The Republican presidential candidate ridiculously claimed that Biden is "trying to hold" Bibi back, as the Israeli prime minister continued to ruthlessly bomb Lebanon and Gaza.

“He’s doing a good job,” Trump saidabout the Israeli leader. “Biden is trying to hold him back, just so you understand, Biden is more superior to the VP. He’s trying to hold him back, and he probably should be doing the opposite, actually. I’m glad that Netanyahu decided to do what he had to do, but it’s moving along pretty good.”

    • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      206·
      1 month ago

      And yet, if comments on this site are to be believed, he’s still also getting the, “We refuse to vote Democrat because we’re against the genocide!” crowd (sorry guys, but not voting or voting third party is a vote for Trump. You cannot escape it).

      • UltraGiGaGiganticEnglish
        1·
        1 month ago

        You cannot escape it

        With state level electoral reform we can “escape” FirstPast The Post voting and the spoiler effect that comes along with it. Why dont democrats, who bring up the faults of of the voting system every election, pass this much needed reform in states they control?

        The DNC would prefer trump torching the country over having to compete for your vote.

    • geekwithsoul@lemm.eeOPEnglish
      189·
      1 month ago

      True. I think it’s more about whether Harris can pull in the “genocide bad” folks, or loses them to third-party protest votes. Of course if any of those folks were paying attention to the crap coming out of Trump’s mouth, they’d understand how much worse Trump will be. I had folks (hexbear and .ml of course) on a different post telling me that not only would Harris and Trump be the same on this, but that Harris would actually be worse. And of course they’re willfully ignoring how bad Trump would be on everything else.

      I have a suspicion that part of what’s pushing Harris’ campaign strategy right now to focus on courting more “centrists” is that they know whatever she did to appeal to the left that’s not voting for her would never be enough to satisfy them. Far easier to court the middle with straightforward messaging than to appeal to a voting bloc that is already determined to hate anyone that’s not as chaotic as they are.

      • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1319·
        1 month ago

        True. I think it’s more about whether Harris can pull in the “genocide bad” folks

        I haven’t seen her try. Have you?

              • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.worldEnglish
                813·
                1 month ago

                That’s not what you are. It’s ALL you are. When you support genocide, it defines everything about you as a person.

                • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                  55·
                  1 month ago

                  It’s so frustrating,… Because I want Harris to win so bad for the sake of the Palestinian people (among other things), and yet, some part of me just wishes there was some way for you to see the outcome of your idiotic actions without having to kill millions of Palestinians, Lebanese, and other Arabs. Some way for you you realize just how fucking stupid it is to do anything that would help Trump win.

                  Or maybe not you, but someone who actually gives a shit about those people and is considering not voting or throwing their vote away by voting third party… Because, frankly, I don’t even believe you.

                  • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.worldEnglish
                    4·
                    1 month ago

                    For the umpteenth time, I’m voting for Harris.

                    You just want everyone to shut up and pretend to be as happy as you are about genocide.

        • geekwithsoul@lemm.eeOPEnglish
          146·
          1 month ago

          Thanks for proving my point.

          Not that you’ll read it, but I think this might help explain:

          https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2024/09/kamala-harris-israel-policy-palestine-gaza-war.html

          Perhaps Harris’ loudest statement, however, was prefaced by her absence. Shortly after getting the nod from Biden in July, Harris snubbed Netanyahu, skipping his speech to Congress. (She spoke to a Black sorority, instead.) The next day, she met privately with him—later describing their talk as “frank and productive,” words that your boss might use after a performance review goes poorly.

          The reaction to her remarks was underwhelming at the time, but the remarks themselves were extraordinary. “We cannot allow ourselves to become numb to the suffering” of Palestinians in Gaza, “and I will not be silent,” she told reporters and cameras. “Israel has a right to defend itself—but how it does so matters.” It was as close as a sitting vice president could possibly come to reading Netanyahu for filth without creating a diplomatic crisis.

          • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.worldEnglish
            1015·
            1 month ago

            Her messaging regarding unconditional support for the genocide all centrists love is more convincing than subtle hints that slate has to speculate about.

            • geekwithsoul@lemm.eeOPEnglish
              148·
              1 month ago

              A nuanced take as always /s

              Did you even get to the end of the article or did you just read the headline?

              Harris has very little room to maneuver, however, without losing a huge part of her base and the party machinery that are still deeply attached to Israel. There is only so much a candidate and sitting vice president can do or say to break with the position held by her staunchly Zionist president, a Democratic establishment beholden to the pro-Israel lobby and AIPAC, and a broad swath of her liberal base that strongly supports Israel and its war. If she’s serious about getting elected, she has to withhold the kind of unambiguous statement—or action—that pro-Palestine activists demand. So she’s reduced to tone of voice, oblique gestures, a message hidden between the lines.

              • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.worldEnglish
                1013·
                1 month ago

                Did you even get to the end of the article or did you just read the headline?

                I read the article. I don’t buy excuses and apologia when we’re talking about literal genocide. I also regard with earned disgust anyone who makes such excuses.

                The whole “she absolutely can’t differ from Biden in any way except for these subtle hints we speculate about” thing is garbage. She’s not the secretary of state. She’s not running everything behind the scenes like Dick Cheney, though she seems to have garnered his approval, and it speaks volumes that centrists were so goddamned happy about his endorsement. In any event, she is free to differ on foreign policy and chooses not to.

                I’m still voting for her. I’m going to be at the polls this coming Monday, which is when early voting opens here in Texas. I have every right to criticize her for supporting Netanyahu’s genocide, even if Netanyahu’s apologists want me to buy that she has shown any opposition whatsoever to the only policy centrists seriously hold.

                • geekwithsoul@lemm.eeOPEnglish
                  108·
                  1 month ago

                  Okay, let’s play this out. What exactly do you want her to say? Specifically. Because it’s not like as VP she can do anything about it directly. So this is just going to be a statement, right?

                  Let’s say as part of that statement, she says Israel should get no more aid. That would be the crux of it, correct? And Biden then has to come out and say, that’s not happening while I’m President. Factions within the Democrats withdraw funding and support from her campaign. And the Iranians start actually drooling about being able to basically act unopposed. Hezbollah gets some shiny new missiles to kill more civilians. Centrists withdraw support from Harris and more than likely sit out the election, though a few may move over to Trump. November 6 rolls around and Trump wins, the region is even more of a shitshow than it is now, and just as important, Palestinians will still be dying. And under Trump it will get much, much worse.

                  Or…she tries to thread a very small needle, gets elected, and can the come to the bargaining table as the newly sworn-in President. She still has to juggle a bunch of different interests, but as President she has the power to do more than make statements and has quite a bit of latitude when it comes to foreign policy. Harris wouldn’t have been my top choice, or even in my top 5, but I can honestly say I can’t believe she won’t make saving Palestinian lives a priority, unlike Biden. But she can’t do it as a candidate.

                  • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.worldEnglish
                    66·
                    1 month ago

                    Okay, let’s play this out. What exactly do you want her to say?

                    That she would consider conditioning weapons sales. She hasn’t even done that. There isn’t one lousy photon of daylight between her and Biden, and there isn’t a photon between him and Netanyahu.

                    Centrists withdraw support from Harris and more than likely sit out the election, though a few may move over to Trump.

                    You mean to tell me that “vote blue no matter who” only works one way? That it’s only meant for progressives to show unconditional support to the pro-genocide anti-worker wing of the party, but that the very instant that centrists don’t get 100% of everything they want for the first time ever, they immediately defect and become red capped trumpers?

                    Or…she tries to thread a very small needle, gets elected, and can the come to the bargaining table as the newly sworn-in President.

                    And announces that she has a mandate to continue Biden’s pro-genocide policies. Centrists rejoice.

                    Harris wouldn’t have been my top choice, or even in my top 5

                    Yeah. Netanyahu can’t run in US elections.