Trump Backs Israel Bombarding Gaza: 'Gotta Finish the Problem'
Donald Trump declared his support for Israel's ongoing siege on Gaza and attacked immigrants in a Fox News interview.
您正在查看单个线程.
But sure, yeah... go ahead and just not vote. Letting Trump in will be so much better for the Palestinians.
A week ago, the difference between the two would have been that Trump would enable Israel in every way, while Biden would enable Israel in every way, but staffers would leak stories about how much Biden didn't like Netanyahu from time to time. Now, Biden has started sending aid to Gaza while Harris is calling for a ceasefire, and this is entirely because 100K voters in Michigan voted uncommitted. When done properly, threatening to withhold your vote can be an effective way to make your voice heard.
I think you make a great point, but I would add a caveat. There IS a difference between Biden and trump. One will listen to protesters, and the other won't. You can pressure Biden and he will change his position because he seems to care what voters think, and Trump doesn't.
Yeah, I agree with that. And, to be clear, I think there have always been tons of differences between Biden and Trump on almost every issue besides Israel/Gaza. I was just saying that, on this single issue, the difference between Biden and Trump would have been mostly rhetoric, not policy, up until the Michigan primary voters convinced Biden to change. I definitely didn't mean to imply they were generally the same.
Now, Biden has started sending aid to Gaza
But he hasn't stopped sending weapons to Israel
Yeah, I'm not saying there's been enough change, just that there has been some change, and it was brought on by people threatening to withhold their vote.
it was brought on by people threatening to withhold their vote.
Its definitely been a wake-up call to the party. Watching Biden shed 20% of Democratic voter turnout in a fucking primary is something. Obama and Clinton never had these kinds of problems in '12 and '96. And guys that did - Carter getting burned by Ted Kennedy in '80 and Bush to Buchanan in '92 - should have been a warning to the party as a whole.
Yeah, I'll be honest, I'm very worried about this election. I'm still unhappy with Biden's approach to Israel, but at least now they can credibly argue that voting for him would be harm reduction for Palestinians. Maybe that will be enough to drive turnout.
at least now they can credibly argue that voting for him would be harm reduction
Right until the polls close in November, at which point its back to business as usual.
Well...yeah, probably.
this is entirely because 100K voters in Michigan voted uncommitted
Objection. Assumes facts not in evidence.
To be clear, I have no problem with people in Michigan voting uncommitted, I just don't think you can draw that line.
Biden's entire approach to Isreal changed almost on a dime after that primary. He started aid drops to Gaza, Kamala Harris suddenly started using the word, "ceasefire," he brought Netanyahu's chief opponent to discuss the humanitarian crisis in Gaza...Biden obviously didn't come out and say, "I'm changing my approach to Isreal because I'm afraid of losing Michigan," but it's pretty clear why this shift is occurring.
It's certainly possible. My opinion has long been that politicians are not really all that responsive to public opinion.
When your representatives are Republicans, that's pretty much true. My blue representatives actually seem to care and I have first-hand experience with this.
I'm afraid that there was a near instantaneous shift in his rhetoric after Michigan.
The 'uncommitted' voters will think that they changed Biden's mind, but most likely he was going to start sending aiding to Gaza anyway. He doesn't like Netanyahu and probably genuinely does want peace.
At the same time the 'uncommitted' stunt has turned voters against Biden. Remember the average voter is functioning at grade 8 or grade 6 level. Educated voters will see this as the political maneuvers that it is, the average 'grade 6' mental age voter will think 'Biden sucks', and not vote.
Letting Trump in
Winner-take-all electoral college means you never really had a voice in the matter.
You should have moved to a Blue State before 2020, so your physical presence could be used to tip how many electoral votes that state produced, if you really cared about stopping Trump in 2024. That's the only consequential method of putting a (very tiny) finger on the scale of a Presidential contest.
Wouldn't it make more sense to move to a swing state and try to tip it blue?
Edit: tip it blue
From a population perspective, it wouldn't matter. Your best bet would be to find a bright blue state that is on the cusp of getting a new house seat. That would boost up the EC total for the state and guarantee consistent adds to Team Blue. Moving to a purple state and hoping you are THE swing voter mostly just means you make the state more valuable to invest in by the various campaigns. You're still going to be functionally feeding Red Team during red election waves (which blue needs votes the most) when your view is most likely to be in the minority.