It probably cost some votes, but those polls didn’t have the actual reasons people didn’t vote for Harris. That is: she is a woman and she isn’t white. It’s the hard truth but no poll is going to include “are you racist?” or “are you sexist?”
Also, anyone with even part of a brain knew that trump is going to make things a lot worse in Gaza than Harris.
Anyone who did that is an idiot for at the very least being pragmatic in realizing that unlike most democrats, republicans have no qualms about Israelis settling the rest of Palestine, hence Trump listing the sanctions placed on Israeli settlers in the West Bank. Most republicans either don’t know or don’t care about the tens of thousands of Palestinians killed in Gaza, and would classify anyone as an extremist just for being Muslim.
Until a system such as ranked choice voting is implemented nationally, voting third party is in practical terms just as effective as not voting at all. The pro-Israeli lobby in the US means that there was no realistic scenario in which support to Israel would be halted outright, so in practice it’s better to at least pick the lesser of two evils.
Even if Biden had vetoed aid to Israel, there’s enough bipartisan support for it for such a veto to have been overrided in Congress. Like it or not, even though I’m all for the cessation of aid to Israel and the implementation of a permanent two-state solution, all that would have done is shift even more lobbyist resources into Trump’s coffers with the end outcome being identical.
He would have lost more moderates than he would have regained disillusioned, single-issue voters on the left. Pro-Israel lobbyists egged on by Netanyahu would have falsely tied such efforts to antisemitism, something that most media outlets latch onto far more often than reports of Israel’s war crimes in Gaza and the West Bank.
Due to bipartisan support for Israel in the US, and the country’s geopolitical interests, both countries vote in a highly-correlated manner at the UN. In a political landscape where supporting Israel is popular, there was no scenario in which a president from either party would diplomatically oppose Israel, particularity in an election year.
Netanyahu took advantage of this to delay the ceasefire for long enough to help Trump get elected. In an election where there was much more at stake than the issue of Gaza alone, anyone who opted not to vote—or worse, vote for Trump—due to support for Israel that would only be entrenched further under a republican administration, is complicit in the harm that has come to pass from the hundreds of other political issues at stake.
And that’s why we now have president Harris. Clearly a winning strategy.
Again, the Israelis wanted the few limitations imposed on them lifted, in addition to the billions of other dollars American oligarchs funneled to Trump in support of other issues, so ultimately intense advertising campaigns in swing states along with propaganda efforts on pro-republican social media platforms far outweighed the electoral benefits of supporting Israel; the point was not adding to Trump’s lead in opposing them.
Many Democratic politicians were already doing that.
As were even more Republican ones; at least the far-left is supportive of cutting off aid to Israel, unlike the far-right, while also not propagating its racist, bigoted values.
A strong argument for voting third party.
Voting third party in the United States only serves to draw support away from one’s second-preferred candidate to the benefit of one’s least preferred candidate, as demonstrated by the failure of relatively popular third-party right-wing presidential campaigns in 1992 and 1996. Without the implementation ranked choice voting to prevent the spoiler effect, most third-party voters end up with a worse outcome for the issues they support than they’d have gotten with their second-preferred candidate.
So the ceasefire would have been in the Democrats’ best interest yet they sacrificed their chances to win at the altar of Zionism.
Not if voters saw it as giving in to terrorism, which is how it would have been spun if Biden had pushed for it. As the media spins Israeli state-backed acts of terror in Palestine as actions of self-defense, most Americans remain supportive of Israel.
“Genocide is a minor issue if it is happening to people we see as inferior.”
Again, things will only get worse under Trump.
Beyond that, it also enables things to get worse for Ukraine. With Ukraine having over 36,000,000 people in contrast to Palestine’s 5,000,000 or Israel’s 10,000,000, Russia’s war crimes there have had a far greater impact than those committed by Israel and Hamas combined. Despite that, Trump’s odd admiration of Putin combined with the strengthened alliance with Israel means than things will not only get worse in Palestine than if Harris had been elected, but in Ukraine as well.
Would you say those who voted for Biden in 2020 or stayed home are complicit in the genocide?
No more or less than those who voted for Trump in 2020, or even any leading third-party candidate, since supporting Israel has been a cornerstone of American geopolitics for decades.
You answered your own argument with that link. How many female, Muslim heads of state are from the United States on that list? If you honestly think that 6 million Americans stayed home over Gaza you don’t have your finger on the pulse of America. Again, I’m sure votes were lost due to Gaza, but it isn’t the main reason why she lost.
The list is in response to the “Arabs and Muslims didn’t vote for Harris due to misogyny” allegations. Some Arab and Muslim countries have already had female heads of state. Arab Americans are mostly Christian anyways and Muslim Americans tend to be more progressive. Yet it keeps getting mentioned as a reason.
No one expects the US to elect a female Muslim president when it can’t even elect a female white Christian president. Not sure what you were trying to say here.
I don’t know why each and every one of the 6 million stayed home, or voted third party, but I know why certain minorities did. I also know that the Democrats haven’t won an election without minorities’ votes since they have had below 50% support from the white European majority, at least since 2008.
It probably cost some votes, but those polls didn’t have the actual reasons people didn’t vote for Harris. That is: she is a woman and she isn’t white. It’s the hard truth but no poll is going to include “are you racist?” or “are you sexist?”
Also, anyone with even part of a brain knew that trump is going to make things a lot worse in Gaza than Harris.
no, that’s not it
trump being worse doesn’t mean Harris and the Democrats aren’t complicit in genocide, people just stayed home or voted third party
Anyone who did that is an idiot for at the very least being pragmatic in realizing that unlike most democrats, republicans have no qualms about Israelis settling the rest of Palestine, hence Trump listing the sanctions placed on Israeli settlers in the West Bank. Most republicans either don’t know or don’t care about the tens of thousands of Palestinians killed in Gaza, and would classify anyone as an extremist just for being Muslim.
Until a system such as ranked choice voting is implemented nationally, voting third party is in practical terms just as effective as not voting at all. The pro-Israeli lobby in the US means that there was no realistic scenario in which support to Israel would be halted outright, so in practice it’s better to at least pick the lesser of two evils.
Biden allowed Israel to destroy the Gaza Strip, Trump will allow them to destroy the West Bank.
Even if Biden had vetoed aid to Israel, there’s enough bipartisan support for it for such a veto to have been overrided in Congress. Like it or not, even though I’m all for the cessation of aid to Israel and the implementation of a permanent two-state solution, all that would have done is shift even more lobbyist resources into Trump’s coffers with the end outcome being identical.
He could have at least won some voters, instead he vetoed ceasefire four times at the UN, and bypassed Congress to aid Israel.
He would have lost more moderates than he would have regained disillusioned, single-issue voters on the left. Pro-Israel lobbyists egged on by Netanyahu would have falsely tied such efforts to antisemitism, something that most media outlets latch onto far more often than reports of Israel’s war crimes in Gaza and the West Bank.
Due to bipartisan support for Israel in the US, and the country’s geopolitical interests, both countries vote in a highly-correlated manner at the UN. In a political landscape where supporting Israel is popular, there was no scenario in which a president from either party would diplomatically oppose Israel, particularity in an election year.
Netanyahu took advantage of this to delay the ceasefire for long enough to help Trump get elected. In an election where there was much more at stake than the issue of Gaza alone, anyone who opted not to vote—or worse, vote for Trump—due to support for Israel that would only be entrenched further under a republican administration, is complicit in the harm that has come to pass from the hundreds of other political issues at stake.
And that’s why we now have president Harris. Clearly a winning strategy.
Many Democratic politicians were already doing that.
A strong argument for voting third party.
So the ceasefire would have been in the Democrats’ best interest yet they sacrificed their chances to win at the altar of Zionism.
“Genocide is a minor issue if it is happening to people we see as inferior.”
الحشر مع الناس عيد
Would you say those who voted for Biden in 2020 or stayed home are complicit in the genocide?
Again, the Israelis wanted the few limitations imposed on them lifted, in addition to the billions of other dollars American oligarchs funneled to Trump in support of other issues, so ultimately intense advertising campaigns in swing states along with propaganda efforts on pro-republican social media platforms far outweighed the electoral benefits of supporting Israel; the point was not adding to Trump’s lead in opposing them.
As were even more Republican ones; at least the far-left is supportive of cutting off aid to Israel, unlike the far-right, while also not propagating its racist, bigoted values.
Voting third party in the United States only serves to draw support away from one’s second-preferred candidate to the benefit of one’s least preferred candidate, as demonstrated by the failure of relatively popular third-party right-wing presidential campaigns in 1992 and 1996. Without the implementation ranked choice voting to prevent the spoiler effect, most third-party voters end up with a worse outcome for the issues they support than they’d have gotten with their second-preferred candidate.
Not if voters saw it as giving in to terrorism, which is how it would have been spun if Biden had pushed for it. As the media spins Israeli state-backed acts of terror in Palestine as actions of self-defense, most Americans remain supportive of Israel.
Again, things will only get worse under Trump.
Beyond that, it also enables things to get worse for Ukraine. With Ukraine having over 36,000,000 people in contrast to Palestine’s 5,000,000 or Israel’s 10,000,000, Russia’s war crimes there have had a far greater impact than those committed by Israel and Hamas combined. Despite that, Trump’s odd admiration of Putin combined with the strengthened alliance with Israel means than things will not only get worse in Palestine than if Harris had been elected, but in Ukraine as well.
No more or less than those who voted for Trump in 2020, or even any leading third-party candidate, since supporting Israel has been a cornerstone of American geopolitics for decades.
You answered your own argument with that link. How many female, Muslim heads of state are from the United States on that list? If you honestly think that 6 million Americans stayed home over Gaza you don’t have your finger on the pulse of America. Again, I’m sure votes were lost due to Gaza, but it isn’t the main reason why she lost.