It’s true not all liberals support this, but I’ve certainly seen a fair number hand-waving Biden’s vocal support of this genocidal state as if it’s no big deal.
It’s not that it’s “not a big deal.” It’s that he’s still the better of the two realistic possibilities. No Republican running for president will be harder on Israel than Biden is being (which is, admittedly, in no way hard), and they are all far worse on other metrics important to the left.
But that’s another hand-waving deflection. When can we discuss the deeply problematic words and actions of our current president without establishment liberals popping out of wells to tell us he’s not as bad as Republicans? He’s still doing and supporting some unacceptably fucked up shit.
We can do that once the threat of right wing extremism is not so imminent. We lashed out at Hillary and got Trump. Now women can’t get abortions without dying first. Corporations have their record profits and record tax breaks. We don’t want another four years of constant stress
You mean the threat that he has basically only delayed? That as a party, historically, the democrats have only ever delayed because their shitty centrist candidates do nothing to progress beyond; leading to an America that is on the brink of fascism?
You should probably retire that macro… it’s getting a little musty.
Then she positioned herself as the only solution. It’s funny when people say “OMG HILLARY WAS RIGHT” yeah, of course she could tell the outcome of a situation she was key in creating. She wanted that presidency and she was willing to promote fascists to get there. Vote for her or die. This is basically the only democrat strategy now. I’m going to keep voting for democrats anyway because our system has no real choice, but don’t use this situation to shield democrats from criticism, they deserve plenty of it.
I’m going to keep voting for democrats anyway because our system has no real choice
Yeah… people are quick to point out that Republicans can’t win elections without massive voter repression - but they never admit that Democrats can’t win without literally threatening everyone with the other side’s fascism, either.
It’s been that way ever since the Obama betrayal - and that’s not something corporate liberalism will ever deserve forgiveness for.
Then they turn around and point at those candidates to say “we must defeat fascism”. The problem is that some of these crazy candidates actually get elected (see trump, as I pointed out with the link I posted about clinton’s team helping him). Democrats would rather slide into fascism instead of moving to the left, which is why they’re funding these campaigns and then claiming they’re the only way to fight it.
It was that way during the 2004 Bush v. Kerry election and probably the 2000 Bush v. Gore election, too. (I don’t remember much about 2000 because I wasn’t really paying attention to politics yet.) And it probably goes back even further than that.
You know all of the rhetoric used against Trump? They were saying all of the same things about W. Bush.
Obama was very different… when Obama promised change people believed him. People don’t really talk about this… but I believe that Obama delivering nothing except more of the same was the last time people who voted Dem would ever trust corporate liberals ever again. There was a break there that the Dems can never fix, and deservedly so. It’s the reason why the Dem strategy to win elections now pretty much boils down to “vote for us or we hand you over to the fascists.”
It’s funny when people say “OMG HILLARY WAS RIGHT” yeah, of course she could tell the outcome of a situation she was key in creating.
That’s s stupid comment regardless of which candidate or election you’re taking about. “Hillary warned us about Trump!” Of course she did. She was running against Trump! She would’ve warned us about her opponent regardless of who it was. In fact, if she didn’t do that, she would be a shitty campaigner.
You know who else Hillary warned us about? Bernie Sanders!
We can do that once the threat of right wing extremism is not so imminent
Is exactly the kind of attitude that results in the kind of right wing democrats that gave the extreme right wing enough leeway to take over the GOP rather than be shunned by society like they were before the DNC and their media arm elevated Trump.
It’s coming from a place of privilege to think we can wait until then. It’s coming from a position in which you can stand back and look at everything through the lens of a campaign rather than being deeply hurt by his policies. People in the border camps need to be freed NOW. We need to give the land back NOW. Israel needs to stop committing genocide NOW.
I’m sorry if it causes you “constant stress” to think about this. I’m sure other people’s pain and suffering is so hard for you to bear, but we need to talk about this. We need to somehow stop Biden and his party from continuing to support and bolster these atrocities.
“My world view is defined by my limited personal experience” is the most right wing thing I’ve ever heard. If we’re going around judging a person’s entire life on single statements.
OK. I’ll be that vs. someone who excuses atrocoties like fascism and genocide. I’ll be that vs. someone who clothes their speech in tolerance while building camps and walls at the border.
Here’s another thing you do that really pushes people away: No one said a damn thing about voting Trump, or DeSantis, or anyone else.
In fact, I don’t think I even mentioned voting at all.
Who’s president right now? Let’s talk about him. We need to be able to demand he cease his genocidal actions without having people like you constantly deflecting criticism with this pointless whataboutism. It’s as pointless as it is exhausting.
You raise a good point, and just as a disclaimer I’m not American, but I feel like there’s space for a) voting and campaigning for the democratic candidate, while also b) decrying your poverty of choice in the matter.
But maybe the stakes are just so existential (clearly), that any disent has to take a backseat to just getting the less shitty party in power.
It’s all a sick game to them. It’s always about the polls and the next election. Sometimes I feel like they’re incapable of any actual genuine empathy.
It’s always about the polls and the next election.
Isn’t that what democracy is supposed to do? The elected leader should follow the will of the people. If the people are saying do X, the leader should do X despite his personal preference.
I’m referring to people who shield the current president from criticism of his genocidal practices by arguing that if we talk about these deeply disturbing things he’s supporting and doing, it will somehow hurt his chances in the next election. Literally no consideration or empathy for the people being harmed by his actions – just “well, he needs to win the next election.” Extremely deranged.
If the people are saying do X, the leader should do X despite his personal preference
No. If the people are calling for genocidal or colonial practices, then no. You are using the same logic people would use to defend the anti-trans and anti-POC laws my own state has passed. The majority here may support them, but this does not mean they are immune to criticism, nor should they be. It’s really anti-human and anti-progress to think otherwise.
Edit: I want people to really read this user’s comments to me right here. This right here is the brainrot that privileged liberals bring to the table. Absolutely appalling behavior by this person.
While you talk about from a distance in terms of political theory, we have people suffering under Biden’s leadership. It’s people like you who enable these atrocities. It’s all a sick game to you…
You have confused me with the majority of people. If the vast majority said do X, a leader in a democracy does X or will be voted out with someone who will do it.
Trump has promised to do worse to Muslims and Palestinians. A large percentage of the American population agrees with Trump and will therefore vote for him.
This doesn’t seem correct. Any criticism of a Democrat immediately elicits defensiveness and wild accusations of supporting Trump. I’m starting to think they’re incapable of actual empathy. Imagine defending something like ICE or Israel.
What total horse shit. Mark Zuckerberg’s safety is in no way conditioned on the existence of Israel.
But Biden isn’t a liberal (in conventional US usage anyway) and I doubt he’d describe himself as one. He’s an establishment centrist if there ever was one.
He’s a neoliberal Clintonite. He’s in the most right wing part of even that right wing form of liberalism, but still a neoliberal, which is the DNC default kind of liberalism and has been since 1992.
this is another meme using the European/PolSci definition of Liberals, meaning classic/neoliberal, as in ‘capitalists’. Definitely confusing and generally wrong in a modern US context.
Interesting. Most liberals I know already agree with that sentiment without having to be told.
It’s true not all liberals support this, but I’ve certainly seen a fair number hand-waving Biden’s vocal support of this genocidal state as if it’s no big deal.
Edit: “Fascism is good, actually.” -liberals
It’s not that it’s “not a big deal.” It’s that he’s still the better of the two realistic possibilities. No Republican running for president will be harder on Israel than Biden is being (which is, admittedly, in no way hard), and they are all far worse on other metrics important to the left.
But that’s another hand-waving deflection. When can we discuss the deeply problematic words and actions of our current president without establishment liberals popping out of wells to tell us he’s not as bad as Republicans? He’s still doing and supporting some unacceptably fucked up shit.
We can do that once the threat of right wing extremism is not so imminent. We lashed out at Hillary and got Trump. Now women can’t get abortions without dying first. Corporations have their record profits and record tax breaks. We don’t want another four years of constant stress
Lol. Do you really think that Trump became president because the Left critizized Clinton too much?
It surely didn’t help. At this point I don’t think people can be blamed for being spooked and leery of anything that might help Trump.
You mean the threat that he has basically only delayed? That as a party, historically, the democrats have only ever delayed because their shitty centrist candidates do nothing to progress beyond; leading to an America that is on the brink of fascism?
You should probably retire that macro… it’s getting a little musty.
The right wing extremism will always be imminent. It’s like a show that ends every episode on a cliffhanger to try to keep audiences watching. Hillary gave us Trump: https://www.salon.com/2016/11/09/the-hillary-clinton-campaign-intentionally-created-donald-trump-with-its-pied-piper-strategy/
Then she positioned herself as the only solution. It’s funny when people say “OMG HILLARY WAS RIGHT” yeah, of course she could tell the outcome of a situation she was key in creating. She wanted that presidency and she was willing to promote fascists to get there. Vote for her or die. This is basically the only democrat strategy now. I’m going to keep voting for democrats anyway because our system has no real choice, but don’t use this situation to shield democrats from criticism, they deserve plenty of it.
Yeah… people are quick to point out that Republicans can’t win elections without massive voter repression - but they never admit that Democrats can’t win without literally threatening everyone with the other side’s fascism, either.
It’s been that way ever since the Obama betrayal - and that’s not something corporate liberalism will ever deserve forgiveness for.
That’s some absurd reasoning. “pointing out how the GOP are literally acting like fascists is the stupid Democrats fault”.
Get the fuck out of here.
Democrats are not just pointing out that republicans are acting like fascists, democrats are actively funding and supporting fascists because they think of it as a valid strategy: https://www.npr.org/2022/06/20/1106256047/why-democrats-are-paying-for-ads-supporting-republican-primary-candidates
https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2022/07/democrats-spend-millions-on-republican-primaries
https://nypost.com/2022/09/12/democrats-spend-53m-to-boost-far-right-gop-candidates/
Then they turn around and point at those candidates to say “we must defeat fascism”. The problem is that some of these crazy candidates actually get elected (see trump, as I pointed out with the link I posted about clinton’s team helping him). Democrats would rather slide into fascism instead of moving to the left, which is why they’re funding these campaigns and then claiming they’re the only way to fight it.
Really? Tell me again who are the ones “reaching across the aisle” as soon as the voting is done, enlightened centrist understander?
No. I won’t.
It was that way during the 2004 Bush v. Kerry election and probably the 2000 Bush v. Gore election, too. (I don’t remember much about 2000 because I wasn’t really paying attention to politics yet.) And it probably goes back even further than that.
You know all of the rhetoric used against Trump? They were saying all of the same things about W. Bush.
Obama was very different… when Obama promised change people believed him. People don’t really talk about this… but I believe that Obama delivering nothing except more of the same was the last time people who voted Dem would ever trust corporate liberals ever again. There was a break there that the Dems can never fix, and deservedly so. It’s the reason why the Dem strategy to win elections now pretty much boils down to “vote for us or we hand you over to the fascists.”
This is all 100%.
Criticizing them doesn’t matter though. They’re still happy and rich if they lose.
The fight won’t be small jabs, it will be big and all at once
That’s s stupid comment regardless of which candidate or election you’re taking about. “Hillary warned us about Trump!” Of course she did. She was running against Trump! She would’ve warned us about her opponent regardless of who it was. In fact, if she didn’t do that, she would be a shitty campaigner.
You know who else Hillary warned us about? Bernie Sanders!
Is exactly the kind of attitude that results in the kind of right wing democrats that gave the extreme right wing enough leeway to take over the GOP rather than be shunned by society like they were before the DNC and their media arm elevated Trump.
It’s coming from a place of privilege to think we can wait until then. It’s coming from a position in which you can stand back and look at everything through the lens of a campaign rather than being deeply hurt by his policies. People in the border camps need to be freed NOW. We need to give the land back NOW. Israel needs to stop committing genocide NOW.
I’m sorry if it causes you “constant stress” to think about this. I’m sure other people’s pain and suffering is so hard for you to bear, but we need to talk about this. We need to somehow stop Biden and his party from continuing to support and bolster these atrocities.
Wow you assume a LOT
Yep, and all based on experience with US liberals
“My world view is defined by my limited personal experience” is the most right wing thing I’ve ever heard. If we’re going around judging a person’s entire life on single statements.
You are badly confused in your vision of what’s possible.
OK. I’ll be that vs. someone who excuses atrocoties like fascism and genocide. I’ll be that vs. someone who clothes their speech in tolerance while building camps and walls at the border.
That’s still much better than what you are.
And voting for Trump or DeSantis or Halley is going to do what, exactly, to help?
Here’s another thing you do that really pushes people away: No one said a damn thing about voting Trump, or DeSantis, or anyone else.
In fact, I don’t think I even mentioned voting at all.
Who’s president right now? Let’s talk about him. We need to be able to demand he cease his genocidal actions without having people like you constantly deflecting criticism with this pointless whataboutism. It’s as pointless as it is exhausting.
You raise a good point, and just as a disclaimer I’m not American, but I feel like there’s space for a) voting and campaigning for the democratic candidate, while also b) decrying your poverty of choice in the matter.
But maybe the stakes are just so existential (clearly), that any disent has to take a backseat to just getting the less shitty party in power.
Eat a bag of dicks. I’m not going to shut up about genocide because you’re afraid of losing an election.
Lol, Biden himself has admired that there are 50 other democrats that could also beat trump.
So try again there, bub.
At least 40 of which would probably be more likely to than himself.
Yup.
I remember Democrats telling me that the strategy was to elect Biden and then “hold his feet to the fire”. When did that happen?
Liberals: “Jeez this genocide is detestable for what it’s doing to Biden’s polling.”
It’s all a sick game to them. It’s always about the polls and the next election. Sometimes I feel like they’re incapable of any actual genuine empathy.
Isn’t that what democracy is supposed to do? The elected leader should follow the will of the people. If the people are saying do X, the leader should do X despite his personal preference.
I’m referring to people who shield the current president from criticism of his genocidal practices by arguing that if we talk about these deeply disturbing things he’s supporting and doing, it will somehow hurt his chances in the next election. Literally no consideration or empathy for the people being harmed by his actions – just “well, he needs to win the next election.” Extremely deranged.
No. If the people are calling for genocidal or colonial practices, then no. You are using the same logic people would use to defend the anti-trans and anti-POC laws my own state has passed. The majority here may support them, but this does not mean they are immune to criticism, nor should they be. It’s really anti-human and anti-progress to think otherwise.
Edit: I want people to really read this user’s comments to me right here. This right here is the brainrot that privileged liberals bring to the table. Absolutely appalling behavior by this person.
Also, imagine thinking the only choices are tyranny of the majority or authoritarianism. Brain. Rot.
A just dictator is the best government. But that’s not democracy. Many people are bad. We can only hope that a majority are good.
While you talk about from a distance in terms of political theory, we have people suffering under Biden’s leadership. It’s people like you who enable these atrocities. It’s all a sick game to you…
You have confused me with the majority of people. If the vast majority said do X, a leader in a democracy does X or will be voted out with someone who will do it.
Trump has promised to do worse to Muslims and Palestinians. A large percentage of the American population agrees with Trump and will therefore vote for him.
Yeah, no ones doing that. Maybe some fringe morons but liberals don’t worship their elected leaders
This doesn’t seem correct. Any criticism of a Democrat immediately elicits defensiveness and wild accusations of supporting Trump. I’m starting to think they’re incapable of actual empathy. Imagine defending something like ICE or Israel.
Got a link? I’d love to call that Democrat a dumbass
I think a lot of people are just frustrated by the religious extremism which drives the conflict.
Yet the guy who says this shit is the liberal choice for president: “Folks, were there no Israel, there wouldn’t be a Jew in the world that was safe.”
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/biden-alludes-disagreements-with-israels-netanyahu-2023-12-12/
What total horse shit. Mark Zuckerberg’s safety is in no way conditioned on the existence of Israel.
But Biden isn’t a liberal (in conventional US usage anyway) and I doubt he’d describe himself as one. He’s an establishment centrist if there ever was one.
He’s a neoliberal Clintonite. He’s in the most right wing part of even that right wing form of liberalism, but still a neoliberal, which is the DNC default kind of liberalism and has been since 1992.
this is another meme using the European/PolSci definition of Liberals, meaning classic/neoliberal, as in ‘capitalists’. Definitely confusing and generally wrong in a modern US context.
In most sane countries Liberals include the US Republican party
Source: My rectum
Your rectum seems to have a grasp of what liberalism means, which makes sense since it sees shit all the time