544

Yeah, both sides amiright?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Keeponstalin@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

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.

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.

Quotes

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.

[-] LittleBorat3@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

Can you also make a graph on how many luxury hotels Trump is going to build in Gaza after the rubble is cleared, thanks 👍

[-] Keeponstalin@lemmy.world -3 points 1 month ago

Do you think I've ever supported Trump or something when I've repeatedly called out his Hitlarian and Fascist rhetoric and policies?

[-] icydefiance@lemm.ee 5 points 1 month ago

Yes, because you helped him win.

[-] Keeponstalin@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

By voting for Harris? By telling others to also vote for Harris even if anti-genocide is their single issue? By voicing my concern that the campaigns strategy of ignoring all the uncommitted voters in swing states and failing to break from Biden on one of his most unpopular positions was risking losing the election? How exactly did I help Trump win?

[-] icydefiance@lemm.ee -1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

By promoting the lies that either Biden or Harris can single handedly stop the genocide, and that they've made no attempt to do so.

If we just ended our alliance with Israel, do you know what they would do next? They would likely ally themselves with Russia instead.

That would give Russia control over a port that facilitates a huge portion of commerce in the middle east. It would also give them control of a lot of tech companies, including Intel's massive R&D campus, and they would have access to the iron dome, which would be a pretty big intelligence leak. Israel also has an extremely important spy network that western countries rely on, and suddenly they would start serving Russia instead.

It would also allow the rest of the middle east to "escape containment", so to speak. Particularly Iran. As soon as that happens, where do you think their missiles will go next?

Oh, and the genocide of Palestinians would still continue.

Geopolitics is complicated, and Biden was walking a tightrope. He was at least placing limits on how US weapons could be used, and trying to negotiate a ceasefire. Trump will scrap all of that and encourage Israel to kill everyone in the region.

But you didn't care about any of that. Your moral outrage prevented you from trying to figure out why things are the way they are, and you joined the choir of people who were trying to prevent anyone from voting for Harris. A choir that mostly consisted of Trump supporters who were just trying to promote anything that might hurt Harris's chances of winning.

[-] Keeponstalin@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

By promoting the lies that either Biden or Harris can single handedly stop the genocide, and that they've made no attempt to do so.

They haven't. You can't have a permanent ceasefire when the US is continually supplying military weapons unconditionally to the side committing the genocide.

He was at least placing limits on how US weapons could be used, and trying to negotiate a ceasefire

Only in rhetoric, not in policy. No limits were placed even after the 30 day deadline of Israel continuing to deny aid to a starving population. The same population Israel continually targets civilians, mostly women and children, and civilian infrastructure like hospitals and refugee camps.

Timeline: The Biden administration on Gaza, in its own words

One Year of Empty Rhetoric From the White House on Israel’s Wars

If we just ended our alliance with Israel, do you know what they would do next? They would likely ally themselves with Russia instead.

Reigning in Israel into a permanent ceasefire is not 'ending our alliance' it would only force Israel to abide by International Humanitarian Law for once and end the genocide and Apartheid. Nor would that mean they would Ally with Russia, which they aren't even on great terms with. Peace is also in China's best interest in order to increase trade with Middle East countries.

Geopolitically, Russia still benefits far more from peace than the current situation.

On Russia and the Middle East

But beyond Russia rekindling old ties and worrying about domestic extremism, the big shift in the Russian relationship with Israel is rooted in Moscow’s increasingly close bilateral security relationship with Iran. I don’t think we can emphasize this enough. This development puts the rest of us—the United States and Europe—in quite a predicament. Russia is now engaged with Iran in two different conflicts, Ukraine and Israel/Gaza. Obviously, this is in quite different ways, but the Russia/Iran relationship greatly complicates the situation in the Middle East, Israel, and Gaza, and the battlefield in Ukraine. Russia’s relationship with Iran—not just Zelenskyy’s Jewish heritage, or all the Russian speakers of Jewish Ukrainian heritage in Israel—as well as the U.S. role in support of both Ukraine and Israel start to draw the two sets of conflicts into the same geopolitical frame.

I think prior to October 7, the Russians were very interested in the idea of the Israelis having a breakthrough with Saudi Arabia that they could then capitalize on economically and politically. Putin may even think that he can still bounce back with Israel at some point when the dust settles in Gaza, although I doubt that. I heard a prominent Israeli at a recent event say that Russia has now moved itself into the enemy category with Israel after decades of relations improving. And Russia has also always had a somewhat complex and awkward relationship with Saudi Arabia, even though they’ve been recently touting that relationship—we saw Putin on a sort of semi-victory tour of the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia in early December last year.

In the context of energy relationships, where Saudi Arabia is so important, Russia has often not gone along with what OPEC+ and the Saudis have wanted in terms of committing to production cuts to bolster oil prices. Russia is always thinking about its own bottom line, and volume is often better for Moscow than just price. Putin is continually focused on trying to make sure that Russia’s energy revenues are not imperiled in any way—especially given Moscow’s loss of its dominant position in Europe’s energy markets after the invasion of Ukraine. And then there is Iran, and Saudi Arabia’s difficult relationship and regional rivalry with Tehran. This is one of the reasons why Putin went to the UAE and Saudi Arabia in December 2023, to cozy up to the Gulf Cooperation Council/leading Gulf states and Saudi Arabia to balance Russia’ closer security ties with Iran.

What is Russia’s role in the Israel-Gaza crisis?

You can rationalize the US's decision to fund and allow Israel to eradicate the entire people of Palestine all you want. It is unacceptable. It's causing a rise in genuine antisemitism and islamophobia. I will do everything in my power to support Palestinian sovereignty and emancipation.

https://www.jewishvoiceforpeace.org/about/

[-] TheOubliette@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 month ago

Western liberals live in a fog of thought-terminating clichés that allow them to support The Party regardless of what it does or stands for. One of those ckichés is thst if you disagree with them or don't support their politicians, you are actually a sleeper agent of the "enemy" faction.

Calling you a Trump supporter isn't the only variation on this. They do the same re: "Putler" if you criticize US policy tiwards Ukraine and various racist accusations if you are anything less than a sinophobe.

In fact there are already BlueAnon conspiracy comments in this comment section trying to call pro-Palestinian protesters a Russian op. Normally you'd see this kind of logic on your weird Uncke's facebook page but through liberalism alk things are possible.

[-] Resonosity@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

Thank you for voicing this opinion in this thread, and bringing the receipts.

[-] futatorius@lemm.ee -2 points 1 month ago

A Gaza ceasefire would be impossible without Netanyahu agreeing to it. So that 6% swing's based on a hypothetical that'd never happen, especially when Netanyahu was doing everything he could to help Trump. And, if Trump were the candidate of peace, why would that butcher do that?

[-] Resonosity@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

Guess what then

Lie to the American people.

Lie like Obama did! And lie well. Tell the biggest lie. Because clearly that worked for Trump!

Democrats stared down the barrel of fascism this election, and didn't even think to come off their high horse to score a victory.

[-] TheOubliette@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 month ago

I mean, they still lied plenty, they aren't on a high horse for pretending to push a ceasefire while providing unconditional support for Israel.

They made a choice to stick by their pro-Israel donors and NatSec ghouls that want clear pro-Israel messaging.

this post was submitted on 15 Nov 2024
544 points (94.3% liked)

politics

19241 readers
1865 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS