99
submitted 11 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

Democratic views on how President Joe Biden is handling the decades-old conflict between Israelis and Palestinians have rebounded slightly, according to a new poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.

The shift occurred during a time in which Biden and top U.S. officials expressed increased concern about civilian casualties in the Gaza Strip, emphasized the need for a future independent Palestinian state and helped secure the release of hostages held by Hamas during a temporary truce.

Fifty-nine percent of Democrats approve of Biden’s approach to the conflict, a tick up from 50% in November. His latest standing is roughly equivalent to Democrats’ 57% approval rating for him on the issue in an August poll, conducted well before the latest war began on Oct. 7 when Hamas attacked Israel.

Still, the issue remains divisive among Democrats, who are less enthusiastic about Biden’s handling of the war than his overall job performance. Seventy-five percent of Democrats said Biden is doing well as president, also up slightly from 69% last month. His approval rating among U.S. adults stands at 41%.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Candelestine@lemmy.world 22 points 11 months ago

I'm just glad he didn't try to stick to his guns, and actually started listening to us, paying attention to the resignations and shit. Otherwise he was gonna go down with that ship, and maybe take us with him.

[-] SCB@lemmy.world 20 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Biden's policy has not undergone any significant changes regarding Israel at all.

The Biden admin has been urging restraint while backing Israel for 100% of this conflict.

Here he is prior to Israel's invasion, doing exactly that.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/abcnews.go.com/amp/International/biden-embraces-netanyahu-steps-off-air-force-tel/story%3fid=104063578

[-] MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago

I'd argue their public statements have definitely shifted away from the "Hold Bibi close in public and push back in private" position recently. I don't know if there's been any meaningful policy changes but messaging has changed.

[-] SCB@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

I would agree that messaging has shifted, which is indeed good news as Dems generally suck ass at messaging

[-] MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago

I feel like Biden has been pretty good about listening to the public and generally tries to get the best outcome for people even in shit situations.

[-] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 4 points 11 months ago

Over 30 years as chairman of the Foreign Relations committee and 8 years as VP and you know what his thinking was or if it changed?

[-] Candelestine@lemmy.world 12 points 11 months ago

Yes, quite easily. He was fully on Netanyahu's side, now he is steadily moving away from him. From this I can conclude that he has decided that supporting Netanyahu is no longer a good idea.

My reasonings why are more supposition, as opposed to any kind of confirmable fact. I cannot read the man's mind, of course. But, some things are more likely than others.

[-] Hyperreality@kbin.social 4 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

It's not exactly a secret that Biden dislikes Netanyahu and has for a long time. He didn't receive the customary invitation to the white house after his latest election win, which tells you something.

I think Biden decided to be fully on Israel's side after the attack, and to give Netenyahu the benefit of the doubt, hoping he'd rise to the challenge and become a true statesman. Weirder things have happened. Perhaps that was naive, clearly that's not in Netenyahu's nature. Likely it was a decision made in part due to domestic political considerations, but here we are.

Does now make it easier for Biden to criticise Netenyahu and push for moderation. No one can accuse him of not supporting Israel, although I assume the GOP will try to do exactly that if they haven't already.

[-] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 3 points 11 months ago

Foreign Relations is like chess. You have to think several moves ahead. He could have seemed to be with Bibi until he could setup negotiations with Hamas. He had to get space to pressure Qatar to work on his behalf. He knows exactly who Bibi is and what he responds to. That is a much more likely scenario than "we changed his mind".

[-] Candelestine@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

Domestic politics is as major a consideration as geopolitics. Perhaps even moreso, as how much can you do if you're not in office?

And we don't need any additional routes towards negotiations with HAMAS. If the Qataris didn't want to do it, we'd ask Erdogan.

[-] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Your goal in this scenario is making every feel good for an election or getting some hostages out? I think it's a good thing that hostages won.

Erdogan expressed his distain for Isreal eary on. He wasn't an alternative in any way.

[-] Candelestine@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

It doesn't matter. He's a politician, he has to deal with hard reality, not how he wishes things could be. Erdogan is an ally, no matter how much we may dislike him sometimes. Elections are a reality, and people vote for what they like.

This is hard reality, where things are not simple or easy.

[-] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 3 points 11 months ago

If Bibi is the biggest liar on the world stage, Erdogan is the biggest crackpot. Biden can perform better than any former President and still get junk poll numbers. He's been around long enough that his last election probably doesn't taste that sweet.

[-] Hyperreality@kbin.social 1 points 11 months ago

Erdogan has continually expressed his disdain for Greece over the past few years. Now he's entirely changed his tune and is visiting Athens to reset relations.

Don't take what politicians say too seriously.

What they do is less influenced by friendships, ideology, or morality. It's mostly realpolitik, the national interest, or domestic political concerns, matter most and not much else.

this post was submitted on 07 Dec 2023
99 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19097 readers
3885 users here now

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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS