241
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 66 points 1 year ago

All they have to do is pledge to follow the Leahy Law....

Israel won't comply, which means we legally can't provide arms. Kamala doesn't even have to be "the bad guy", she can just say she's choosing to follow American law and if Israel wants arms then they can comply like every other recipient has to.

It's really as easy as saying:

If elected I will not break American law to send arms to foreign countries.

Boom, election locked up.

[-] Mac@mander.xyz 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

How many voters would she lose if she declared intent to stop assisting Isreal?

She might possibly gain a few, but would she lose any?

[-] Grimy@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

Is not about voters, it's about money. Both parties are bribed to keep it going.

[-] nednobbins@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago

It's a valid question and I'm sure the Harris campaign has spent considerable resources trying to get a good estimate of that number.

It's pretty insane that the Democratic party officials have to say, "We'd love to stop funding a genocide but our members won't vote for us if we do that."

[-] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 6 points 1 year ago

She'd gain more than she'd lose, even before counting in the electoral college. Conditioning Israeli aid is supported by the majority of people of Democrats, Republicans and independents, and the people who don't want it don't care too much either way. Definitely not more than left wingers who want the genocide to stop. In terms of votes it's a no brainer.

[-] cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago

She would likely gain voters because she would be distinguishing herself from Biden who remains deeply unpopular.

[-] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago

This is THE potential problem with this

[-] Mac@mander.xyz 4 points 1 year ago

Yeah, I would hope there are more anti-genocide voters but i doubt it, honestly.

[-] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 1 year ago

Yes. Enough to lose. These people don't seem to understand this (or refuse to)

[-] Keeponstalin@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Any voters she would lose are far outweighed by the amount of voters she'd get. It's about 5:1 from what the polls indicate, or about a +6 point gain. Quite significant considering how dead-locked the race is right now

Quote

Our first matchup tested a Democrat and a Republican who “both agree with Israel’s current approach to the conflict in Gaza”. In this case, the generic candidates tied 44–44. The second matchup saw the same Republican facing a Democrat supporting “an immediate ceasefire and a halt of military aid and arms sales to Israel”. Interestingly, the Democrat led 49–43, with Independents and 2020 non-voters driving the bulk of this shift.

Quotes

In Pennsylvania, 34% of respondents said they would be more likely to vote for the Democratic nominee if the nominee vowed to withhold weapons to Israel, compared to 7% who said they would be less likely. The rest said it would make no difference. In Arizona, 35% said they’d be more likely, while 5% would be less likely. And in Georgia, 39% said they’d be more likely, also compared to 5% who would be less likely.

Quotes

Quotes

Quotes

Majorities of Democrats (67%) and Independents (55%) believe the US should either end support for Israel’s war effort or make that support conditional on a ceasefire. Only 8% of Democrats but 42% of Republicans think the US must support Israel unconditionally.

Republicans and Independents most often point to immigration as one of Biden’s top foreign policy failures. Democrats most often select the US response to the war in Gaza.

[-] Mac@mander.xyz 2 points 1 year ago

Maybe their thought process is that D voters will vote for her either way and they're trying to pull R voters who support Isreal? Otherwise, I don't get it. The data here supports pulling support of Israel.

[-] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 year ago

You people really have a massively inflated concept of how many voting progressives that there are. Get off the internet for a while...

Harris would 100% lose the election if she said that.

this post was submitted on 14 Oct 2024
241 points (94.5% liked)

News

36628 readers
590 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS