Omar says Israel policy divisions won’t stop her from supporting Biden in November
Omar says Israel policy divisions won’t stop her from supporting Biden in November
Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) said policy differences toward Israel between her and President Biden won’t stop her from supporting him in the November general election. “Of course,” Omar said Tuesday, …
Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) said policy differences toward Israel between her and President Biden won’t stop her from supporting him in the November general election.
“Of course,” Omar said Tuesday, when asked by CNN’s Abby Phillip on “NewsNight” whether she would vote for Biden if the election were held that day, in a clip highlighted by Mediaite. “Democracy is on the line, we are facing down fascism.”
“And I personally know what my life felt like having Trump as the president of this country, and I know what it felt like for my constituents, and for people around this country and around the world,” Omar continued. “We have to do everything that we can to make sure that does not happen to our country again.”
You're viewing a single thread.
It's insane how when someone criticizes anything about Biden, the first move is accusing them of supporting trump, and when they have to clarify trump is obviously worse, everyone then acts like their criticisms of Biden becomes invalid.
Biden is better than trump. But we deserve better than either option.
"Shutting up and voting Biden" doesn't help anything, and is what we give republicans shit for.
Liberals always choose to stand in the way of progress. You'll never have better Dems if you don't criticize them. They aren't your friends and voting is a tool.
Malcolm X put it well:
The white conservatives aren't friends of the Negro either, but they at least don't try to hide it. They are like wolves; they show their teeth in a snarl that keeps the Negro always aware of where he stands with them.
But the white liberals are foxes, who also show their teeth to the Negro but pretend that they are smiling. The white liberals are more dangerous than the conservatives; they lure the Negro, and as the Negro runs from the growling wolf, he flees into the open jaws of the "smiling" fox.
That said, many people have a mistaken view of voting.
They think “I’m picking someone who represents who I am as a person, and so who I pick is a reflection of my very soul.”
Or at best, they think “I’m picking someone who will act in my best interests. I may not like them as a person, but the actions they take are at least a good approximation of the actions I want them to take.”
The reality is more like “I’m picking someone who will inevitably act in the interest of those in power. I need to pick someone who has the right vulnerabilities. They don’t have a good rapport with certain powerful entities, so they don’t mind pissing those ones off if it means they can score some votes as a result.”
You’re not picking someone to lead your side. You’re picking who you’d rather negotiate with from their side.
You're saying that here, but you have repeatedly said you're voting third party, and I among many others have given you shit for that, as well as your refusal to even acknowledge one thing you think Biden has done well. You complain about this so much on Lemmy that I recognize your name, and can usually tell when you've written a comment before I even look at the name. Go outside sometimes.
Feel free to respond to this but fyi I'm not going to read it.
Feel free to respond to this but fyi I’m not going to read it.
I too have seen exactly this from that user.
Wow, and with 26 comments over 9 months, you're surely not someone's alt account...
No, in fact, I'm not.
Weird.
Looks like you just make pro genocide comments and get super down voted for it.
So still makes since why you're upset with me. I do spend a lot of time pointing out how we shouldn't be spending billions a year so another country can do a genocide.
Congrats on finally have some comments with a positive score tho!
Doesn't look like it happens often
Mkay buddy
https://lemmy.world/u/fukhueson?page=1&sort=New&view=Comments
I'd say something about how weird it is to deny something blatantly true...
But it looks that's just SOP for you
your refusal to even acknowledge one thing you think Biden has done well.
Because everything he's "done well" has been pretty much the same shit they've always done. It's not enough. You can blame Republicans all day long but we need something to change and Democrats are the only option available to progressives and leftists. But every single time there's an opportunity to demonstrate looking towards the future and making these changes Biden has passed that up. Here's some examples:
Called on congress to block the rail strike: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/biden-calls-on-congress-to-block-potential-railroad-strike
Walks back his own campaign promise for $50k forgiveness: https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/539139-biden-balks-at-50k-student-loan-forgiveness-plan/
Goes around congress to sell weapons to Israel: https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/29/politics/biden-congress-israel-military-aid/index.html
Forced federal workers back to office: https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/13/politics/in-person-work-biden-administration/index.html
Increased the defense budget: https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/28/politics/defense-budget-biden-administration/index.htmlThese behaviors put me as a voter in a no win situation. If I support Biden after all this what am I doing besides giving establishment Democrats and moderate voters a blank check opportunity to say "See? Everything is fine.". They will completely ignore the fact that I and other voters compromised our principles in order to prop up a candidate we hate for what he's done.
On the other hand I can protest vote 3rd party or write in. And of course that comes with it's own risks.
At what point will moderates and establishment Democrats have a moment of self awareness and admit that this isn't a sustainable model? Personally I had hoped 2016 would be that wake up call but instead I'm seeing people try to turn it around as if it's progressives and leftists who need to change.
You’re saying that here, but you have repeatedly said you’re voting third party
Nope, never.
But thanks for blocking me! I know you're going to sign out to check this, but it's still nice to know I'll never get another response from you.
If you bet banned for personal attacks, please don't forget to also block me on your new account or any alts you currently have
Sure, but "right now" you need to vote for Biden or risk never being able to vote again.
and the general election is eight fucking months away, so it’s 100% justifiable to vote however the fuck I want to in the primary.
Which I did, and I voted uncommitted. And I will vote for not Trump in November. But don’t mistake my enthusiasm for “not living in a fascist theocratic state” for enthusiasm towards Biden, because it’s not and never will be.
Apologies. I wasn't talking about the primaries. I was talking about the presidential election.
Edit: I didn't realize they were talking about the primaries. My bad.
Edits aside, that is kinda the issue. I have disliked Biden not because he's Biden, but largely because I feel he's a little more conservative of a president than I would like. Will I vote for him still if he's up against Trump? Unless he genuinely gives me a reason to think he'd be as bad as Trump (pretty damn unlikely), yes. But I very much dislike his handling of the Israeli - Palistinian conflict, so much so that during the primaries I voted uncommitted. But every time I bring up my opinion, the default is not to say that I must be implicitly be a Trump supporter because I'm not 100% behind Biden. I live in the southeastern US, so I absolutely have family that are Trump supporters, and that argument of all or nothing is sounds very similar in my mind to those that support Trump. I'd argue that this rhetoric of total support will most likely be more damaging than not for the democrats, as it has actually made me more wary about voting for Biden than I suspect I would be otherwise.
All I’m seeing here is that you don’t seem to understand how the spoiler effect works in an entrenched two-party political system, which this is. Also, it appears you’re not aware of how absurdly tilted to the right the electoral mechanisms have become in this country - largely due to gerrymandering, and the continued refusal of Congress to reapportion the number of Representatives in the house from the cap imposed in 1929.
I would say it is a spoiler effect if another candidate was running in the democratic party, but there wasn't, so now it pretty much the choice between Biden and Trump (I doubt there are many on the fence voters at this point). I also very much understand gerrymandering, I am a left leaning voter in NC after all. What is troubling is that it seems the simple solution is to not support Israel and back the UN in investigation of war crimes and handing out aid. But when you suggest that, the default is often to suspect that I am actively suggesting not to vote for Biden (I'm not), and that I am implicitly supporting Trump (who I acknowledge would handle the situation way worse). The reason I am worried about this is that it is very reminiscent of Trump voters that follow with questioning the reason why, which I have seen firsthand. There are likely going to be other big issues raised during this election year, and if they are often answered like this it isn't exactly confidence inspiring.
And since DNC pulled NH primary delegates for something only republicans can change and Biden supported it...
We can't even use your point to convince people.
This sham of a Dem primary might be our last.
Do you think NH republicans learned their lesson and will change NH state law so the NH Dem primary doesn't have to be first?
Or do you think they'll leave the law in place so in 2028 the DNC cancels the NH primary again?
The only people that can fix it are NH republicans and the DNC. And the DNC seems fine with just not letting NH Dems have a say in who the candidate is.
What's stopping the DNC from canceling other states that vote progressive like NH was?
They've already argued in court they can do what they want, because primary is nonbinding and they can just ignore it anyways.
This is the danger of just blindly supporting Dems no matter what. They keep acting more and more like Republicans
DNC conspiracy theory nonsense gets so tiresome. You had some legitimate grievances over what happened with Bernie, but not really in the recent primary. Unless you can name the challenger to Biden that was worth spending money holding the primary for.
I sincerely hope the far left does fall in line with its own party eventually, with some voting reform we could make a multiparty system viable. For now though, much like in WW2, we have fascists to defeat. Regardless of how much liberals and communists may dislike each other, we are at least capable of civil cooperation.
It'd just be nice if you stopped trying to attack all forms of liberalism so hard and take over the dem party just like MAGA took over the repubs. It won't work on educated people in the same way fascism can convince the uneducated. We tend to know the difference between liberal and neo-liberal.
I mean you say 'legitimate grievances' then proceed to ignore what happened to NH.
The reality of the situation that we're all in is that oarty primaries are the only 'real' mechanism we get to engage with democracy in a material way, and time and time again the stewards of those parties are thumbing the scales towards specific outcomes.
You acknowledge it, then dismiss it as 'nonesense'. It's not fucking nonsense. There is almost nothing 'democratic' about the DNCs primary process. If you run a competitive race but aren't the predidermined party leadership acceptable candidate, they steal it from you, in fact, they'll conspire to do so. If a state 'votes wrong', they take your primary from you. It's material and real you chucklefuck and dismissing it trivializes the real consequences it has around voter disenfranchisement.
If we consider the primary process to be a part of our political system, and we should because it is, the DNC is less democratic than some of the lowest ranking "democracies" in the planet. The RNC didn't rig their primary to stop Trump. The DNC did so to stop Bernie, twice. And when a state which was one of the first in the nation primaries gave the primary to the non-dccc candidate, they took the primary away from that state.
It's an indefensible mockery of the word democracy to call the DNCs primary a democratic process
Conveniently skipped over where I asked someone, and anyone can do this, to name the viable leftist challenger in the recent NH primary, that would make holding it worthwhile.
And really, can name a non-leftist challenger too if you want, if you really think Dean had a real shot or something.
The degree of personal attacks and cherry-picked arguments in here is remarkable.
Oh stfu you pedant.
You are dismissing the structural critique that makes your first point irrelevant.
There are no viable challengers because the DNC has repeatedly changed the rules or moved the goal posts to prevent that from happening again.
Ah, more conspiracy theory. Bernie ran just fine. Twice. He's not even a registered democrat. You got any evidence of the new rule that prevented it from happening this time, or just an anonymous claim on the internet?
DNC conspiracy theory nonsense gets so tiresome.
From my perspective, it's you guys who ennervate. Is there a point to reading any more of the couple a paragraphs or is it all pompous nonsense about how you 'just know better' without a shred of shame?
Read something jackalope. And write something worth reading.
Personal and tribal attacks. You can be better.
Hey, you can too! You shortened your ridiculous whining down to 2 sentences i can dismiss more quickly.
Show me the meat in your argument and ill bite.
Read your previous comment again and think of how else you might improve, professor
That's cute and all, but we're not all teens here.
Youre right. I'm 45 and officially over your arrogant, empty words. You could have at any point attempted to argue a point but chose to act like a know it all instead (while providing nothing except vitriol.)
which as you say is pretty effin' childish.
Make. A. Point. Or admit you have nothing but faith.
Yeah, you sure sound 45 on the internet.
Thank you. I think when i get extra mad at kids i remind myself of my father.
He was an asshole when i was growing up and i learned real good how to make people feel small when they get big headed. If you are angry enough to keep replying like this i have succeeded in my estimation. Think about this discussion, cool off, and use this as opportunity for growth.
Goodbye
> like in WW2, we have fascists to defeat
that's what leftists are saying, and that's why they are saying not to vote for democrats, too. it's like you're saying if we don't vote for mussolini, we'll get hitler. well i'm not voting for either of them.
Right, because the best way to fight fascists is to let them take over. Brilliant!
Oh, and do you not think Omar and the rest of the squad leans left? Because she just said she plans to vote Biden. Or they just not progressive enough for you?
>Right, because the best way to fight fascists is to let them take over.
you don't seem to get that mussolini was a fascist too.
Yeah, he invented it. You equating Biden with Mussolini? Because I'm not seeing the hyper-nationalism, the militarism, the subjugation of the individual for the state, the undemocratic holding of power, etc etc etc.
Unless you believe in the right-wing conspiracy theories anyway. Hmm...
oh. let me help you out:
he wrote the patriot act
he wrote the crime bill
he voted for every military intervention for the last 50 years, sometimes grandstanding on making them happen
i don't know about the undemocratic holding of power: i'm pretty sure that the appearance of democracy is a desirable trait for any authoritarian regime, but when less than half the eligible populace votes, how can you claim any government is democratic?
Patriot Act:
On October 23, 2001, U.S. Representative Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI) introduced House bill H.R. 3162, which incorporated provisions from a previously-sponsored House bill, and a Senate bill introduced earlier in the month.[5] The next day, October 24, the Act passed the House by a vote of 357–66,[6] with Democrats comprising the overwhelming majority of "no"-votes. The three Republicans voting "no" were Robert Ney of Ohio, Butch Otter of Idaho, and Ron Paul of Texas. On October 25, the Act passed the Senate with a vote of 98–1. Russ Feingold (D-WI) voted "no".[7]
He did draft the Senate version of the '94 crime bill, you're half right on that one, though only half since his draft wasn't that different from the House version. Though I'm not sure that makes him a fascist.
Regarding the WoT, we were attacked, I'll remind you. Democratic countries responding to attacks does not make them militaristic fascists. Did we conquer anything?
Lastly, people have the liberty to vote or not. That supersedes any authoritarian requirement that they do so, in most people's opinions anyway. People are free to vote if they wish, and if they vote him out, he'll leave.
looks like you got your facts wrong AND you made excuses for military adventurism. are you the real fascist all along?
>Unless you believe in the right-wing conspiracy theories anyway
what right wing conspiracy theory are you talking about? this appears to be an attempt to pigeonhole me and my legitimate criticisms.
Only way I can think of Biden fitting the fascist glove, is if someone believes Trump's lines about the election. Otherwise it just doesn't make sense.
oh, i just know what fascism is and i know the US has been fascist for decades.
People complaining about the process of the Democratic Primary this year seem to have forgotten that there is only one viable candidate this time around. If somebody else viable had announced his candidacy this year, I would be there with you all the way. However, if an open primary implies that Biden has to debate anti-vaxer Kennedy as his closest competitor, I don’t see what the point is. This primary is not rigged by the DNC, but by other candidates (e.g. Whitmer/Newson/AOC) not running.
People complaining about the process of the Democratic Primary this year seem to have forgotten that there is only one viable candidate this time around.
So...
You're saying Biden was going to win no matter what, so the DNC yanking NH delegates and Biden being outspoken in support of that is fine?
If he was going to win anyways, why would Biden and the DNC risk taking that incredibly undemocratic step?
Why wouldn't they just let the most progressive candidate win NH for the third time?
Why remove their delegates and have Biden publicly take himself off the ballot just to spend campaign money on a write in campaign?
How is any of what Biden and the DNC logical if you're right?
The main point is that if you are ever putting pressure on NH to change the date on their primary election, then this is the time.
Except NH state government is all Republican and the only one that can change the law that NH goes first...
The DNC told NH Dems they had to violate state election laws or lose their delegates.
That is a giant fucking issue, and something I thought republicans wouldn't even sink to.
There's no choice, and you acting like there was isn't a good look.
Did you just not know the details?
Or do you think the DNC telling a state party to break election laws is no big deal?
Sorry to chime in, but I find this particular debate/conversation going on within Liberal and Leftist circles interesting and at times frustrating.
While I don't buy that the DNC is involved or cultivating some sort of conspiracy to take the election, I do believe every US election from here on out will be a choice between Capitalist Technocracy and Imperialism and outright Theocratic Fascism. Do I prefer one? Sure (not fascism), do I think it's even remotely ideal? Not at all. Am I pissed that I'm at times criticized for wanting something unrealistic?
Yes, because a reality where those are constantly the two options presented EVERY election is pathetic and points to the fact we're just prolonging the end of US democracy because it failed to evolve into a socialist democracy soon enough and thusly became vulnerable to fascist rhetoric.
This is more likely the reality than "we can turn back fascism now and next year, when Biden is president, then we can protest what you want." That simply isn't what's going to happen. Trump is just the beginning of a Fascist wave, the ideology of Fascism, White Supremacy, and Theocracy has been allowed to fester for too long in America and it's like a cancer that has grown too deep for a single chemo treatment to treat it. You've got to cut it out stem and all, and that isn't a peaceful or painless process.
The left that is pro Palestine and calling out the war in Gaza as the genocide it is are the future of The Democratic Party in America whether you like it or not, unless we're finally going to splinter from Bipartisan politics, which I just don't see happening. But we can always justify lesser of two evils when the enemy is fascism. Very much how Netanyahu needs Hamas (as evidenced by his rhetoric and past policies, so too does the Democratic Party need Fascists deeply seeded in the ranks of the Republican party.
This ensures that Democrats don't have to enact laws that align more with the increasingly more leftist leaning public's desires for an end to American Imperialism, and can simply be not Fascists to win election after election after election.
All until Capitalism destroys not just this country, but the majority of humanity at large, because just like any dying empire, America has become a nation controlled by an elite class that, regardless of party, solely desire to retain the status quo regardless of the consequences to those not within said elite class.
So yeah, I'm voting Biden, but I don't expect Fascism to move even an inch regardless of the victor. It'll be there the next morning, and 4 years from now to try its hand again...and 8 years from now...again and again...until finally we fall.
We've had many chances to stomp Fascism in the head while still in the cradle, and we slept on it cuz we needed to "be fair" (but only to white supremacist fascists) and give Fascism a voice at the table in a Democratic system, and look how that infection spread! Now when it's at our doorsteps we want to fight it in an election!? Give me a break. If you think your vote matters, you haven't been paying attention. We're already a Fascist dictatorship, we just think that means boots and bad moustaches and killing Jews, but Fascism is just a nation state where those with the money make the rules and the people don't. Sound familiar?
Question: If they run an even worse candidate next time, which considering the trend of them all, they will; Will you finally allow leftists to stop blindly voting for a party that doesn't reflect their values?
At what point will the responsibility be on the dems to appeal to us, instead of us blindly backing the blue against our better wishes?
The answer is never, so it's time to start organizing now. Labor unions are on the rise for the first time in a century, and historically are an incredibly strong voting bloc. Coordination between them could lead to a proper leftist party, split from the Dems.
Splitting the left would result in a permanent Republican majority.
That presupposes the Republican party survives. They've put a lot of capital into Trump, and if he loses this November there's a good chance he's just dead before he gets a chance to run again. None of the other claimants to the throne are anywhere near as popular amongst the cult.
Nobody is suggesting we get a leftist party together for November. That's just not possible, and getting a president would be meaningless. Organize for midterms, start getting house and congress seats. Work with the Dems while the Republican threat remains, but prepare for when their movement collapses to infighting
That's true. I think there is a reasonable chance that the right-wing could split or collapse.
There is an interesting parallel here with Canada, which also has a FPTP system. Canada is more progressive than the US, so it already has two left-wing parties (one more centre-left than the other). But, for about a decade in the 90s, the right wing party split in two and this guaranteed electoral success for the centre-left Liberal Party. The interesting thing is that this was actually bad for the Liberal Party. They became arrogant, internally fractious, and scandal-prone. When the two right-wing parties re-merged, the Liberals suffered their worst defeat in history.
If the Republicans in the US split into two right-wing parties, there might be room for two left-wing parties as well. In fact, it would be good if a left-wing split ensured that the Dems weren't guaranteed electoral success, as this would lead them into making stupid mistakes. However, if the right-wing later re-united, the left would have to be prepared to reunite again as well. The problem is that the US is more right-wing than Canada, so vote-splitting on the left is more of a worry.
All of that said, it would be interesting to see how much support a left-wing working class party would have. I recall that there were midwest working class voters who were prevaricating between Trump and Bernie, not between Trump and Hillary/Biden. They didn't care about left vs. right politics as much as they wanted to vote for someone who would bring good working class jobs back to the Rust Belt. A left-wing party that really focused on bread and butter working class issues and not culture war bullshit might do well, but it's too risky when Trump is the alternative.
If moderates can't get over their unwillingness to compromise with progressives and leftists the split is guaranteed.
Genuinely curious, how is Joe worse than Hillary?
And the real fun begins when you look at what the Dems do in the primaries. Progressives get outfunded in favor of "centrist" Dems BY the DNC and DGA, and the DNC/DGA also have a bad habit of trying to elevate the craziest Republican to the general election in states all over the country.
The DNC et al would like very much to continue forcing democratic voters to vote for them to save the democracy the party are actively undermining.
Yall watch that bit on John Oliver about the mark robinson? I looked into it. Yes, the DGA ran their game ("attack" ads designed elevate fringe candidates into the public consciousness) in North Carolina and helped him secure the Republican nomination.
How much can a voter force a party like "that" left?
If you hate Democrats and Republicans, don't vote for them, but recognize that abstaining has consequences as well.
It’s the dem magalike cult in action. It’s sad because by denying criticisms of Biden, they’re effectively endorsing changing nothing after the election.
Supporting the nominee for president does not preclude criticism.
Is nothing going to change after the election if Biden wins? Probably not, no.
But in this situation, right now, that's a good outcome given how profoundly things will change if the other person wins.
I don't know how to make it understood that no matter what criticisms you have about the way Biden and the Democrats have been running this country, absolutely none of them, not a single one, is more important than preventing Trump from winning, because literally everything goes to shit forever if he wins again.
As soon as conservatives got Faux New, neoliberals have been trying to get the same unquestioning support from their voters.
The issue is if Dem voters wanted that shit, they'd be republicans.
The people running the DNC don't understand basic psychology because when they finished their educations, psychology was still pretty new, and the only big studies was shit like Zimbardo that threw out the scientific method and had researchers meddling with experiments to get the desired result.
Imagine if Verizon hired a guy that stilled used a beeper instead of one of those newfangled mobile phones.
Sounds ridiculous, right?
But that's what we're doing with politics and psychology
They'll all forget how long they've been told to 'wait until next time' too. Everything happening now happened in 2020. 2016. Fer the love of God, wipe the CNBC outta yer eyes eh?
Sure, but there are only 4 options when November comes: 1) vote for Biden, 2) vote for Trump, 3) vote 3rd party, or 4) don’t vote.
Due to how the US system works, options 2-4 only help Trump, so unless you want a Trump presidency, only option 1 is valid.
Anything else is just at best a pipe dream, or at worst, direct support for someone who will become a dictator.
If the weatherman says a tornado is going to hit your town tomorrow, would you start getting upset at them for causing a tornado?
Or would you be appreciative that someone gave you a heads up while there's still time?
Because I see a lot of people frantically ringing alarm bells. For years at this point.
The primary still isn't over despite the DNC pulling delegates from NH.
There's still time to not run Biden. And I know that's unlikely.
But there's still also time to make noise and hope Biden and the DNC sees reason and move left so trump doesn't win
But telling people:
Shut up and vote Biden
Isn't going to get Biden enough votes to beat trump. He's sitting at less than 1/3 approval with voters...
We can't just stick our heads in the sand and hope that's enough.
If you want to be sure we beat Trump, start making noise and praying Biden actually listens.
Sure, but there are only 4 options when November comes: 1) vote for Biden, 2) vote for Trump, 3) vote 3rd party, or 4) don’t vote.
Due to how the US system works, options 2-4 only help Trump
Doubt this claim. Using this logic (voting for 3rd party is a vote for Trump) a vote for 3rd party is a vote for Biden as well. Not voting trump only helps Biden. I won't be voting for Trump or Biden, so i guess by not voting for either I'm voting for both of them and an committing voter fraud so at least you won't have to worry about me in 2028s election as I'll be in jail.
The general logic as I understand it is this: (effectively)No one who might have considered voting Trump is going to vote for anyone else. So folks who defect to a third party vote, especially due to the current Israel/Palestine situation, are assumed to be potential Biden voters by a much wider margin than potential Trump voters. Then you factor in all the R who claim they don't support Trump or what he has wrought, but continue pulling the lever for him and politicians like him because of the R in front of their names. They aren't voting third party either.
That logic may or may not reflect reality, but I think it's what is in most folks' heads when they make that statement.
Thank you, that makes sense.
But we deserve better than either option.
You can deserve all you want, but that won't change the names on the ballot. If you really care, start organizing some grassroots support around 3rd parties, or perhaps take on a role in government in your local jurisdiction. The upcoming election is 99.999% going to be between Trump and Biden. Vote or not, there's very little you can do about alternatives at this point. Start working on the next one.
Man, if only we had an earlier election where we have a say in who the general candidate was....
But I'm sure if Biden doesn't move left and trump wins, you're going to do the rational thing and blame Biden and his campaign team for their words and actions.
I mean, it would be ridiculous if instead you blamed all the people who held their nose and voted D but spent 4 years telling everyone that Biden isn't popular enough to beat trump again. And he needs to do more to reach out to Dem voters.
https://www.axios.com/2024/03/14/us-settler-sanctions-west-bank
The U.S. Department of Treasury announced new sanctions Thursday against two illegal outposts in the occupied West Bank that were used as a base for attacks by extremist Israeli settlers against Palestinian civilians, three U.S. officials told Axios.
Why it matters: It is the first time U.S. sanctions are being imposed against entire outposts and not just against individuals.
The move comes as the Biden administration ratchets up pressure on the government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over a range of issues, including settler violence against Palestinians and the war in Gaza. There were nearly 500 Israeli settler attacks against Palestinians between Oct. 7 and Jan. 31 of this year, according to the UN humanitarian office (OCHA).
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-israel-gaza-finish-problem-rcna141905
PALM BEACH, Fla. — Former President Donald Trump declared Tuesday that Israel must “finish the problem” in its war against Hamas, his most definitive position on the conflict since the terror group killed 1,200 Israelis and took more than 200 hostages on Oct. 7.
That month, his campaign also said that, if elected again, he would bar Gaza residents from entering the U.S. as part of an expanded travel ban.
Is this good enough for you?
Flashback: On Feb. 1, President Biden signed an executive order allowing the U.S. to impose new sanctions on Israeli settlers — and potentially Israeli politicians and government officials — involved in violent attacks against Palestinians in the West Bank.
I remember when Biden sanctioned the few individuals....
Even a comment I made back then, but it would be a hassle to find it.
I said it was better than nothing, and if Biden actually sanctioned the politicians and government officials behind this shit, I'd unironically stand up and clap.
But that sanctioning random settlers literally accomplishs nothing. So I dont know why people want to brag about it.
I still dont know why someone would act like this means anything, and I'm still desperately waiting for the chance to be proud of Biden.
He's doing a lot of diplomacy behind closed doors, a bit too much for my taste even, but that's how he's always worked and he'll keep doing that, so there's not much visible but the few public statements. I think he needs to do more, but he's very risk averse and the problem is that if he just straight up blocks all support for Israel then that could cause chaos (risk for war in the region, loss of internal support, etc).
but he’s very risk averse
If he was averse to risk, he'd stop doing all this shit his voters hate less than a year out from an election...
He's being dangerously risky right now, and we're all fucked if it turns out he made a bad judgement call and loses the election.
he just straight up blocks all support for Israel then that could cause chaos (risk for war in the region, loss of internal support, etc).
At the same time, Biden says trump is incredibly dangerous, and him becoming president again could be the end of American democracy.
And I agree with that.
Which is why I think Biden putting Israel over America is so fucking stupid.
America isn't responsible for the safety of Israel. If America stopped protecting them at the UN, and the UN forced them to stop their genocide...
That wouldn't be the end of Israel, just the end of their current genocide.
If Israel got attacked after that and invaded, then aid to Israel would be a different story and the rest of the UN would be helping.
You're arguing from this false stance where Joe Biden is the only thing keeping Israel a state right now, and ignoring that his support of Israel could very well lead to the actual end of American democracy.
The president of America's priority should be America, not if a foreign country might have to stop their genocide.
Like, if Biden was stopping a genocide, that would be different.
Do you legitimately not understand any of that?
Yeah and while it's ok and good for blue team punters to lecture ("ignorant", "petulant") non-biden voters or genocide haters on how important it is to" swallow what they don't like and vote D", just try and lecture them on any political history or conditions that led to your concerns. Anything that goes against their little sports team sends them into a tizzy
Im guessing they get mad cuz the tv told them to. They really just don't understand why others won't buy into their ridiculously simplistic worldview and it gets them breathing hard
Change is easier to make early in the process. At the very end of the process, i.e. the election, it’s all but impossible.