this post was submitted on 04 Jan 2024
128 points (68.3% liked)

politics

18988 readers
3600 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

In a letter published Wednesday on Medium, an anonymous group of Biden's campaign staffers demanded the president call for a ceasefire in Gaza, citing concerns that not shifting his policy on the issue could hurt his 2024 chances.


"Biden for President staff have seen volunteers quit in droves, and people who have voted blue for decades feel uncertain about doing so for the first time ever, because of this conflict," the Medium letter read.

"It is not enough to merely be the alternative to Donald Trump," the campaigners continued. "The campaign has to shift the feeling in the pits of voters' stomachs, the same feeling that weighs on us every day as we fight for your reelection. The only way to do that is to call for a ceasefire."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 29 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

This smells like #WalkAway psyop bullshit. Anon letter on Medium as a source, lol please.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (2 children)

The letter was organized by campaign staffers. Five of them confirmed the authenticity of the letter to West Wing Playbook. Those staffers, who were granted anonymity because of their concern of backlash, said they were motivated to organize their letter out of a sense of moral responsibility.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/01/03/biden-campaign-anonymous-letter-israel-hamas-00133705

Nice try though to ignore the issue.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

I jumped to conclusions, at least someone has confirmed it's legit. Wasn't ignoring it but the astroturfing "Anon outside any verifiable or published source says" is a problem that keeps recurring.

They are entitled to their opinions, and I'm not even in disagreement - the entire conflict is an abomination and horrendous... but I'm curious who they'd vote for otherwise. No one worth talking about in US politics would chart a different course.

[–] logi 7 points 9 months ago

It's much easier to hold your nose and vote for the (much!) less bad option than it is to decide to spend your time and effort working for their campaign.

[–] SCB 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

17 people is not a significant portion of his campaign staff, and the campaign hasn't even mobilized for staffing heavily yet.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The letter is the latest example of internal rifts not just within the Democratic Party but within the Biden operation over how to approach the conflict. Since the fall, a flurry of protest letters — often written without names attached — have urged the president to support a ceasefire. In November, 500 political appointees and staff members from 40 government agencies anonymously signed one letter, while another letter included the names of over 500 alumni of Biden’s 2020 presidential campaign. White House interns also sent a letter to the president and staffers on Capitol Hill have also sent similar letters to their bosses. Biden supporters have raised questions about the veracity of those numbers, noting that the anonymity makes it impossible to confirm.

How about 500 people? Is that number more significant?

[–] SCB 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Not particularly, no. Something to the tune of 2-3 million people volunteered for the Biden campaign in 2020

[–] [email protected] -1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The 500 number isn't volunteers, but "political appointees and staff members from 40 government agencies".

[–] SCB 2 points 9 months ago

Ah well then definitely no.