Probably the same geniuses that told the protestors the best way to get positive publicity was to deface monuments, attack police, and burn the American flag. It's almost like neither side gives a shit about actually making progress.
2024 U.S. Elections | Trump v Harris
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
i'm always curious about arguments like this.
would them not doing the same have made progress? is there any evidence of that? at all? did we not all just see what happened in so many universities? in dem trifecta states, with a dem president supporting the cops? is there any single thing stopping her from announcing this policy "progress" right now, while ignoring the protests? and what would this progress mean while her boss continues to support this genocide?
Mendozaaaaaaaaa!
She probably can’t help herself. Harris is massively pro Israel.
There's no progress to be made. The US has been clear, the genocide will go on and have political support. People have nothing left but to express their anger.
This will probably change a bit in the coming weeks
So glad people like you were not leading or even involved in the civil rights movements of the past. "This is hard so I quit and I'm going to burn all my existing bridges" is a hell of a strategy.I think the numbers are fairly accurate given that they were accrued largely from Biden's final numbers. Not enough data on Harris to change the math yet.
I think the answer is based on what you see progress as. There were over a hundred congress members (about half of Dem's in the Senate and in the House) who skipped the speech. Of course you wouldn't know that due to the fill in staff members (from other members) that took their places. That is half of one of the 2 parties that skipped the speech, most in solidarity with the ceasefire movement.
If you look at successful civil rights and anti-war movements of the past, at least in the US, they were almost all based on peaceful and continuous resistance. Do you think the scenes from yesterday make it more or less likely those members continue to show a political backbone on this issue? To address your follow up questions, all you need to do is look at the rapidity with which Biden was "encouraged" to step down. IT took the majority of dem leadership revolting, but when the snowball started rolling it rolled fast an results happened. That is what, I think, needs to be the strategy here. There is no quick and instant solution to the addiction American politicians have to Israel, but the field is shifting.
Yeah it's very funny. People have used all kinds of protests in the US. They were ridiculed, called terrorist sympathizers, had the police beat them, they were threatened in several ways. The government didn't move an inch, in fact it doubled down and the genocide is ongoing.
But let's expect people don't get angry and burn a flag... oh that is really bad and damaging.
"Certainly not support for terrorism". Oh, the irony.
.
He's leaking out of the Westminster thread again.
I assume @maniak is the white moderate in your MLK analogy?
Your the guy who is complaining about flags burning and defaced monuments.
Pete moving up the VP ladder already.
I’m genuinely curious as to what you’d have elected / appointed government officials say instead about those two things, and then how you’d want them to incorporate that statement into campaigning to win an election.
I'm going to stan for Walz, of whom I'd never heard of till yesterday:
I dunno, on the surface he just seems to be a likeable bloke. Going the Ed Davey route.
I dunno, on the surface he just seems to be a likeable bloke. Going the Ed Davey route.
I could give less than two shits about someone burning a flag, and the monuments I only care if the damage is permanent. I just find it dumbfounding that some of you all shout to the sky that Gaza is THE most important thing but are totally uninterested in the reality of what it will take to at least try and change things. Like I said above, over half the Dem Senate and House boycotted the speech. That is a massive shift in how our politicians normally handle Israel. If you want them to keep that political backbone and use it to maybe apply pressure on Biden/Harris then just about the stupidest thing you could do is what those few protesters did. It is the same as it was during the police brutality protests after the George Floyd murder. The few dumbasses (and I'm sure not a small number of MAGA provocateurs) dominated the media with their actions, and in some cases completely overwhelmed the actual message.
They could say nothing. Trump almost got assassination yet it hardly made a difference to the polling. American politics has a goldfish memory of about 10 days and then everyone mostly moves onto the next horrific event.
One of the many disgusting things about the America and Israeli relationship is the performative cruelty. There’s was no need for Netanyahu mini Hitler speech yesterday and there wasn’t any need for Harris to put out such a stupid statement. But these sickos can’t help it. They enjoy the cruelty. They want to do the fortnite brat floss dance on a pile of corpses.
I don't think the protesters paid the same political consultant.
Is “nothing” what you’d rather them have said & what you’d want them to campaign on?
As a candidate running for President of the US, Harris absolutely needed to put out that statement. She is in a competition with Trump for a relatively small pool of uncommitted voters in a handful of states. Gaza almost certainly does not make the top 10 of important issues to this group, but what they will care about is the 30 second clip they see on TV of capitol police being attached or the liberty bell replica being spray painted with "Hamas."
"I condemn the burning of the American flag. The flag is a symbol of our highest ideals as a nation and represents the promise of America. It should never be desecrated that way. I support the right to peacefully protest, but let's be clear: Antisemitism, hate, and violence of any kind have no place in our nation."
The same argument could be made about voting for the war in Iraq in 2003. It's a surefire method to continually step in dogshit and then complain three years later that there's shit in your shoe.
What argument?
So you agree with her then.
So the only part you object to is the first part pointing out the Hamas graffiti?
That you "absolutely need to do X" in order to appeal to a swing voter that is automatically assumed to be a sub 60 IQ racist moron.
Your example is the polar opposite of the Gaza situation. The gulf in the aftermath of 9/11 was of incredible importance to the electorate while most voters in the US would not rank Gaza in the top 10.
I had to look up who that was. Definite similarities. Farley a lot more disconcerting though. Walz is the friendly cooking everyone sausages on the barbecue. Just has an easy, relatable way about him. I can't see him playing badly with many.The electorate has a brain. It might be good to engage them as if they do every once in a while.
And that electorates brain does not really care about Gaza, hence the message being what it was and not one in support of the Palestinians.
I think this, from another thread, tells you all you need to know!
About the congressmen who skipped, I have a pessimistic view of the bolded line. The line from Bernie (who is extremely on the left of the rest of the senate on this) has focused on Netanyahu's personal culpability, his personal extreme-right nature, etc. I saw a few other statements and they all focus on him. It's a start, but it's about 20 years in the past. Bibi's views on Palestine are the centre of Israeli politics, not the right. Bibi is also somebody who personally snubbed the Democratic party repeatedly, including, in public, from the same podium, their previous president. I'm not sure this ratio of withdrawal, or support for a (redefined in an Orwellian way) ceasefire, would have held up under a less personally noxious Israeli leader.
And to back up my impression that this is about Bibi and not a ceasefire, almost all the senators and a majority of the House reps who skipped, voted to fund Israel with billions in weapons this April.
For the second part: Simultaneously yesterday, there was an absolutely Gandhian* protest within the Capitol by JVP. They filed in, sat, and were duly arrested, including family members of some of the Israeli hostages. They got little publicity outside already-committed social media, made no impact, and weren't mentioned or singled out for praise by the president, VP, or anyone else. Do you think that protest would have made any politician change their minds? Quake in their boots? Get persuaded? In general, there have been a lot of protests for Palestine -much, much larger ones - that didn't have the scenes from yesterday. I don't see them moving the needle on an ongoing genocide a single bit. The vote totals from Congress for weapons sales are proof of that.
The analogy with Biden stepping down is interesting, but for me doesn't work. There was a vested interest there - power - which doesn't apply here. Keeping BIden at the top was a guaranteed loss of the White House and was very likely going to also be a bloodbath in the House.
Withdrawing support for this genocide would mean the full weight of the Israel lobby and overwhelming majority of the media would immediately try to end you. And in terms of voters among the Democratic base, you can gain some young voters and Arabs who consider this important enough to not vote, while losing some older Jewish voters who might defect if policy is changed. Just because a majority of the country is pro-ceasefire, that doesn't make it a frightening political constituency, because they have no financial or institutional leverage and limited electoral leverage. Swapping out Biden for Harris also helps avoid this issue, because enough young voters are flaky and aesthetic-driven that the same policy from her could be tolerable or ignored by them.
I agree that the upward trajectory for Israel support among the US public and politicians is over, but the downward trajectory is slow, and I don't see it moving before Israel has finished whatever pacification it thinks is enough.
In the meantime there is an ongoing genocide. As I said in the Palestine thread, the only (inadequate) force standing in the way of that genocide is Hamas. Iranian-made Hamas RPGs have stopped more Israeli tanks that protesters, the ICC, ICJ, the UN, though of course they cannot keep up with the weapons replenishment rate from the US, Germany, and India. What we're left with in these protests is impotent rage.
*A tangent: whatever success Gandhi achieved wasn't just because tens of thousands passively getting thrashed and arrested or passively shot dead - it was because the strategy was non-cooperation and civil disobedience on a massive scale. Resigning govt jobs, boycott of foreign goods, refusing to pay taxes, breaking unjust laws, general strikes, etc, all on a nationwide scale. And there was often violence accompanying such a massive movement, including burning govt buildings and destroying telegraph and train lines.
Some further insight about Harris on Israel from her husband.