this post was submitted on 18 Jul 2025
117 points (100.0% liked)
El Chisme
466 readers
341 users here now
Place for posting about the dumb shit public figures say.
Rules:
Rule 1: The subject of a post must be a public person.
Rule 2: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 3: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 4: No sectarianism.
Rule 5: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 6: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)
Rule 7: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 8: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
founded 9 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Yeah this has precious little to do with actual policies. Which means the lesson is, if some liberal asshole asks your opinion on something that isn’t directly related to what you’re trying to accomplish, you’re not obligated to give them an answer.
But thats the whole point of what I said. That he said "globalized the intifada" is already out there and used to paint him in a negative light and he still won his primary. Who's vote is he going to try and win over by backtracking? The Republicans that already hate him for being Muslim? The Zionist that won't forgive him for saying that in the first place?
What he should have done is flip the question and ask the reporter if its alright for Israel to continue murdering Palestinians. Its not that hard. He doesn't need to make it about what should happen to the state of "Israel", just point out the evil shit they're doing and how his critics are wringing their hands about Zionist tears.
It is out there, but he didn't say it. All this bullshit is because an associate said it and he said he's not interested in policing such statements.
I haven't kept up with all the details of the election cycle, but this seems like even more of a reason to push back on the reporter, no?
Absolutely right.
Again, he's not winning additional votes by backtracking or playing nice with Zionists.
Also consider that this general election, as of right now, is going to feature two conservative Democrats running as independants, in addition to a Republican. Obviously things can change and Cuomo or Adam's may drop out, but all this means is that "moderate" and conservative votes are going to be split three ways.
If he wants to win the election, he would do well to not let his political enemies badger him into going back on what he has said so many times in the past, because they are still going to call him a terrorist sympathizer and Jew-hater regardless. He's not actually winning any favors by doing this, just encouraging his enemies to keep on with this cheap badgering, and showing his supporters that he is willing to bend to such a thing.
Is that "optics"? I guess so, but I think it's deeply myopic to just categorically reject something because it can be described that way, as though something only matters to his campaign/administration/career if it's a policy proposal.