this post was submitted on 27 Oct 2024
575 points (98.6% liked)

politics

19127 readers
4323 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

“To those people who are saying, ‘Well, I can’t support Harris because she disagrees [with] Trump on that issue’ … he will be closer to Netanyahu,” Sanders said on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

Sanders said he thinks Vice President Harris can be moved “on that issue” of the Israel-Hamas war.

Harris has called for a cease-fire deal and pushed for the war in Gaza to end, but she faces scrutiny from both sides — from people who want to see Hamas defeated and those who call for the end of the war in Gaza.

“So, if we are able to elect Harris, I think we’re going to have an opportunity to move her on that issue, to make it clear, we cannot allow children in Gaza to starve to death,” Sanders said. “She will be open to that. I doubt that Trump will.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It is a very slim chance but there is hope that the Kamala administration will at least give israel fewer bombs or demand they be used for things that benefit US interests (like attacking iran) rather than cheering on the genocide.

If there's only a very slim hope, then might as well let the Democrats lose so they at least have to posture.

In the past, when there were chances to evacuate them as refugees, the majority of neighboring countries actively refused (ironically citing fears of Hamas led insurrections).

Middle Eastern countries notoriously don't represent their people, being dictatorships and all that.

But when it is a way to bleed resources out of israel they suddenly are all humanitarians.

Who are "they"?

It is hard to believe that suddenly, after everyone discovered Palestine existed on October 8th, that is truly the greatest issue facing the planet (especially when other active genocides are still ignored).

Many people only learned how bad things are in Palestine because of Israel's genocide in Gaza. What's so strange about that? Also the West is not actively intervening in those other genocides, which might not be palatable to some people but it's much better than actively bankrolling one. Again, what's the problem with not wanting to bankroll a genocide and increase the chance of being caught in another war in the Middle East? Also, have you not considered that many people (a quarter of either all Americans or Democrats, not sure which but you can find the numbers online) opposed Israel's Apartheid regime but couldn't speak out for fear of being labeled antisemites? Also why are you conveniently ignoring the existence of Arab and Muslim Americans who are personally invested in seeing Israel's genocide stop?

I don't think you know what the word "gaslight(ing)" means

"No you don't care about Palestine tankie/useful idiot/right wing bot/whatever" is, in fact, gaslighting.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

All those words and not a damn message anywhere.

Real shame.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

It's insane these people lack any sense of objectivity. They pretend they want a better situation for Palestinians and they go about the absolute worst and completely ineffective option. So ineffective, they are rushing to elect the person who will make it worse.