102
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 01 May 2024
102 points (85.4% liked)
politics
19080 readers
2197 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
They aren't though. See the complaints about the economy. The youth vote is very vocal, but they don't have the money to make up for lost donations from the Pro-Israel PAC.
It’s this mentality that will give the US another Trump presidency. If you are worried about losing money from a Pro-Israel PAC because you won’t stop aiding an active genocide, you aren’t fit to make decisions for a major country. Not aiding genocide is kinda important. And yes, the economy sucks for students and the working class. That’s why they don’t want to send bombs (with their tax dollars) to Israel, when the people here need the funding more.
I'm sorry you find political facts inconvenient.
Here's what the students and pro-Palestinian movements are up against:
https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus?ind=Q05
https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/summary?cycle=All&ind=Q05&recipdetail=S
There simply is no equivalent on the other side, so instead we get:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/apr/17/pro-israel-money-progressives-congress-challenges
and:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/22/aipac-pro-israel-lobby-group-us-elections
The students can barely live, they can't afford to contribute at this level.
So, yeah, despite all of Israel's bad behavior, going back decades now, US support will continue going to them, because politicians can't afford otherwise.
That sounds like something a PAC would say lol. Self-fulfilling prophecies
Well, when the students are actively complaining about not being able to afford rent or food, that's the big indicator that they don't have money for political donations:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/may/16/food-insecurity-us-college-students
https://www.homemattersamerica.com/the-invisible-cost-of-college-students-who-cant-afford-a-secure-home/
Now, I'm not saying you HAVE to donate to get politicians to do the right thing... but, yeah, you kinda do.
Well it sounds like the current government is not providing a path forward for them to support themselves, so I hope it doesn’t come as a surprise when they don’t come out to support the current government. Especially one that is involved in active genocide and shutting down their peaceful protests.
I agree that you cannot dispute the power PACs and the Pro-Israel lobby has. It is unfortunate that money runs the US government. It is even more unfortunate that people apologize for it
It's crazy how people come out and paint this dismal picture and then complain about voter apathy. Like, literally after they just got done telling people the things they will vote for will never, ever happen.
Then it's game over already. We lost.
We should keep supporting genocide because gaslighting the poor hasn't worked?
Supporting Biden isn't supporting genocide, that's a false argument.
Biden is supporting Israel because that's where the PAC money is and poor college students can't make up that difference.
Biden is supporting Netanyahu's genocide. Should he continue because gaslighting the poor hasn't worked?
He isn't supporting genocide, he's supporting Israel, just like every other President since the start, and Bibi is misaporopriating that support.
You wouldn't say Reagan or Clinton supported war crimes when Israel illegally attacked Lebanon during their administrations. Same deal here.
He's selling them weapons that he knows will be used for genocide, with no strings attached. He's running interference for Netanyahu at the UN.
That looks like support from where I'm sitting.
"That's the way we've always done it" is a lousy justification, since the way we've always done it got us here, with the US selling weapons for genocide.
Didn't Reagan threaten to withhold weapons when Israel illegally attacked Lebanon?
In any event, the article's about protests from a generation that weren't even alive for Reagan and were children during Clinton's administration.
Ah. It’s okay if it’s blood money. Cause only Biden and his Israel money can be our option. So. Fucking. Stupid.
They really don't care where the money comes from so long as they get it. That's kind of the whole point.
I love linking to this clip from Bulworth, it never gets old, more people should watch that flick:
https://youtu.be/-Cg7Z2eZmcM
That is not the society I would prefer to live in. That being said. That looks like a movie worth watching lol
Man, the absolutist crowd is out in force today.
As always, context kinda fucking matters a lot.
Edit: all that said: I’m pretty sure the downvotes are due to how dismissive you are being of “poor college students”
Let me ask you a hypothetical, given the choice between continuing to ship weapons to Israel or Biden winning the 2024 election which would you choose?
I’m sorry, no, that’s an absolutely idiotically framed question, to the extent that I’m quite confident you’re just trying to push agitprop.
To be clear:
You’re presenting a dichotomy where there is none.
Edit:
Ok, let’s try this another way: which of the two presidential candidates that are advancing to the general election do you believe will actually stop shipping weapons to Israel, or at least has the possibility of being convinced of stopping the shipments?
I’ll give you a hint: it’s not Trump.
I'm presenting a purely hypothetical choice. In a purely hypothetical situation where that choice is put in front of you what would you choose?
Yup, as I said in another comment:
There are two viable candidates, Biden and Trump. Taking votes away from Biden only helps Trump. So not voting, voting Stein, Kennedy, West, all of that only helps Trump.
Helping Trump is supporting:
https://apnews.com/article/trump-hannity-dictator-authoritarian-presidential-election-f27e7e9d7c13fabbe3ae7dd7f1235c72
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_2025
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/donald-trump-mexico-military-cartels-war-on-drugs-1234705804/
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/aug/30/trump-interview-jail-political-opponents-glenn-beck
https://apnews.com/article/trump-biden-israel-pr-hugh-hewitt-21faee332d95fec99652c112fbdcd35d
https://visitukraine.today/blog/3712/trumps-peace-plan-is-to-surrender-crimea-and-donbas-to-russia-wp-reveals-details
https://apnews.com/article/trump-nato-presidential-election-congress-republicans-20e902788e8701999ce0424f73d478cc
So, yeah, when the alternative is maximizing negative impact, the only voting solution is to vote for the one person who can defeat that agenda... and that's Biden.
I try to let up and down votes do their job.
Bad opinions aren't necessarily misinformation.
What nuance is to be found regarding genocide? There is no justification that makes support for genocide acceptable.
This is true. He's supporting genocide, not committing it. That's still morally reprehensible.
He's selling them weapons that he knows will be used for genocide. That's support for genocide.
I mean, you can at least admit that Netanyahu is committing genocide, right?
So that's a "no" on admitting that Netanyahu is committing genocide.
Bruh.