• NatakuNox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 days ago

    It doesn’t matter. Even more so the less power she had to change the situation. All she had to do while vp was say was I don’t support, agreed with, nor play a part in the genicide happening in Palestine. She could have said during the campaign that she would stop all weapons going to Isreal and that she’d hand over anyone that helped kill innocent people. She has nothing to lose. Her silence proved she wasn’t ready to be president. If she can’t stand up to special interest groups with no real skin in the game, do you think she’ll magically gain morality once in power? And additionally, what a dumb political move that is ultimately! Not a single vote was gained by backing Isreal, because Republicans were going to back them anyways. Pro genicide people aren’t going to vote Democrat, full stop. She was more afraid of losing money rather than the election.

          • NatakuNox@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 days ago

            Uh? what? Among progressives. Among Dem voters? Among Muslims? Among the people the dems needed their votes? How many polls? Lol the support wasn’t enough to win her an election. So Ya.

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

              Among Americans in general. If she opposed Israel she would have lost outright. There likely will not be an anti-Israel candidate in the Oval Office any time soon.

              • NatakuNox@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                And I’m sorry but this just hit me.

                she would have lost outright.

                She would have lost outright…

                She. Would. Have. Lost. Outright.

                Compared to… (check notes) Lossing!?

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

                  An outright loss means she would never have a chance of winning. Taking the much less popular view would not make it more likely for her to win. Did you really need that clarified for you?

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

                    Outright

                    So you’re saying you know exactly how greater her loss would have been if she didn’t stand up for human rights? If you know that since outright loss means, never had a chance. So since she didn’t outright loss what did she need to do to get more votes from the right or left?

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

                being anti genicide doesn’t make you anti Israel. Simply not giving them the tools to do harm wouldn’t even be enough. We need to actively protect both sides from each other, and return to original boundaries. That’s not anti Israel. That’s pro human.

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

                Among Americans in general.

                Americans in general includes every last republican who would never vote for her. Centrist democrats need to quit trying to get the fascist vote just because they deeply admire all fascists.