“Extreme Danger”: Harris Earns a Stunning Endorsement Over Trump
“Extreme Danger”: Harris Earns a Stunning Endorsement Over Trump
Kamala Harris has earned an eleventh-hour show of support from Palestinian, Arab, and Muslim community leaders.
More than 100 Arizona Palestinian, Arab, Muslim, and progressive Democrats and community leaders have signed a letter making the case for those reluctant to support Kamala Harris against Donald Trump.
“We know that many in our communities are resistant to vote for Kamala Harris because of the Biden administration’s complicity in the genocide,” the letter, published Thursday night, reads.
“Some of us have lost many family members in Gaza and Lebanon. We respect those who feel they simply can’t vote for a member of the administration that sent the bombs that may have killed their loved ones,” the letter continued. “As we consider the full situation carefully, however, we conclude that voting for Kamala Harris is the best option for the Palestinian cause and all of our communities.”
You're viewing a single thread.
It is important to note that foreign nations like Iran, Russia and China are using this topic to convince voters to allow facism to win the election in the US. This doesn’t mean that Israel shouldn’t be held accountable for their actions. But history shows how foreign actors use these topics to manipulate us.
I think it is important to note that a surprisingly large number of voters say they like fascism without any need to rationalise that as foreign meddling. Being told that you are good because you are ingroup and they are bad because they are outgroup is an enduringly popular message with a large minority of people.
Looks like teaching history was important after all...
It seems like this message resonates strongly with about 1/3 of people across time and space.
Yeah, it sucks but everyone just needs to hold their nose and do what will have the best outcome. Sadly, if Trump is elected, this will probably not be an issue in the future. Yeah, Harris needs to do more and the democrats need to be pressured into doing what's right, but the only way that matters is if they're in power. If Republicans have control, nothing you say regarding Palestine will matter.
You should not normalize genocide by voting for any genocider candidate, nor publicly rationalizing doing so.
It is extremely effective to not vote! The republicans have been pushing this shit for years and I trust them.
I would like you and others to stop normalizing the genocide of Palestine. If you stop announcing your unconditional support for the people genociding Palestine to any degree then it has been effective.
In terms of being more generally politically effective, it is important to take a step away from the dictates of your political class faction. I think that having a simple red line of not supporting genocide should be enough for any moral person to do so.
Yes, let’s let a fascist who wants to kill the Palestinians even faster into power. It will be super effective to protest against him when he is using military force to suppress us. It’s not like he hasn’t already used BOTAC to kill leftists during the George Floyd uprisings. Surely all the guardrails will allow us to stop the genocide with him in power!
“After Trump, Our Turn” comrades! Don’t vote!
Yes, let’s let a fascist who wants to kill the Palestinians even faster into power.
Israel already has unconditional material support from the Biden-Harris administration on which the genocide is entirely dependent.
However, you can help prevent the normalization of genocide by saying it is your red line that you will not cross.
It will be super effective to protest against him when he is using military force to suppress us.
The Biden-Harris regime recently issued an EO, prompting a corresponding memo from the Pentagon, to authorize domestic military use, including lethal force against citizens in the US. Harris' running mate mobilized the national guard against George Floyd protesters. Harris is a prosecutor known for harsh and unfair treatment of the accused.
They are not oppositional forces in this matter.
It’s not like he hasn’t already used BOTAC to kill leftists during the George Floyd uprisings.
The people that killed leftists were cops and right wing stochastic terrorists. The cops are funded and defended and overseen and protected by Dems at all levels of government. And it is a rabbit hole, but the fates of Ferguson organizers are something to follow as well.
Surely all the guardrails will allow us to stop the genocide with him in power!
There are no guardrails. The question is whether you will take the first step in opposition of genocide by refusing to support it. There is much more work to be done.
"After Trump, Our Turn” comrades! Don’t vote!
Please center Palestine in your thoughts.
I’m aware of literally everything you are talking about but I have historical context that you apparently lack. Look up what happened to socialists in nazi germany. We need to stop the fascists before they take power or everything gets worse. Things can fucking get worse.
My inclination is damage limitation not some bullshit ideal. There are two options on the table, and I voted for Harris because I love my trans brothers and sisters, my many migrant friends, my wife who is a disabled immigrant. I hate Harris and Biden for what they are doing to migrants and Palestinians. Trump would make literally everyone worse off. So I will take my meager power at the ballot box to oppose fascism. Outside of the ballot box I will oppose the democrats for the genocidaires they are.
I’m aware of literally everything you are talking about but I have historical context that you apparently lack. Look up what happened to socialists in nazi germany.
I don't need to look it up, of course. Who knows where you got this ides that I don't know history. Maybe you should just ask instead of presuming? They were killed and oppressed and organized resistance as partisans.
We need to stop the fascists before they take power or everything gets worse. Things can fucking get worse.
Stop the fascists by doing what?
Remember what the various left factions did in the 192ps and 1930s? How did Hitler become chancellor?
I do need to say that the US is not like Germany leading up to the Nazis, though. If it has similarities to Germany it is Germany from the late 1800s, before they lost status in WWI. But even that doesn't make sense because the Germany of the late 1800s had a much larger left than the US. The important factor here is that the US is not an embarrassed former imperialiat nation in decline, it is the dominant global superpower overseeing and causing most of the war and intentional death on the planet. Why are you worried about Hitler when you are voting for Himmler while he does a genocide? That is not fighting fascists!
My inclination is damage limitation not some bullshit ideal.
Being against genocide is a bullshit ideal? Tell me more.
There are two options on the table, and I voted for Harris because I love my trans brothers and sisters, my many migrant friends, my wife who is a disabled immigrant.
There are, of course, more options on the table. Third party candidates and leaving it blank. You did not have to vote for someone that is committing a genocide, let alone rationalize it as just a decision to help marginalized people. You almost seem proud of it.
I hate Harris and Biden for what they are doing to migrants and Palestinians.
Not enough to not give them exactly what they want and tell others to do the same.
Trump would make literally everyone worse off. So
I don't think Trump would have had your consent to genocide the Palestinian people. I think you would have had this "bullshit ideal" and there is a decent chance I could have gotten you to mobilize at least once and foment a crisis re: unilateral executive arms donations (which Biden is doing BTW). I don't think Trump would have been as competent at coordinating European complicity, likely would have thrown a wrench in the works.
I think you are overlooking material impacts and are focused on the reactionary aesthetics.
PS Dems are promoting at least one transphobic D politician now. They will shift right in this just like they now embrace the border wall, introduced and fought for a harsh right wing immigration bill, and are tiptoeing around mass deportation discourse.
One if the reasons they can do all of this is that they don't need to earn your vote. Ever. You will even vote for them when they commit genocide. Unmoored by any attempt to organize demands they will do whatever they think is best for their donors and can't be managed by PR goons. And you are helping, not just with your own vote, but in justifying it to others and by being shitty to those who oppose genocide with a coherent, principled stance.
So I will take my meager power at the ballot box to oppose fascism. Outside of the ballot box I will oppose the democrats for the genocidaires they are.
You are contradicting yourself because you are telling everyone here that what you did was good and right and aligned with opposing fascism. If you want to vote for a genocider and never tell anyone to do the same I would accept that compromise.
I'm so fucking sick of this ridiculous argument. You've identified the problem, what's your genius solution?
They solution is to I've the country to trump and not have elections anymore. They are not too bright.
The solution requires commitment to building power, i.e. leverage and numbers, gaining a political education, and engaging in action.
What I am suggesting is just the absolute bare minimum, and you all know it: genocide should be a red line and you are complicit if you vote for someone doing a genocide.
Your vote isn't strategic, either. You are just demonstrating that you will put up with anything and will be ignorable for the indefinite future for them to do these and greater crimes. And by justifying it to yourself, you will fail to take the necessary steps to, in your words, "solve the problem".
It's possible to vote Dem and still do all the other things you listed.
It is possible, but it doesn't happen particularly often. The kind of thinking on display in this thread is defense of a barrier to doing these kinds of actions, from recognizing one's own lack of political education, from developing a concrete notion of leverage or collective action.
When people do hold themselves to those standards but still hold out hope for Dems, they learn some uncomfortable lessons. The first one is that Democrats make you their opponent and gladly lie about you and will even throw their money and influence behind Republicans instead. Something else that people learn (at least when they are honest with themselves) is that they often don't really have a concrete idea of how to make demands or build leverage, and so they will engage in actions and spin their wheels. The ones that are not honest with themselves will still claim a victory. The ones that are honest with themselves will engage in productive criticism and development of their political program.
But this is so many steps past what the people here are doing, relying on tired canards shared as memes. I would rather they at least get to the "try and fail" step of becoming politically educated and a force for humanity, but we are stuck at the "defend everything Dems tell us to do" phase.
As someone who is politically active in ways other than voting, I'm calling bullshit. You're just making assumptions about how other people act, you have no evidence.
Is that so? What else do you do?
After you answer the same question
I have already described some of it throughout this thread. One if the things I do is organize with and among Palestinians to engage in actions and organization building.
Your turn.
Great intro to philosophy lesson. In the real world, we have the choice between Harris and Trump. You can forget anyone else exists because our election system is broken. If I don't vote, one of them will still win. Now, without philosophizing, what do we do to stop the violence?
Great intro to philosophy lesson.
I did not describe anything particularly philosophical.
In the real world, we have the choice between Harris and Trump
Oh, so you just mean you are trying to be condescending and pretend I am not being reakistic. Unfortunately for this excuse for why you will vote for someone doing a genocide, I am pragmatic. I criticize your ideas of "strategy", which are just bog standard lesser evil vote shaming trotted out to discipline Democrats' empathetic voters every 4 years and suggest you take the first steps towards empowerment by doing the same. My hope would be that them asking you to support genocide would be enough to take that srep., that you could accept that there is not a greater evil than genocide, and that as a good person, you would be an opponent of genocide rather than complicit.
If you want to talk more specifically on being pragmatic when it cones to political power,I would be happy to do so. It is mostly about building leverage, which is basically the exact opposite of your rhetoric.
You can forget anyone else exists because our election system is broken.
The system is working as intended.
But in your terminology, would you say it is more broken or less broken than when the Whigs dissolved and an abolitionist party took its place over the issue of slavery? In this scenario, you would be someone saying that you must always vote for the pro-slavers.
If I don't vote, one of them will still win.
Yes, that is true. But are you going to orient yourself in opposition to genociders or are you going to decide on which one to support? I think it should be a red line.
Never again means never again for anyone. What do you think that phrase means?
Now, without philosophizing, what do we do to stop the violence?
"The violence" is far too vague for me to give you any real answer. If you mean US support for genocide, then you will need to join groups opposed to the genocide, participate in political education, and build those organizations so that they can make demands and enact material change, such as blockading weapons manufacturers. Or, if you can only understand politics through elections, you can spend your time organizing a principled anti-genocide voting bloc, ideally tied to some material interest. You have no leverage as a voter unless you can credibly threaten to withhold your vote. And your leverage is dramatically decreased when you act as an individual rather than an organized bloc.
Is that practical enough for you?
That was a lot of words that, in no way, answered my question.
It did answer your question but you clearly don't actually care about the topic. It is just a rhetorical device for you to avoid thinking about your complicity in genocide.
Let me know when you have the courage of your convictions. If it were me, I would be damn sure I knew what I was talking about if there was any risk of me normalizing genocide.
We should protest and take action, but vote for those who will make things less bad. Our system is fucked, but making yourself effectively invisible doesn't help. If your vote doesn't got for one of the two parties you are worth as much as someone who doesn't exist.
We should protest and take action, but vote for those who will make things less bad.
The Biden-Harris administration is committing this genocide. "Less bad", friend, they are doing the worst thing.
Our system is fucked, but making yourself effectively invisible doesn't help.
Given the extent to which Dem voters rely on personal moralism, I think that "don't vote for genocidera" should be enough. You are complicit if you vote for a person doing genocide.
But if you prefer to think this is about strategy, what do you think makes your interests more relevant? Being a loudly guaranteed lever pull for the party even when you acknowledge they are doing a genocide, or someone that will, at least some of the time, actually withhold their vote on a stated principal?
It is actually your logic that leads to irrelevancy. It is logic handed down by party PR ghouls and they repeat it because it works: it means they don't need to listen to you, they can just convince you to disempower yourself!
If your vote doesn't got for one of the two parties you are worth as much as someone who doesn't exist.
I disagree, but even if I didn't, a vote complicit in genocide is worse than not voting at all.
They're not doing the worst thing. Doing Genocide AND the 2025 Trump agenda is worse.
Genocide is the worst thing and should be a red line. Please do your best to not help erase that red line.
Question: Is genocide in Xinjiang a red line for you?
I already know what your answer's going to be, I'm just asking to highlight what your real goal here is.
I do not live in China and cannot do any advocacy related to Xinjiang. Though I will point out that there is not a genocide there. By now you should be able to recognize the differences. The mass killings, the videos, the diaspora, the intense censorship. We could discuss the ridiculous think tank and fake university apparatus that sold that lie with the US State Department, but to be frank, it is disgusting to distract from opposition to the genocide of Palestinians with this lazy attempt at a gotcha. Personally, I think you should apologize.
I already know what your answer's going to be, I'm just asking to highlight what your real goal here is.
My real goal is to advocate against normalization of genocide in the US. I have organized actions and protests to this effect for over a year.
Do your best to at least not believe your own bullshitting.
Okay, so you're okay with genocide in Xinjiang, just not in Gaza. And your strategy for solving the genocide in Gaza is to let someone come into power who's even more pro-genocide that the tepid pro-genocide stance of the current Democrats. Dooming millions of innocent people who can't fight back to a catastrophe beyond even their present catastrophe.
So you're okay with certain genocides. And you don't want strategies that will avoid a huge escalation of the existing genocide in Gaza.
It honestly doesn't sound like you're very anti-genocide.
Fucking 🤡
Go away.
Please do your best to engage in good faith and avoid namecalling.
Yes. BadA + BadB < BadA
Unconditional support for genocide cannot be made any more maximalist. There is no BadB to add.
Yeah there is. Genocide vs Genocide with agenda 2025.
The genocide itself cannot be made more maximalist. You mean there is another category.
I reject that argumentation as well, as genocide should be a red line. You don't get to come back from that. You cannot put salve on that wound so easily. Look at yourself in the mirror and see if you can withstand it. And if you can, ask yourself why anyone should look to you for solidarity and what you would be doing in Germany 1930, in the US in 1855. Would you be the abolitionist? Would you be the person fighting against fascists? Or would you be the "pragmatist" supporting regulation of slavery, the Whigs, and compromise with monarchists and liberals?
I understand your stated idealist position, "I won't vote for someone engaged in genocide".
... but the reality is that Trump win, which is likely without every possible Dem vote, will cause the worst possible genocide.
So by withholding your vote you're not complicit in Harris-supported genocide, but you're complicit in Trump supported genocide, which everyone understands to be worse.
As I often say in these threads, withholding your vote is precisely what the republicans want you to do.
Seriously, will your ideals be much comfort when Trump supported Netanyahu is grinding Gaza to dost?
I understand your stated idealist position, “I won’t vote for someone engaged in genocide”.
I don't think it's particularly idealist, though it is formulated to appeal to those with empathy. If they won't listen to "genocide is a red line", what do you think they will listen to? A long-winded explanation of political organizing, realignments, game theory, economics? Just saying "don't support genocide" elicits a flurry of bad-faith insults and absurd lies.
… but the reality is that Trump win, which is likely without every possible Dem vote, will cause the worst possible genocide.
There is no bigger gun to threaten people with. There is already genocide with maximalist support from the United States and a deftly subjugated Europe. It even gets support from alleged "good guys" that vote for Democrats. No resistance except from those with personal connections, a stronger connection to empathy, or the politically educated.
So by withholding your vote you’re not complicit in Harris-supported genocide, but you’re complicit in Trump supported genocide, which everyone understands to be worse.
That's funny, I don't think I told anyone to vote for Trump, either. Instead, I do work against genocide, organizing actions, politically educating those who don't just sit on their computers and justify supporting genocide to one another.
As I often say in these threads, withholding your vote is precisely what the republicans want you to do.
Of course it is, because the GOP and Democrats are competing for votes for an election. Do you believe this to be revelatory?
Seriously, will your ideals be much comfort when Trump supported Netanyahu is grinding Gaza to dost?
That is already happening under the Biden-Harris administration that forwarded this genocide for over the last year. Have you not seen the destruction, mass murder, burning of children alive? Do you not know where those weapons come from, how they are donated, what logistical support they receive, how the US attacks all opposition to the genocide?
"don't vote for Harris" means "vote for trump", so that is what you are saying, with a bunch of other BS tacked on.
Who should I vote for?
Anyone that is not a genocider. Even not voting is better. If you would like to communicate that genocide is unacceptable, then the camdidates with anti-genkxise messages are de la Cruz and Stein.
I will not vote for those people.
why not? either one would be better than harris or trump at this time. primarily due to the fact neither has the support of a major group of genocidal congress critters.
Because they won't win and it would be a wasted vote. I live my life aware of reality.
But you will vote for genociders? Please do some introspection.
You and your gang at .ml don't have a problem with genocide. Why are you pretending to? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_genocide_of_Ukrainians_in_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War
If you would like to decenter the genocide of Palestinians, I will gladly discuss your bullshit presumptions in another thread. Feel free to make one and ping me.
If Republicans have control, nothing you say regarding Palestine will matter.
I sadly suspect that political orthodoxy will continue, and that orthodoxy is "it's okay for the IDF to kill innocent people".
For sure, in the near future. Hopefully we can improve on that, but we have to have Palestinians alive to improve on it.
You cannot improve on it by giving unconditional support to those committing the genocide.
You do it by overwhelmingly knocking out the GOP so that there’s room within the blue wave for more progressive candidates.
If, somehow, the Democrats swept with some insane margins, the GOP in its current form would need to evolve or die.
When a race is this close, the Democrats will always move to the center.
You do it by overwhelmingly knocking out the GOP so that there’s room within the blue wave for more progressive candidates.
That's not how it works. Dems treat their "left" flank as a group to be disciplined, not accommodated. And giving them the greenlight on genocide confirms a move right, not making space for the left.
Dems got their "wave" under Biden. They have moved right and their "progressives" have been cowed.
But genocide should be something you consider a red line regardless of the illogic sold to you by the party.
If, somehow, the Democrats swept with some insane margins, the GOP in its current form would need to evolve or die.
The same applies to Democrats who are committing a genocide, don't you think?
When a race is this close, the Democrats will always move to the center.
The Democrats move to the center because they are gambling that their "concerned" voters will fall in line and because they absolutely do not want to do the things those "concerned" voters want.
They look at you as someone to be handled by PR, not met with any concessions. And you enable that, including genocide, by voting blue no matter who.
There are other means of resistance that don't give power to those who will do worse. Take direct action and vote for who will reduce harm.
Do not normalize or support genociders.
Re: reducing harm, genocide is as harmful as it gets and the candidate you are telkjng people to support is an active part of the ongoing genocide. The idea that you would be reducing harm by advocating for that is absurd.
You should, of course, engage in meaningful resistance, but those who rationalize voting for genociders are not the people who do that. This is a barrier to action, it is complacency.
The current administration is advocating for a ceasefire while Trump is literally on the other line with Bibi trying to thwart the negotiation. These things are not the same.
The current administration is not advocating for a ceasefire, they are just telling you that they are. They have redefined the meaning of the term to mean full surrender and occupation for Gaza and all the while have been providing unconditional material support for Israel, including when they kill the negotiators for the resistance.
This is something that Harris is particularly complicit in, she was a major part of the push in March-June for this redefinition of ceasefire.
This is also why ceasefire rhetoric was always very weak. It is just so easy to coopt. The newer line on ending arms to Israel is much better.
Continuing to behave as though Netanyahu is acting in good faith when it's clear he isn't is called "being played."
How did you figure out how to not pay taxes?
There's this secret hack called, "not being an American citizen despite being everywhere in threads about US elections"
You guys are spamming the whole internet with your election bullcrap, idiot.
While taxes show up on a balance sheet somewhere, the MIC is funded by financial magic and imperialism. If committing tax fraud would help the cause I would probably do it, but I really don't think it does.
Yeah, it sucks but everyone just needs to hold their nose and do what will have the best outcome.
southpark_cableguys.jpg
I have to say, "The evil foreigners are to blame for us becoming fascist" is an onion-level take.
I mean, it's no secret that a bunch of countries are running massive disinformation campaigns in order to divide the populations of western countries. Attempting to destabilise another country by propping up certain political factions is a tactic that has been employed across the world for at least the past century (see: Lenin, and how he got in power).
Of course, we are responsible for ensuring that we do not become fascist states, but acting like theres no outside influence propping up the fascists is naive at best.
Yes, but the point stands: Lenin wasn't grown in a vat in Berlin, he was only ever in Vienna because being in St. Petersburg would get him arrested. There are American political factions favored by certain foreign nations, but they are, at the end of the day, American political factions. And I frankly find it
deeply depressinghilarious that the current state of the discourse seems to agree that foreigners are destroying the country, but can't agree over which foreigners exactly. Talk about Overton loopholes.
So many options for the title:
Jiminy Cricket is a Putin plant.
America's Collective Conscience: Misguided or Manchurian Candidate?
Ask not what your country can do for genocide, ask what genocide can do for your country.
Important to note that fascism and genocide broadly persist under the current Harris co-led administration. Persecution and the marginalization of black Americans persists in the most democrat-controlled cities of America, not just in the Uyghur Autonomous Region.
Amusing that Americans fear countries that, even combined, are responsible for a fraction of the worldwide political coups and corruption America itself is responsible for.
America has singlehandedly propped up the Israel military, why pretend it is divorced from moral responsibility in the aftermath of a genocide?
doesn’t mean that Israel shouldn’t be held accountable
Why pretend Americans have any moral high ground in geopolitics, especially regarding Israel?
This new tack that Harris is bad for Black people is as transparent as it is far fetched.
As the California AG, she piloted programs that provided educational resources to both released prisoners, as well as at risk kids beginning in elementary schools.
Those programs reduced truancy and improved outcomes for at risk individuals and families, who were disproportionately black. They have since become national models of social harm reduction.
Harris supports legalization of marijuana and releasing non violent drug offenders, again disproportionately benefiting black Americans.
Edit: Although these statements are all trivial to verify, some people may lack the basic search skills to do so. the following links provide additional information:
Attorney General Kamala D. Harris Launches Initiative to Reduce Recidivism in California 2013
Kamala Harris, District Attorney for San Francisco, launched Back on Track 2009
[The program has] Been adopted by the National District Attorneys Association as a model program.
Kamala Harris Will Legalize recreational marijuana 2024 official campaign announcement
Why spout obvious lies when Google exists? There are many examples of Harris fighting to keep now-overturned convincts imprisoned as well, need I go on?
“Defiance of the federal court order requiring the reduction of the California prisoner population is reminiscent of the Southern governors of the 1950s declaring their defiance of federal court desegregation orders,” Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of UC Berkeley Law School, told NPR at the time. “Both were misguided efforts to undermine enforcement of the Constitution.” Added Barry Krisberg, longtime president of the National Council on Crime and Delinquency, “The legal arguments that the state is putting forward make no sense.”
https://prospect.org/justice/how-kamala-harris-fought-to-keep-nonviolent-prisoners-locked-up/
You're being downvoted but you're not wrong. While a Trump presidency has dark implications it happening due to foreign interference would be no different than the coups, assassinations, and implanted dictatorships America has done in other countries for decades. Trumps whole immigrant fear mongering doesn't happen if the US government had helped the countries they fucked up in Central and South America.
I think it's important to remember this
From what I've seen over the last year, Iran and China are working against Trump. Russia is working for him and so are some Israeli actors. This is unsurprising as Trump would be worse for Iran and China and better for Russia and Israel. This is not to say there isn't interference, but that the sides aren't all pro-fascism. Assuming fascism is ascribed only to Trump.
China is 100% for Trump. Iran is more complicated.
Iran is more along the lines of "fuck the US. But, fuck, US, fuck it up the right way ok? Butt fuck, the US."
More like Iran really wants to progress as a nation technologically without progressing as a nation socially. China and Russia were able to do that, and Iran is being unable to because of the US, but was doing better for a while with the last Iran deal that Trump fucked up.
Iran is sort of the weirdest place in the world. highly educated folk, restricted access to literature and products, all sorts of restrictions on women. It's always been very educated, and until the US overthrew the democratically elected government, it was doing quite well in the academic realm.
The Iranian religious conservatives have such brutal tactics that they effortlessly stifle any social progress. As seen the last dozen times women have attempted it.
They are also in the weird realm of not being able to accept Kamala as president for 'moral' reasons and Trump directly harmed Iran. Which all benefitted China and Russia because guess who supplies that stuff now?
So, yeah. Iran is complicated
Well put!
There are also a number of conflicting views between Iran's religious authorities and the civilian government that have caused a lot of these inconsistencies.
Really? What's the Chinese pro Trump angle that I'm not seeing?
Anything that weakens the west is good for the CCP. Also, Trump's trade war benefitted them a lot last time.
Weak west also means smaller market for China's export driven economy. How did the trade war benefit them?
I can't remember another recent candidate in the US that not only wasn't super pro-Taiwan, but said the US should just hang them out to dry if the PRC were to invade the island. They probably like that side of him.
Plus, an incredibly vain, greedy and self-confident idiot is not the hardest of targets to get to do what you want.
The Taiwan angle I get. The idiot angle too. However that is complimented by further decreasing Chinese access to the US market.