For them the choice is between do they endorse the president who kills and bombs Palestinians or they don't.
It is not between Kamala Harris or Donald Trump. Even they know none of the choices can or will lead to less violence in the middle east.
Even they know none of the choices can or will lead to less violence in the middle east.
Ah, but one choice will definitely lead to more.
And by not voting, statistics show, you favour that more-genocide candidate.
Good job.
Ah, but one choice will definitely lead to more.
You sure? Biden went against the DoD and approved the invasion of Lebanon, triggered the Iranian retaliation by lying about a ceasefire, and sent in US infantry and air support.
What more genocide than complete and indiscriminate annihilation of people. Using terrorist tactics to kill, maim your opponents. This will carry on or escalate irrespective of either candidate.
Only thing worse would be Israel using nukes, which is independent of the US President.
The only group of people it is going to make any difference to, are the Americans.
The Uncommitted Campaign, a movement that gained media attention for its call to withhold votes from President Biden during the primary elections over the war on Gaza, released a statement earlier this month saying that while it could not officially endorse Harris, voters should not cast their ballot for any other candidate but her.
How's that not an offical endorsement?
I mean I guess it leaves open the option of not voting.
I guess it could be interpreted like that if someone want it very much, in such case why they didn't said it straight: do what you want.
It's indirect support, but weaker than a straight up endorsement.
I guess maybe America can’t mess up the Middle East any worse if it’s busy fighting a civil war.
In the great words of Terrence Howard, an action times an action equals a reaction.
It's like the dumbest version of the trolley problem where the tracks are reversed. You could do nothing and people will die. Or you could pull the lever (convince a bunch of people not to vote for Harris) and a lot more people will die but, hey, at least you can say you did something.
In terms of a bipoloar two party system, you're right, the other party will fuck them hard.
In terms of swaying their main party to listen to their voters or risk losing an election, they did the right thing. You have to make a stand at some point to hold your representatives accountable.
I used to think the best time to do this was once your party was in power, but through sheer osmosis of being on this instance, I'm now of the mind that once they're in power they will have no reason to listen to you, so you might as well strike when their victory is uncertain.
and a lot more people will die
Biden is sending in US troops and air support, approved the invasion of Lebanon despite the DoD and Pentagon disapproving, and triggered the Iranian retaliation by lying about a ceasefire. Both the DNC and GOP are genocidal monsters, trying to pretend Trump would somehow be a lot worse than Biden already has been is nonsensical. Both are evil.
Let's run with your hypothetical. Let's follow it to the logical conclusion... The election is going to come down to swing states, and the only voters that could possibly affect the result are the Muslim voters mentioned above. Magically, nobody else exists or matters. Don't worry about how. If they vote third party, Trump wins, and it's all their fault... That's your scenario.
Except wait. Today isn't Election Day. Harris could do a 180 on her stance this evening. She has the ability to act now to change the future, to get those precious votes, the only votes that matter. But for some reason, she really doesn't do it, she doesn't care... And that's the problem your hypothetical has.
In reality, her campaign staff made their own choices, and they still have the power to adjust course if they feel like it. Or not. Whatever they like. But somehow you think it's the Muslim voters who are in control here.