I don't disagree with that either, but random tweets isn't quite the same thing. I'm sure he camn articulate his position now and will do.
2024 U.S. Elections | Trump wins
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Imran (@Annihilate Now!) look forward to a new life under Ruben Amorim. What system will we be playing? What players will impress? and how will it all go? We also say goodbye to Ruud Van Nistelrooy and review United's 3-0 win at home against Leicester City.
Random tweets is the law of the land now. We've gotten weeks of memes out of a random tweet about J.D. Vance's couch fecking. The tweets giveth, and the tweets taketh away.
Politics had been gradually becoming showbiz since the Clinton era at least, and social media plus cost per click had only accelerated the process. And showbiz is about novelty and scoops, not gravitas.
I think it's good he's confronted with it. Was he talking bs then or does he still agree with it? It's fair to ask.
So, what if, just what if, Shapiro is the nominee and Harris doesn’t win PA? Not that it’s likely, but it’s not impossible either.
Then what’s the advantage of having him as a running mate?
I’m just not sure that the upside of picking Shapiro outweighs the downside.
Then what’s the advantage of having him as a running mate?
I’m just not sure that the upside of picking Shapiro outweighs the downside.
https://today.yougov.com/politics/a...ut-kamala-harris-running-mates-vice-president
"Among Democrats and Democratic-leaning Independents, 25% say a pro-Palestine vice presidential candidate would be good, while 11% say it would be bad. 13% say a pro-Israel running mate would be good, and 28% say being pro-Israel would be bad".
The only thing worse than being pro-Israel is being old.
"Among Democrats and Democratic-leaning Independents, 25% say a pro-Palestine vice presidential candidate would be good, while 11% say it would be bad. 13% say a pro-Israel running mate would be good, and 28% say being pro-Israel would be bad".
The only thing worse than being pro-Israel is being old.
An Arab or Muslim politician who was running for office and had articles from 20 or 30 years ago saying Jews cannot make peace would 100% be pulled up in America and be questioned on those comments.
With respect, for quite a long time now, your approach to the discourse around the conflict has been to, in a manner showing your frustration, trying to mould the conversation to a tone more of your liking or shut it down entirely when it annoyingly gets in the way of things you personally find much more important.
Which is neither helpful nor particularly possible for such an emotive topic and one that many people do find very important.
Is the downside his Israel position?
Not dismissing that, just curious if I’ve missed anything else.
Yes. He looks too pro Israel than the average Democrat. His past and present positions could hurt Harris.
This issue is more important to Democrats than some people here seem to realize. I heard more about it than inflation.
If she loses PA, there's a very high likelihood she will lose the election and Donald Trump will return to the WH. If Trump loses PA, there's also a significant chance he will lose the election so that should be the most important consideration.
Beyond that, there is no other downside to picking Shapiro. He's a popular governor, who many were tipping to be on the shortlist to be the next President (along with Newsom and Whitmer).
I understand, but he’s too risky of a choice. We need to at least realize that instead of being shocked on election night.
There are other candidates who I think are seen by the left on the democrat party as more pro union.
There's also some controversy from them about his policies on charter schools and a settlement one of his aides had who was accused of sexual harassment (though not sure how much Shapiro knew about this).
Last edited:
What demographic were you speaking to?
1. Suburban whites
2. Young voters of all backgrounds
3. Arab voters in Northern Virginia and Muslim voters in VA and MD.
4. Other minorities who have no connection to the Middle East.
Now, I expect that most will vote for Harris no matter who is the VP pick, but Shapiro doesn’t make people feel comfortable. In Maryland, it wouldn’t matter, but it could matter in the crucial states.
National polls say otherwise. It's simply not an top tier issue for the 'average' Democrat who votes consistently, maybe cracking the top five.
I don't know if this is accurate, especially given the low priority of foreign policy among voters in the last election cycle, as well in polling this year. People are first and foremost interested in economic policy from the President. And even if one were to play the game of thinking Shapiro's policy on Israel was a concern, the other VP candidates would have nearly identical views on Israel, Ukraine etc., all of which in either case still have to fall in line with what Harris' policy is, which is likely to be very similar to Biden's. So after all of that, the only distinguishing factor you are left with on Shaprio is he is Jewish.
I hope that’s the case.
In 2022, democracy/rule of law ended up being more important in exit polls than the usual polls showed, and that was in a year in which gas prices reached more than $5/gallon and inflation (y-o-y) was close to 10%.
And so, you never know.
That's not entirely true as people have said.
His school voucher position is problematic and a big downside for teachers and people passionate about equality in education. He's not as union friendly as a Walz would be. And the Me Too issue shows he cares more about his own political rise to power than anything else. He's actually the worst choice she could make.
And the last bit is not true. He was nowhere near as nationally prolific as Newsom or Whitmer before all this VP talk which is solely because some people mistakenly believe he is going to guarantee a Penn win.
I don't buy the voucher issue as animating Dems. If anything, it may attract some centrist R leaning independents, which would be born out in his popularity 61% rating in a swing state. The vouchers and other issues are an appendage to the central issue of Shapiro's view on Israel, which (not to beat a dead horse) are just about the same as every other prominent Dem. ---> Supportive of Israel, critical of Netanhahu, pro two-state solution.
Reading some comments from americans here, I don't get how these two square up:
a) the election will be decided by small margins in some states
b) palestine only matters for a small percentage of voters
a) the election will be decided by small margins in some states
b) palestine only matters for a small percentage of voters
This is honestly such a weird gaslighting in real time process.
Shapiro was barely mentioned on here as a potential replacement for Biden if he stepped down. He was barely mentioned on any of the articles I read or by any of my American friends as a potential candidate.
Then when Biden stepped down, he was, again,not mentioned as one of the initial favourites for president (before Harris swept the delegates) or one of the favourites as VP. Even as recently as last week I believe he wasn't even the bookies' favourite out of the candidates.
Yet we're not supposed to believe that not only is he the only logical choice ( despite not being a favourite until about 2 days ago) but that the only reason anyone may lean against him is anti semitism.
Here's some Gallup polling from earlier this year. Reality is quite different when one steps away from Twitter.
This is from the last election cycle
If the school voucher thing is not going to animate Dems it's absolutely not going to attract any independents.
And that's also not entirely true about every VP all being same on Israel. Did Walz or Beshear or Buttigieg come put with statements anywhere near as harsh on protestors as Shapiro? All Dem VP may be within a broad category of "not going to go as harsh on Israel as many would like" but within that category he certainly lands on the furthest edge of pro Israel based on his comments. And Israel issue doesn't have to matter nationwide because it matters to enough voters in swing states that might stay home.
It's because the Palestine issue just doesn't rise to the import as other issues for Dem voters. The numbers just aren't there.
Here's some Gallup polling from earlier this year. Reality is quite different when one steps away from Twitter.
So no point on the dems leaning heavily on abortion then from this it seems seeing as its as important an issue to almost as many people as the ME war is.
Looking at the last election, biden won some states by ridiculous small margins. If this issue leaves even a small percentage of voters at home, it can make a difference. What am I missing?
I suspect that poll is among all Americans not just Dems.
Just look at the primaries, the numbers outside of MI simply aren't there.
Has Shapiro been more vocal when it comes to stuff like his anger at the college students and BDS and the likes than say Walz or Beshear? Cause everything I've seen seems to suggest he has. The posts of yourself and I think it was Cheimoon as well seem to suggest the idea Shapiro has been a stronger public supporter of Israel is an anti-semitic fantasy.
Exactly, this is very well articulated. It does feel like some interests are trying to really force him onto us and twisting history a bit to set him up with a bit of a manufactured narrative.
Probably so yes, primarily because his state is bigger in terms of population, and as such, saw a higher volume of protests. During that time, he was critical of the President of U Penn when testifying before Congress, she hedged about whether people calling for the genocide of Jews violated the schools code of conduct. She was eventually sacked, which he supported as well.
You're missing the logical inconsistencies of your posts I presume. Ah well.
I just don't see the purpose here. There are many posters on this forum for whom Palestine is literally the most important thing in the world. That's fine. But this is a thread about the future US President, in a race between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris. The last two pages have been almost exclusively from Palestinian focussed posters basically lamenting that no choice is pro-Palestinian enough. Fine. I get that. I'm hugely in favour of completely reconsidering the federal taxation system, ripping it up and starting again so that we can finally start to address the surging wealth inequality that will one day tear apart the nation. But I know I'm not going to find that in the candidates and parties on offer, so I'm not posting daily about it, or digging out tweets or what not.
As someone that is pretty well-versed in US politics I can very confidently say: it is NOT the most important issue in this election to voters, no matter how much some think it should be. And therefore I don't believe we should be attacking the one Jewish candidate obstensibly because of his religion. I also don't think the same people doing the attacking would stand for that if he weren't Jewish.
Last edited:
I've not seen anyone saying he's the logical or enough best choice. What I see is people trying to say he's a non-starter because of his previous support of Israel and something he wrote 30 years ago. Personally, he's last on the list of vetted candidates for me. But I also think he's only being attacked in the way he is (on here) because he's Jewish, and the Gazan situation is more animating on redcafe than any other world topic.
For example, he struggles with unions and that would be a much larger needle mover, politically, than anything he wrote in college.
Pritzker is also Jewish.
"Ostensibly because of his religion" is you editorialising.
I don't want him because of some of his views and because I think there are far better candidates.
I think its more of a testament of how social media has mangled perceptions of what ordinary people actually think is important in the real world. Its pretty normal to subscribe to highly curated social media feeds that only focus on one subject and come out of that believing that said subject is the most important thing in the world. Its not really the posters fault and more so an emergent property of how technology and algos drive our thoughts and narratives.
Since when have you cared about what the numbers say? These were your responses to Biden's poor polling:
This thread is unbelievable sometimes. People making failed prediction after failed prediction and acting like they've got the finger on the pulse of the American electorate.
I think this is pretty spot on. Beyond him being a Governor of a critical state Harris needs to win, the argument isn't that Shapiro is in any way superior, its that he should be considered equally by Harris along with all the others she is seriously considering, given that there is nothing in Harris' own policy background that would justify excluding someone who she agrees with on a vast majority of policies.
And we were starting to see a shift to Biden, albeit small, up to the debate. Then it was over.
Go back further than February, I like reading my old posts. Don't stop now.
I read this post thinking it was post debate numbers you were talking about but these posts are months and months old. They don’t really make much of a point.