Activists from around the country told The Intercept that they will advocate for an anti-war agenda at the convention in August and withhold their vote in November unless an adequate candidate steps up, listing policy priorities such as support for a permanent ceasefire and standing up to the pro-Israel lobby as it intervenes in Democratic primaries. Even as the Biden campaign insists that he will not step aside, many Democrats appear to be lining up behind Vice President Kamala Harris as an alternative candidate, with some Democratic governors being floated as well.
“My number one criteria for any candidate is opposing the genocide in Gaza,” said Saad Farooq, an uncommitted voter in Massachusetts. Farooq said it was unlikely that the Democratic National Committee would select any candidate who took a stance against Israel’s ongoing war, and that he would support Green Party candidate Jill Stein if she were to appear on the ballot in Massachusetts.
Will Dawson, an uncommitted voter in Washington, D.C., named several factors that could get him to switch his vote from the Green Party’s Stein to another politician. First on his list is a promise to call for an immediate ceasefire and fighting the influence of the pro-Israel lobby and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee in Congress.
“This candidate would also ideally work toward pulling further away from the Israeli colonial project over time, with the goal being repealing our absurd financial support, ending the foreign interest agency of AIPAC, and pushing for a nation-wide boycott a la [South Africa] during their apartheid,” Dawson wrote.
The candidate would also have to push to reform the Supreme Court, he added. “The candidate would have to promise to both push for justice impeachment, and expand the courts,” Dawson said.“If a replacement candidate met both of these requirements, I would absolutely consider switching my vote from Jill Stein. Hell, I might even knock doors/canvass for them!”
What the fuck is wrong with people. Number one criteria for president is dealing with a small scale civil/proxy war.
Meanwhile in Sudan, Ukraine, China, Myanmar, etc. there are millions more people being killed/impacted by genocidal governments and these don’t even make the list of anyone giving a shit when it comes to presidential choice.
Meanwhile the entire world economy is falling apart for the average person.
Meanwhile there’s a drug epidemic (somewhat related to the last one) killing around 100,000 Americans a year.
If your number one criteria is the Palestinian war you are either Palestinian(totally okay) or you have no idea how to prioritize your life in a rational manner and should not be allowed to vote.
I think it should be pretty clear, right? It’s different because America is helping them commit genocide. It’s not like this is all happening separately from us and people are calling for some kind of foreign intervention, they’re asking that we stop helping the people doing a genocide.
That’s not to say it’s my only priority this election, but it’s definitely up there, because I, like many Americans, feel like I’m complicit to some degree.
Make no mistake, though, Trump would be far worse. I still know the score here, but I can understand why it ranks highly on people’s priorities.
But there is a huge difference between intervention and stopping support for an ally that is RIGHT NEXT TO RUSSIA. Like do they even think that it’s not a strategic decision? Is it the best take? No. Is it the best place to be in? No. But pissing off an ally we have had for 50 years is also a bad decision. Maybe weigh the options here.
Except Israel has been talking about starting another invasion against Hezbollah…
Who have a defensive treaty with Russia, Iran, and a couple others.
An ally that starts wars isn’t a good ally.
They’re not providing a strategic advantage, they’re dragging us into large scale multi-country war.
It would likely get tied up with Ukraine as well, and get us to a legit WW3.
Because Biden won’t cut weapons to Israel and has spent 50 years saying there’s no line that Israel could cross
Edit:
RIGHT NEXT TO RUSSIA.
I googled it…
Israel is 3,700 some miles away from Russia. That’s wider than America
It’s on the same continent. And a big reason why Russia is where they are with the Middle East. My point is that it’s not so simple to just stop with someone who is in the area against our biggest enemy. As well as another nuclear power. Pissing them off may not be a good formula. Even if they are doing shitty things. It’s not a black and white decision to stop helping when they have been receiving it for 50 plus years.
It’s on the same continent
Just about 50% further away than America is wide…
Like, did you think putting something in all caps meant sarcasm?
Usually people do it to show that they’re being literal.
Did you just not know and instead of admitting it you’re trying to say that you knew it was 3,700 miles away and intentionally said that was close?
Pissing them off may not be a good formula. Even if they are doing shitty things.
-
Genocide that we’re violating international law to supply munitions for is not “shitty things”
-
Pissing them off? By telling them to stop the current genocide or not to attack another foreign government at the same time that’s allied with multiple nuclear powers?
It’s not a black and white decision to stop helping when they have been receiving it for 50 plus years.
Well, that’s sunk cost fallacy… And over those 50 years almost every US president has had to threaten to cut off aid to prevent it from progressing to this. It wasn’t till Biden came into office after 50 years of saying he’ll always support Israel for them to take it this far. Biden isn’t going to stop, and neither is Israel
I’m just trying to get your pov, but I can’t follow it logically
No. I’m saying not involving an ocean and being right next to Ukraine is a lot closer. But I guess you don’t know anything about logistics or strategy when it comes to war. So do you. Keep thinking it’s an easy choice. I’m done arguing about distances on a map when it is much closer than we are.
No. I’m saying not involving an ocean and being right next to Ukraine is a lot closer
What?
In both cases Russia and Israel are partly invading to get ocean access, but you’re coming out of nowhere with that…
Like, none of what you’re saying is making any sense.
Did you mean to reply to someone else?
I’m done arguing about distances on a map when it is much closer than we are.
Closer than we are to what?
You mean Israel is closer to Russia than America?
That’s not true either.
But like, you’re the one that only wants to talk about the distance you were wrong about, there’s lots of other wrong things you said I’m trying to explain here…
-
Do you think Palestine is in Europe?
And why are you calling a genocide a war? Because the victims have been resisting?
And you’re ignoring literally everything else I said, which is exactly my point.
And you’re ignoring literally everything else I said
I mean, when talking about geopolitics, the “geo” part is fundamentally important…
It would have been nice if you apologized, but fine we’ll move on to the next sentence:
Meanwhile in Sudan, Ukraine, China, Myanmar, etc. there are millions more people being killed/impacted by genocidal governments and these don’t even make the list of anyone giving a shit when it comes to presidential choice.
In which of those is the US providing munitions to the attackers against international and domestic laws for them to carry out a genocide?
Quick edit:
Were you going to answer this:
And why are you calling a genocide a war? Because the victims have been resisting?
There’s just so much wrong with your first comment, it’s hard to address it all.
But I’m willing to help explain it so you can understand. This is pretty important stuff. We cleared up that Israel isn’t in Europe pretty quickly. So I’m optimistic on the rest.
The US could stop what’s happening in multiple of those countries. Does non-action not count towards death tolls? If you have the ability to pull a level that lets 20 people live, is it not your fault if you choose not to pull that lever and they die?
Also, what level of support matters? What if instead of sending munitions they only sent money, would that be a problem? What if instead of money they only sent food, which frees up their own money to buy munitions? The fun thing about the global economy is that almost anything is fungible at scale. Hell, if you look behind the curtains there are US goods and services being used in Russia to attack Ukraine right now, it’s just flowing through third parties first to obscure the transactions. The government may not be sending it directly, but America is benefiting from it.
The US though has provided both direct and non-direct support causing genocides in multiple places even in the last 20 years. George W Bush got re-elected while the Iraq war was happening, and that killed a couple hundred thousand civilians, which is what… 6 times the current Gazan death toll? Not to mention Afghanistan which was it’s own problem on top of that.
Yes, Palestine vs Israel is a war. It’s not automatically a genocide just because one side is absolutely wiping the floor with the other. It’s been a war since literally the day after Israel was founded, FIVE arab countries invaded Israel the moment the British Protectorate ended because they didn’t like the UN agreed upon borders. People seem to ignore this fact for some reason because it’s inconvenient to their “truth”.
You’re smart, so I’m hoping you’re smart enough to follow the money. The US and the west are funding Israel. Why? I’ll give you a hint, it has nothing to do with Palestinians, and everything to do with who is funding the Palestinians.
The truth behind of all of this is that both the Israelis and the Palestinians are mostly just being used by others in a proxy war, Hamas is fully funded and armed from outside of Gaza by foreign groups, they have effectively no local income or production related to the fighting other than supplying the people to die.
So why would the US and allies care? Because if Iran and group take out Israel (as is their stated goal) the US ability to control Iran will be diminished and Iran can then become a bigger threat to the western world.
And that’s how Geopolitics work.
Also, what level of support matters?
Well, with the genocide in Gaza, Israel literally would have ran out of munitions and would have had to stop months ago…
If Biden hadnt kept giving them.
But Israel is in no way a “proxy” they should be, but Biden lets them drive the car all the way to Genocide town.
Bibi wants to genocide Palestine, and take their land.
He ain’t exactly subtle about it, members of his government keep saying it out loud even.
You’re obviously very opinionated about this, you’re just wrong…
About almost everything you said so far I’m honestly curious. Where are you getting your information to form these opinions?
Because if Iran and group take out Israel (as is their stated goal) the US ability to control Iran will be diminished and Iran can then become a bigger threat to the western world.
Even that.
If Iran attacks Israel, it’s going to be because Israel keeps attacking Hezbollah, and Iran is one of the country’s they have a defensive treaty with
Israel is the one starting shit in the Middle East
“I’m just wrong”
Israel does want the land. So does Palestine and the supporting countries, they’re also on record stating they want to eliminate Israel.
That’s kind of what defines a war most of the time.
“If Iran attacks Israel” You say that like it’s a hypothetical, have you already forgotten the 100+ drones and missiles they lobbed at Israel on April 13th?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_Iranian_strikes_against_Israel
As I said before, and as you completely ignored. The British protectorate ended on May 14th, 1947 and on May 15th a coalition of Arab states invaded Israel. They did so because they did not like the borders set by the UN and wanted more territory. Tell me again how it’s Israel that started this shit?
Israel does want the land. So does Palestine
What?!
Palestine wants the land inside Palestine’s borders?!
You’re right, that totally warrants a genocide y
/s
Nothing is improved by Trump being elected; for Gazans , for Israelis, for Americans, or anyone else.
Which is why we need to run a candidate with a shot of beating trump…
It’s too important of an election to let Joe have one more go out of nostalgia.
It would be easiest for everyone if he stepped aside, but he’s not willing to.
It blows my mind that people can argue that Trump is the worst possible outcome for our country and the world, and then follow that up with “we need a candidate that can beat Trump”. If everyone knows what is at stake (democracy), how is Biden not capable of beating Trump? Do people think that not voting, or voting 3rd party is going to somehow keep Trump out of the white house? Anything but a vote for Biden (or whoever ends up on the ticket opposite Trump) is who everyone needs to vote for, or they have chosen Trump and doomed us all.
Do you think it’s easier to convince 10s of millions of voter’s minds?
Or get Joe Biden to understand that polls show people don’t want him and that the best thing he can do to prevent trump is step aside.
Seriously.
Please provide some evidence to support your claim that the best thing Biden can do to prevent Trump getting elected is to step aside.
The post-debate Data for Progress poll tested the odds of eight Democrats who have been floated as possible alternatives to Biden, including Vice President Kamala Harris and multiple Democratic governors. Biden’s self-proclaimed advantage is tempered by the lack of name recognition — so far — for the other options. Aside from Harris, prospective voters were so unfamiliar with these Democratic leaders that between 39 and 71 percent* *of respondents said they hadn’t heard enough about them to have an opinion. Even so, each potential candidate performed the same or even better than Biden.
You kind of buried the lede there:
Overall, these results show that voters continue to be concerned about Biden’s age — but there is not yet clear evidence that an alternative nominee would significantly outperform him against Trump in a head-to-head matchup.
That’s evidence that some candidates poll similarly to Biden.
That’s not evidence the best thing Biden can do to stop Trump from becoming president is drop out.
Didn’t really bury it because I don’t agree with that analysis and it’s not part of the poll.
If they’re polling similar to him with 39%-71% of the people not knowing who the candidate is that means their floor is where Biden is.
