284

During negotiations with the DNC and the Harris campaign, we were repeatedly told by interlocutors that Harris couldn’t meet any of our basic requests (a policy shift from Biden, a Palestinian speaker at the DNC, a statement distinguishing herself from Trump on Israel, or even a meeting with Michigan families who lost loved ones to Israeli bombs) because of AIPAC-aligned politicians like Fetterman, who might take to TV, rile up suburban white and Jewish voters, and fracture the party’s coalition in a swing state.

That political calculus alienated a key voting bloc, although likely not large enough to have shifted the ultimate election outcomes, that should be part of a durable Democratic majority. But few will ever be held accountable for that choice.

A Fetterman staffer condemning Uncommitted for not advocating for Palestinians 'the right way' is like an arsonist scolding the fire department for using the wrong hose.

Source

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] donuts@lemmy.world 38 points 3 days ago

a statement distinguishing herself from Trump on Israel

Quoting @jordanlund@lemmy.world again:

Harris stated multiple times that she wanted a cease fire and a two state solution. Polar opposite of Trumps “sweep them out and take over.”

July:

https://www.the-independent.com/tv/news/kamala-harris-says-two-state-solution-is-the-only-path-after-meeting-with-netanyahu-b2586161.html

August:

https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/23/politics/gaza-israel-harris-convention-speech/index.html

September:

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/watch-harris-says-two-state-solution-end-of-israel-hamas-war-is-crucial

October:

https://www.aa.com.tr/en/americas/harris-dodges-direct-question-on-palestinian-deaths-calls-for-2-state-solution-during-cnn-town-hall/3372480

Every month from becoming the nominee until the election: cease fire, hostage release, two state solution.

These are not genocidal statements.

Trump?

https://apnews.com/article/trump-biden-israel-pr-hugh-hewitt-21faee332d95fec99652c112fbdcd35d

“But they’ve got to finish what they started, and they’ve got to finish it fast, and we have to get on with life.”

She did, but you didn't listen.

[-] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 43 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

So Harris said the same thing as Biden said... while Biden and Harris were complicit in genocide. And this changes anything about the post... How exactly?

Did Harris say no bombs? Did Harris draw red lines? Did Harris to concede any of the demands in the post you are trying to strawman?

[-] donuts@lemmy.world 23 points 3 days ago

stop moving the goalposts. The subject was a statement distinguishing herself from Trump on Israel

[-] surph_ninja@lemmy.world 26 points 3 days ago

Trump made an equivalent call for peace, while promising he would not impede the flow of weapons, same as Harris.

[-] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 25 points 3 days ago

No the statement was Harris distinguising herself from Biden. You have inserted a strawman.

Furthermore you are lying because Trump also promised empty words about peace for Palestinians. Trump even invited Palestinians on stage. Something Harris refused.

[-] donuts@lemmy.world 11 points 3 days ago

What? Look at the quoted tweet. It says

a statement distinguishing herself from Trump on Israel

And you're calling me a liar? Lol

[-] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 21 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

I will concede that point. I read the first line about "policy shift from Biden". Conveniently you did not address that

Even a distinguishment from Trump on Israel has not happened from Harris either.

Trump promised unconditional support for Israel. Harris promised unconditional support for Israel.

Now I will call you out on your statement. This article debunks your selective statement usage of Trump.

They have to get it done. Get it over with and get it over with fast because we have to — you have to get back to normalcy and peace.”

“I’m not sure that I’m loving the way they’re doing it, because you’ve got to have victory. You have to have a victory, and it’s taking a long time,” he said.

He said Israel is “absolutely losing the PR war” from the video coming out of Gaza.

“They’re releasing the most heinous, most horrible tapes of buildings falling down. And people are imagining there’s a lot of people in those buildings, or people in those buildings, and they don’t like it,” he said. “They’re losing the PR war. They’re losing it big. But they’ve got to finish what they started, and they’ve got to finish it fast, and we have to get on with life.”

[-] donuts@lemmy.world 6 points 3 days ago

Nah, I'm out. You're obviously not conversing in good faith.

[-] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 23 points 3 days ago

You concede when you get called out on quoting out of context. Your bad faith is clear.

[-] inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 21 points 3 days ago

It’s not moving goal posts. What she said isn’t credible because her own actions betray it. Politicians will say anything to get elected and LIE.

[-] Plastic_Ramses@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

What control does the vice president have on spending by the military?

I eagerly await your comment.

[-] liyunxiao@sh.itjust.works 11 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Given Biden's proven medical incompetence, likely total. 'Biden' provided funding to Israel without congressional approval multiple times.

[-] Plastic_Ramses@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

Lmao, what a complete non answer.

[-] liyunxiao@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 days ago

It's a complete answer, it's not the one you tried to bait out, but it's a complete answer and it's correct. You can be mad at yourself for not laying a good enough trap to get what you want, or simply for trying to defend one of the worst human beings in one of the worst political parties in the world; but you can't be mad at getting a correct answer.

[-] Plastic_Ramses@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

I dont accept right-wing propaganda as an answer.

Just tell me you dont understand what the office of vice president does and move on. Geez.

[-] liyunxiao@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago

I'm sorry you think reality in this case is right wing or propaganda. I hope you get better soon. Being a simp for a dead right wing party that has only realistically caused mass suffering is a terrible thing.

[-] inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 days ago

Executive branch is the one that declares war. They could of put a stop to the arms policy but didn’t. Useless democrat simp, blaming voters instead of awful policy from politicians.

[-] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 day ago

congress has the power to declare war

[-] inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 day ago

Right, and they didn’t. The executive branch has been rogue since 9/11.

All of our “wars” are just “special military operations” without congressional approval. The executive branch just goes around congress.

[-] dessalines@lemmy.ml 25 points 2 days ago

Actions speak louder than words.

The only difference between the republicans and democrats, is that one is better at lying.

[-] Turbonics@lemmy.sdf.org 32 points 3 days ago

Didn't the Biden administration vote against the two state solution at the UN after claiming to support it?

[-] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 15 points 2 days ago

but but but the Russians and Chinese vetoed the usa ceasefire! (that was ceasefire in name only and usa had vetoed everyone put forward before and almost every after)

[-] inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 25 points 3 days ago

Her words are meaningless when her actions are genocide

[-] GlacialTurtle@lemmy.ml 23 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

The White House routinely makes mutually exclusive statements about its desire to “end the war,” while saying Hamas could “have no role in postwar Gaza.” Yet no mainstream reporter, editor, or opinion writer bothers to reconcile this contradiction. This calculated vagueness is central to why Israel is permitted to continue bombing and killing at will for an indefinite amount of time. How can US officials simultaneously push for an “immediate, lasting ceasefire” while, at the same time, saying the other warring party must be completely defeated before they can support a lasting ceasefire?

This isn’t a call for a ceasefire—it’s a call for, in Netanyahu’s phrasing, “total victory.” The pairing of these two mutually exclusive phrases can only mean one thing: In common usage from the White House and its friendly media, “pushing for a ceasefire” means “continuing to bomb and besiege Gaza while reiterating terms of surrender.”

One linguistic trick that permitted this contradiction to go unchallenged is the sleight-of-hand in what the White House means by “ceasefire.” In some contexts, it means the term as it has been used by the Israelis, namely by Netanyahu: a temporary pause in fighting to facilitate hostage exchanges, followed by a continuation of the military campaign whose goal, ostensibly, is to “eliminate Hamas.” But this is explicitly not an effort to “end the war” as Netanyahu made clear repeatedly throughout the conflict.

The White House’s demand to “end the war,” increasingly popular since the summer of 2024, is just a reiteration of surrender terms. The State Department banned its staff from even using the word “ceasefire” for the first few months of the conflict. But in late February 2024, on the eve of a Michigan primary that was embarrassing then-candidate Biden, the White House, as we noted in The Nation at the time, pivoted to embracing the term. But the Biden administration changed its definition to mean (1) hostage negotiations, but with a firm commitment to continue the “war” once Israeli hostages were freed, and (2) a reiteration of surrender demands, sometimes using both definitions simultaneously.

The concepts of “ceasefire” and “push to the end the war” became, like the “peace process,” a ill-defined, open-ended process for process’s sake that US officials could point to in order to frame themselves not as participants in an brutal, largely one-sided siege and bombing campaign but a third party desperately trying—but perpetually failing—to achieve “peace.”

How the US Media Helped the Biden Administration Distance Itself From the Horrors of Gaza | White House–curated stories of performative outrage and feigned helplessness provided cover for an administration arming death on an industrial scale.

Several attendees at the November meeting — officials who help lead the State Department’s efforts to promote racial equity, religious freedom and other high-minded principles of democracy — said the United States’ international credibility had been severely damaged by Biden’s unstinting support of Israel. If there was ever a time to hold Israel accountable, one ambassador at the meeting told Tom Sullivan, the State Department’s counselor and a senior policy adviser to Blinken, it was now.

But the decision had already been made. Sullivan said the deadline would likely pass without action and Biden would continue sending shipments of bombs uninterrupted, according to two people who were in the meeting.

Those in the room deflated. “Don’t our law, policy and morals demand it?” an attendee told me later, reflecting on the decision to once again capitulate. “What is the rationale of this approach? There is no explanation they can articulate.”

Soon after, when the 30-day deadline was up, Blinken made it official and said that Israelis had begun implementing most of the steps he had laid out in his letter — all thanks to the pressure the U.S. had applied.

That choice was immediately called into question. On Nov. 14, a U.N. committee said that Israel’s methods in Gaza, including its use of starvation as a weapon, was “consistent with genocide.” Amnesty International went further and concluded a genocide was underway. The International Criminal Court also issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his former defense minister for the war crime of deliberately starving civilians, among other allegations. (The U.S. and Israeli governments have rejected the genocide determination as well as the warrants.)

A Year of Empty Threats and a “Smokescreen” Policy: How the State Department Let Israel Get Away With Horrors in Gaza

Absolutely wild the apologia for Democrats doing genocide you guys will do to avoid holding Democratic politicians and campaigners to account for their own decisions on policy and how they campaign.

[-] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 16 points 2 days ago

As ever, blueMAGA shitlibs care more about what politicians say than what they actually do. Because decorum is more important than the lives of hundreds of thousands of foreigners.

[-] eldavi@lemmy.ml 10 points 2 days ago

talk is cheap and actions speak louder than words and the biden administration only talked.

[-] zante@slrpnk.net 21 points 3 days ago

She was calling for a ceasefire for at least 6 months. As VP.

And the money and the weapons kept flowing.

So you can see the problem .

[-] AntiOutsideAktion@lemmy.ml 17 points 3 days ago

The fact that you read "she called for a two state solution" as anything but her endorsing genocide makes you appear to be a fucking moron.

This assessment of you is only reinforced by one of your links literally saying "She dodged the question on Palestinian deaths" in its URL

Of course I don't really think you're an idiot. I think you're a nazi. You don't give a flying fuck except for the fact that refusing to back down on this subject cost you the election. And because you're nothing but a fucking nazi, you will literally say fucking anything. You will insist that the person who refused to budge an inch from Biden's "zero conditions for unlimited support" position was actually the opposite. You're only upset that people got upset at you. You are a nazi.

[-] nullpotential@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 3 days ago
this post was submitted on 07 Feb 2025
284 points (100.0% liked)

United States | News & Politics

7514 readers
282 users here now

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS