Yeah, both sides amiright?

  • corsicanguppy
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    1 month ago

    Let’s be discerning: there was the potential for a better path out of this, but people decided on the definitely-worst-case-for-everything option on this binary choice, to ensure everyone suffers as much as possible in every situation, most assuredly during the belligerent invasion by Israel.

    It was explained over and over; you need more time?

    • TheOubliette@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Let’s be discerning: there was the potential for a better path out of this

      Harris, of the Biden-Harris regime that has been the necessary backer of this genocide for 13 months, did nothing different from Biden rhetorically and was an empty suit candidate that holds the party line. A party whose reoresentatives almost unanimously provide the material support needed for this genocide despite 70-80% of their constituents opposing it.

      The “better path” you are referring to is literally unconditional support for genocide. I slmost said you were describing the better path, but you didn’t actually describe what it looks like. Presumably, you cannot.

      but people decided on the definitely-worst-case-for-everything option on this binary choice, to ensure everyone suffers as much as possible in every situation, most assuredly during the belligerent invasion by Israel.

      Who provided you with these choices? Have you considered looking at politics as more than just which monster to press a button for?

      It was explained over and over; you need more time?

      There was a peeiod, maybe two months, when I could barely get Harris supporters to even say the word genocide. What do you think you are explaining?

    • kreskin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 month ago

      Harris just needed to stop the shipments to win the election and she wouldnt do it. She had a billion dollars of pollster and consultant data to tell her this. But its everyone elses fault she lost?

      • draneceusrex@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 month ago

        Lol, no. Gaza didn’t lose Harris the election. Sadly, America cares less for Gaza than they do for women’s health, that Trump is a traitor and a convicted felon, or actually understanding the economy. Eggs are expensive so Dems bad.

      • futatorius@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 month ago

        She wouldn’t have won the elections even if she did that. The pro-Zionist Democratic Party vote far exceeds the vote for evenhandedness or pro-Palestinian policies.

        • TheOubliette@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          Around 70-80% of Democratic voters are against the US sending weapons to Israel. The people most committed to this are younger, they are the people that Dems rely on to have any kind of ground game. Accordingly, Dems had no ground game.

          All Harris had to do was cynically oppose the genocide by threatening literally any kind of restrictions and to cynically claim to do something about high prices at the grocery store. In both cases she waffled.