this post was submitted on 06 Feb 2025
67 points (92.4% liked)

politics

19889 readers
4771 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
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/25667361

By Liam Stack

Liam Stack, who has reported from the Middle East on and off for two decades, was part of the team that covered the war in Gaza for The Times.

Feb. 5, 2025
https://archive.ph/S2pSi

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Keeponstalin -1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Here Are 34 Polls That Show A Ceasefire & Weapons Embargo Help Kamala Win

Let's say the 1.8% difference was significant. Why did the Democratic Party run away from that voter block?

Is your issue with what the Uncommitted campaign wanted? A weapons embargo to make Israel take the ceasefire? (The one the US put forward as an Israeli proposal) You're issue was with how the campaign was run? Despite them going through every proper channel?

They knew how popular a ceasefire and weapons embargo was. Total uncommitted in the Primary was 706,591 (Which may have been undercounted). On average, general turnout is twice that of primary turnout.

They knew an Arms Embargo was required by US and International Law.

Yet we still saw over a Year of Empty Rhetoric From the White House on Israel’s Wars and the campaign continued to alienate voters

They knew it was popular. They knew it was required by international law. They knew how many they risked to lose by continuing to violate the law against public sentiment. Those chose to risk that many votes when campaigning against a fascist. That's not the behavior of a party that wants to win.

[–] just_another_person 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Read my comment in context with the OP. I'm not here talking about where Democrats did what and how. I'm saying that the people crying about Gaza after helping get Trump elected in the face of an obvious choice to NOT have Trump in office can keep on crying about it, because this is what they brought on themselves.

If you were previously one of these people supporting that movement, you can do whatever mental gymnastics you want to say it wasn't your fault, but you'll be wrong all day. Anyone supporting not voting for Harris now responsible for all of what is happening now, and will happen as a result.

[–] Keeponstalin -2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Got it, your not here to talk about the actual problem with the campaign. You just want to focus your anger on those people torn most by having their family members and friends in Gaza being blown up with American weapons and support. People who were forced into the position to either vote for the party that was enthusiastically funding the bombing of their loved ones, with the only reason why being that the other guy will bomb them more, or protest vote against the administration that greenlit the death of their loved ones.

No analysis of how the Democratic Campaign lost those votes, no understanding of the position Palestinian Americans were put in. Just anger towards people who got scammed with the glimmer of hope of a ceasefire during an ongoing genocide. One only possible because the Democratic Campaign refused to pivot, despite domestic and international law, despite public sentiment, despite how much that pivot would have helped them win against the opposition.

Got it. Enjoy the view up there inbetween punching down

[–] just_another_person 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Yes. I'm replying to the context of the post, and you came in with some tertiary argument that you decided to broach yourself.

[–] Keeponstalin 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Palestinian Americans are not the people who "essentially got Trump into office"

[–] just_another_person 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Anyone who didn't vote for Harris is.

[–] Keeponstalin 0 points 2 days ago

I'm replying to the context of the post

Which is Palestinian Americans, where you said

The same people who essentially got Trump into office are now pissed about it? You don't say...

Which is saying Palestinian Americans are the people who essentially got Trump into office

Like I said

Is it understandable to be mad at everyone who didn't vote Democratic? Absolutely. Does it make sense to hyperfocus anger at anyone pro-palestinian and pro-palestinian sentiment? Absolutely not