Pennsylvania governor Josh Shapiro is perhaps the top contender to be Kamala Harris’s running mate. But Shapiro would be an awful selection, with a history of alienating and antagonizing core party constituencies and caving to pressure on major issues.
  • jeffw@lemmy.world
    247·
    3 months ago

    On Wednesday, he continued his sentiment noting that protesting is a right that should be protected, but that a Jewish-owned business should not be held responsible for the actions of the Israeli government.

    That’s from their linked article about how he tried to stifle free speech by condemning protestors. Yet the article says he said they should protest elsewhere and not attack Jewish businesses.

    These articles critiquing him on Israel always seem to omit that Shapiro has called Netanyahu the “biggest barrier” to peace in the Middle East. They also omit that his college editorial focuses on his personal views on Arafat. Even though he opines that both sides should set aside their differences for peace, the point of that article is that he doesn’t think it’ll happen.

    The article goes on to say he made “a false equivalence between criticism of Israel and antisemitism.” Again, he literally said they should protest not in front of businesses, as well as one other comment where he said the encampments were unsafe.

    I also think it’s laughable that these same people continue to hold up Walz as some sort of example of perfection. He has refused to engage with the BDS movement and actively engaged with AIPAC (more than Shapiro has, from my understanding). He even stated “Israel is our truest and closest ally in the region, with a commitment to values of personal freedoms and liberties, surrounded by a pretty tough neighborhood.” The only thing he’s done that is remotely in support of Palestine is to say that Democrats shouldn’t ignore the uncommitted activists if they want to win. That’s a logical statement about the math behind winning an election, not a support of Palestine.

    • Soulg@sh.itjust.works
      149·
      3 months ago

      I gotta say, I didn’t know much about Shapiro before this so started, and frankly I still don’t.

      But nothing is more suspicious than seeing someone go from limited mention to being called a zionist constantly, 0 to 100 like I’ve seen with Shapiro.

      • HomerianSymphony@lemmy.world
        143·
        3 months ago

        But nothing is more suspicious than seeing someone go from limited mention to being called a zionist constantly

        I think that’s a pretty natural consequence of:

        1. Reports that he is the front-runner to be Harris’s vice-presidential pick (which pretty naturally takes someone from “who?” to the topic of national discussion); and

        2. The Philadelphia Inquirer digging up an old op-ed where he says that the Palestinians are incapable of governing themselves.

        I’m going to skip over everything else that has been reported about that op-ed and focus on that one line. Because that is bonkers.

        I do believe people’s political opinions can change, and that’s why I’ll forgive most of the op-ed (my opinions have certainly changed since I was 20, and I’m not much younger than Shapiro). But that one line speaks to a bigoted, colonialist mindset that would have been more at home in the 1860s than the 1990s.

        I honestly think it’s disqualifying. For someone to think like that at age 20 points to such a lack of empathy, it’s probably the sign of a sociopathic personality.

  • Carrolade@lemmy.worldEnglish
    4010·
    3 months ago

    I’m sorry, but progressives are a wing, not a core. If you want us to become the core, we need to convince people of the importance of simple progressive policies, and how they can benefit people out in their day-to-day life. Not just assume we already are something we’re not.

    This is especially important these days, when so many independents are fleeing Trump, and applying pressure to the dem party to move closer to the center to court them. We need to convince some of them to become more of us, increasing our numbers.

    Then we actually will be core. We can’t just lie about the dem voters not leaning more neo-lib than progressive, though, that accomplishes nothing.

    What is the top issue among dem voters this cycle? It isn’t Gaza or the climate, it’s the economy. Again. 63% of dem voters said it’s the top priority as of Feb. That’s a majority, a core, and not a particularly progressive position.

    https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2024/02/29/americans-top-policy-priority-for-2024-strengthening-the-economy/

    They’re just people, though, they can be convinced of the primary importance of sustainability.

    • grue@lemmy.worldEnglish
      332·
      3 months ago

      What is the top issue among dem voters this cycle? It isn’t Gaza or the climate, it’s the economy. Again. 63% of dem voters said it’s the top priority as of Feb. That’s a majority, a core, and not a particularly progressive position.

      Since when is the economy not a progressive issue? IMO the primary failing of the Democratic Party has been its utter refusal (probably due to the influence of corporate donors) to apply any progressive solutions to economic issues.

      • Carrolade@lemmy.worldEnglish
        47·
        3 months ago

        Perhaps, at the same level as all our other issues, in specifically an income inequality framing. Though usually we’d specifically say “income inequality”, where when a typical American says “economy” they mean unemployment rate, stock market and these days, inflation.

    • Wiz@midwest.socialEnglish
      123·
      3 months ago

      That’s a weird position to have.

      Things would become only worse for Palestinians under an administration of TFG.

      • HomerianSymphony@lemmy.world
        512·
        3 months ago

        And what guarantee is there that the Palestinians wouldn’t have it worse under Kamala Harris and Josh “Peace is not Possible” Shapiro?

          • HomerianSymphony@lemmy.world
            106·
            3 months ago

            Yes. Absolutely.

            Unfortunately, Israel doesn’t want peace as much as it wants all of Jerusalem and the West Bank.

            Peace will happen when the international community forces Israel to return the West Bank and most of East Jerusalem (including the Al-Aqsa mosque) to the Palestinians and recognize Palestinian statehood.

        • Wiz@midwest.socialEnglish
          1·
          3 months ago

          There are no guarantees. If you make “guarantee” the high bar, you will never vote - but maybe that’s your goal to influence other people to do.

          We know the mission, though. Defeat Trump, in any (legal) way possible.

        • frostysauce@lemmy.world
          41·
          3 months ago

          You don’t have to like anyone but voting third party is making a choice to support a second Trump regime.

          • HomerianSymphony@lemmy.world
            24·
            3 months ago

            voting third party is making a choice to support a second Trump regime.

            But a Republican would tell me that voting third-party is a choice to support a Harris regime.

            Which is correct?

            (Neither.)

            • WoahWoah@lemmy.world
              51·
              3 months ago

              Actually if you were intending to vote for Harris but Shapiro would make you vote third-party, a republican would heartily encourage you to do so for the same reason a Democrat will happily encourage a Trump voter that doesn’t like Vance to vote third-party.

    • Wiz@midwest.socialEnglish
      54·
      3 months ago

      That’s a weird position to have.

      Things would become only worse for Palestinians under an administration of TFG.

  • knexcar@lemmy.worldEnglish
    525·
    3 months ago

    Isn’t Shapiro one of those conservative influencers, similar to Tucker or Alex Jones? Why would Kamala choose Ben Shapiro?

    • djsoren19@yiffit.net
      8·
      3 months ago

      I honestly think the unfortunate name association is enough of a reason not to go for him, but it would be really hilarious if Kamala actually chose Ben Shapiro and everyone just had to try and rationalize it.

  • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
    254·
    3 months ago

    Shapiro is an argument to sacrifice MI and WI for PA, and it doesn’t even come close to guaranteeing PA.

    You have no path to the white house with our MI and WI.

  • dhork@lemmy.worldEnglish
    2428·
    3 months ago

    The more folks on Lemmy complain about this guy, the more I am convinced he might be the right choice. It worked for Harris, after all.

        • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1710·
          3 months ago

          Ok. do whatever stupid shit you want. Keep thinking that enthusiasm doesn’t matter and that second worst is always a winner.

          You’ll blame anyone but yourself when you’re wrong, like you did in 2016.

          • Eldritch@lemmy.worldEnglish
            814·
            3 months ago

            Enthusiasm is fine. Fanaticism is a problem. Know the difference.

            Second worst has always been the winner throughout American history. Much the rest of the world too. Apart from that one time a Republican invented his own party to run on and won on his name recognition. Because the Republican party abandoned him. But hey if you got the stats to prove otherwise. We’d all like to see them.

            Name calling and casting baseless aspersions won’t make your points anymore reasonable or sound. Honestly it just makes people see you as a cringy obsessed weirdo. Which isn’t helping any of the people you and I both want to see helped.

            • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.worldEnglish
              1310·
              3 months ago

              Second worst has always been the winner throughout American history.

              You may think that Trump was second worst to Clinton, but I don’t.

              • Eldritch@lemmy.worldEnglish
                611·
                3 months ago

                Definitely unsurprising. Irrationality definitely doesn’t appear to be against your modus operandi when it comes to these topics.

                • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.worldEnglish
                  1010·
                  3 months ago

                  If second worst always wins and Trump beat Clinton, you’re saying that Trump was second worst to Clinton.

                  As always with centrists, abuse is what you use in lieu of defensible positions.

    • pjwestin@lemmy.world
      7·
      3 months ago

      The more I hear centrists talk about how he’s a smart pick, the more convinced I am he’ll be a disaster. It was true for Biden, after all.

    • jeffw@lemmy.world
      219·
      3 months ago

      Except if you read the editorial he wrote, he’s mainly critiquing Arafat and the PLO. He literally says he supports peace but doesn’t think it’s realistic (edit: and closes the article by saying that he hopes he’s proved wrong). He also mentions how Israel won’t relinquish sufficient land to Palestine for peace to be made.

      There are many legitimate criticisms of Shapiro (your first link, for example, as well as his flip-flopping on school vouchers), but claiming he’s significantly more pro-Israel than any of the other candidates is misleading. I’m not aware of any other candidates who called Netanyahu the “biggest barrier” to Middle East peace.

      • Coelacanth@feddit.nu
        131·
        3 months ago

        But is the average voter going to actually read his editorial and form their own opinion? Or will they get swayed by loose quotes and bad optics?

    • tacosplease@lemmy.world
      6·
      3 months ago

      Probably because of the electoral college. There’s reason to believe she is going to choose a governor as her VP pick, which would exclude Mark Kelly.

      • mipadaitu@lemmy.worldEnglish
        3·
        3 months ago

        That and if she picked Kelly, that would remove a Democrat from the Senate, and the Senate can’t afford to lose any Democrats.

        • tacosplease@lemmy.world
          1·
          3 months ago

          Damn that’s probably why it doesn’t seem like it will be him. Too bad we have to play the election game vs choose the best VP for the job, but here we are.