More than 100 Arizona Palestinian, Arab, Muslim, and progressive Democrats and community leaders have signed a letter making the case for those reluctant to support Kamala Harris against Donald Trump.

“We know that many in our communities are resistant to vote for Kamala Harris because of the Biden administration’s complicity in the genocide,” the letter, published Thursday night, reads.

“Some of us have lost many family members in Gaza and Lebanon. We respect those who feel they simply can’t vote for a member of the administration that sent the bombs that may have killed their loved ones,” the letter continued. “As we consider the full situation carefully, however, we conclude that voting for Kamala Harris is the best option for the Palestinian cause and all of our communities.”

  • pjwestin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    61
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    1 month ago

    Man, I hope this changes some minds, but it might be too little too late. She’s had a lot of opportunities to turn things around with the Arab community, and she’s flat out ignored all of them. I’m really worried this will be her version of Hillary’s, “I don’t need to campaign in the Rust Belt,” decision.

    • GBU_28@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      It’s a major complication / fault with running a candidate who is in office already. They cannot deviate from the official position, tone, language, admission of guilt, etc.

      I’m not saying I have secret info and Harris would 180 on Israel if she won, just saying she can’t even build breathing room from Biden while being the sitting vp.

      This is not an excuse for the administration’s stance, just a reflection on the challenges of running while in office.

      • pjwestin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        Yeah, when she first started running, I figured she was trying not to undermine Biden’s ceasefire negotiations, but I assumed she would find some way to reach out to the Arab communities she needs for Michigan and Wisconsin. Now It’s the 11th hour, and she hasn’t done anything. I just don’t understand why they’re completely ignoring this demographic.

      • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        They cannot deviate from the official position, tone, language, admission of guilt, etc.

        Why not? She’s not the Secretary of State, and she’s not running the administration like Cheney. She can differ from Biden. After all, she moved to his right when she said she would appoint a Republican to her cabinet.

      • HomerianSymphony@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        1 month ago

        They cannot deviate from the official position, tone, language, admission of guilt, etc.

        Just have her hug an Arab child or something.

        Why are they so bad at this?

        • GBU_28@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          1 month ago

          Imo the Arab/Palestinian community would see that for the pandering that it is

          • HomerianSymphony@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            Yeah, probably. She should still do it.

            Her problem isn’t just with the Palestinian community.

            There was a surge of enthusiasm among Democrats when Kamala was first elected because people thought she might take action on Gaza. That enthusiasm soon evaporated when it became apparent that she wouldn’t.

            People are desperate for anything and she’s giving them nothing.

    • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      1 month ago

      She’s had a lot of opportunities to turn things around with the Arab community, and

      You DO realize that she can’t campaign on that, right?

      I know it’s a little subtle for an American political scene that no longer uses such terms as waffler and carpet-bagger, but these used to be campaign-wrecking slurs.

      She’d be labeled a waffler in seconds. And not only would we like her to change her position, but so would the gqp for the political damage. She can’t change until she’s achieved a 4-year contract.

      • pjwestin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        No one is saying she has to do a 180 on Gaza, but she could have let a Palestinian speak at the DNC, or met with the Uncommitted leadership last month. It would take very little effort to make herself look more appealing to Arab Americans than Biden and Trump, but she just didn’t do it.

        • PriorityMotif@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          It’s the lawyer effect, they overanalyze everything and make “safe” bets. Trump is going out there and waving his bare ass around while the Dems sit above wringing their hands about what each micro group might think. They’re too worried about stroking “group leaders” egos than actually addressing real people’s needs.

          • pjwestin@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 month ago

            Yeah, that seems right. I also wonder if they’re chasing the wrong numbers. There was a WSJ article last month that said swing state voters were more confident in Trump’s handling of Gaza than Harris’. It didn’t necessarily mean that they would vote for Trump, and honestly, a lot of the impression that Trump is, “stronger,” on military issues is probably just misogyny, but I could see an overreacting campaign look at and say, “we can’t soften our position on Gaza at all, we need to close that gap!”

          • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 month ago

            It’s the lawyer effect, they overanalyze everything and make “safe” bets. Trump is going out there and waving his bare ass around while the Dems sit above wringing their hands about what each micro group might think.

            Except progressives and Muslims.

    • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 month ago

      Fact is that no matter what position Kamala takes on this, she’ll lose votes somewhere and win votes somewhere. Most Jewish people vote for Democrats. Trump just straight up does not care about Palestine. That’s a much more simplistic take.

      • pjwestin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        Well, first of all, I would be very careful equating Jewish people with support for Israel and their attacks on Gaza. Not all Jews are Zionists, and not all Zionists support Netanyahu. I don’t know the numbers for sure, but I would bet that Evangelicals and military hawks make up a larger base of pro-Israel voters than the Jewish population.

        The thing is, Biden’s policy, from a material position, is essentially, “There is almost nothing Israel could do that would limit our military support,” while Trump’s position is, “There is absolutely nothing Israel could do that would limit our military support.” If you’re the kind of voter that would be put off by any criticism of Israel, you’re probably voting for Trump no matter what.

        Like, sure, I’d Harris started chanting, “From the river to the sea!” and demanding the immediate decolonization of the Israel, yeah, she’d lose a lot of voters. But if she had taken a position like, “Israel has a right to defend itself, but the bloodshed in Gaza has gone on long enough, and we must acknowledge that the Netanyahu administration has been a major obstacle in ceasefire negotiations,” she would have been massively more appealing to Palestinian supporters, and she would have only risked hard-liners who, again, almost certainly have gone for Trump anyway. Instead, she told Netanyahu that she would, “not be silent,” on Palestinian suffering, and since then, has been mostly silent on Palestinian suffering. It’s like she was trying to appeal to no one on this issue.

        • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          if she had taken a position like, “Israel has a right to defend itself, but the bloodshed in Gaza has gone on long enough, and we must acknowledge that the Netanyahu administration has been a major obstacle in ceasefire negotiations,” she would have been massively more appealing to Palestinian supporters

          Thing is that she doesn’t really have to. She’s already massively more attractive to Palestinian supporters than Trump or not voting. That’s the problem with a two-party system with only two real choices.

            • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              1 month ago

              There has been a lot of talk to pressure Democrats on the Arab issue, including during the primaries. At the end of the day, the Democratic agenda is much more friendly toward Palestine than the Republican agenda. Most Arab-Americans are fully aware of that and it will probably show on election day. But they may as well try to get as many concessions as possible before the election by threatening to withhold their vote. Makes sense.

              • pjwestin@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 month ago

                I get what you’re saying, but that’s just an assumption. You’re assuming that they’ll show up for Harris, just like Hillary assumed she didn’t need to campaign in the Rust Belt. You may be right, but I wouldn’t gamble the Presidency on it again.