• Raja@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Who said anything about “going hard against Israel”? And it’s not like there’s a report that contradicts your claim, right?

    You have no idea how I voted. Op suggested that people didn’t vote for her for trivial reasons, which trivialises the real documented reason of expressly supporting a genocide.

    • adjectivenoun@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      You have no idea how I voted.

      We can make an educated guess. Thank goodness for Gazans (and Lebanese) that Harris didn’t become president. That would have been a disaster!

      • dubs@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Yes, it would have been. That’s why the anti-genocidists were against her. But the Democrats decided they’d rather lose to Trump, than stop supporting genocide.

      • Raja@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        I guarantee you’re wrong about how I voted. And why are you moving the goal posts? Harris stated clearly that she wouldn’t change anything when dealing with Israel and she wanted to make Israel the most violent army in the world, so it’s very likely that the situation in Gaza and Lebanon would be very similar. It was already a disaster when Biden was president.

        • adjectivenoun@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          she wanted to make Israel the most violent army in the world

          lmao. People don’t take you seriously because you say shit like this.

          • Raja@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            You’re right about that one phrase, I mixed it up with something else. She did state that she would continue to support arming Israel unconditionally.

            Everything else I said still stands, and you haven’t addressed any of it.

            • adjectivenoun@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

              OK well Harris sucks but there were only two horsies in the race. Did you vote strategically for the objectively better candidate?

              • dubs@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 day ago

                There were more than two horses, but Liberals refuse to understand the concept of “not voting for genocide”, so that only left two candidates for them.

              • Raja@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 day ago

                Yes.

                Look, we had pretty much a textbook trolley problem where it was objectively correct* to pick the track with fewer casualties. But now that the train has gone, we need to lay responsibility squarely with those who tied the casualties to the tracks in the first place.

                (*One reason for choosing the other track was to give the democrats their own trolley problem, choosing between getting elected or leaving casualties on their track. And they chose the latter. Now we’re seeing more progressive candidates emerge so arguably it worked. Was it worth the cost? That’s harder to decide since we’d have to estimate the long term costs of a hypothetical scenario.)

                But regardless of what the objectively correct choice was, belittling those who disagreed by trivialising their reasons or absolving the architects of the dilemma of responsibility is just wrong.

                • adjectivenoun@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  We’re not going to know if the accelerationist strategy of making the Democrats powerless to encourage people to elect Dem Socs will work for years. What I know is that fractally corrupt fascists are in power now, ICE gestapo are in my streets now, we are at war with Iran now, and Israel has accelerated its ethnic cleansing of Gaza and Lebanon now. Am I happy DSA candidates are winning? Sure! Was it worth it? Nah. New York could have tolerated another round with Cuomo, but can America withstand four more years of Trump? We’ve lost so much in 18 months, and he has another two years and change. (At least.)

                  I’m not trivializing people’s reasons for not voting for Harris. Those reasons, set across from the alternative, were objectively trivial. If your key issue was Gaza, Trump is worse. If your key issue is the economy, Trump is worse. If your key issue is privacy, government overreach, persecution of whistleblowers, freedom of the press. Name any issue and Trump is worse, and it was obvious he is worse from the first go 'round. It’s hard to treat someone’s reasons for voting MAGA or not voting at all as legitimate or informed when the alternative is voting for the worse option or declaring that both options are equally bad. I’m honestly more angry with the self-righteous abstainers than I am with MAGA dolts. MAGA is a cult. I don’t expect those people to know better or make good choices. The people who are chronically online following every political scandal? They knew better and they failed to do their duty as citizens.

      • Jax@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Look, I voted for Kamala because lesser evil > greater evil. That being said, she did express support for Israel through maintaining arms sales and military assistance.

        Like, everyone recognizes that Kamala would have been marginally better than Trump. She still would have been a bad president, just not a bad president responsible for fucking the economy. Status quo and all that.

        • CannonFodder@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          Yes she did express support for Isreal - but not for Isreal to commit genocide. You might think it was a genocide happening at the time, but most people then saw it as them fighting Hammas without taking enough care about civilians.
          It was after Trump encouraged Netanyahu to wipe out all Palestinians, that things got significantly worse. I don’t think Harris would have encouraged genocide. I think she would have even pushed back somewhat against human right violations eventually.

          • Jax@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            She would have pushed back when it was politically convenient, if it became politically convenient.

            I worked for the DoJ under her. The corruption was there before her and got worse under her. She is not the saint you, for some reason, think she is. An important thing to keep in mind is that simply because they’ve been demonized by the right does not somehow make them a good person.

            Case in point: Gavin Newsom.

            • CannonFodder@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              16 hours ago

              No, she’s not a saint. She’s a politician, and a high ranking one. The only way to get there is to be a backstabbing asshole. And yes, she would have pushed back on Israel if and only if it became a politically good move - which it is now. So that’s exactly the point, she would be pushing back now. Which is much better than what Trump is doing. I know life wouldn’t be cupcakes and roses under Harris, just a lot better than under Trump. And that was the choice at the last election which too many Americans idiotically didn’t see and are to blame for Trump if they failed to vote for Harris. That’s my only point. That, and the related importance of not fucking up again in future elections because a Democrat isn’t perfect enough.

          • dubs@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            No, most people saw it as genocide. She just pretended it wasn’t happening because it was inconvenient for her.

            I don’t think Harris would have encouraged genocide. I think she would have even pushed back somewhat against human right violations eventually.

            Biden never did, in fact, he openly supported it. Why would she be any different? Since when has Democratic leadership cared about human-right violations?

            • CannonFodder@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              16 hours ago

              Maybe in your circles most people already saw it as genocide - but that’s simply not true for most most people. And of course that also applies to Biden as this was before Israel went undeniably psycho.
              But I suspect you can’t tell the difference, and so you are just as happy with Trump telling Isreal to wipe out the Palestinians and build casinos in Gaza, as with Harris likely following an (inadequate) diplomatic push to respect human right. If so good for you, I’m glad you’re happy with the result.

              • dubs@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                16 hours ago

                Maybe in your circles most people already saw it as genocide - but that’s simply not true for most most people. And of course that also applies to Biden as this was before Israel went undeniably psycho.

                You can keep saying “Nah, it’s not true”, but that doesn’t change the fact that it was true. It was pretty clear they were committing genocide.

                But lets take your argument in good faith, lets pretend that Biden didn’t know they were commiting genocide: He still knew they were bombing innocent people, raping women, shooting kids, torturing, kidnapping, and starving people. Yet he continued to give them weapons, and support anyway. Is this your hero? the guy who raped women, bombed kids, and gave support to rapists, torturers, kidnappers, etc?

                I don’t know why your so quick to defend him, but I have a few guesses.

                But I suspect you can’t tell the difference, and so you are just as happy with Trump telling Isreal to wipe out the Palestinians and build casinos in Gaza, as with Harris likely following an (inadequate) diplomatic push to respect human right. If so good for you, I’m glad you’re happy with the result.

                Well, if you had bothered to read what I’ve written, you’d know that I’m not happy with the result. I guess you are right, that I am “just” as happy, since Harris was pretty clear that she was going to do the same as Biden, and Trump. So yes I’m very unhappy about the result, just like I would have been very unhappy about the result if Harris had won.

                She never had any intention to push for human rights, considering that she stood proudly behind Biden as he violated human rights, and made it very clear that she would keep doing the same things that he did.

                • CannonFodder@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  16 hours ago

                  Given that the options were Trump or Harris, if you really think they are the same, then you really are ok with Trump being the outcome because you didn’t care.
                  It boggles the mind that you would see them as the same, that you can’t recognize that even though they both are bad, that one is clearly worse than the other. But there we are.

                  • dubs@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    16 hours ago

                    Given that the options were Trump or Harris…

                    Luckily for me, that’s not a given. Which is how I was able to vote against both of them.

                    …if you really think they are the same, then you really are ok with Trump being the outcome because you didn’t care.

                    No, I’m not OK with Trump being the outcome, because I care. If you had bothered to read what I’ve written, you would have known that.

                    It boggles the mind that you would see them as the same, that you can’t recognize that even though they both are bad, that one is clearly worse than the other. But there we are.

                    Well, it will please you to know, that I don’t see them as the same. Nor have I ever claimed that. But please, continue telling me what I think and see. I’m sure that’ll win people over, instead of providing things like data, or facts.