245

In a letter published Wednesday on Medium, an anonymous group of Biden's campaign staffers demanded the president call for a ceasefire in Gaza, citing concerns that not shifting his policy on the issue could hurt his 2024 chances.


"Biden for President staff have seen volunteers quit in droves, and people who have voted blue for decades feel uncertain about doing so for the first time ever, because of this conflict," the Medium letter read.

"It is not enough to merely be the alternative to Donald Trump," the campaigners continued. "The campaign has to shift the feeling in the pits of voters' stomachs, the same feeling that weighs on us every day as we fight for your reelection. The only way to do that is to call for a ceasefire."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] phoneymouse@lemmy.world 17 points 10 months ago

I’m upset too, but there is more than one issue in the world. These people need to put things in perspective. If Trump wins, America is literally over.

[-] CommanderCloon@lemmy.ml 13 points 10 months ago

So, genocide is a "single issue" which means it should be ignored? How can you hope for any semblance of change if you start by overlooking literal genocide

[-] dvoraqs@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

How can you hope for any semblance of change...

You balance it against your other priorities

[-] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 4 points 10 months ago

How can you hope for any semblance of change

I don't. I gave up hope a while ago. Feels nice.

[-] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

It isn't overlooking it to accept that there's nothing we can do about it. There will be no viable candidate who opposes Israel, and that's the unfortunate truth. There are still significant differences however between the two candidates, and I don't want the one who's likely to start a domestic genocide to win.

There's blood on our hands, and we don't have a way to wipe it off. I'd rather accept it and try to move forward than try in vain to clean them.

[-] SCB@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

It isn't a literal genocide, but a figurative one, which is the source of the disagreement.

0.0044% of Gazans have been killed. The US killed the same net amount of civilians during the Battle of Mosul, and Gaza is three times as dense as Mosul.

This number will go up, because this war is being brutally waged, and Israel does deserve criticism for it. But words matter, and genocide is a dumb word to use because it has actual meanings, and requires specific intent

[-] Silverseren@kbin.social 9 points 10 months ago

0.0044% of Gazans have been killed.

?????

The population of the Gaza Strip is just over 2 million (2.048). The amount of Gazans killed in the past three months is 22600, as of today. That is, by my math, 1.13% of the population that has been killed in those three months, or 1 out of every 100 people.

[-] dtjones@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

To add to this, genocide (as defined by the UN) does not just include directly killing a particular group:

Definition Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide

Article II

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

  1. Killing members of the group; 2. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; 3. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; 4. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; 5. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

So in addition to killing 20k+ Gaza civilians, Israel's response has displaced countless others with their intense and indiscriminate bombing (see points #2, #3, possibly #4). NYT and other sources claim that up to 1.8 million Gazans have been displaced, which NYT claims is 80% of their population. This is in addition to the conditions Gaza was already being subjected to, such as being denied water and electricity (#3) by Israel.

The evidence overwhelmingly shows that this is genocide. "Figurative" is such a sleazy doublespeak way of excusing the behavior here.

Edit: sorry my link should work now

[-] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Textbook Case of Genocide is as literal as you can get. From a Jewish Holocaust and “genocide” expert.

[-] SCB@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Weird because words still have meanings even if this person disagrees.

[-] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Pretty sure he knows the definition of “genocide” better than you.

[-] SCB@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago
[-] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Lol… how humble of you. Dunning-Kruger epitome y’all.

[-] Aabbcc@lemm.ee 8 points 10 months ago

Too bad trump and Biden are the only two people so I just have to be pro genocide.

[-] phoneymouse@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago

You don’t have to. You can have your own views and make the best decision available to you given the circumstances.

[-] knightly@pawb.social 3 points 10 months ago

So you're saying not to vote? Or that we should write-in a vote for a non-genocider?

[-] phoneymouse@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago

No I’m saying that you can vote for someone and not agree with everything they stand for because that’s the best option you have. We do need reforms in America, but is that a reason to not vote or to wait around until all the conditions are perfect for you to vote your ideals?

[-] pozbo@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

So what is the move? It's clearly wrong to vote for Biden and you say not voting is a waste. So be frank and say what you're thinking clearly and plainly.

[-] HipHoboHarold@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

They did say it clearly. But let me see if I can't help.

You can have a slap in the face

Or a rusty shank to the neck

One or the other.

If you don't pick, one will be picked for you.

I get not wanting to vote for him. I do. But not all of us get that luxury.

I'm gay. Me and my boyfriend are talking about leaving the country. He's got one last semester of nursing school. Lots of places are desperate for nurses. We can probably get out. If we do, then I can say we get to move.

If the Republicans win, it won't just be get to, it will become need to as well. Any queer person who stays is taking a big risk. But not everyone will be able to leave.

Between the push for a fascist theocracy with Trump as the dictator as he uses phrases pulled from the Nazis and gives us their plans under Project 2025, I don't get the luxury of saying "Well, let's see if we can't come back from this." When we talk about being terrified of a Republican presidency, we are not exaggerating.

This isn't a light decision to make. I hate it. Even if the dems win, we might still leave. Project 2025 will just turn to Project 2029. Project 2033. Eventually they will win. But in the mean time I have to decide between voting for Joe who supports Isreal

Or risk Trump who supports Isreal, but also supports the same thing here

It's Biden or Trump

A slap in the face or a rusty shank to the neck

[-] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social 3 points 10 months ago

if the choice is leaving or voting for genocide, I'd pack my bags. I can't believe you're about to vote to send more money to Israel to kill Palestinians.

[-] HipHoboHarold@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Thanks for proving you're not here for a real conversation. But yeah, if it's vote for genocide or genocide either way, feel free to leave. Guess I'll just go volunteer myself for the gas chamber.

[-] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social 2 points 10 months ago

>feel free to leave.

that's what I said

[-] HipHoboHarold@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago
[-] K1nsey6@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

If genocide isn't enough of a red line for liberals, they are the larger threat to society and worldwide safety.

[-] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social 2 points 10 months ago

Palestinians aren't getting slapped in the face. it's a fucking genocide

[-] HipHoboHarold@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

Thanks for proving my point even more. Feel free to argue the point or move on.

[-] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social 2 points 10 months ago

don't tell me what to do

[-] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social 2 points 10 months ago

telling you your analogy is insulting doesn't prove your point at all.

[-] HipHoboHarold@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

If the point went over your head and you can only focus on that and ignore the rest, than take a seat. Of course the "don't tell me what to do" comment makes me think you really might not be adult enough to have this conversation.

[-] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social 2 points 10 months ago
[-] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social 1 points 10 months ago

# you really might not be adult enough to have this conversation

[-] HipHoboHarold@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

So I was right about that. Thanks.

[-] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social 2 points 10 months ago

# Thanks for proving you’re not here for a real conversation

[-] HipHoboHarold@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago
[-] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social 2 points 10 months ago

do you need help finding the block button? it's control+w

[-] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social 1 points 10 months ago

# feel free to leave.

[-] Reptorian@lemmy.zip 1 points 10 months ago

Vote people that has naunces on the downballot.

[-] knightly@pawb.social 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

So if I disagree with one pro-genocide politician less than the other, I should support a pro-genocide candidate? That's not reasonable, it's falling prey to a false choice. I hate to paraphrase the Declaration of Independence at Americans, but at least the founders understood when the course of human events made it necessary to dissolve political ties.

this post was submitted on 04 Jan 2024
245 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19096 readers
3051 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