108
I'd like if Walz was picked. He seems like a good guy.
Walz, please, Walz.
Also: peace is possible.
Don't really want a VP who likes to stomp out student's right to free speech. He belongs on a 90s ticket, not a 2024 run.
Building on that comment, we don't need a president who likes to stomp out students right to free speech by implying that those students are pro- Hamas, backed by Iran and Anti Semitic.
Shapiro: criticizes campus protests for their antisemitism, publicly reaffirms his commitment to a 2-state solution, and calls Netanyahu an “obstacle” to the solution Lemmy: OMG!!! Terrible human! Walz: criticizes campus protests for their antisemitism Lemmy: Yay!!!
Edit: in case anyone actually cares about facts, the quotes are about the PLO and Arafat (you can find the whole op ed thing easily online and it’s like 1 page). He also describes his support for a 2 state solution in the article. He ends the article by saying that he hopes the two sides can get over themselves and stop fighting, despite his skepticism
Shapiro: criticizes campus protests for their antisemitism
Which is a strawman. The protests are against genocide and in large part led by anti-zionist Jews.
publicly reaffirms his commitment to a 2-state solution
That's what they all say to sound like they're pro-peace without saying anything to endanger the legal bribes from AIPAC.
and calls Netanyahu an “obstacle” to the solution
Gonna need a source with full context on that one.
the quotes are about the PLO and Arafat
Oh, you mean the ones who were actually willing to negotiate in good faith and were then replaced by the initially Israel-funded terrorist group Hamas?
He also describes his support for a 2 state solution in the article. He ends the article by saying that he hopes
More empty rhetoric
the two sides can get over themselves and stop fighting
And a colossal false equivalence to go out on. Nice. 🙄
despite his ~~skepticism~~ bribes from AIPAC
“I believe everything you say except the stuff that makes Shapiro look good and challenges my narrow worldview”
That’s hilarious my dude, it’s pretty easy to google things.
And denying that any antisemitism happened during the protests is laughable. There were specific cases Shapiro named. He never issued a blanket condemnation of the protests, only specific instances
“I believe everything you say except the stuff that makes Shapiro look good and challenges my narrow worldview”
Another ridiculous strawman. Are you incapable of arguing in good faith or do you just choose not to at every opportunity?
That’s hilarious my dude, it’s pretty easy to google things
Says the Hasbarist whose sources are likely only pro-Israel ones such as Times of Israel, NYT, and Jerusalem Post 🙄
And denying that any antisemitism happened during the protests is laughable
I didn't. I said that wasn't what the protests were about any more than Black Lives Matter protests are about breaking things like the American Fascist Party pretends.
There were specific cases Shapiro named.
Cases such as the one where what Zionists had used as the basis of painting all the protesters with a broad brush as antisemites turned out to be a Zionist successfully trying to get protesters arrested?
“Palestinians will not coexist peacefully,” Shapiro also wrote in the op-ed titled “Peace Not Possible.”
“They do not have the capabilities to establish their own homeland and make it successful even with the aid of Israel and the United States. They are too battle-minded to be able to establish a peaceful homeland of their own,” added the then-20-year-old.
Veep Not Possible.
People need to take to whatever socials they might use to make it clear to the KH campaign that this asshole will tank her popularity. Just because he was much younger when he wrote that doesn't make it ok when Israel is literally committing genocide and deliberately fouling up every opportunity for a ceasefire today. The world has had its eyes opened to what they're doing in a way that cannot be denied ever again. This man made himself toxic with what he wrote and it's his own fault that he isn't qualified for the job.
Why do have no faith that the DNC will pick the best candidate that will help her win? I feel they will find a way to sabotage her run because they can't let us have a progressive VP. They probably will choose this asshat or someone worse. I hope I am wrong.
Why do have no faith that the DNC will pick the best candidate that will help her win
They picked Hillary, Tim Caine, and Biden. It's not like they have a great track record in recent years.
I feel they will find a way to sabotage her run because they can't let us have a progressive VP
Or she'll tank it herself by revealing that, pretty speeches aside, her actual policies and ideals are completely dependent on what's most advantageous for her at any given moment.
I hope to be proven wrong, but other than being the first presidential candidate to ever mention the security and self-determination of Palestinians, (which is admittedly huge, as far as statements go) her record so far isn't that convincing..
Well, I imagine having to constantly fear for one's life due to neighbouring a country that wants you dead will make one battle minded. Maybe if the IDF and the Israeli government tried not being absolute bastards and instead sent assistance, Palestinians may start to not be battle minded?
Dismissing this as something he wrote when he was 20 and neither believes in nor stands for anymore is the reasonable thing to do. But we all know politics isn't reasonable, and particularly not when it comes to this specific issue. It's deeply emotional, and this will look bad to a lot of voters regardless of how unreasonable it is.
I think picking Shapiro for VP would be risky.
Judging by his anti-BDS stand that he still holds, and his he dealt with campus protests, I don't think you can claim he changed his opinions.
He still believes it whether to a smaller degree. I listened to his interview with his friend David Sirota (the point at which I stopped listening to his podcast) because they basically said the same thing.
The Democrats seem to think that a “policy re-tweak” will be all that’s necessary once they get the right person. They’ve done this with Kamala, and they think it’ll work with their VP pick— I don’t think that kind of wizardry will work twice.
Mark Kelly is, everyone agrees, the winning pick mathematically, but there are a couple of others that could work otherwise. Shapiro is on the “loser” list, and he just needs to go.
Agreed. Though even Mark Kelly has a less than ideal stance on Gaza/Israel. Overall I think his upside outweighs it, though.
Dismissing this as something he wrote when he was 20 and neither believes in nor stands for anymore is the reasonable thing to do
Based on what? Because he said so just in time to be considered for a prestigious gig after not recanting it at all for decades?
Excuse me if I don't automatically take him st his word 🙄
Imagine writing that publicly and living the rest of your life like it won't come back up. Incredible.
I mean, it wouldn't come back up for the vast majority of people so I'm not sure what you're getting at.
Probably getting at the fact that he's been a public figure for decades without recanting it, and only does so now that it might prevent him from getting a prestigious gig as VP.
He hasn't changed his mind, he's just doing damage control.
I'm so glad all my thoughts from HS and college aren't saved somewhere for people to use against who I am now. But I would really prefer someone else. I don't like how powerful Israel is in our nations politics and would prefer someone with less connection right out of the gate unless he loudly and strongly denounce AIPAC on a regular basis
Shapiro is a bad pick, but Democrats always think that someone who appeals to conservatives is a good choice, so they might convince themselves that a moderate with strong support for Israel is a smart idea. Kamala has a lot of enthusiasm behind her at the moment; it would be a real shame if the Democrats found a way to kill that with a bad VP choice.
For the love of God just pick Kelly as VP, he's a fucking astronaut for christs sake
I mean, does that make you automatically qualified to be the Vice President?
No, but it's not like he's just a random astronaut, he's also a well respected senator.
Part of the issue is they don't want to lose his Senate seat which was formerly held by McCain and by no means safe. It needs a strong defender like Kelly.
It shows he's smart and adaptable enough to handle high stakes situations, so he may be a little overqualified but would make a great pick nonetheless.
Mark Kelly is "healthcare reformer" that doesn't support universal healthcare.
"I was young and needed the blood money!" 🙄
this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2024
108 points (87.5% liked)
politics
19082 readers
3704 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.
- 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