Over the past year, the Biden-Harris Administration has continued to take action to fight hatred and violence against Muslim and Arab communities. Members
All they have to do is pledge to follow the Leahy Law…
Israel won’t comply, which means we legally can’t provide arms. Kamala doesn’t even have to be “the bad guy”, she can just say she’s choosing to follow American law and if Israel wants arms then they can comply like every other recipient has to.
It’s really as easy as saying:
If elected I will not break American law to send arms to foreign countries.
She’d gain more than she’d lose, even before counting in the electoral college. Conditioning Israeli aid is supported by the majority of people of Democrats, Republicans and independents, and the people who don’t want it don’t care too much either way. Definitely not more than left wingers who want the genocide to stop. In terms of votes it’s a no brainer.
It’s a valid question and I’m sure the Harris campaign has spent considerable resources trying to get a good estimate of that number.
It’s pretty insane that the Democratic party officials have to say, “We’d love to stop funding a genocide but our members won’t vote for us if we do that.”
Any voters she would lose are far outweighed by the amount of voters she’d get. It’s about 5:1 from what the polls indicate, or about a +6 point gain. Quite significant considering how dead-locked the race is right now
Quote
Our first matchup tested a Democrat and a Republican who “both agree with Israel’s current approach to the conflict in Gaza”. In this case, the generic candidates tied 44–44. The second matchup saw the same Republican facing a Democrat supporting “an immediate ceasefire and a halt of military aid and arms sales to Israel”. Interestingly, the Democrat led 49–43, with Independents and 2020 non-voters driving the bulk of this shift.
In Pennsylvania, 34% of respondents said they would be more likely to vote for the Democratic nominee if the nominee vowed to withhold weapons to Israel, compared to 7% who said they would be less likely. The rest said it would make no difference. In Arizona, 35% said they’d be more likely, while 5% would be less likely. And in Georgia, 39% said they’d be more likely, also compared to 5% who would be less likely.
Majorities of Democrats (67%) and Independents (55%) believe the US should either end support for Israel’s war effort or make that support conditional on a ceasefire. Only 8% of Democrats but 42% of Republicans think the US must support Israel unconditionally.
Republicans and Independents most often point to immigration as one of Biden’s top foreign policy failures. Democrats most often select the US response to the war in Gaza.
Maybe their thought process is that D voters will vote for her either way and they’re trying to pull R voters who support Isreal? Otherwise, I don’t get it. The data here supports pulling support of Israel.
All they have to do is pledge to follow the Leahy Law…
Israel won’t comply, which means we legally can’t provide arms. Kamala doesn’t even have to be “the bad guy”, she can just say she’s choosing to follow American law and if Israel wants arms then they can comply like every other recipient has to.
It’s really as easy as saying:
Boom, election locked up.
How many voters would she lose if she declared intent to stop assisting Isreal?
She might possibly gain a few, but would she lose any?
Is not about voters, it’s about money. Both parties are bribed to keep it going.
She’d gain more than she’d lose, even before counting in the electoral college. Conditioning Israeli aid is supported by the majority of people of Democrats, Republicans and independents, and the people who don’t want it don’t care too much either way. Definitely not more than left wingers who want the genocide to stop. In terms of votes it’s a no brainer.
She would likely gain voters because she would be distinguishing herself from Biden who remains deeply unpopular.
It’s a valid question and I’m sure the Harris campaign has spent considerable resources trying to get a good estimate of that number.
It’s pretty insane that the Democratic party officials have to say, “We’d love to stop funding a genocide but our members won’t vote for us if we do that.”
This is THE potential problem with this
Yeah, I would hope there are more anti-genocide voters but i doubt it, honestly.
Yes. Enough to lose. These people don’t seem to understand this (or refuse to)
Any voters she would lose are far outweighed by the amount of voters she’d get. It’s about 5:1 from what the polls indicate, or about a +6 point gain. Quite significant considering how dead-locked the race is right now
Quote
Quotes
Quotes
Quotes
Quotes
Maybe their thought process is that D voters will vote for her either way and they’re trying to pull R voters who support Isreal? Otherwise, I don’t get it. The data here supports pulling support of Israel.
Removed by mod
You people really have a massively inflated concept of how many voting progressives that there are. Get off the internet for a while…
Harris would 100% lose the election if she said that.