It’s kinda fascinating how every single comment section about another Trump news is filled with folks dogging on a minority who voted third-party and not the, what was it, third of the country (?) who didn’t vote at all.
Do you all really think that those who trully didn’t vote because of the Palestine would somehow change the final outcome? Were they that numerous?
This is a genuine question, I’m not trying to be snarky.
Funny to see them cry over 3rd party that at least showed up and helped dems get seats, instead of the people who didn’t come out to vote because the DNC can’t energise anyone saying the same nothing will change bullshit
Given the highly political atmosphere of Lemmy, I have the impression that most users vote hard. Most in the liberal side were vocal about their desire to vote Kamala to prevent *gestures broadly* from happening. However, users from the tankie instances, amounting to a third of lemmy, regularly decried the democrat option, instead urging protest votes or abstention.
The world isn’t lemmy, lemmy is lemmy. And lemmy has plenty people to clown on for actively choosing this.
It’s not just lemmy, it’s something I’ve seen on other sites as well as traditional media (repeated by news anchors, commentators and even politicians). It’s just weird to me that the focus is on such a small number of voters instead of those who simply didn’t care enough/were prevented from voting/weren’t successfully convinced by the democrats.
It might be different elsewhere but I can only speak to what I see on lemmy, and it seems appropriate here. I don’t check out other sites or watch the news enough to notice their talking points, so I can’t speak on that. I do know that I saw similar calls for protest voting in 2016, and they left a strong negative impression on me.
Irl, I do see hear complaints about non-voters. Fewer of them on lemmy, where words were aimed mostly at voter disenfranchisement efforts, but I did see them during the election.
Yeah, I’m not from or in the US which is why my question was mostly about what I’ve seen online and some media snippets. I have no idea about IRL sentiment, though I assume it varies like with everything.
Vote hard? The ‘liberal’ side was worried about gestures broadly at what’s actually happening in reality right this very moment. Lemmy isn’t an island, it’s a megaphone.
Dude, this is a trans-positive communist Linux forum. We are far from representative of society at large. Lemmy is as much a megaphone as my mouth is a cup. Take a sip, if you dare.
America has a FTTP voting system, so time has distilled its presidential election into to 2 real choices. This was one, and the milquetoast status quo party is the other. By that merit, not voting for one party helps the other party, though not as much as voting for the opposite. In our case, the opponent of the milquetoast party is the crypto Nazi party.
I’m not the other person you replied to, but personally I think there was a clear choice between the two candidates in regard to which one was better for the Palestinians given their track records. Granted, maybe not good enough in these voters opinions, given that they enabled a genocide in the first place and refused to swiftly correct that action.
Besides billionaires and straight, white, conservative, “Christian” men, I honestly don’t know who benefits from a Trump/Musk presidency as compared to a Harris/Walz presidency.
I get that democrats weren’t good enough, they rarely are in my opinion either, but I do consider them better than this. And yep, she and Biden enabled a genocide, no argument there. I even empathize with those that feel adamant that either we have justice all, or justice for none. But I think we are a little frustrated that in the fatalistic protest, Kamala’s opponents ensured the doom of not just Palestinians, but women, LGBT+ folk, and likely many more.
Frankly I’m getting sick and tired of every story about Gaza being filled with smug comments blaming everything on liberal Lemmy members. Biden was a shit candidate who was losing badly before Gaza ever happened. Harris was a golden opportunity to pivot the Biden campaign into something that stood a chance of winning and instead Harris ran on a campaign of “I’m exactly like Biden but a little younger” which is the most gobsmackingly stupid decision of a political campaign in at least a couple decades.
Harris didn’t lose because of Palestine. I mean it didn’t fucking help, but there were plenty of other reasons she lost. So can we please stop with all the annoying smug “are you happy with what you did?” comments? It’s getting really fucking old.
Now for what I actually wanted to say.
Besides billionaires and straight, white, conservative, “Christian” men, I honestly don’t know who benefits from a Trump/Musk presidency as compared to a Harris/Walz presidency.
Only billionaires are benefiting. Straight, white, conservative, Christian or even men, none of those groups in any combination is benefiting. They may not be getting shafted as hard as others are, but only billionaires are going to see anything even remotely positive out of this.
There was a poll of non-voters who voted four years ago. The number one reason they gave for not voting was the genocide in Gaza at 29%. I was surprised by this, but yeah you can potentially say she lost because of Palestine.
I agree she was a shit candidate who, if anything, aimed to the right of Biden. The Democrats are terrible. I still voted against Donald Trump. I’m not here to gloat at all, but look at the situation the world is in now.
Sorry hearing “We told ya so” is so irritating to you. The collective focus will shift over time.
You’re right, Harris absolutely lost because she wasn’t good enough. But yeah, people are going to remind you that the alternative is worse, so that hopefully we can avoid this if there ever is a next time.
I am actively looking to join one as soon as there is momentum, because I am certainly not the right candidate for leading a political movement, nor do I think I’m a great fit to generate that early momentum.
But no matter what, I don’t think the group sentiment should be “give me a perfect candidate, or I’m helping the Nazis” That seems like a foundational issue that needs to be corrected, don’t let perfect be the enemy of good. And relatively speaking, the “good” choice was simply not being Nazis.
Adapt to the situation, and as part of the progress maybe we can adopt a better voting system that doesn’t force you to make one of 2 choices for high level government positions. But don’t delude yourself into thinking there was any other option. Our choices were genocide, or more genocide, and voters that didn’t want the genocide candidate ironically helped the more genocide candidate. They should regret that.
I honestly don’t think division is the intention of most folks like myself, I think it’s a venting of frustration and an honest plea for people to reflect on the past so that history doesn’t repeat itself immediately.
Maybe some people want an apology, but that sounds silly. Personally I just want to see reflection and a commitment to avoiding the same issue going forward. Cause I’m gonna be blunt, it’s impossible to please everyone in a 2 party system, and I guarantee you the Democrats are going to disappoint you next time, but can we agree that they are better than the alternative? And can we embrace the reality of the 2 party system while we strive to improve it?
Kamala didn’t lose because of Palestine. She lost because DNC centrism has been a political dead end since at least 2012. 2020 was the anomaly; Trump only lost because of Covid.
Centrists are just using the Palestine issue as a scapegoat for their own failures. Kamala/Biden was doomed long before Palestine.
But yeah, people are going to remind you that the alternative is worse, so that hopefully we can avoid this if there ever is a next time.
The thing is though that I don’t think anyone doesn’t already know that. The people who legitimately didn’t vote for Harris in the general election won’t care because they’ll say “I didn’t vote for Trump either, so it’s not my fault” and no amount of everyone telling them it is or explaining the reality of our terrible first past the post system is going to change that. You’re basically preaching to the choir here and it’s frankly nothing but a distraction from addressing the real and pressing issue of the white nationalist fascists literally seizing power right now. The thousandth “told ya so” post isn’t doing anything more than the last 990 did besides stroking your own ego.
I mean, it’s also part of the discourse in social media, too. The person I replied to actually asked for the opinion related to those who share the same sentiment as I do. In this instance, it is kinda on you that you kept reading the thread.
Though I would agree that the overall focus should be on what we do from here. And to that, I’d like to see some form of organized community action, protest, or something like that start to pick up steam so that I could support or participate in.
The issue is that it’s practically the only thing being commented in any post related to Palestine and it’s drowning out all the useful discussion that needs to be taking place. Pick any post about Palestine and look at the comments and the overwhelming majority of them are some variation on “boy, I bet all those people who refused to vote for Harris are so happy now”, which is about as useful a comment as all the idiots that used to rush to post “First” on articles back in the day.
These “told you so” comments are so pervasive it’s starting to feel vaguely like astroturfing. A bunch of comments encouraging non-Republican voters to fight amongst themselves and drowning out any possible productive discussion or organization sure sounds like it would be a brilliant move by the fascist supporters. I’m not suggesting everyone making those comments is astroturfing or a troll, but the absolute way that’s blanketing all discussion around Palestine sure does make me wonder if some of them are.
You’re accusing me of something I never did. I’m asking because pretty much all the blame I’ve seen is put on those protest voters and the topic of non-voters rarely, if ever, comes up in these comments.
To me saying “people like you” implies similarity between “them” and the person you’re saying it to but whatever.
To reiterate, I don’t think these people are blameless (every bit of resistance counts after all) but I feel like for many normal people, politicians and media commentators, they (pro-Palestinian protesters, LGBT folks etc) became a scapegoat that completely stole the focus from all the rest of the potential voters who didn’t feel strongly enough to oppose an openly fascist candidate. It’s just weird to see.
I don’t think they are being a scapegoat at all. I think they are being told they share in the blame. And they refuse to admit it, some to the point of saying ludicrous things like “ethnic cleansing isn’t as bad as genocide and Harris wanted genocide.”
Perhaps I’m just unlucky enough to stumble mostly on comments focusing on them. I was however lucky enough I didn’t have to read explanations like the one you’ve quoted here yet.
There’s a lot of frustration at the segment of the population who 1) vocally said that Harris would be just as bad as trump in regards to Gaza 2) loudly argued that failure to listen to them in regards to Gaza would cost the Democrats the election, and 3) said that anyone who was willing to vote for Harris despite not perfectly walking the line in regards to Gaza was a supporter of genocide. “The lesser of two evils is still a vote for genocide”, and “it’s not like it can be more genocide” are both things that have been said to me.
So, according to the people in question: yes, they are that numerous. I’m incredibly sad that I seem to have been right, but also fuck you to all the absolute assholes who accused me of supporting genocide because I’d rather the president get a middling cease fire and shamefully keep sending munitions to Israel than have us actively send troops to ethnically cleanse Gaza. Congrats! You got what you wanted! No more war in Gaza, because we’re going to finish it now.
Even if they’re in they’re not large enough to matter, electorally, they were consistently aggressively smug and superior to anyone who said that maybe trump wasn’t going to be the savior of the Palestinians, as evidence by his explicit words.
It’s cathartic to be mad at people who were condescending towards you when they were wrong, even if you’d rather not be right, purely because they called you a bad person for wanting the same thing but thinking their way to get it wouldn’t work.
Well, for point 2, they were kind of right. It’s mostly a self fulfilling prophecy, but when a sizable chunk of your voting block says “take this position if you want my vote” and then you take the opposite position it really shouldn’t come as a surprise if you subsequently lose the election. That 100% was on Harris.
Whether Harris would have been better than Trump (for Gaza) is perhaps a more interesting question. Ultimately Israel is going to be using their own troops for this not US troops because US troops aren’t going to go along with gunning down unarmed civilians in mass the way the Israeli troops will. Whether it’s Trump or Harris that wasn’t going to change. The biggest difference is just one of political posturing. Harris would have made disapproving statements and basically said “we’re very disappointed in Israel” while still sending the exact same weapons and funds Trump is sending. Maybe Israel would have played things more low key, maybe not, we’ll never know now. So point 1 is kind of a wash.
Point 3 is really a more abstract moral question I suppose. At what point does something cross over into “supporting genocide”. Does sending money to the Israeli government count? What about doing business with companies that do so? What about having the power to do something about it and instead choosing to do nothing? I think we can all agree that Trump absolutely supports genocide. The argument for if Harris did is far less concrete, and for people who voted for Harris (or I guess Trump for that matter) more nebulous still.
The real problem ultimately though is that none of this existed in a vacuum. If this was literally a referendum on how the US should respond to Israel that would be one thing, but that was such a tiny slice of a much bigger discussion. The biggest and most concerning of which was Trump essentially admitting that he was planning on staging a coup of the US government which meant no matter how the Gaza situation was going to play our Trump absolutely could not be let anywhere near the office of the president.
The election is over though, Harris lost because she ran a shit campaign on proven losing policy. People need to get over that and focus on actually dealing with the shit sandwich we’ve collectively been handed instead of continuing to point fingers and argue about whose fault it was.
The election is over though, Harris lost because she ran a shit campaign on proven losing policy. People need to get over that and focus on actually dealing with the shit sandwich we’ve collectively been handed instead of continuing to point fingers and argue about whose fault it was.
I mean this with all sincerity: fuck off.
Arguing that letting this and everything else happen is better than what Harris brought to the table doesn’t just get forgotten because the people who said this would be better are upset they were wrong and don’t want to be blamed.
The “winning policy” is evidently “ethnic cleansing”. That’s what came of all this, do you get that? Milquetoast ceasefire and continuing the slow push towards a two state solution lost to ethnic cleansing.
Whether it’s Trump or Harris that wasn’t going to change. The biggest difference is just one of political posturing.
Trump has already increased the weapons being sent, rolling back a Biden administration block on certain weapons. You can’t just say “no, they won’t use US troops” when we’re on an article about trump wanting to use US troops for ethnic cleansing. Why do you think Israel gets a say in what troops go in? It’s not like they can stop US if we want to send ours in. Why do you think American troops wouldn’t do these things?
We’re not at the hypothetical stage here. There have already been concrete changes in policy that are beyond “posturing”.
The real problem ultimately though is that none of this existed in a vacuum. If this was literally a referendum on how the US should respond to Israel that would be one thing, but that was such a tiny slice of a much bigger discussion.
Yes, and that’s exactly the point. Even if their policies on Gaza were exactly the same, which they very much were not, it would still be better to have voted for Harris because of so many reasons, none of which mattered to the people who swore to not vote for her over Gaza.
This is being civil about things. We’re not saying that the people who refused Harris because of Gaza are transphobic, antivax, anti-education, anti abortion, racist misogynists, even though supporting Harris evidently makes one a genocidal racist in their eyes.
Maybe if people said “you know what? Maybe I made a mistake” there wouldn’t be such animosity, but here we are. Better a mask off fascist than an imperfect compromise.
And don’t worry, I am doing what I can to deal with the shit sandwich they wanted us to have. That doesn’t keep me from having the ability, nor seeing the need for, needling people who thought that this would be better for Gaza than what Harris wanted.
That’s another thing I didn’t see brought up nearly enough. Granted, I’m not extremely tuned into American media so maybe it is a hot topic there but yeah, thanks for mentioning it.
Yes, because everyone who could have voted and didn’t bears responsibility for looking the other way while Trump gained the presidency.
And everyone who was vocal at any point about not voting for Harris for any reason is culpable for assisting Trump in gaining the presidency, and for influencing others to do the same.
See, that’s kind of what I’m talking about. Based on the results I’ve seen, all the votes for independent candidates combined amounted to less than 2% of all counted votes. Do you really think those 2% had a bigger impact on the end result than the 90 or so million of people who didn’t vote at all?
I’m not saying they had no impact, it just feels weird to focus so much on those who cared enough to take part in the democratic process while treating the rest as a secondary issue.
To clarify, this is just my observation based on internet comments and some news snippets I’ve seen. I understand things might look different IRL and from a perspective of someone in the middle of this madness.
It’s kinda fascinating how every single comment section about another Trump news is filled with folks dogging on a minority who voted third-party and not the, what was it, third of the country (?) who didn’t vote at all.
Do you all really think that those who trully didn’t vote because of the Palestine would somehow change the final outcome? Were they that numerous?
This is a genuine question, I’m not trying to be snarky.
Funny to see them cry over 3rd party that at least showed up and helped dems get seats, instead of the people who didn’t come out to vote because the DNC can’t energise anyone saying the same nothing will change bullshit
Given the highly political atmosphere of Lemmy, I have the impression that most users vote hard. Most in the liberal side were vocal about their desire to vote Kamala to prevent *gestures broadly* from happening. However, users from the tankie instances, amounting to a third of lemmy, regularly decried the democrat option, instead urging protest votes or abstention.
The world isn’t lemmy, lemmy is lemmy. And lemmy has plenty people to clown on for actively choosing this.
It’s not just lemmy, it’s something I’ve seen on other sites as well as traditional media (repeated by news anchors, commentators and even politicians). It’s just weird to me that the focus is on such a small number of voters instead of those who simply didn’t care enough/were prevented from voting/weren’t successfully convinced by the democrats.
It might be different elsewhere but I can only speak to what I see on lemmy, and it seems appropriate here. I don’t check out other sites or watch the news enough to notice their talking points, so I can’t speak on that. I do know that I saw similar calls for protest voting in 2016, and they left a strong negative impression on me.
Understandable, it just seems like a wider sentiment based on my limited exposure to this topic.
Irl, I do see hear complaints about non-voters. Fewer of them on lemmy, where words were aimed mostly at voter disenfranchisement efforts, but I did see them during the election.
Yeah, I’m not from or in the US which is why my question was mostly about what I’ve seen online and some media snippets. I have no idea about IRL sentiment, though I assume it varies like with everything.
Vote hard? The ‘liberal’ side was worried about gestures broadly at what’s actually happening in reality right this very moment. Lemmy isn’t an island, it’s a megaphone.
Full ballot, urging others to do the same.
Dude, this is a trans-positive communist Linux forum. We are far from representative of society at large. Lemmy is as much a megaphone as my mouth is a cup. Take a sip, if you dare.
Don’t threaten me with a good time.
I guess we know where you stand then.
America has a FTTP voting system, so time has distilled its presidential election into to 2 real choices. This was one, and the milquetoast status quo party is the other. By that merit, not voting for one party helps the other party, though not as much as voting for the opposite. In our case, the opponent of the milquetoast party is the crypto Nazi party.
I’m not the other person you replied to, but personally I think there was a clear choice between the two candidates in regard to which one was better for the Palestinians given their track records. Granted, maybe not good enough in these voters opinions, given that they enabled a genocide in the first place and refused to swiftly correct that action.
Besides billionaires and straight, white, conservative, “Christian” men, I honestly don’t know who benefits from a Trump/Musk presidency as compared to a Harris/Walz presidency.
I get that democrats weren’t good enough, they rarely are in my opinion either, but I do consider them better than this. And yep, she and Biden enabled a genocide, no argument there. I even empathize with those that feel adamant that either we have justice all, or justice for none. But I think we are a little frustrated that in the fatalistic protest, Kamala’s opponents ensured the doom of not just Palestinians, but women, LGBT+ folk, and likely many more.
But hey, price of eggs and all too, right?
Frankly I’m getting sick and tired of every story about Gaza being filled with smug comments blaming everything on liberal Lemmy members. Biden was a shit candidate who was losing badly before Gaza ever happened. Harris was a golden opportunity to pivot the Biden campaign into something that stood a chance of winning and instead Harris ran on a campaign of “I’m exactly like Biden but a little younger” which is the most gobsmackingly stupid decision of a political campaign in at least a couple decades.
Harris didn’t lose because of Palestine. I mean it didn’t fucking help, but there were plenty of other reasons she lost. So can we please stop with all the annoying smug “are you happy with what you did?” comments? It’s getting really fucking old.
Now for what I actually wanted to say.
Only billionaires are benefiting. Straight, white, conservative, Christian or even men, none of those groups in any combination is benefiting. They may not be getting shafted as hard as others are, but only billionaires are going to see anything even remotely positive out of this.
Thiel is white and certainly not straight, and I guarantee he is immensely benefiting.
There was a poll of non-voters who voted four years ago. The number one reason they gave for not voting was the genocide in Gaza at 29%. I was surprised by this, but yeah you can potentially say she lost because of Palestine.
I agree she was a shit candidate who, if anything, aimed to the right of Biden. The Democrats are terrible. I still voted against Donald Trump. I’m not here to gloat at all, but look at the situation the world is in now.
Sorry hearing “We told ya so” is so irritating to you. The collective focus will shift over time.
You’re right, Harris absolutely lost because she wasn’t good enough. But yeah, people are going to remind you that the alternative is worse, so that hopefully we can avoid this if there ever is a next time.
Or you could stop and build a string coalition with an action plan.
I am actively looking to join one as soon as there is momentum, because I am certainly not the right candidate for leading a political movement, nor do I think I’m a great fit to generate that early momentum.
But no matter what, I don’t think the group sentiment should be “give me a perfect candidate, or I’m helping the Nazis” That seems like a foundational issue that needs to be corrected, don’t let perfect be the enemy of good. And relatively speaking, the “good” choice was simply not being Nazis.
Adapt to the situation, and as part of the progress maybe we can adopt a better voting system that doesn’t force you to make one of 2 choices for high level government positions. But don’t delude yourself into thinking there was any other option. Our choices were genocide, or more genocide, and voters that didn’t want the genocide candidate ironically helped the more genocide candidate. They should regret that.
Stop focusing on what was/could have been. Focus on what is/can be. A house divided refers to self before all.
I honestly don’t think division is the intention of most folks like myself, I think it’s a venting of frustration and an honest plea for people to reflect on the past so that history doesn’t repeat itself immediately.
Maybe some people want an apology, but that sounds silly. Personally I just want to see reflection and a commitment to avoiding the same issue going forward. Cause I’m gonna be blunt, it’s impossible to please everyone in a 2 party system, and I guarantee you the Democrats are going to disappoint you next time, but can we agree that they are better than the alternative? And can we embrace the reality of the 2 party system while we strive to improve it?
Kamala didn’t lose because of Palestine. She lost because DNC centrism has been a political dead end since at least 2012. 2020 was the anomaly; Trump only lost because of Covid.
Centrists are just using the Palestine issue as a scapegoat for their own failures. Kamala/Biden was doomed long before Palestine.
The thing is though that I don’t think anyone doesn’t already know that. The people who legitimately didn’t vote for Harris in the general election won’t care because they’ll say “I didn’t vote for Trump either, so it’s not my fault” and no amount of everyone telling them it is or explaining the reality of our terrible first past the post system is going to change that. You’re basically preaching to the choir here and it’s frankly nothing but a distraction from addressing the real and pressing issue of the white nationalist fascists literally seizing power right now. The thousandth “told ya so” post isn’t doing anything more than the last 990 did besides stroking your own ego.
I mean, it’s also part of the discourse in social media, too. The person I replied to actually asked for the opinion related to those who share the same sentiment as I do. In this instance, it is kinda on you that you kept reading the thread.
Though I would agree that the overall focus should be on what we do from here. And to that, I’d like to see some form of organized community action, protest, or something like that start to pick up steam so that I could support or participate in.
The issue is that it’s practically the only thing being commented in any post related to Palestine and it’s drowning out all the useful discussion that needs to be taking place. Pick any post about Palestine and look at the comments and the overwhelming majority of them are some variation on “boy, I bet all those people who refused to vote for Harris are so happy now”, which is about as useful a comment as all the idiots that used to rush to post “First” on articles back in the day.
These “told you so” comments are so pervasive it’s starting to feel vaguely like astroturfing. A bunch of comments encouraging non-Republican voters to fight amongst themselves and drowning out any possible productive discussion or organization sure sounds like it would be a brilliant move by the fascist supporters. I’m not suggesting everyone making those comments is astroturfing or a troll, but the absolute way that’s blanketing all discussion around Palestine sure does make me wonder if some of them are.
It’s equally fascinating how people like you think that only one group can be to blame for an electoral loss and that blame can’t be shared.
And if their protest vote changed nothing, what was the point of it?
You’re accusing me of something I never did. I’m asking because pretty much all the blame I’ve seen is put on those protest voters and the topic of non-voters rarely, if ever, comes up in these comments.
I very specifically said “people like you” because I did not know if you were amongst the people I was talking about.
To me saying “people like you” implies similarity between “them” and the person you’re saying it to but whatever.
To reiterate, I don’t think these people are blameless (every bit of resistance counts after all) but I feel like for many normal people, politicians and media commentators, they (pro-Palestinian protesters, LGBT folks etc) became a scapegoat that completely stole the focus from all the rest of the potential voters who didn’t feel strongly enough to oppose an openly fascist candidate. It’s just weird to see.
I don’t think they are being a scapegoat at all. I think they are being told they share in the blame. And they refuse to admit it, some to the point of saying ludicrous things like “ethnic cleansing isn’t as bad as genocide and Harris wanted genocide.”
There is a lot of blame to be shared.
Perhaps I’m just unlucky enough to stumble mostly on comments focusing on them. I was however lucky enough I didn’t have to read explanations like the one you’ve quoted here yet.
That’s for sure.
It was a huge talking point before the election. We really needed to punish Democrats for not stopping Isreal.
There’s a lot of frustration at the segment of the population who 1) vocally said that Harris would be just as bad as trump in regards to Gaza 2) loudly argued that failure to listen to them in regards to Gaza would cost the Democrats the election, and 3) said that anyone who was willing to vote for Harris despite not perfectly walking the line in regards to Gaza was a supporter of genocide. “The lesser of two evils is still a vote for genocide”, and “it’s not like it can be more genocide” are both things that have been said to me.
So, according to the people in question: yes, they are that numerous. I’m incredibly sad that I seem to have been right, but also fuck you to all the absolute assholes who accused me of supporting genocide because I’d rather the president get a middling cease fire and shamefully keep sending munitions to Israel than have us actively send troops to ethnically cleanse Gaza. Congrats! You got what you wanted! No more war in Gaza, because we’re going to finish it now.
Even if they’re in they’re not large enough to matter, electorally, they were consistently aggressively smug and superior to anyone who said that maybe trump wasn’t going to be the savior of the Palestinians, as evidence by his explicit words.
It’s cathartic to be mad at people who were condescending towards you when they were wrong, even if you’d rather not be right, purely because they called you a bad person for wanting the same thing but thinking their way to get it wouldn’t work.
Well, for point 2, they were kind of right. It’s mostly a self fulfilling prophecy, but when a sizable chunk of your voting block says “take this position if you want my vote” and then you take the opposite position it really shouldn’t come as a surprise if you subsequently lose the election. That 100% was on Harris.
Whether Harris would have been better than Trump (for Gaza) is perhaps a more interesting question. Ultimately Israel is going to be using their own troops for this not US troops because US troops aren’t going to go along with gunning down unarmed civilians in mass the way the Israeli troops will. Whether it’s Trump or Harris that wasn’t going to change. The biggest difference is just one of political posturing. Harris would have made disapproving statements and basically said “we’re very disappointed in Israel” while still sending the exact same weapons and funds Trump is sending. Maybe Israel would have played things more low key, maybe not, we’ll never know now. So point 1 is kind of a wash.
Point 3 is really a more abstract moral question I suppose. At what point does something cross over into “supporting genocide”. Does sending money to the Israeli government count? What about doing business with companies that do so? What about having the power to do something about it and instead choosing to do nothing? I think we can all agree that Trump absolutely supports genocide. The argument for if Harris did is far less concrete, and for people who voted for Harris (or I guess Trump for that matter) more nebulous still.
The real problem ultimately though is that none of this existed in a vacuum. If this was literally a referendum on how the US should respond to Israel that would be one thing, but that was such a tiny slice of a much bigger discussion. The biggest and most concerning of which was Trump essentially admitting that he was planning on staging a coup of the US government which meant no matter how the Gaza situation was going to play our Trump absolutely could not be let anywhere near the office of the president.
The election is over though, Harris lost because she ran a shit campaign on proven losing policy. People need to get over that and focus on actually dealing with the shit sandwich we’ve collectively been handed instead of continuing to point fingers and argue about whose fault it was.
I mean this with all sincerity: fuck off.
Arguing that letting this and everything else happen is better than what Harris brought to the table doesn’t just get forgotten because the people who said this would be better are upset they were wrong and don’t want to be blamed.
The “winning policy” is evidently “ethnic cleansing”. That’s what came of all this, do you get that? Milquetoast ceasefire and continuing the slow push towards a two state solution lost to ethnic cleansing.
Trump has already increased the weapons being sent, rolling back a Biden administration block on certain weapons. You can’t just say “no, they won’t use US troops” when we’re on an article about trump wanting to use US troops for ethnic cleansing. Why do you think Israel gets a say in what troops go in? It’s not like they can stop US if we want to send ours in. Why do you think American troops wouldn’t do these things?
We’re not at the hypothetical stage here. There have already been concrete changes in policy that are beyond “posturing”.
Yes, and that’s exactly the point. Even if their policies on Gaza were exactly the same, which they very much were not, it would still be better to have voted for Harris because of so many reasons, none of which mattered to the people who swore to not vote for her over Gaza.
This is being civil about things. We’re not saying that the people who refused Harris because of Gaza are transphobic, antivax, anti-education, anti abortion, racist misogynists, even though supporting Harris evidently makes one a genocidal racist in their eyes.
Maybe if people said “you know what? Maybe I made a mistake” there wouldn’t be such animosity, but here we are. Better a mask off fascist than an imperfect compromise.
And don’t worry, I am doing what I can to deal with the shit sandwich they wanted us to have. That doesn’t keep me from having the ability, nor seeing the need for, needling people who thought that this would be better for Gaza than what Harris wanted.
It’s funny because millions of people did vote, but it was never counted. And unlike 2020… These uncounted votes are proven 🤷
That’s another thing I didn’t see brought up nearly enough. Granted, I’m not extremely tuned into American media so maybe it is a hot topic there but yeah, thanks for mentioning it.
I mean if you’re going to dog on minorities then you gotta dog on the white people he has majority support from.
Yes, because everyone who could have voted and didn’t bears responsibility for looking the other way while Trump gained the presidency.
And everyone who was vocal at any point about not voting for Harris for any reason is culpable for assisting Trump in gaining the presidency, and for influencing others to do the same.
See, that’s kind of what I’m talking about. Based on the results I’ve seen, all the votes for independent candidates combined amounted to less than 2% of all counted votes. Do you really think those 2% had a bigger impact on the end result than the 90 or so million of people who didn’t vote at all?
I’m not saying they had no impact, it just feels weird to focus so much on those who cared enough to take part in the democratic process while treating the rest as a secondary issue.
To clarify, this is just my observation based on internet comments and some news snippets I’ve seen. I understand things might look different IRL and from a perspective of someone in the middle of this madness.
Got it. It’s all the fault of people, not the inept dnc for this situation.
Well, both.
Seems to most in this thread dnc is faultless though
I hear you… I see tons of dnc hate here too
A lot of the people who are defending the DNC are not the ones decrying it.
Which many seem to not want to see or hear
It’s a world filled with people who believe what feels good
You made a fucking choice. Take some responsibility for it
Just like it was their choice to do the opposite of whatever got them enthusiasm
the party can never fail only be failed
deleted by creator