41
submitted 1 month ago by geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml to c/usa@lemmy.ml

You were one of the organizers of the Uncommitted vote — to get people to write “uncommitted” on their ballots in the presidential primary to protest the U.S. government’s backing for Israel’s war. That produced roughly 700,000 primary votes. What did you discover about the task of translating protest to politics?

A lot of reporters in the winter were saying to me, “Don’t you think if Biden swings toward Muslims in Michigan, he will lose Jews in suburban Philadelphia?” And my hypothesis is that Muslim partisan loyalty to the Democratic Party is much thinner than it is with Jewish Americans, who are part of the Democratic Party for many reasons that have nothing to do with Israel — liberal and democratic values, social justice values. Over the years, polls have shown that Jewish voters generally do not list Israel among their top five issues. Many Muslims are part of the Democratic Party for its anti-racist values, so when the [party’s support for the] Gaza war is in contradiction with those values, it’s easy for them to leave.

Some people don’t know that Muslim and Arab voters voted for George W. Bush in 2000. They might defect to the Republican Party out of anger. That’s a real possibility. In the same way that you’ve seen a slow realignment of Latinos toward Republicans, I think this election will show a slow realignment of Arabs and Muslims toward Republicans.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com 3 points 1 month ago

I agree. If the DNC had let the one person speak then no matter what all folks whos main issue is whats happening in israel and the us relationship thereof would totally now vote for them. Its as easy as that. That is all they want. /s

[-] queermunist@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 month ago

You're being sarcastic, but people wanted to pretend that Harris was not responsible for Biden's genocide and that she represented a change in policy. The uncommitted movement only asked for a single Palestinian-American and that would have satisfied them. Obviously it wouldn't satisfy all voters but it would satisfy that specific voter bloc.

[-] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com 3 points 1 month ago

I put sarcastic because it totally would not have satisfied the block. The comments would be about does the DNC having this one speaker think that is enough.

[-] queermunist@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 month ago

It wouldn't satisfy the entire anti-genocide bloc, but it would satisfy that specific movement of 700,000 voters because that's literally all they asked for. Why are you trying to make excuses for silencing Palestinian-American voices?

[-] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com -2 points 1 month ago

definately my bad. I was not speaking limiting to that movement. Im not trying to silence anyone but at the same time I find the screaming for something that is so complex is pointless. Tageted affairs like this are exactly the right way to go. I merely did not understand it. which can be another problem for a movement.

this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2024
41 points (87.3% liked)

United States | News & Politics

7169 readers
334 users here now

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS