Single-issue voters are ignorant to begin with, but failing to help stop another Trump presidency isn’t the moral high ground. If you’re in that group there’s no point polishing your halo, because you are shitting on it.
Where where these people of moral conscience when Bernie had a shot?
it’s not like this shitshow sprung up overnight.
They voted for Hillary, because the party decided it was her turn and made everyone else drop out and endorse her.
That’s right. And then they conveniently forgot about the following midterms.
I just don’t get how people are looking at Harris’ stance as being pro-genocide. Biden is the President and historically, foreign policy during the tenure of the President by the Vice President doesn’t veer too far off from the President. That said, Harris has absolutely called for investigation into the suffering of civilians in the conflict.
Congress sets the budgetary amount of aid to direct to Israel and the President distributes the money via their diplomatic channels. There are very few options for the President to just suspend funding, which Biden has done twice for weapons under the rules established within 10 USC § 362 (a)(1)
Of the amounts made available to the Department of Defense, none may be used for any training, equipment, or other assistance for a unit of a foreign security force if the Secretary of Defense has credible information that the unit has committed a gross violation of human rights.
But outside that, there’s very little the President can do once Congress approves funding and that funding has been signed into law. This is why an independent channel investigation is required and is exactly what Harris has called for. This would allow the the US Government to establish their own inquiry into the human abuses. This would give the required evidence to cancel funding under Title XII authority. But none of that can happen overnight. It’s not an easy path to override the will of Congress.
On the opposite side, Trump has indicated that he will absolutely turn a blind eye to the whole thing and allow Israel to determine solely the “best” course of action for their current conflict. Trump has literally stated in his rallies:
From the start, Harris has worked to tie Israel’s hand behind its back, demanding an immediate cease-fire, always demanding cease-fire
Trump would not see a cease-fire as a required condition for the on-going conflict.
Harris and Democrats historically have called for a two-state solution. Trump’s plan which has been broadly adopted by the Republican party in general would:
- Give Palestinians only about 15% of their original territory
- Jerusalem would become Israel’s undivided capitol, meaning all claims by the Palestinians to the eastern half of the city would be tossed out.
- Allow Palestinians to “achieve an independent state” via a means that is not clearly defined in the plan but indicated that Israel would have a final say in that process.
- “No Palestinians or Israelis will be uprooted from their homes” indicating that the territory that Israel has already colonized from their current conflict would become Israel’s.
- Would put Israel and Jordan on equal footing for the administration of al-Haram al-Sharif, which will absolutely ignite a conflict.
- Any territory allocated to Palestinians would have to undergo a four year “wait” period, but there’s no protections from Israel obtaining that territory if done so during conflict. So Israel could provoke someone to fight them and that would give them justification to take the land during this “four year wait period”.
Trump has all but given up completely on a two-state solution. Which means, he’s for a one state solution. And people are fooling themselves if they believe that Trump would seek a “peaceful” one state solution. He has told Netanyahu directly, “Just get it done quickly”. Now we can play a game as what manner is used to “get it done quickly” means, but only idiots are the one’s thinking that doesn’t give a tacit nod to ethic cleansing.
I just have no idea what these people who think Harris is a bad idea for Palestinians are actually thinking. And really, I don’t think they are thinking at all. You have one solution that is long, stupid, and required because we are a nation of laws. And you have the other solution that is “fuck it, firebomb them all and call it done”. It is difficult to imagine that there are truly people this blind and ignorant to this reality. But yet, here we are.
The notion that we might get a 3rd party into office like twenty years from now if we start today, helps nobody if the people we’re trying to help are all eradicated over the next four years. Going down this “third road” only ensures an outcome where we are fifteen years too late to help.
I’m trying to understand how this system works and came across this article from Al Jazeera which, if I’m reading it correctly, is saying that the US did determine gross human rights violations but the Biden administration is refusing to apply the Leahy Law. Doesn’t this mean that Biden does have the authority to stop sending military aid but isn’t, or am I misunderstanding something? Also, aside from Leahy Law why can’t he veto the military aid?
In really it’s probably a mix that totals to around 90% of the people making these pronouncements are either bots, paid trolls from enemy nations, nihilists, or the equivalent. The remaining 10% probably have a genuine belief that voting for Harris makes them complicit in the genocide the Israeli government and its military are committing. They’re incorrect, on many levels, but that is probably their genuine belief.
We must always vote for the lesser evil because that’s what the real world is, from the most negative point of view: reducing evil and suffering. We know some of the things we’re doing today will be seen as evil by our progeny. We don’t know others.
A Harris administration will be the most likely to reduce the suffering of Palestinians, the most likely to force the Israeli government and military to end the genocide, and the most likely to make real strides toward middle east peace.
Your world view is pretty self defeating dont you think?
I’m torn on how to approach this, i’m left with a couple of options:
A) so Trump would somehow be even less self defeating?
B) are you suggesting we should all spontaneously rise up and overthrow the military industrial complex?
C) if you think this world view is self defeating then:
C.1) you owe some clarifying thoughts as to how you see a measured response to the existing democratic systems as self defeating
C.2) you appear to be making yourself out as someone who idealizes violence and oppression
C.3) you appear to be using contrarian language with the explicit purpose of dragging down the mood of the conversation. Quit that shit
It makes no sense, but have you considered the possibility that most people pushing that narrative are Russian assets trying to get Trump elected?
deleted by creator
I just have no idea what these people who think Harris is a bad idea for Palestinians are actually thinking. And really, I don’t think they are thinking at all.
They live in cloud cuckoo land where Biden/Harris can just tell Netanyahu “Fuck off and shove a grenade up your arse, you genocidal maniac” and that would actually work.
They believe in Schrodinger’s Jew: that Jews simultaneously control US politics and that US Presidents control Israel.
No they believe that US politicians are bribed and blackmailed and they don’t want to support those politicians. Either way I don’t want to vote for the candidates supporting and paying for genocide.
Most of Israel’s weapons come from the US. It’s very well possible for the US congress/government to say “no more weapons if you use them for agression”.
Biden tried just slowing weapon shipments earlier on and Rs and some Ds rammed a bill through saying nope, no slowdowns on these shipments allowed.
Nooooo!!! Anything other than perfect support at all times for everything Netanyahu does is Trump support from Russia! Every lemmy genocide supporter says so!
The two-state solution is a boondoggle.
There can only be a one state solution.
So make a choice: Israel or Palestine.
So make a choice: Israel or Palestine.
You say that like the choice hasn’t already been made without the input of the voters.
The two-state solution is a boondoggle.
Better tell that to China, or do you know better than an AES state?
What do you think “critical support” means?
What should happen to Palestinians if Israel is chosen? What should happen to Israelis if Palestine is chosen?
I by say we find land for each of them someplace in the US, build infrastructure and housing, evacuate Jerusalem and bulldoze it.
I’m not who you replied to but I like the idea of a single new country for both Palestinians and Israelis. I think this would avoid the ethnostate issue.
Ultimately I think the only way forward is to aim for peaceful coexistence between the two groups.
Great idea! Maybe we could look to history to find the last time that Jews and Muslims lived peacefully together in a single state, and name the new country whatever that is.
Hmmm… Looks like in the 1900s there was a country called Palestine where Muslims and Jews live equally. Let’s get rid of Israel and Palestine, and replace them both with Palestine.
Isn’t the issue of a single country that the Palestinian population is much higher than the Israeli population, so if there were a single democracy, it would mean that Palestinians would basically be fully in charge?
I think this is why a federated or two state solution is often suggested. Both parties need at least some level of autonomy.
Isn’t the issue of a single country that the Palestinian population is much higher than the Israeli population, so if there were a single democracy, it would mean that Palestinians would basically be fully in charge?
Should we segregate America just because some minorities are outnumbered?
No, Gaza+ west bank are a little smaller than Israel in terms of population
Israel has made it clear that it wants to exterminate Palestinians, and is literally in the process of doing so right now.
Palestinians are not genocidal. They don’t want to exterminate Israelis. They just want to be able to go home and stop being killed and starved and tortured.
Israelis can assimilate into Palestine and stop trying to make a Jewish ethnostate. Palestine can be one multi-ethnic, multi-racial, multi-religious democracy.
Harris and Bernie are both 100% pro genocide. Just at a slower pace than Trump, who will more explicitly fully support Iran war. Bernie is 100% correct that Trump is worse, but any position that declares Hamas as more evil than IDF, “Israel has a right to defend itself platitude”, is a pro genocide position, because to Israel, every child and hospital is a Hamas target.
Hey look, Bernie right on it. Again.
You think he ever gets tired of being right all the time?
He probably gets tired of so many others being more popular and more incorrect.
We need a whole senate of inter generational Bernies.
Yes, Trump is even worse. But killing innocent people is still so bad that I am harmed by it being politically acceptable.
If politics is killing innocent people more nicely (‘yeah, that’s bad, but it just happens’) or more nastily (‘haw haw stupid children’), I no longer care about politics.
Let’s say Trump gets elected, and ten years from now, some kid asks you, “What did you do to prevent this?”
Are you going to tell them you just didn’t care enough to bother?
The non voters will tell the children that letting Palestine be destroyed was worth it. That participating in genocide wasn’t that bad.
In that same 10 year, some kid asks, what did liberals do to prevent this during Biden’s term.
You can respond we were at brunch we didn’t notice what was going on.
I’m going to point at the Green Party, one of the 3 major parties in the current election, and at the 3 or 4 smaller parties that are gaining traction, then I am going to explain to them that 10 years ago, the country was deeply gripped by a plutocratic fascist duopoly and I did what was necessary to combat that fascism while others accepted it and pledged to it because it was in their best interest to just fall in line.
Then I will encourage them never to kiss the ring of fascism and genocide in order to preserve their own personal feelings of security.
You heartless liberals think that sacrificing thousands of Palestinian lives in the here and now is worth it in order to have a chance at a Green Party presidency maybe in 30 years. No! Genocide is never an acceptable cost of doing business. Stop being complicit in genocide! Vote for Harris.
The one who is steadfast pro-genocide…?
Am I missing something here?
Harris cant answer a question to save her life, but an answer she has given over and over IM TALKING… is that she unconditionally condones and supports the genocide.
one of the 3 major parties in the current election
Call it what you want, but the green party has no chance of making an impact on the outcome of this election except as a spoiler candidate.
I did what was necessary to combat that fascism
And by that you mean voting for the only non-fascist candidate with a chance of winning the election, right?
These liberals voting for the green party think that letting a genocide happen now is an acceptable cost of doing business if it maybe leads to a Green presidency in 30 years. They’re willing to be complicit in Trump’s genocide.
Liberals don’t vote for the green party. Not genocidey enough.
Sure it is. The Green Party is doing more to make genocide happen than the Democrats are. The Greens are explicitly running as a spoiler candidate to make Harris lose swing states. This will cause Trump to win the presidency and bomb the West Bank.
We are not in a position to win the White House, but we do have a real opportunity to win something historic, we could deny Kamala Harris the state of Michigan. And the polls show that most likely Harris cannot win the election without Michigan.
Source: https://www.nj.com/politics/2024/10/harris-vs-trump-spoiler-says-the-quiet-part-out-loud.html
You seem to have liberals and leftists confused. Liberals support Democrats because they’re happy that the party has come around to supporting the genocide they’ve always wanted. Some leftists don’t want genocide and vote for someone you don’t want them to (someone who, yes, is an intentional spoiler, which I’ve said before), so you have to pretend that your genocide support is the moral genocide support.
You’re no different. I voted for Harris, by the way. Took a long shower afterwards. Didn’t help. I will resent Democrats forever for manipulating me into voting for liberals’ genocide.
I was referencing the election cycle in 10 years.
And I don’t vote like a 13 year old trying to get my buddy the little fake crown for homecoming. Green party hits 5%, they get federal election funding, we are no longer a 2 party nation.
All this time the shills have been saying “vote for the genocide today, and then start the work the day after election day to make the Green party viable” has been a shameless diversion tactic the entire time.
I can throw away my vote on a genocidal cop who is pro-border wall, pro-incarceration of refugees, pro-genocide, pro-cop city, pro-lethal response to protesters, etc, or I can vote for the Green party to get actual funding and actual participation in the election process in 4 years.
It would have been so much faster for the supposedly left leaning party to actually lean left and get my vote, but since they decided to disenfranchise me and do everything they can to silence me, my went Green.
we are no longer a 2 party nation
We’re a two-party nation as long as first past the post voting is the standard. If you want the green party to be taken seriously, that should me what you’re campaigning for, not a third candidate in an inherently two-party system.
I can throw away my vote on a genocidal cop who is pro-border wall, pro-incarceration of refugees, pro-genocide, pro-cop city, pro-lethal response to protesters, etc, or I can vote for the Green party to get actual funding and actual participation in the election process in 4 years.
You can vote for a candidate who’s got a chance of beating the authoritarian dictator wannabe, or you can throw away your vote on a spoiler candidate with no chance of winning the election on the hopes that other people don’t do the same and let Trump win.
I do hope that if Trump wins, all of you people who’re trying to take the moral high ground will reflect on the situation and realize that you not only didn’t do the bare minimum you could have to stop it, your actions actually indirectly assisted him gaining power again. I don’t have much hope that that will happen, but I hope it does.
It’s really a shame, because normally, I’d be very in support of the green party. I like their platform. But they need to get political seats elsewhere before going for the fucking presidency. Even if, by some weird happenstance, they got elected, they would be completely blocked by the other branches of government at every turn. Get some seats in local government, get some seats in state governments, get some house and senate seats, then try to join the big leagues.
Exactly, Jill Stein is a stooge with no government experience whatsoever who thinks she can jump right in and be president of the most powerful country on earth. Not to mention taking money from republicans and accepting legal aid from Trump’s personal attorneys. It’s a joke.
If you want to be a real candidate, start with city council. Mayor. Governor. state senate. ANYTHING and work up from there. But she isn’t interested in making any actual progress.
Look at AOC for example, a progressive politician who is starting where she can actually make a difference and learn how to be a legislator and leader. Who knows, maybe one day we can vote for her for president.
When you lose with your “fall in line with my fascist” bullshit, remember you are at fault for your own loss.
You could have stood up for what is right, you could have influenced the Democrats to return to their roots, but you didnt. You made excuses for them and championed their fascism.
You are the reason they lost.
I honestly hope you’re getting paid by someone to be here. The Trump campaign, Musk, Putin, China, somebody, because at least then I could understand your stance from a purely self-serving standpoint. If this is your sincerely held belief, I don’t know what happened to get you here, but you should probably review your sources and really think about what you’re saying, because it’s pure fiction.
Green or socialist party (better. not funded by GOP even if you don’t buy into socialism generally) in California or other non-swing state. Awesome. In swing state, destructive.
Green Party … major parties
That’s a great joke… oh, you’re serious.
Their membership is < 1/3 that of the libertarian party.
I’m against innocent people being killed. I’m sorry that upsets you. It may well be that, under Trump, more innocent people will be killed. Still, I have the preference of voting for people who reduce the number of innocent people being killed, rather than voting for people who condone it.
Yes, Trump is even worse. But killing innocent people is still so bad that I am harmed by it being politically acceptable. Humans will destroy themselves because they lack compassion for other living beings, and that’s just what it is. You can get angry at me because I don’t like that, but that’s just another lack of compassion, and I won’t be surprised.
In politics you choose a direction. Do you want more death, less death, or don’t care about the deaths.
Trump is more deaths, Harris is less deaths, not voting is that you don’t care about the deaths (or a different differentiating issue matters more)
Those are your choices when it comes to voting and encouraging others to vote.
That is your impact, pick one
You’re a single issue voter. Think about that.
Yeah, that’s cool, so am I - that’s not the only thing that’s on the ballot, though, and you can try to justify it as “Well, I’m not voting for anyone”, but this is very much a “If you aren’t voting against Trump, you’re voting for him, directly or indirectly” situation.
It’s cool, though - I’m sure everyone will understand. You couldn’t do the bare minimum to prevent an authoritarian takeover because you felt very strongly about one issue. Nevermind that your actions actually made that issue’s outcome worse for the people you purport to care about. We’ll all overlook that.
AKA:
“Why are you hitting that screw with a hammer?”
“I refuse to use a screwdriver; it takes too long and I’m morally opposed to patents that you get with screwdriver heads.”
“You do know that your hammering is going to make a total mess of things, rIght?”
“I don’t care; it’s the principled stance I’m willing to take to build this house.”
Claims to have a principled opposition to screwdriver head patents: buys screws anyway.
Sounds like the Democrats to me. All “I’m the anti-genocide candidate!” while shipping cluster bombs to the middle east.
It’s possible for both to be correct. You can’t fix the US government by voting third party for President, because the system isn’t set up to support that. First you have to deal with the electoral college and FTTP voting, then the laws on the books, which means electing third party representatives who are willing to support changing the laws.
And on the other hand, the President can at least call out what Congress is doing that’s enabling genocide in the middle east instead of politely asking for both sides to stop killing each other so everyone can talk, while representing the people sending weapons to one side of the conflict, who are taking advantage of their position in government to methodically wipe out an entire people.
First you have to deal with the electoral college and FTTP voting, then the laws on the books, which means electing third party representatives who are willing to support changing the laws.
Apologies for paraphrasing you, but the system isn’t set up to support that either.
That said, It’s going to be happening a lot anyway in 2026 now that the Republican party is coming apart at the seams and the remaining “moderates” are jumping ship. I’m looking forward to the new left wing coalition, it’s going to be such a wonderful mess.
And on the other hand, the President can at least call out what Congress is doing that’s enabling genocide in the middle east
I was told that no one can because AIPAC.
Harris is calling for an investigation into Israel that would reduce the amount of innocent deaths, and they’ve been trying to negotiate a cease fire for a while now.
The executive branch has very little power to stop congress from approving funding for anything.
Executive branch has 100% control over actual spending. Congress could approve $10T for Israel, and executive can spend it as fast or slow or none as it feels like. Congresses only power is setting a ceiling on spending.
This sounds great but isn’t really true at all. Please don’t spread misinformation.
money Congress appropriates? Yes, federal agencies must prudently plan to spend money during its period of availability, but the President can request that Congress cancel or rescind some of this funding. The Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act (Impoundment Control Act) of 1974 outlines a fast-track procedure for legislation responding to a President’s rescission request. Upon submitting a proposal to Congress, the President can withhold the funds targeted for rescission for up to 45 days or until a withholding would prevent the funding from being prudently obligated. If Congress has not enacted legislation by the end of that period, the funds must be released, and they cannot be proposed for rescission again under the Impoundment Control Act. Until 2018, a president had not proposed a rescission under this process since 2000. In May 2018, President Trump sent a package of proposed rescissions to Congress for consideration. Congress did not act on that request to approve any of the proposed reductions under the fast-track procedure, and the funding was released.
Also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impoundment_of_appropriated_funds
Ok, thank you. There was a lot of unspent covid relief allocations, fussed over without anyone in congress trying to force the spending. It would seem impossible to impose quality of spending criteria.
There was a lot of unspent covid relief allocations, fussed over without anyone in congress trying to force the spending.
Yes, but those might have helped Americans. When it’s propping up the political career of the fascist head of a genocidal apartheid state, that’s when congress springs into action and makes it happen. Funny how Netanyahu doesn’t have to wait for decades for incrementalists to get off their worthless asses to get what he wants.
I’m against innocent people being killed. I’m sorry that upsets you.
[…]
You can get angry at me because I don’t like that, but that’s just another lack of compassion, and I won’t be surprised.If you think your stance is more moral than others’ and would like for people to agree with you, have you tried not being a complete cunt about it?
I have no dog in this race since I live in a country with a sane voting system, so you can spare me your performative moral outrage.
I live in a country with a sane voting system
You don’t have a spare room by any chance, do you?
If politics is killing innocent people
It’s not just politics, it’s a rule of law. We have passed in the past under different administrations laws requiring funding to the Israeli state. Only via our legal process can we undo that. Now there are some laws that allow the President to suspend funding that has been legally appropriated, but those only go so far.
It’s a will of Congress and the understanding that we are a nation of laws, that money keeps funneling towards Israel. But at the same time there are some bending of the laws via creative justification that allows us to setup a floating pier and deliver supplies to the Palestinians.
And Israel doesn’t want aid being delivered by the United States because at the same time it allows them to begin collecting evidence against Israel’s current abuse of human rights.
There has to be an understanding that there is a process by which an administration has to follow. It’s dumb we have that process, I won’t deny that, but until Congress gets off it’s collective ass and change that, we have to follow that process. Otherwise, just doing whatever opens the door for folks to do whatever in the opposite direction as well and have zero recourse.
But killing innocent people is still so bad that I am harmed by it being politically acceptable
It’s not acceptable but at the same time we can have two takes to it. We either follow our laws or we don’t. Everything that has created this situation, that didn’t happen overnight. The laws that provide unquestionable aid to Israel, those weren’t passed in the last four years. It takes time to undo those things. Now that does provide a means for innocent people to die and you have every right to be disgusted by it. I will absolutely not tell you, that your opinion is incorrect. It’s dumb that we’ve put ourselves into this position.
But that said, absent any system, this “I no longer care about politics”, the ONLY thing that will do is ensure the complete and effective eradication of these people. The “I no longer care about politics” stance is synonymous with the “I don’t care if these innocent people are wiped from this Earth.”
This is a difficult conflict and it’s wild that so many people toss their hands into the air and shout “I don’t care anymore!!” the second the conflict actually gets into one of it’s really difficult phases. If this phase of the conflict troubles you, you are not an ally for any means of protecting innocents that you think you are. Protection of people’s lives is dirty ass work, if the messiness of the politics of this troubles you, you wouldn’t be able to save anyone anyway. It may come as a surprise to many here, but humanitarian crisis like this are messy affairs, shit is complex, and nobody ever walks away hands clean. Who knew the world was like this?
People seem to forget that our government was intentionally created to be hard to change.
Ho Chi Minh knew all about America’s long history of slavery and genocide. He knew that and he welcomed the Americans who came to fight the Japanese.
Any questions?
Help me I’m being harmed by Biden
Democrats have taken the stance that it’s absolutely UNTHINKABLE that they could possibly not support a genocide, instead full bore opting that the other side’s genocide support is somehow worse. Man, fuck these people so hard.
Like it or not, a significant portion of the country is in favor of supporting Israel, and so they have to walk the line of supporting Israel without supporting genocide, because if they don’t they also lose.
Republicans can campaign on being pro-genocide, give weapons to Israel on the condition they use them with less discretion, and make a campaign promise to deny asylum to any refugees and they don’t lose a vote.
Democrats have to support Israel and Palestine, which is nearly impossible to do without a degree of “please don’t use this gun wrong like you have every other time”.If you actually don’t see how a Republican administration would be vastly worse for Palestinians, I don’t know what to tell you.
Like it or not, a significant portion of the country is in favor of supporting Israel,
Straight up not true to an extent that electorally matters. The only people who would drop Harris for supporting Palestine are the republican voters she’s needlessly trying to court. Meanwhile at this rate she’s losing/already lost Michigan and at least one other swing state with a significant Muslim population (there are a few of them). Her neglect of her voter base is what will do her in.
Got any data for that claim, or just asserting?
It’s why the Harris campaign is consistently trying to thread the needle and support Israel while not supporting the genocide.
I’ve been trying to find recent data separated by political party (it’s there I’ve seen it before) but I can’t find it for some reason.
Do you have any sources to back up your claims?
Democrats have taken the stance that it’s absolutely UNTHINKABLE that they could possibly not support a genocide
“It’s just what happens!!!”
I’m ready for the Dems to roll over when abortion is banned and the numbers of women dying in childbirth skyrocket. “The voters have decided. This is just what happens!” Instead they will shift the Overton window to “women should be jailed for 5 years rather than 10 when they have a miscarriage which looks like an abortion”. I hope this statement is a joke, and not actually a prediction.
Your hypothetical situation regarding abortion is happening as we speak, and the democrats are fighting it. I’m not sure where you’ve been for the last year.
In fact it’s one of the other major reasons why we need to vote democrat. RvW was overturned because SCOTUS is stacked with republicans. You want to prevent shit like that happening again, you need to vote so we can rebalance the courts.
The democrats have openly refused to pack the courts. How are they supposed to campaign if they don’t have Republicans to threaten us with?
not sure what you’re talking about, Biden has appointed almost as many judges as Trump did. And also not far off Obama who served two terms.
They had two years of majority in both houses under Biden where they could have added justices to the bench.
yeah obviously moderate dems and DINOs like Manchin are never going to go for that. If that’s your bar for voting for democrats you’re being completely unrealistic.
Recent post around here said “democrats will shift to the right if they lose”. Yes that overton window will be “only get 1 year prison if they accuse the father of rape” shift.
God forbid Biden/Harris actually change their handling of Israel.
They always expect the millions of voters to change rather than the dozens of politicians to change to align with the voters.
- They expect the voters to align with the donors
Donors think of voters/voting as “the fifth column.”
Biden is in charge right now, not Harris.
And she explicitly said that she wouldn’t change anything
I think she will change things, but can’t really speak out like she would probably want being she is Biden’s VP. Either way, Trump will only make things worse.
We can guarantee there’ll be no Ukraine and no Gaza if Trump takes office. Coin flip if he randomly decides to hulk smash Iran to show the world he’s a big tough guy with the best bombs (which would inarguably lead to far-reaching ramifications).
Best thing that could happen if they changed their stance re: Israel is that Trump can now claim he’d do it sooner and the blood of countless Palestinians is on their hands, and that they’re only trying to score political points by turning their back on their allies, and that they’re flip-floppers that are incompetently throwing spaghetti noodles at the wall. This would get Benghazi-ed so damn hard.
Trolley problem
Trump may win election because he is more progressive on Ukraine. Only path to Ukraine existing with Odessa, until a referendum, is peace. It is Biden/Harris neocons that want to diminish Russia to the last Ukrainian.
Trump may win election because he is more progressive on Ukraine.
More “progressive” by… giving Putin what he asks for?
If Trump wins, Ukraine can both say goodbye to any support from the US and watch as Trump lifts sanctions against Russia and turns a blind eye to any arms manufacturers that want to make a quick buck by selling to both sides.
The only deflationary policy whatsoever Trump has is peace in Ukraine. Everything else ruins the country. That said, the Ukraine war is extreme evil and of zero benefit to ordinary Americans. Russia doesn’t buy arms from US, and Ukraine only accepts gifts. Russia is only side in this war that has ever offered reasonable peace. Provocation and disinformation was deliberate.
Trump doesn’t want peace. He’s a narcissistic wannabe oligarch who licks the boots and sucks the toes of people he perceives as powerful.
Whatever momentary “peace” comes out of his hypothetical second term is a consequence of dropping any and all support for Ukraine and backing away from defense treaties. He can and will give a plausibly-deniable green light for Russia to do whatever they see fit to “end” the war and annex neighboring countries. That’s not peace—that’s the setup for decades of violent revolutions with even more violent responses.
Russia is only side in this war that has ever offered reasonable peace.
Right, so: if I mugged someone and stabbed them, then offered to not stab them again if they let me keep their wallet and threw in their car keys as well, that’s peace?
That’s a weird way of saying Trump supports Russian imperialism and will encourage genocide in Ukraine in addition to the genocide in Palestine.
No genocide in Ukraine. Liberated regions will stay Russian, no NATO path, neutrality commitment. Can trade with EU/US if it wants, though Russia has expressed resistance to this. Likely referendums for what country oblasts wish to join, though Ukraine would resist this latter point, but just betrays what hated nazis they are in east and Odessa. Peace.
“Liberated regions”
“No NATO”
“What hated nazis they are in east and Odessa”
“Russia is only side in this war that has ever offered reasonable peace”How many rubles are they paying you to write this? If it’s more than zero, they’re overpaying. Nothing says subtle social media propaganda campaign like using Russian talking points.
I would assume that Biden has a vested interest in Harris winning. That’s why I specified Biden/Harris in my original comment, rather than Harris/Walz.
How is Biden having an interest in Harris winning at all relevant to the powers of the vice president or her actions if she is elected?
Biden and Harris are two completely different individuals, which is a fact that you guys seem to forget.
So which is it? Biden is in charge and isn’t changing stance? Or Harris isn’t in charge but also isn’t signaling a departure from Biden if she is elected?
Either way, neither Biden (who is actually in charge) nor Harris (who isn’t in charge) is changing (Biden) or stating an intention to change (Harris) their handling of Israel.
Did you read the rather long text at the top of this thread? It explains all this rather well.
Yes. Fwiw, my first comment here preceded that one.
Edit: also, that comment addresses something different than what we’re discussing here. The responses here seem to be fixated on Harris being VP rather than president. The comment you are pointing out discusses Biden’s limitations in managing this situation. Different issues, different discussions.
Idk I think Biden might be spiteful enough to want to see Harris fail.
No.
Damned if they do, damned if they don’t. PACs just gotta snap their fingers, flyers ready to print, websites ready to host like newspapers stockpiling living celebrity obits
God forbid Biden/Harris actually change their handling of Israel.
They watched Seymour Skinner ask himself “Am I out of touch?” and decided that he was completely correct when he decided “No, it’s the children who are wrong.”
NBC News - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for NBC News:
Wiki: reliable - There is consensus that NBC News is generally reliable for news. See also: MSNBC
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Search topics on Ground.News
