, and another of their tools, useful idiots and bought-and-paid for bad actors (note: Mods, not accusing THIS poster of this, but you can’t disagree such people exist and operate here on Lemmy and on other forums across the Internet) spread bullshit across the web to convince people that the Shitgibbon with his plans to directly enable his fellow authoritarian shithead to exterminate and/or subjugate the Palestinians AND his plans to let Russia do the same RE: Ukraine AND his plans to bring that same subjugation/extermination to LGBTQ+, non-Christian, minority, female, and non-Conservative populations HERE IN THE USA is somehow better than letting Team Biden/Harris have 4 more years.
You don’t like me calling that out? Well, you can fuck right off because I’m not going to stop.
Not everyone who opposes Biden’s policies on Gaza is a Russian plant. We know third parties are not viable, but we also want to pressure Democrats. This isn’t hard, and you thinking this is all Russian conspiracy and that you wanna curse out your political allies is a Feinstein-level of out-of-touch rambling. Peace.
None of what this poster said countered a thing of what I said, and all its personal attack did was concede the debate.
Pretty sure if Trump gets elected people will be too busy with their own local genocides to care about Gaza.
Yup.
If we’re at the point of states doing ethnic cleansing, the president isn’t going to matter
You’re right in one sense. When Trump gets elected he won’t matter at all. It’ll get out of his control in days
Two people refusing to vote for anyone or voting for a third party has the exact same impact as one person voting for Trump instead of Kamala.
TIL that 92 million non voters actually voted for Trump in 2020, but somehow Biden became president.
🤦
ELI5?
no
People just make shit 💩 up because it makes them feel good, then others follow along like lemmings, and everyone wonders why we can never get shit done. Think for yourselves people.
I like how you saying it makes it true.
Do you just not understand how voting actually works?
You do understand you can’t force people to vote how you want them to right? Pretty basic concept of voting you are missing.
Who’s forcing anyone to do anything? You can stay home and jerk off to how righteous your protest vote was and none of us will actually force you not to. Whether or not you recognize that it was just another vote Trump didn’t have to overcome to win is on you.
Force, coercion, manipulation maybe. Pick whichever word is right for you. If your position is that there is only one valid perspective for everyone in this country, then you are part of the problem.
You will never browbeat people into joining your position, but you keep trying and call it a good effort all you want.
If you really wanted to change third party or undecided voters opinions, I’d recommend a different approach.
I notice you left out “Persuasion.” If you think the presentation of facts regarding the basic function of our voting system is somehow force, coercion, or manipulation, then I can see why you would want to do your part to get Trump elected, and you’re a lost cause.
Either Trump or Harris are going to win the election. No third party candidate has any serious chance of winning, and nobody who actually understands how the election works thinks they do. You are ALLOWED to vote third party if you want to (see how nobody is FORCING you not to?) but doing so is just another vote the real contenders don’t have to beat. If you’re more left leaning, that means it’s a vote Harris would have had that Trump doesn’t have to beat.
The huge mistake you make in the freedom to vote is that people are free to vote for WHATEVER REASONS THEY WANT TO.
No matter how many times you say it, if I vote for the green party, I am not voting for the republican party.
I’m telling you this because your rhetoric is doing the opposite of what you think it is. Putting third party voters on the defensive, and again avoiding any conversation about why they would vote third party in the first place, is an awful way to change someone’s mind.
Calling people Russian shills or saying they don’t care what happens to the country doesnt help either.
No, it is basic statistical analysis of outcomes.
Does it really matter the reasoning when the goal is to force people to vote how you want them to?
You would benefit from coming to terms with the fact voting is a free choice no matter what you shout into the void.
Does it really matter the reasoning when the goal is to force people to vote how you want them to?
Force?.. Are people threatening you with harm and watching to make sure you vote the “right” way? The closest to that that I’m aware of is the right-wing “poll watchers” who intend to try to intimidate people and suppress voting rights or, the FPTP, two-party system itself that.
You would benefit from coming to terms with the fact voting is a free choice no matter what you shout into the void.
Freedom of choice does not mean freedom from consequences. You would benefit from taking responsibility for how your decisions impact the lives of others, especially those who are not so privileged as to feel insulated from impact of a possible fascist state.
Fear makes people irrational. Like when they go in public forums and argue there is only one moral way to vote. Sounds kinda preachy to me, huh.
Hey what’s good for you must be good for me right? You’ve convinced me, tell me who to vote for to make your life better please? Is this sort of like trickle down politics?
And yet they refuse to support the one person that could keep him out of office.
Fucking geniuses they are!
Israel has already slaughtered a full 10% of the population of Gaza.
How many Palestinians will be left to save by the time Biden leaves office?
Israel has already slaughtered a full 10% of the population of Gaza.
idk why you put full here, i feel like just saying 10% would work just as well, seems more semantically confusing to me more than anything lol.
I’m not sure what it’s trying to imply.
I guess similar to saying at least 10%, to convey that it isn’t 9.5% or 9% but more than that.
maybe, i feel like you would just say “10%” or like you said “at least 10%” then, considering that numbers are like, really specific.
If you weren’t being specific you would say something like “about 10%” implying somewhere around it, 7-13% probably.
full just reads a little weirdly in that context.
TANKIE DETECTED.
ARGUMENT IS INVALID.
Yawn….
Unsurprising. While people opposed to any criticism of the democrats’ self defeating and inhumane policy on this issue like to pretend it’s all a pro Trump psy op, it’s actually more of a DON’T SUPPORT GENOCIDE YOU EVIL FUCKS type of thing.
But for the dems it’s fine because the electoral college has the whole country by the balls I guess ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ who are you going to vote for dumb dumb? Orange hitler? Spoiler candidates? Lol didn’t think so, send the bombs boyos
Try reading the article.
What makes you say that? Is there something I’m missing?
The Uncommitted group “opposes a Donald Trump presidency, whose agenda includes plans to accelerate the killing in Gaza while intensifying the suppression of anti-war organizing,” the statement continues. Additionally, the group is “not recommending a third-party vote in the Presidential election, especially as third party votes in key swing states could help inadvertently deliver a Trump presidency given our country’s broken electoral college system.”
I agree with them. Including about this:
Vice President Harris’s unwillingness to shift on unconditional weapons policy or to even make a clear campaign statement in support of upholding existing U.S. and international human rights law has made it impossible for us to endorse her
Although I would say obviously people should still vote for her because the political system is broken.
I was responding to this “news” because it is what many of us have been saying the whole time, only to be met with accusations that this must mean we think trump is better. Obviously he would be much worse for this and everything else. But that doesn’t excuse the dems position.
I don’t disagree with any of that. I didn’t read your previous comment as opposing the system in a productive way. The system is garbage but we still have to participate or it becomes worse.
You will likely get the accusations anywhere you are omitting the part about voting for Harris despite opposing an endorsement. That is due to the prolific MAGA campaigners on here urging people to vote third party and using this issue as the reason.
You will likely get the accusations anywhere you are omitting the part about voting for Harris despite opposing an endorsement.
Yeah absolutely. But I don’t really see why anyone should need to add a voting disclaimer if they are criticising the government’s support for a genocide. People can downvote all they want, some things are just more important than party politics.
That is due to the prolific MAGA campaigners on here urging people to vote third party and using this issue as the reason.
Yeah I’m sure there are such people and they can get fucked. But in my experience the people receiving these accusations mainly just don’t want the government to support Israel unconditionally. But as you said, without the disclaimer, these people are accused of a bunch of stuff.
Is it really so hard for people to believe that others actually just care about preventing mass murder? The fact someone can say something like that and get many responses talking about Trump and the electoral college system rather than acknowledging the legitimacy of the problem being raised is truly disgusting to me.
Huffington Post - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for Huffington Post:
MBFC: Left - Credibility: Medium - Factual Reporting: Mixed - United States of America
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/gaza-war-harris-trump_n_66eb9ed6e4b00b7ce259a657
What, just because he basically said he would and loves dictators?
I can get behind this. Sure, we can criticise Team Blue for slow-dragging their feet on protecting Palestinians. Never said we couldn’t. That said, there’s clear consequences to a Trump victory. The Uncommitted have made it clear they grasp this and ask you to vote for Harris, even if they can’t endorse Harris. Staying home, voting third party, or heaven forbid, voting Trump will just make things in the Middle East FAR worse.
“Voting is just a way to pick the person that will be sitting across from me at the negotiation table next year”, is one of the ways to think about it.
Harris‘ policy on Israel is ambiguous, weak and too-little-too-late. But you’ll get further trying to influence her administration than Trump 2.0.
Well, your thought experiment actually just agrees with the uncommitted, since if they don’t want to negotiate now that they want your vote, what hope you have after you lost that leverage?
I do agree with the uncommitted: voting third party because of Palestine is for idiots.
That said, if you are a political activist, and you think your one vote is the only thing you have to offer, you need a new ducking job.
The inability to think this way is why we’re in this mess. Happy Cake Day!
The ambiguity is ironically a good sign. That she isn’t outright committed to the status quo. But rather not willing to signal her actual position. If she came out strongly against Israel and for Palestine. Unfortunately that would be a large hindrance to her candidacy in the current climate.
It’s a shame that those illegally occupying Palestine have such influence over our government. Especially after their terrorist attacks of the last few days. Not to mention the decades long slow genocide that’s only accelerated in the last year.
She saw the Genocide Joe protests and is now “ambiguous” on this matter to pretend she isn’t exactly like Biden on this subject.
It’s okay to just say you disagree with Harris on some things and still vote for her.
Thanks for this comment, clearing it up!
I was about to ask this - because if they aren’t endorsing Harris but also asking folks not to vote for the GOP or third parties, then who should we vote for? Surely they’re not saying stay at home and don’t vote, right? (That was the only possibility that seemed not covered by the post’s description.)
So another way to look at it is - (if one ignores the way they mince words and instead just looks at the practical effect then) they are in fact endorsing Harris, but in a muted fashion to express their displeasure over Harris’s stance on Gaza.
For real, that’s all I’ve been saying whenever people start come in and start bashing on Harris and pushing false equivalence. Like, yeah, Biden is super bad on his policy towards Israel and Gaza; I HOPE Harris will be better; I KNOW Trump will be worse.
That’s it. That’s the whole dynamic. That’s the only two choices we have as members of the American electorate.
bashing on Harris and pushing false equivalence
You claim the Ds and Rs are the same, but you can very clearly see that the Ds are in favor of 10% less infanticide.
That’s the only two choices we have
The genocidiers have us by the balls, folks. Nothing you can do but voice your full throated support for one of them.
Don’t you understand the difference? All of them can die of rape and starvation as of now or all of them can die of rape and starvation while Trump is president.
CaNt YoU SeE tHE DiFeReNcE? (This was annoying to type on mobile.)
These people are delusional. Somehow there’s many situations we can’t do anything about (like our politicians cannot even show disapproval over rape country called Israel even though we are their biggest benefactors) yet somehow not voting Democrat is the end of the world. We cannot do anything to make anything better but putting pressure on politicians is also bad. Oh, how convenient. Why can’t they admit they have to think of their own interests first (at least the few things the Democrats will allow them).
CaNt YoU SeE tHE DiFeReNcE? (This was annoying to type on mobile.)
A for effort
Somehow there’s many situations we can’t do anything about (like our politicians cannot even show disapproval over rape country called Israel even though we are their biggest benefactors) yet somehow not voting Democrat is the end of the world.
Was listening to a WTYP episode about stealth jets, and they priced all the different kinds of aircraft in “multiples of ending national poverty”. ($10B is the current working figure)
The F-22s we used to shot down Chinese
weathersuper spy balloons came in at 20x the cost. That’s the only combat mission the plane has flown since it entered service over a decade ago.Why can’t they admit they have to think of their own interests first
These numbers are so big and these systems are so vast that it’s easy to lose sight of them entirely. The idea that we could all live very comfortable happy lives if a tiny minority were to stop the war profiteering is very difficult for your retail Democrat voter to grasp.
That’s the only combat mission the plane has flown since it entered service over a decade ago.
Interesting story. I do wonder if any of this equipment was made to be used or is there “just in case.”
The idea that we could all live very comfortable happy lives if a tiny minority were to stop the war profiteering is very difficult for your retail Democrat voter to grasp.
This is a great summary of the issue.
So you’re saying I should still vote for infanticide? I don’t want that kind of blood on my hands. That’s the issue in the Trolley Problem.
Not voting is just allowing the worse option which still puts blood on your hands. Inaction still has consequences.
We don’t live in a world where we have the ability to be completely pure, it’s an option that simply doesn’t exist unfortunately. :(
We need some way to denote “not gloating.”
I don’t want that kind of blood on my hands.
The joke of the modern American electoral system is that all the “viable” candidates are bloody. And if you abstain from voting or vote third party, you’re accused of supporting the winning candidate, regardless of your personal politics.
That is, I think, a big part of what drives the street protests. Americans who don’t want to be complicit in this barbarity have no other actionable way to express their condemnation.
You claim the Ds and Rs are the same, but you can very clearly see that the Ds are in favor of 10% less infanticide.
Be fair. They’re in favor of 10% slower infanticide.
The genocidiers have us by the balls, folks. Nothing you can do but voice your full throated support for one of them.
Not only that, you must also shout down anybody who says they don’t want to support genocide. Only full loyalty is acceptable.
Oh so you’re likely voting dem anyway because you aren’t stupid and/or racist but you also say Harris should abide by US law and stop arms sales to Israel? WOW LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE A TRUMP SUPPORTER HERE BOYS
It is deeply fucked the way social media has conflated opposing genocide and supporting The Other Team.
Really reeks of the Bush Era “You’re with us or you’re with the Terrorists!” when it came time to invade Afghanistan and Iraq.
It is deeply fucked the way social media has conflated opposing genocide and supporting The Other Team.
As far as centrists are concerned, opposition to genocide is the other team.
Joining hands to pass the bipartisan “Glass the Middle East Act of 2024”
Literally. Many people seem to have forgotten all the lessons from 9/11 and the clusterfuck that followed
It’s weird when you talk to yourself like this.
What do you mean?
The path to ending the conflict is through boycotts, not the president. But that takes time, so 10% less killing makes sense as a stop gap.
There is precedent for this. See apartheid South Africa. Palestinian freedom will seem impossible until it becomes inevitable.
The path to ending the conflict is through boycotts, not the president.
US House overwhelmingly passes anti-BDS resolution
We’ve already seen individual states go so far as to issue state sanctions aimed at BDS movements. US House Resolution 246 seems to be an exercise in vote counting by the AIPAC Lobby to advance a national bill to the same effect.
Palestinian freedom will seem impossible until it becomes inevitable.
The South African Apartheid system likely would have held up indefinitely if the US was the only country involved deciding its fate. And the Afrikaners had far less influence over the US Congress than the Israel lobby.
Pressure needs to be applied everywhere, from awareness by friends/family to personal BDS to local representatives to DNC delegates to Presidents. Anti-genocide and anti-apartheid momentum has made great strides in the last year, it’s critical to keep that momentum growing. This will definitely be more difficult than the South African Anti-Apartheid movement
Don’t put words in my mouth. You are a part of the problem that I’m highlighting.
Biden isn’t dragging his feet…
He’s moving at light ing speed (for his age) to support Israel’s genocide in anyway he can, including going around congress illegally to avoid a delay of just a few days.
I just hate how all the blame is put on voters, it’s literally Kamala and her campaign teams job to get votes, and despite how much they hate the thought, that means giving Dem voters what Dem voters want.
And they don’t want to citizens of pretty much the only country still supporting the genocide by sending munitions. Especially when it’s a violation of the Legacy law and care minimum we should be demanding Israel track the use of US supplied munitions.
Like. You’re completely underselling the damage Biden and other party leaders are causing…
And then claiming you can’t understand why people don’t like him or the party’s stance.
Why do t you spend your time and effort trying to stop a genocide instead of telling people they have to support a genocide?
Your way even if we win. Still a genocide.
If we demand Kamala and party leadership stop breaking US and international law, and they actually listen
Kamala could moonwalk into the oval office and Israel wouldn’t be able to continue their genocide.
What’s so hard about picking the best path?
We can stop trump and genocide or just stop trump.
Seems like an easy choice to me
I mean if I understand you correctly you’re saying bascially the same thing as OP - can hold Biden/Harris feet to the fire while working to re-elect Kamala and defeat Trump.
And the fun part is these aren’t my words. These are the words of the “Uncommitted” faction that wants to hold Democrats’ feet to the fire. They’re saying that at the moment, there’s bigger fish to fry – a MAGAt movement that would make everything Team Blue has done look like child’s play in comparison. So, Mr. Give Some Fucks isn’t just arguing with me. He’s arguing with the guys and gals actually advocating for Palestinians.
Do you honestly think they give a fuck?
Sorry, can’t answer that question. I’ll be Rule 3’d if I did. :3
Sure, we can criticise Team Blue for slow-dragging their feet on protecting Palestinians.
Incredibly generous way to put it. They are providing the weapons that maim and kill the innocent children. I criticise them for the blood on their hands
Sure, we can criticise Team Blue for slow-dragging their feet on protecting Palestinians.
HA.
I think everyone who is being intellectually honest knows full well that Trump would be worse. The problem seems to be that the Democratic party has decided it can take the votes of the left wing of its party for granted. If the left is not willing to actually follow through and withhold their votes, then the Democrats know that they never have to appease them. It’s really a lose-lose situation until the Harris campaign shows some moral courage or takes seriously the possibility of losing votes over this issue.
Exactly. We know how bad Trump is, but Biden in his disastrous “hug Netanyahu” policy went out of his way to not just ignore pro-Palestinian voices but actively insult them. He said “I have zero trust of Palestinians” and publicly supported the invasion of Al Shifa hospital despite the ridiculous and debunked claim that there was a 3 story underground Hamas base beneath it. He overrode his advisors and removed pro-Palestine language in all his October and November speeches. He met with Israeli victims but never met a single Palestinian one and even had his tour bus detour around towns in Michigan that had too many Arab-Americans. He claimed he was looking for peace but vetoed ceasefire attempts and bashed Palestinians in general. (He later privately told people he meant to bash Hamas and shouldn’t have use the words interchangeably, but never apologized).
It’s one thing to hold your nose and vote for Biden, but it’s quite another to vote for him when he’s so unapologetically anti-Palestinian. And his attempt to get Arab-Americans to vote for him when he helped kill their relatives is to ignore them and say “Trump would be worse.” That’s not a winning strategy and he wants to claim he both needs our votes to win but also that we aren’t politically relevant.
I hope Biden retires in shame and that Harris does better. She already had been meeting with Palestinian-American families when Biden refused to be seen with one.
“If the left is not willing to actually follow through and withhold their votes”
Wthholding your vote only helps Trump. Candidates know they have to appease the folks with money. We’re fighting the wrong bad guy - focus on reversing Citizens United.
Or maybe listen to your representstives and figure out why they don’t agree with you. Maybe they know something you don’t.
Everyone knows something I don’t. It’s a good thing for folks to be involved in the democratic process. Politicians aren’t gods or super heroes. They can be wrong as easily as the rest of us.
Citizens United allows those with deep pockets to speak much louder than the rest, and this is a huge problem.
Exactly
They also acknowledge Biden can stop the killing.
No serious person thinks that’s the case.
