this post was submitted on 06 Nov 2024
200 points (100.0% liked)

Politics

10181 readers
139 users here now

In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.


Guidelines for submissions:

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.


Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

[alt text: a screenshot of a tweet by @delaney_nolan, which says, "Biden/Harris saw this polling and decided to keep unconditionally arming Israel". Below the tweet is a screenshot from an article, which states: "In Pennsylvania, 34% of respondents said they would be more likely to vote for the Democratic nominee if the nominee vowed to withold weapons to Israel, compared to 7% who said they would be less likely. The rest said it would make no difference. In Arizona, 35% said they'd be more likely, while 5% would be less likely. And in Georgia, 39% said they'd be more likely, also compared to 5% who would be less likely."]

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] DdCno1@beehaw.org 88 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (20 children)

And Trump will be better for Palestinians how exactly? Anyone who prefers inane grandstanding instead of picking the lesser evil (no matter the topic) is a moron. That's how politics work. The ideal candidate doesn't exist and will never exist. If you ever come across one who 100% mirrors every single one of your opinions, get your head examined.

Edit: Also, every single credible poll out there indicates that American voters - idiotically - picked Trump due to their dissatisfaction with the economy. Middle Eastern wars were not high on the list of priorities for most voters.

[–] theangriestbird@beehaw.org 26 points 1 week ago (14 children)

you don't have to convince me, friend. The fact is, winning a national election involves building a coalition with people that you don't see eye-to-eye with 100%. The Dems don't have a great coalition to begin with - if they win their highly-educated base and nobody else, they lose the election 100% of the time. They have to win over other people, mostly the very few groups of undecided voters. And in this election, it was clear that one of the few undecided groups available were Arab-Americans that cared a whole lot about what has been happening on the West Bank. And Harris did fuck-all to court those voters, so they decided to stay home.

[–] DdCno1@beehaw.org 17 points 1 week ago (13 children)

Arab-Americans

0.639% of the US population. This is a tiny minority of no relevance to American politics. Trump has 51% of popular votes already, not that this matters, because the districts that carry Trump to victory have few voters with this kind of background. Arab Americans could not have changed the outcome of this election, even if 100% had voted for Harris.

[–] Sundial@lemm.ee 12 points 1 week ago

That 0.639% of the population actually has a lot of them in a critical swing state that helped Biden win 2020. Harris lost Michigan by less than 85K votes, they could have made the difference.

load more comments (12 replies)
load more comments (12 replies)
load more comments (17 replies)