Vice President Kamala Harris' refusal to break with the Biden administration's support for Israel's assault on Gaza cost her millions of potential Democratic voters. Will the Democratic Party learn from this and listen to its voters who want leaders to oppose sending more weapons to Israel? #Gaza #ElectionImpact
Precisely. Harris enabled her opponent to win by having a weak stance on Israel. She handed him the keys to the White House, as the article clearly describes, by not standing up and speaking out against genocide.
She literally stood and spoke out against genocide at the DNC. Granted, it came off a little soft but, she very clearly said that her administration does not condone genocide and that they would use various strategies to put pressure on Israel, while “maintaining strategic military alliances in the region”. It was a tactful/“politically-savvy” way to say it, but she did speak on it and promise action. I may be wrong, but I don’t think we can say the same for Donny.
a) A soft stance against genocide is not a very good stance on genocide.
b) Biden also said he was against genocide. His position is that all the starvation, collective punishment, and attacks against civilian infrastructure just weren’t genocide so nothing much needed to be done. She said she didn’t disagree with anything he had done.
And just to jump to the next step of this conversation, yes, Trump was vocally worse and while it’s hard to imagine being much worse than what Biden has done, I think he has the potential to figure out a way. A sober and objective and rational game theorist should choose to vote for Harris.
But that’s not how voters work. “We’re 98% bad, but he’ll be 100%” isn’t a message to keep your coalition together. Emotional voters will cut off their nose to spite their face and that’s a fundamental aspect of how politics works that can’t be ignored or dismissed because they should do something else.
Well, I suppose it’s a good thing that wasn’t “the next step of the conversation”, internet-stranger-oracle. What an odd and presumptuous way to make an argument…
What I would have said is; So, no evidence? You’re right that a softly worded stance on genocide is not a good one. It also isn’t supporting genocide. Those two things are long and far apart. Harris’ statement on Israel was political/tactful because she knows that US military bases in Israel are extremely important for US interests in the region. She had to give an answer to a very complex question, without alienating or enraging multiple different groups, with very different interests, while still promising some action will be taken against Israel. I thought she walked that tight-rope pretty well and, in doing so, showcased a quality of leadership Trump, IMO, is not capable of displaying on his best days.
I’m sorry, but putting the entirety of the blame on Harris when there were plenty of people who didn’t care whether or not a rapist fascist dictator got into power and plenty of others specifically telling people not to vote for Harris is ludicrous.
There is so much blame to go around and people like you who just blame Harris now make me think that you were part of the group telling people to absolutely not vote for Harris no matter what. People like you are why I have to flee for my daughter’s safety.
Oh, okay. Well you know Flying Squid better than I do because I didn’t think he even implied that candidates were entitled to votes.
Please continue and tell me more about this Flying Squid fellow because I really thought I could get inside his head and figure out what he was thinking.
You’re certainly not because that is not a recognized psychological disorder, but the issue here is that I thought I was Flying Squid, but you’re telling me Flying Squid is saying things that I definitely did not in any way even imply.
So who am I?
By the way, can you please quote where Flying Squid said a candidate is entitled to votes? Because I’ve read everything Flying Squid has said in this thread and I have yet to find it.
(This is where you refuse to quote what you claim was said if this plays out how these things normally do.)
Precisely. Harris enabled her opponent to win by having a weak stance on Israel. She handed him the keys to the White House, as the article clearly describes, by not standing up and speaking out against genocide.
She literally stood and spoke out against genocide at the DNC. Granted, it came off a little soft but, she very clearly said that her administration does not condone genocide and that they would use various strategies to put pressure on Israel, while “maintaining strategic military alliances in the region”. It was a tactful/“politically-savvy” way to say it, but she did speak on it and promise action. I may be wrong, but I don’t think we can say the same for Donny.
a) A soft stance against genocide is not a very good stance on genocide.
b) Biden also said he was against genocide. His position is that all the starvation, collective punishment, and attacks against civilian infrastructure just weren’t genocide so nothing much needed to be done. She said she didn’t disagree with anything he had done.
And just to jump to the next step of this conversation, yes, Trump was vocally worse and while it’s hard to imagine being much worse than what Biden has done, I think he has the potential to figure out a way. A sober and objective and rational game theorist should choose to vote for Harris.
But that’s not how voters work. “We’re 98% bad, but he’ll be 100%” isn’t a message to keep your coalition together. Emotional voters will cut off their nose to spite their face and that’s a fundamental aspect of how politics works that can’t be ignored or dismissed because they should do something else.
Well, I suppose it’s a good thing that wasn’t “the next step of the conversation”, internet-stranger-oracle. What an odd and presumptuous way to make an argument…
What I would have said is; So, no evidence? You’re right that a softly worded stance on genocide is not a good one. It also isn’t supporting genocide. Those two things are long and far apart. Harris’ statement on Israel was political/tactful because she knows that US military bases in Israel are extremely important for US interests in the region. She had to give an answer to a very complex question, without alienating or enraging multiple different groups, with very different interests, while still promising some action will be taken against Israel. I thought she walked that tight-rope pretty well and, in doing so, showcased a quality of leadership Trump, IMO, is not capable of displaying on his best days.
Here’s a clip of that portion of her speech, if you haven’t seen it already: https://youtu.be/oogNVOqnChc?si=rM_JBf6EQbUaG1pL
I’m sorry, but putting the entirety of the blame on Harris when there were plenty of people who didn’t care whether or not a rapist fascist dictator got into power and plenty of others specifically telling people not to vote for Harris is ludicrous.
There is so much blame to go around and people like you who just blame Harris now make me think that you were part of the group telling people to absolutely not vote for Harris no matter what. People like you are why I have to flee for my daughter’s safety.
Are you that dense? You’re literally trying to blame voters for Kamala’s support of genocide.
You get a big nope. Nope out of here with that noise.
I am doing no such thing and that’s a ridiculous lie to tell.
That’s literally what you’re doing. Candidates are not entitled to votes.
Oh, okay. Well you know Flying Squid better than I do because I didn’t think he even implied that candidates were entitled to votes.
Please continue and tell me more about this Flying Squid fellow because I really thought I could get inside his head and figure out what he was thinking.
Good luck with that, as of now he seems to have multiple personality disorder, but I’m no doctor 🤷♂️
You’re certainly not because that is not a recognized psychological disorder, but the issue here is that I thought I was Flying Squid, but you’re telling me Flying Squid is saying things that I definitely did not in any way even imply.
So who am I?
By the way, can you please quote where Flying Squid said a candidate is entitled to votes? Because I’ve read everything Flying Squid has said in this thread and I have yet to find it.
(This is where you refuse to quote what you claim was said if this plays out how these things normally do.)
Edit: called it.
Can you provide some sort of evidence that Harris supports genocide?