Dearborn anti-Kamala fools played themselves, final chapter (3 Viewers)

[Gimmesometruth]

Ok, Dems are better than Republicans. What now?

I know, thats the extent of it.

strong stuff from the socialist.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

if voters actually bought into your narrative,

5th request.

Did I get placed on ignore for some slight?

 

[Phys251]

Call more attention to their meddling in our election. Run ads everywhere regarding how much AIPAC spends on influence US politics.

Although under Trump's reasoning AIPAC could be designated a terrorist organization. They're foreign and they agree with a country that targets innocent civilians.

You second paragraph has a point.

I think that if we somehow get a trifecta again, we should pass a law that forbids monetary lobbying by entities designed for foreign influence (like AIPAC). They are free to use the diplomatic channels that nearly every other country uses.

 

[Dans La Lune]

I know, thats the extent of it.

strong stuff from the socialist.

You'd think Dems would start welcoming criticism from the left after liberal moderates lost to Trump twice.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

You have really shown yourself to be someone not deserving any attention, between the obnoxiousness, the dishonesty, and other flaws you are showing over and over, so I didn't need to read past that. Have a nice day.

Don't be mad at me because you have no examples, I had a hard time finding any worth reposting too.

 

[Deuce]

You second paragraph has a point.

I think that if we somehow get a trifecta again, we should pass a law that forbids monetary lobbying by entities designed for foreign influence (like AIPAC). They are free to use the diplomatic channels that nearly every other country uses.

I wouldn't hold my breath.

 

[Dans La Lune]

You second paragraph has a point.

I think that if we somehow get a trifecta again, we should pass a law that forbids monetary lobbying by entities designed for foreign influence (like AIPAC).

 

[Phys251]

I wouldn't hold my breath.

I know, it's a long shot. But until AIPAC gets the hell out, I see no way forward from our enabling of Israel.

 

[NolanVoyd]

Gee dude, the voters pretty clearly do.

And the fact America is a dysfunctional oligarchy doesn’t actually change the reality the Democratic Party chose to support borderline genocide, apparently on the assumption that the mere existence of the Republicans would make that choice acceptable, and were baffled when it wasn’t.

Logically speaking the Democratic Party has no incentive to ever actually change any of its policies if voters actually bought into your narrative, because they could always simply point and go “but Republicans”.

Which is why it doesn’t work.

Blah blah blah.

You know on the Palestine issue that Trump was a far worse choice.

Dont tell me you dont know that, you are a not an idiot.

The dumbass strategy you defend got the objectively worse candidate elected.

That is a fact.

That makes it an illogical strategy.

For christs sake man! Maybe take a logic class.

 

[Phys251]

If you have a better plan than neutering AIPAC, one that actually has a chance, I am all ears.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

You'd think Dems would start welcoming criticism from the left after liberal moderates lost to Trump twice.

You are not left, we just went through your inability to show examples of anything resembling criticism of Trump 1.0 or 2.0 at the same level of vitriol concerning policy on Israel like what you have produced in just this thread against B/H.

 

[Tigerace117]

Blah blah blah.

You know on the Palestine issue that Trump was a far worse choice.

Dont tell me you dont know that, you are a not an idiot.

The dumbass strategy you defend got the objectively worse candidate elected.

That is a fact.

That makes it an illogical as long strategy.

For christs sake man! Maybe take a logic class.

Uh....no, actually “help Israel commit borderline genocide while openly gloating about it” isn’t really that much worse than simply “help Israel commit borderline genocide”.

And, once again, nobody accepts your narrative because of the simple fact that doing so would mean the Democratic Party would never, ever, bother with adjusting its public positions to voter sentiment again.

 

[ElChupacabra]

https://www.cnn.com/2025/05/05/middleeast/israel-gaza-expansion-hnk-intl

There's no hope whatsoever that Kamala Harris, as President, would allow this. Only truly insane people think that she would.

Congratulations, Dearborn anti-Kamala brigade, you screwed Palestinians over by sitting the election out.

Remember:

Biden Announces Ceasefire Deal Between Hamas, Israel in Farewell Address

President Joe Biden announced a ceasefire and hostage-exchange deal between Israel and Hamas — a truce that Defense Department officials believe signals a possible end to 15 months of conflict in the

www.defense.gov

Biden signed a peace deal to end this shit. And then Trump green-lit more Israeli bombardments and crapped all over Biden's deal.

So much for the "Kamala would have kept the bombings going" nonsense.

The problem is the Biden administration did nothing to get in Israel's way and it's highly unlikely Harris would have either. As for the Muslim population here that voted for Trump, the odd thing with that choice is it was going to be open support of whatever Israel wants to do, which is what we're seeing now. The main difference now is Netanyahu and the rest of his nutter base can spew the rhetoric that matches their actions with no public reprimands from the US, for whatever that's worth.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

And, once again, nobody accepts your narrative because of the simple fact that doing so would mean the Democratic Party would never, ever, bother with adjusting its public positions to voter sentiment again.

I'm still waiting to hear your ideas on what would have been the winning narrative for Harris on Gaza, something that would have caused enough non-voters or Trump voters to vote for her.

Monday criticism is easy, lets see your positive message.

 

[bullseyelqcs]

There is no reasonable argument to be made that people are obligated to vote for the party supporting a borderline genocide

Except that is essentially what those people did anyway...either directly by voting for Trump or indirectly by NOT voting for Harris.

Standing on "principle" doesn't mean anything when it leads to the worse outcome for the principle you were supposedly standing on.

People with common sense realize that there is a world of difference between Netanyahu doing what he wants against our wishes and doing it with our blessings. He was going to do whatever he wanted anyway, but at least Biden talked the game of TRYING to slow down the violence. Trump had and has no intention of doing anything other than basically applauding what's going on.

You really gonna try to tell me there's no actual difference between those two things?

 

[Dans La Lune]

If you have a better plan than neutering AIPAC, one that actually has a chance, I am all ears.

The Biden Admin ignoring US law, undermining international law, defunding and banning humanitarian aid groups, and outright lying to facilitate a genocide is not because of AIPAC.

 

[bullseyelqcs]

We agree.



Perhaps, but it seems you are not understanding/appreciating the issue of asking people to vote for people *who are committing genocide* because the other guy might be worse, instead of their saying they won't vote for either. It's a bit like asking Americans to vote for Osama bin Laden over an even worse terrorist. Except what's being done to Gaza is far, far worse than bin Laden.

No, not might be worse. Told you he was GOING to be worse.

Imagine you had a relative on death row. What you had during the election was one candidate telling you they weren't going to do anything to change your relatives situation and the other candidate telling you they intended to throw the switch themselves.

 

[Tigerace117]

Except that is essentially what those people did anyway...either directly by voting for Trump or indirectly by NOT voting for Harris.

Standing on "principle" doesn't mean anything when it leads to the worse outcome for the principle you were supposedly standing on.

People with common sense realize that there is a world of difference between Netanyahu doing what he wants against our wishes and doing it with our blessings. He was going to do whatever he wanted anyway, but at least Biden talked the game of TRYING to slow down the violence. Trump had and has no intention of doing anything other than basically applauding what's going on.

You really gonna try to tell me there's no actual difference between those two things?

Except the outcome that the Democrats produced was the exact same one, so again, the idea that voting for them was “averting the greater evil” simply isn’t true.

The Democrats gave Bibi their blessing, as the ongoing weapons shipments make rather clear

Biden engaging in empty, hollow words while supporting Israel’s actions isn’t better.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

The Biden Admin ignoring US law, undermining international law, defunding and banning humanitarian aid groups, and outright lying to facilitate a genocide is not because of AIPAC.

wow

 

[Craig234]

Logically speaking the Democratic Party has no incentive to ever actually change any of its policies if voters actually bought into your narrative, because they could always simply point and go “but Republicans”.

Which is kind of what Republicans do, and they got trump.

 

[bullseyelqcs]

Except the outcome that the Democrats produced was the exact same one, so again, the idea that voting for them was “averting the greater evil” simply isn’t true.

The Democrats gave Bibi their blessing, as the ongoing weapons shipments make rather clear

Biden engaging in empty, hollow words while supporting Israel’s actions isn’t better.

Look, if you want to have the discussion about whether we should be giving aid to Israel at all, that is something COMPLETELY different. I would agree with you that we have allowed this shit to be going on for far too long....

That said.....this isn't new. Not by a long shot....but you are going to have a really hard time convincing anyone that you really care when you either didnt do anything to stop, or even worse, directly supported with your vote, a party that for 80 years has pledged absolute unwavering support for Israel and every decision they make and action they take.

Someone took exception to it being called a purity test earlier in the thread, but for lack of a better way to say it, that's what your stance is. You are saying that if a candidate doesn't come out and say every dime going to Israel is going to be stopped on day 1 of a presidency, they won't get your support. All that is going to lead to is either more of the same or even worse outcomes.

That's just dumb. Sometimes the Sophie's Choice is the only reality.

 

[Phys251]

The Biden Admin ignoring US law, undermining international law, defunding and banning humanitarian aid groups, and outright lying to facilitate a genocide is not because of AIPAC.

You think that AIPAC has nothing to do with Washington's approach to Israel? If so, I have the world's biggest bridge to sell you.

 

[Tigerace117]

Look, if you want to have the discussion about whether we should be giving aid to Israel at all, that is something COMPLETELY different. I would agree with you that we have allowed this shit to be going on for far too long....

That said.....this isn't new. Not by a long shot....but you are going to have a really hard time convincing anyone that you really care when you either didnt do anything to stop, or even worse, directly supported with your vote, a party that for 80 years has pledged absolute unwavering support for Israel and every decision they make and action they take.

Someone took exception to it being called a purity test earlier in the thread, but for lack of a better way to say it, that's what your stance is. You are saying that if a candidate doesn't come out and say every dime going to Israel is going to be stopped on day 1 of a presidency, they won't get your support. All that is going to lead to is either more of the same or even worse outcomes.

That's just dumb. Sometimes the Sophie's Choice is the only reality.

Voting for the Democrats wouldn’t do anything to stop the mass murder campaign, as I already pointed out. The Democrats were the ones to choose to enable it in the first place.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

the outcome that the Democrats produced

The outcome of 2024 was what Dems produced? As if the dems were somehow in control of the election? yer verbiage is grarbiage.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

Voting for the Democrats wouldn’t do anything to stop the mass murder campaign, as I already pointed out.

Yeah, the guy that can't say what would have "produced" a win for dems, is now going to say that Harris would not have done anything differently on Gaza.

Not even the Israelis thought that.

The Democrats were the ones to choose to enable it in the first place.

Wait what....this has been going on since 1948, the GOP has been far more supportive of Israel throughout its history than the Dems, even more so since the rise of evangelicals on the right.