522
submitted 2 weeks ago by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/politics@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

Maybe if Harris were running as a Republican.

But its not Republican votes she's leaving on the table. Its literally registered Democrats. And Democrats put the responsibility for the state of things on the Israeli government.

[-] grubbyweasel@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Center right republicans are up for grabs here, idk if youve heard but Harris and Trump are pretty much neck and neck in every battleground state. She's trying to reach out to Republicans that are fully sick of Trumpian politics. It's not progressive voters she's courting nor should she

[-] jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 2 weeks ago

And if she loses as a result? Then who are you going to blame? The Democrats who left her? the Republicans who didnt join her? Or harris for being so committed to genocide she lost to a literal fascist?

Keep in mind the longer she waits the more likely it is those historically democratic voters are lost due to early voting.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

Centrists will do what they always do. They will interpret a win as vindication and an indicator that moving to the right works.

They will blame their left for a loss, announce that the left are unreliable voters, and use that as justification for moving to the right.

[-] jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 week ago

Yes thats why i dont care about their lesser evil nonsense.

[-] grubbyweasel@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 weeks ago

It's her calculus man, not mine. The Harris campaign has decided this is the way to go, if she loses because of it then she loses because of it. I think it's the right way to go but honestly not really any point arguing about it, we're gonna find out real soon either way

[-] jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 weeks ago

indeed we are. but then you'll be stuck knowing you did jack shit to stop a genocide when all you had to do was lie a little bit to make her sweat it out. maybe follow through if your state can take the hit on democratic support. instead you decided your effort was better spent arguing with me and others like me instead of getting in on the game. =)

[-] dan00@lemm.ee 1 points 2 weeks ago
[-] jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Np mate. We're all doing our part hoping for the best outcome we can manage.

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago

You are literally arguing she make a speculative play to turn Republicans instead of going after registered Democrats that she's lost.

I'm highlighting this to demonstrate for posterity how patently absurd the apologist rhetoric was on this matter.

[-] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

Not just to turn Republicans, but to depress the Republican vote. Speculation here, but I think it's reasonable to bet there's a large number of Christian Republican voters who will never vote for Harris but aren't motivated enough to vote for Trump...unless Harris condemns Israel. If Harris gains 2% Dem votes from never-genocide lefties but Trump gets 5% votes from Israel-to-the-max Christians, she loses.

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

I'm just really happy you responded with this, so thank you.

Posterity, when you are looking back on this, the comment above is the kind of wack-a-doodle, baseless, hopium, purely speculative, completely devoid of evidence kind of thinking people were using to defend Kamalas' obvious failures as a candidate.

[-] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

Tactics in first past the post democracies is indeed whackadoodle, but that's the system we live in.

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

I'm all about tactics, but I'm all about evidence as well. If you can provide some data, some evidence that what your saying has merit, I'm more than happy to discuss.

[-] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

That's a complicated one. I think we can agree that in general, Republicans support Israel and don't believe that Israel bears any responsibility for their genocide in Gaza, and largely either don't believe there's a genocide happening or are perfectly happy that it is happening.

Here's an article from back in July where Republican leaders (not voters) condemn Harris for expressing sympathy for Palestinian civilian deaths: https://www.factcheck.org/2024/07/republican-rhetoric-on-harris-position-on-israel-goes-too-far/

About 30% of Republicans want the US to pull back on ceasefire negotiations: https://www.newsweek.com/poll-democrats-republicans-divided-israel-role-war-escalation-1977027

Trump is absolutely courting Jewish Republicans: https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2024-09-05/trump-harris-israel-gaza-hamas-hostages

But I can't find any specific poll numbers asking Republicans "would you be more likely to vote for Trump if Harris denounces Israel?" So I don't have any hard data, just informed guesses.

this post was submitted on 30 Oct 2024
522 points (94.7% liked)

politics

19089 readers
1435 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