334
Muslim Americans in swing states launch anti-Biden campaign
(www.axios.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 03 Dec 2023
334 points (100.0% liked)
politics
23061 readers
3251 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- 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.
- 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.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
This thread indicates not.
Centrist Democrats have never considered that a party is obligated to represent people whose votes it needs.
You don't understand that people don't want to participate in a system where both choices require them to take active participation in what they see as genocide of their own people?
Or you just don't see how anyone could possibly oppose genocide?
In either case, you certainly didn't show any evidence at all that you have given any consideration whatsoever to the idea that a party is obligated to represent people whose votes it needs.
You've only got three options.
Pick Gun A. Someone shoots 8 people with Gun A.
Pick Gun B. Someone shoots 20 people with Gun B.
Don't pick either gun. Other people decide which gun will be used. Someone shoots either 8 or 20 people with the chosen gun.
If I don't want people to die, what should I pick? Should I pick Gun A because I want to make sure the fewest people die? Or should I not pick at all, so that I can feel good about myself if gun B is chosen and 20 people die?
I'm sympathetic to them, but refusing to participate in the system doesn't mean the system goes away. It just means you pretend you don't have blood on your hands. If you care about keeping the Palestinian death toll as low as possible, you vote for the option that will kill the fewest. That's voting for Biden. Choose not to vote, and the death toll may be higher.
Blood will be on my hands no matter what I pick. I choose to see and accept that blood, if it means even one life is saved that would be doomed otherwise.
If you don't need their votes, keep acting like you can order them to vote like you want. You can always blame them for the results, but you'll still have the results.
The party would rather lose to Trump and have someone to blame than try to appeal to the voters it regards with withering contempt. It may make you feel morally superior to scream at people, but that doesn't move the needle in the direction you need.
Weird so many in this thread seem to think if you insult people for not wanting to be genocided, they'll support the candidate you like. Make it feel more clear that these people don't actually care about them and just see them as pawns for their own goals.
"Vote for me to do shit you hate, moron! Wait... why are you staying home?"
Pretty much. If fascism takes over America centrist Democrats will be partly to blame
Won't stop them from blaming all the people they alienated.
If you refuse to vote for the option that will result in the fewest Palestinians being killed, you care more about your ideals than you do their lives. Full stop. You aren't an ally if you're content with letting the more deadly option win because the less deadly option is still lethal.
As I keep having to say, I'm voting for Biden.
The party needs to start trying to get back votes it's losing. That is if they care about beating Trump and not just having yet another opportunity to punch left and never right.
I know you are, that's why I find it interesting to engage with you. You understand what I'm saying if you're voting for Biden.
I don't disagree. I'm all for discussing what Democrats can realistically do so long as we agree that Trump is an existential threat that takes priority over everything else.
So, let's discuss it. We both know that outright telling Israel to go fuck itself isn't an option. What do you think would be the best, realistic way to stop their massacre while alienating the fewest voters overall and leveraging our relationship to put pressure on them?
I suppose congrats are in order. We have a real life Trolley Problem.
Shit. It actually is.
These comments are crazy. No political party in power in the united states deserves support. Its those who cling to the democratic party who are "electing" trump by not moving to support a new alternate. Those who are promoting and supporting politicians who support genocide are those who are in the wrong and who are sabotaging progress.
I’m not clinging to the Democratic Party. I’m simply aware of how first past the post voting works.
That just tells you there can only be two dominant parties. Which parties are those two can change. Those who keep supporting democrats are still the ones preventing it from being another party. If it not democrats, it would be a different one...
I’ll bet you any amount of money that either Dems or reps win the next election. How much would you like to wager?
I'd bet its not democrats if people stopped voting for them.
Maybe I wasn’t clear.
I’ll bet you any amount you like that no third party wins the next election. You game?
The fact that no one ever takes me up on this shows y’all fucking know I’m right but don’t want to admit it.
If they won, they would no longer be a third party. If democrats became a third party, another party would become first party.
That’s why I worded it the way I did the first time.
I bet you $1000 that either the Democrat or the Republican wins the next presidential election.
No one is disagreeing about that. Its irrelevant to the topic.
It directly contradicts your claim that another party can win.
I think its more that they kinda can't win. Trapped in the inertia of past governments propping up Israel...backing out of support fully is never going to happen. Best they can do is try to lean on Israel to ceasefire. Then of course there's the consideration for Jewish voters who support Israel, which iirc is a larger voting bloc than American Muslims.
Of course it is also amusing that Muslims are seemingly okay with getting Trump in, the guy who intentionally inflamed tensions in the Middle East.
Then of course there's also the danger of turning Dems against Muslims because of the perceived betrayal...which honestly I'd care a lot less about what happens to Muslims in America if they get Trump in.
Essentially, this is sorta like trying to create a hostage situation with a pistol at your own head.
I'd wager the majority of American Jews would actually approve of at least conditioning aid to Israel so they stop bombing civilian targets. And the ones that are pro-genocide, are probably already voting for Republicans.
You're probably not wrong. It's an impossibly difficult problem to determine exactly what every voter wants.
Then of course we have to wonder all the non-public things that are keeping the US tied to Israel...would make it a lot easier to understand why things are happening as they are.
For one, the occupation is an amazing source of tools and tactics that end up being used by cops in the US to ~~occupy~~ police certain neighbourhoods.
It's a lot easier to not give a shit and just scream insults at anyone who's had enough.
Like you're doing in this entire thread? LMAO
Who have I insulted?
Dishonest discussion is insulting lol
All you've done is throw out supposed "gotcha" statements and added nothing to conversation. It makes me embarassed to fundamentally agree with you on things.
It's literally dipshits like you that undermine the cause of the left: head to far up your own ass to accept anything less than everything being what you want. Learn the reality of the situation before crying about how the dems did something that isn't what you think is best and turn your energy to actually achievable results
The party should adapt to get the votes of people it needs to win.
That's not expecting everything to be like I want. That's wanting the party to do what is necessary to win so we don't get stuck with Trump again.
Dismissing them is fine if you think you don't need them. Hurling abuse at them is great if you think you can win without their votes. But if you do that, don't turn around and blame people to whom you were hostile and whose votes you didn't attempt to get.
Democrats would never act that way while trying to court Republican votes that they'll never get, but they're perfectly comfortable doing so to anyone to the left of party leadership -- votes they can get but are too proud to try getting.
Ah, finally, an actual answer
I'm explicitly talking about this scenario: American Muslims are overplaying their hand to the detriment of the rest of the bloc. What they want is utterly unattainable in such a short term, and the only counter they are attempting is threatening to vote for Trump as though it is some sort of solution. Sure, demanding a ceasefire and stopping Islamaphobia at home is a great long-term goal, but it is ludicrous to see their demands as valid when they are essentially saying "if you don't stop Islamaphobia I'm gonna be the Islamaphobes in power."
As for hurling abuse at them, I don't think any Democrat official has done anything of the sort, whereas the party they are turning to does constantly.
And when it comes to courting Republicans...they have to play nice or risk the government ceasing to function. At the same time, given current trends the Democratic party will shift more to the left because more and more young people are going to force their hand within the next decade or so as the Boomers are (thankfully) culled.
People do illogical things sometimes, yes. How do we go about getting them back?
I wish I had your optimism regarding the future of the Democratic Party.
We get them back by reminding them of exactly what has been done for them and the realities of the alternative, as well as opening a dialog on what reasonable concessions can be made (if any). If that doesn't work, then clearly, there was no way of turning them, and they should be cut loose.
As for optimism, it's really more of simply extrapolating trends in the culture of younger generations and the realities of more workers than at least the last 40 years realizing they are being screwed and striking. Clearly, something is changing as people realize the system is a scam
Yeah, it doesn't work when the person you're attempting to extract concessions from doesn't care if you pull the trigger. And it's evident that Democrats would prefer Trump to even attempting to represent these people.
See, the problem here is that the Muslims can do whatever they want in this scenario, but the bottom line is that they have to accept the same shit as everyone else.
If I'm being honest, this whole stunt just looks like trying to force the democratic party into doing what they want at the expense of other, more numerous voters.
For example, I have to accept that Biden isn't going to do everything I want like go hard after the wealthy or force through student loan forgiveness. However, him being in power means my LGBT friends and family, as well as any female relatives and friends have protection for their rights and bodily autonomy.
It's not a great choice to have to make because our system sucks, but I have to make that call because Republicans will absolutely make things worse. In the cold, calculating world of politics, if I had to choose between my friends and family having rights or Palestinians not being killed...I'd pick my friends and family 10/10 times. Of course I'd rather have both, but that's the reality of the situation.
Then of course there's the whole question of why those Muslim people are in America (yes, I'm aware of how dangerously close this line of thinking gets to dipshit conservatives bitching about immigrants). Is making their current home demonstrably worse for them really a good idea?
Yeah, voters having free will is a problem for Democrats.
You were already close to the line.
Like are you dense or just being intentionally dishonest? I'm not saying it is a problem the Muslims have free will: I'm saying the problem is that they are free to do what they wish, but their actions will have consequences for them that are likely to not be worth it, so they need to accept tradeoffs like everybody else.
And then you don't bother actually responding to my arguments. Maybe try that next time in order to get meaningful responses.
Accept tradeoffs like everybody else? When was the last time the republican-adjacent wing of the party had to accept any tradeoffs?
When they didn't successfully do all the horrible shit they wanted to do under Trump. When they failed to coup the US Government on Jan. 6. The fact that a nationwide abortion ban isn't in effect and Muslims are allowed to enter the country.
Bitch and cry all you want about "wahhh it's just accepting Fascism more slowly with the Dems." Go look at how the government actually votes on issues and see how much shit is stopped by the Dems, and how much actually positive legislation for people does get passed exclusively because of the Democrats.
I hate having to defend them, but I have to accept the reality that without them my life would be objectively worse.
I didn't say the Republican Party. I said the republican-adjacent portion of the party. To clarify: Centrist Democrats. The Manchin wing of the Democratic Party. The Corporate wing. The wing that always manages to find the no votes to kill progressive anything. The wing that only ever compromises to their right and only ever punches left. That portion of the party.
When was the last time they had to accept any tradeoffs?