You're viewing part of a thread.
Since being primarily concerned about the genocide is that unpopular of a position then why are you so concerned? If Harris made the decision that those voters are not as important to her then that's that. You can't have it both ways no matter how many self-righteous posts you make online.
Since being primarily concerned about the genocide is that unpopular of a position then why are you so concerned?
Because elections in this country are often decided on fractions of a percentage point.
That's exactly why pivoting left on Gaza is critical if Harris wants to secure a Victory. Hundreds of thousands of likely voters all over swing states would be gained of Harris makes Israel a partisan issue
An April 2024 poll of likely voters across the U.S. found that 30% strongly supported withholding military funds to Israel until the attacks on Gaza stop; another 25% somewhat supported that conditional aid policy.
Below we asked all respondents what minimum combination of policies would secure (for non-Biden voters) or solidify (for Biden voters) a vote for Biden for President. A third or more voters in every state except Minnesota said a lasting ceasefire was among the minimum policies that would be needed to secure solidify their votes
Although voters are split on whether they approve or disapprove of Biden’s handling of the war, the vast majority (≥ ~75%) across all states still support an immediate and permanent ceasefire. Only a small minority of voters, from 11.2% to 16.1% in Minnesota and Pennsylvania, respectively, strongly approve of the President’s approach on Gaza. Of those, the vast majority in each state (≥64%) strongly support an immediate and permanent ceasefire. That is to say, a change in approach would not lose those votes, but staying on the current path risks doing so.
Many of the broad suggestions ("Ceasefire now, condition aid") end up polling poorly when specifics are brought up ("Pressuring Israel, removing aid until conditions are met"). People are generally not informed on foreign policy issues and vote on 'gut instinct', which makes propaganda, such as that peddled by AIPAC, very potent.
She's probably going to do her damndest to be "everything to everyone", not say anything that would upset Israel supporters whilst still trying to tack a more dovish position than the current Israeli position of "total genocide", as that's the old politician's trick on base-splitting issues.
I agree that Harris SHOULD pivot leftwards on the issue, both morally and because I see it as more likely to be beneficial to the campaign. But it's not a clear-cut issue in terms of electoral calculus. Whatever position she takes, including the aforementioned hedging bets option, it's going to be a gamble, and a big one.
Over 55% support at least conditional aid, which is necessary to secure a ceasefire, which that yougov poll shows 64%/13% approval for US Citizens. Even a 50%/25% approval for Republicans according to that poll.
We agree that it's the right move morally and politically. Ultimately Harris needs to calculate whether AIPAC money or gaining all those votes and grassroots momentum is more important to win the campaign
Either it makes political sense for her to adopt her current position or it doesn't. You can't get voters on both sides of an issue but you can mark where you stand on it and have people vote accordingly.
Either it makes political sense for her to adopt her current position or it doesn’t. You can’t get voters on both sides of an issue but you can mark where you stand on it have people will vote accordingly.
What an astounding way to say absolutely nothing.
If they are decided by a fraction and you made the correct the political choice then you win. Hope this helps.
Sounds like you don't actually care about what happens and just want to feel self righteous and make some noise. So... the exact kind of person I had in mind making this.
You couldn't argue on the merits, so you went with, "Haha, sure, I'm doing bad things, but it won't matter so why do you care?"
Do you need me to spell it out for you to make it really obvious how dumb that argument is? Or were you just trying to be facetious?
Not voting for a candidate who is tacitly supporting a genocide on that basis is not "doing bad things" no matter how much bad faith spin you try to add. The candidate has to earn the vote and that applies to non-voters too. Some people care about certain issues enough to abstain from voting on that basis and others vote strategically because its not a team sport. You just want validation for your own voting decision by implying those abstaining from voting are directly or indirectly responsible for your candidate's opponent winning which they are not. If Harris wins or loses it will be based on her and her party's policy and campaign decisions.
the candidate has to earn your vote.
If "She's not Trump" isn't all you need to know about how you should act in this election, I already know everything I need to know about how much of an actual ally you are as opposed to a willing collaborator who just doesn't want the stink of being an out fascist.
The other side are fascists running on doing fascism.
That is the entire discussion.
If that is not enough for you then you're just a fucking fascist, and you'll be regarded as such when the revolution you probably cream your jorts fantasizing about leading starts among the people your self glorifying behavior actually endanger.
Keep projecting
Did typing that feel good? I mean, if you're going to be playing 'fuck around and find out' with millions of lives, at least you should be getting something out of it, right?
Keep projecting your own insecurities
Yes, that was a great comeback. What would have been useful is a logical explanation of how your stance does anything to help Palestinians in the current political climate, but I guess that's a little too much intellectual labor for you. Turns out, I actually want the same thing you do. Which you would know if you actually bothered to read half of my comments. I'm just not being an idiot about it and ignoring reality.
If I didn't actually want to help Palestinians, do you think I'd be sitting here giving folks advice on how to ACTUALLY lock up the government to force them to deal with the Pro-Palestine lobby? The next debt ceiling negotiation is in 1/2025. You know, that thing we do every two years that we use to determine FUNDING? For things like sending money to Israel?
Just a couple of Pro-Palestinian congressmen in office, enough to keep the Democrats from obtaining outright majority (assuming they even win it back in the first place) could have been a game changer. But no, the few voices we had in congress lost their primaries.
Tell me more about how you shouldn't have to vote if you don't want to.
You're doing great, with whatever the hell you're doing. Keep up the good work.