Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
sources: cnn exit polling for demographics, ap for total general result counts and https://www.uncommittedmovement.com/
title stolen from @[email protected] because i thought it was good
It brings tears to my eyes seeing extremely nationalist American jews and arab minorities voting for the same president for diagonally opposite reasons. One of them got the logic correctly, the other not so much.
According to Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) - which describes itself as the largest progressive Jewish anti-Zionist organisation in the world - more Jewish Americans, both young and old, "are anti-Zionist (more) than ever before".
"Jewish Voice for Peace is an anti-Zionist organisation (and has been since 2019) and we're very public about that," Sonya Meyerson-Knox, the communications director at JVP, told Middle East Eye.
Knox explained that across the board since 7 October, JVP has doubled or more in terms of membership, supporters, followers, and people simply signing up to take action. src
.46% of general voters? So 1/4 of our loss margin? That's not nothing.
Don't get me wrong. The fall into fascism is primarily on white America. The minority vote is overwhelmingly what has kept us from fascism in my lifetime. That minority support for fascism increased in this election is fucking insane and notable.
Yep, white people supporting it is awful but logical. They tend to benefit from it. Minorities who are targeted by it supporting it. Is notable and shameful.
That .46% still represents individuals who voted Democrat in the primary, but indicated non-commitment to any candidate as a way to voice their positions.
You cannot in sound faith compare the uncommitted turnout to the general loss margin and draw conclusions without further data, though I respect the inquisitive approach in doing so.
It is good to note the increase, as you have here. To use the increase as an attack or blame, as others have elsewhere, is ignorant and bigoted.
You cannot in sound faith compare the uncommitted turnout to the general loss margin and draw conclusions without further data
Likewise, you cannot in sound faith equivocate people's general election votes with people's votes in the Democratic primary.
People are complaining about how others voted in the general election, not about them voting uncommitted in the primary. I, for example, am complaining about people's general election votes, but I'm also part of that small fraction who voted uncommitted in the Democratic primary. Of course, I'm not bringing race into it - I'm complaining about everyone who didn't do the most effective thing to prevent Trump's election.
sounds like this post isn’t about you then :)
No, it's just a bad-faith strawman.
trust me man it sounds like i have no beef with you or your position. i list some examples of the rhetoric i actually do have qualms with here: https://lemmy.world/comment/13552387
feel free to check those out and understand the difference, otherwise feel free to keep being argumentative and abrasive. i have no investment either way it just sounds like you came on here for a fight rather than to discuss.
I'm not sure where in that thread with PugJesus (which I read before making even my first comment) you show any examples of that. You make statements that you dislike something they and I also dislike, but that's not the same as examples of the rhetoric.
This post is bad faith because it's implying that there's a large backlash against uncommitted primary voters but no backlash against white people who voted for Trump. Both of those are false, so it's based on two false premises.
those quotes that you and i both dislike are the backlash. those are real quotes i have seen written. my concern is the disproportional count of attacks against an ethnic minority, not that there is “no backlash against white people.” my concern is communicating solidarity and collective consciousness against a common enemy.
your concern appears to be making up things about me to be angry at, so your account is now blocked. i hope you have a really good rest of your week.
your concern appears to be making up things about me to be angry at
My concern is that you're making up things to be angry at, but keep up that projection mate!
You cannot in sound faith compare the uncommitted turnout to the general loss margin and draw conclusions without further data, though I respect the inquisitive approach in doing so.
Then what conclusion is meant to be drawn in this meme by bringing that data point up?
To expose the hypocrisy in people group A (white voters) getting less attack and blame than people group B (Arab American voters et al), despite being two orders of magnitude larger.
In other words, to expose leftist infighting that disproportionately benefits the status quo and could lead to unjustified xenophobic violence. Thanks for your question. :)
I mean, at this point, most of us talking about politics already know that the majority of white folk in the US are fascist (or, in terms the mainstream media prefers to use, 'Republican'). That's like talking about the sky being blue. No one is talking about the white vote because we already expected the majority to vote for the oppression of minority groups, like they have in the past (at minimum) 10 presidential elections. That minority groups have increased their support for the oppression of minority groups is much more noteworthy.
It is good to note the increase, as you have here. To use the increase as an attack or blame, as others have elsewhere, is ignorant and bigoted.
Is using it as an example of leopards eating peoples' faces an attack or blame, just to clarify?
You're forgetting that this group deliveredMI because of their stunt. Dearborn has the largest concentraction of Arabs ooutside the Middle East. Note Talib won her seat easily in contrast to Harris despite both being Democrats. It's not bigotry, it's just math
I am in fact not forgetting about Michigan.
https://www.270towin.com/ Here is an interactive map of the 2024 election. If you can use your math to get it to show a Harris win by just switching Michigan, I will change my position. 😄
seeing an awful lot of downvotes in ratio to a dearth of screenshots proving me wrong 😉 it’s okay to be misinformed; take your time to learn and grow ❤️
I think it was just to show how badly the democrats and especially Harris read the minorities she was counting on...
Yeah, I believe that is the stated motive of the movement as well:
The movement has highlighted a clear disconnect between the Democratic party and key constituencies in their base. src
And so with the leftist Arabic vote being such a tiny % of the overall voter base, it would be really smart to pivot to single-issue to maybe win some of that 0.46%, right?
It was the Harris campaign that made the decision to not break from Biden on Israel, at the cost of at least a net +6 points gain. Those votes were entirely up for grabs. Not enough to win the general election majority, but certainly enough to win swing states. 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 with the electoral college. Winning the popular vote would have needed more progressive policies that address and resolve the material needs of the general public.
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.
i’d gift you gold if that was a thing but here’s a bagel 🥯
restarting this thread just to say you are misreading, i hope not intentionally, an older post of mine. i do not believe this. see here for clarification: https://lemmy.cafe/comment/8372851
I disabled replies because you said /conversation and I thought it was done. I didn't bait you.
I think we agree on most things. I disagree that pivoting left on Palestine would have net improved voter turnout for Harris. I do agree that the Dems have failed to appeal to undecideds and non-voters. I do agree some people in the Democratic party will be blaming third-party voters, despite them being of little consequence this election. Criticizing Hispanics for voting Trump based on vague notions of "the economy" is fair game, though, along with criticizing white people who thought Biden was still running, etc.
Re: your other post, if your post is so widely misinterpreted that you have to comment a clarification, maybe your communication isn't clear.
You're clearly not dumb, but not everyone who replies is committing a logical fallacy.
Waiting until the last minute to link the post you were referencing (which, to be fair, most people didn’t need me to explain) was a bit confusing, so I’ll admit that felt like bad form. But no hard feelings.
It seems like we’re on the same page about most things, and I agree with all the points you listed.
I’ll also apologize for the immediate defensiveness—people on this site can be really mean, and shove words into my mouth without evidence, and after a while, it starts to get to you. You are one in a million for actually having a source for your opinion on me (which I just wish you had linked earlier 😛).