I think a decent amount of people have quit. It hasn’t been enough because the pushback from Biden’s administration in ignoring them is pretty stubborn and strong. I think both parties have divided on this but I feel like a larger portion of Democrats, when compared to Republicans, are pro-Palestinian or at least were opposed enough to the bloodshed to quit their posts. The views of these two groups should not be expected to be generalizable at such a critical and decisive time.
I’m looking not at the personal stand some have taken, but the effects of the party’s action in whole.
It’s just no different from Republicans. Democrats say they oppose Israeli genocide, but they make sure the money and weapons flow into it, so to me, the words and symbolic actiosn ring hollow.
Yeah sure but my point is again: you cannot generalize the party as a whole at this time. You can’t just call any difference in opinion within the party as a “personal stand”. It’s not personal, it’s a political statement.
I seriously think this is a bad way to go about life, generalizing in general. Makes you see things in black and white. I realize this in itself is a generalization but I think you get the point.
In some ways, yes, but look at this objectively. The people who vote Democrat could have voted for Marianne Williamson, a person is actively against genocide, and also has other positive views like support for a living wage.
Those same voters have watched Joe Biden enable genocide and apartheid, and it was only an embarrassing incident on national TV that finally got them to admit that, maybe, they were wrong, not the genocide.
This generalization is well-earned. I’d feel differently if Williamson had gotten even handful of delegates, but nope.
I think a decent amount of people have quit. It hasn’t been enough because the pushback from Biden’s administration in ignoring them is pretty stubborn and strong. I think both parties have divided on this but I feel like a larger portion of Democrats, when compared to Republicans, are pro-Palestinian or at least were opposed enough to the bloodshed to quit their posts. The views of these two groups should not be expected to be generalizable at such a critical and decisive time.
I’m looking not at the personal stand some have taken, but the effects of the party’s action in whole.
It’s just no different from Republicans. Democrats say they oppose Israeli genocide, but they make sure the money and weapons flow into it, so to me, the words and symbolic actiosn ring hollow.
Yeah sure but my point is again: you cannot generalize the party as a whole at this time. You can’t just call any difference in opinion within the party as a “personal stand”. It’s not personal, it’s a political statement.
After this last primary, I certainly can.
I seriously think this is a bad way to go about life, generalizing in general. Makes you see things in black and white. I realize this in itself is a generalization but I think you get the point.
In some ways, yes, but look at this objectively. The people who vote Democrat could have voted for Marianne Williamson, a person is actively against genocide, and also has other positive views like support for a living wage.
Those same voters have watched Joe Biden enable genocide and apartheid, and it was only an embarrassing incident on national TV that finally got them to admit that, maybe, they were wrong, not the genocide.
This generalization is well-earned. I’d feel differently if Williamson had gotten even handful of delegates, but nope.