The “Uncommitted” movement seeking a change in the Democratic Party’s approach to the war in Gaza on Thursday announced it is not ready to support Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris — while urging voters not to back Republican nominee Donald Trump or third-party candidates who could help Trump win the November election.

The “Uncommitted” group “opposes a Donald Trump presidency, whose agenda includes plans to accelerate the killing in Gaza while intensifying the suppression of anti-war organizing,” the statement continues. Additionally, the group is “not recommending a third-party vote in the Presidential election, especially as third party votes in key swing states could help inadvertently deliver a Trump presidency given our country’s broken electoral college system.”

11 points

And yet they refuse to support the one person that could keep him out of office.

Fucking geniuses they are!

permalink
report
reply
5 points

Israel has already slaughtered a full 10% of the population of Gaza.

How many Palestinians will be left to save by the time Biden leaves office?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

TANKIE DETECTED.

ARGUMENT IS INVALID.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

Yawn….

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

Israel has already slaughtered a full 10% of the population of Gaza.

idk why you put full here, i feel like just saying 10% would work just as well, seems more semantically confusing to me more than anything lol.

I’m not sure what it’s trying to imply.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

I guess similar to saying at least 10%, to convey that it isn’t 9.5% or 9% but more than that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-7 points

I’m honestly doubtful Trump would make any additional difference considering Biden didn’t do anything to reduce Israel’s insanity. He’d still have to let congress pass the big stuff, and Biden approved every single smaller sale bar holding up one shipment temporarily.

Everyone keeps saying “yeah but Trump would be worse for Gaza” just because he did the whole embassy thing, but this really looks as if it’s maxed out.

Even from a purely utilitarian perspective assuming this is true, I’d rather take my final stand and be wiped out than to be continuously subjected to essentially warcrime torture for the remainder of my life.

Harris already made it clear that her policy with Israel won’t change. Her campaign decided that the amount of votes in this group do not matter (which I completely disagree with), which is why she barred them from talking at the DNC, despite the fact that they were offering to endorse her. She went all in on the AIPAC funding and lobby though.

This is basically their last desperate call to get the DNC to change their minds (probably won’t happen), so I guess I’ll see you all in r------- red Michigan this year.

permalink
report
reply
6 points

Everyone keeps saying “yeah but Trump would be worse for Gaza” just because he did the whole embassy thing, but this really looks as if it’s maxed out.

It’s a lot more than that. Trump also gave a Medal of Freedom, the highest civilian honor, to Miriam Adelson, a billionaire heiress who is actually more extremist even than Netanyahu. She openly opposes Palestinian statehood, wants Israel to annex the West Bank, and wrote an op-ed saying critics of Israel are “our enemies” and “dead to us”. She gave Trump money, so she owns him. The US can do a lot more than send a few weapons to Israel, and this rabid extremist billionaire will ask Trump for everything she can get. And he will do what she says.

permalink
report
parent
reply
21 points

Pretty sure if Trump gets elected people will be too busy with their own local genocides to care about Gaza.

permalink
report
reply
3 points

If we’re at the point of states doing ethnic cleansing, the president isn’t going to matter

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

You’re right in one sense. When Trump gets elected he won’t matter at all. It’ll get out of his control in days

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Yup.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-24 points
*

Completely feckless. Effectively an endorsement of Harris despite getting absolutely nothing in return. The people who want the genocide to continue (like Harris) were just proven to be strategically correct in writing off this movement because they knew they could and they’d just come crawling back to the lesser evil. What’s worse is that this spinelessness discredits any future movements or protests on the issue.

Somehow telling people to vote for Harris is “not an endorsement,” because liberals think you can do the exact same action and it’s meaningfully different if you feel kinda bad while doing it.

permalink
report
reply
2 points

Everyone, don’t bother. I have made every reasonable argument against this silly narrative that I could think of since it began and not a single time has any one of these folks gone, “Yeah, Trump/GOP has promised worse” or anything remotely similar. You will receive one of a couple canned responses, which I’ll paraphrase below:

  1. “So you support the genocide?!”
  2. “You BlueMAGA are all the same. You support the genocide?!”
  3. “If you don’t support the genocide you will vote third party!”

They will not listen to things like how you don’t support the genocide, don’t support war, know things like genocides are horrible, any explanation about how it will get worse, or anything similar.

Just trying to save you some time.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Just assume everyone making those arguments are just Maga trolls trying to siphon votes away from democrats. Saves your sanity

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I’m fine with the arguments fundamentally. Like yeah, it’s fucking horrible what’s happening. Though also for the last 30 years there has always been a conflict, or voter issue, or something that divides the Center and Left and drives voters away. Now we also have a very real threat to our way of life, or what’s left of it. So it’s frustrating considering how these people may affect even a single person’s willingness to vote, even if they are arguing in good faith.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

i got banned for a rather unfortunate string of comments regarding IP, though i will say, it was my fault.

IP people are in my experience entirely single issues voters. They do not care about anything else, and cannot be made to care about anything else. It’s pretty par for the course as far as issues voters go.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

liberals think you can do the exact same action and it’s meaningfully different if you feel kinda bad while doing it.

They will not listen to things like how you don’t support the genocide, don’t support war, know things like genocides are horrible, any explanation about how it will get worse, or anything similar.

Literally the exact thing I just described. If your actions are indistinguishable from someone who supports genocide, then nobody gives a shit what’s going on inside your head regarding it, least of all politicians.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Centrists want to support genocide but not be judged for their support for genocide.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

So you want Trump to win and you want Gaza eradicated, then.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-8 points

So you want to reestablish the Third Reich then, got it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

What exactly is your ideal outcome? They successfully prevent Harris from being elected, Trump gets in, funds the construction of the Israeli version of Auschwitz, and the Palestinians getting thrown into gas chambers will think “at least the Americans voted on principle”?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-9 points

My ideal outcome is that Harris caves and stops the Israeli version of Auschwitz which is already happening. Failing that, my ideal outcome would be that the protesters establish a credible threat going forward that supporting genocide will result in tangible political consequences. Establishing such a threat is far more important is far more important than any one election, especially when both people are pro-genocide.

The moment you commit yourself to the ideology of lesser-evilism, you have sacrificed every ounce of bargaining power you might have wielded. The concerns of reliable voters don’t factor into any politician’s calculus. I can’t figure out whether liberals just have terrible instincts regarding wielding power, or if it’s just that they don’t care to wield it because they’re satisfied with the status quo.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Your words would have more weight if you weren’t in full support of the Uyghur genocide in China.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

My ideal outcome is that Harris caves and stops the Israeli version of Auschwitz which is already happening.

the correct strategy here would be to push for full support on harris, under the pretense that “she will do something for palestine” and then after she gets into office (assuming she does) when the “inevitable” nothing gets done for palestine you can then rally support while in office in order to drum up what is more than likely going to be more effective support. Bargaining for something that currently exists in front of you is simply going to be much easier.

Though this still doesn’t solve the whole problem of shooting yourself in the foot and ending up giving the republican congress more say, or just doing nothing at all, instead of something minor that would’ve been impactful.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

They also acknowledge Biden can stop the killing.

permalink
report
reply

No serious person thinks that’s the case.

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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

Community stats

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 14K

    Posts

  • 412K

    Comments