• @Ephoron@lemmy.kde.social
    link
    fedilink
    -1
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    To do this Harris needs to take away voters from Trump

    You’ve provided no evidence at all for this, and all the available evidence demonstrates the contrary.

    Just declaring things to be the case isn’t an argument. You have to bring evidence to bear.

    Harris coming out against Israel will give voters to Trump, not take them away from Trump

    Again. No evidence, and all the available evidence is to the contrary.

    Harris must not come out against Israel before elected or she won’t get elected

    Again, all the evidence given shows the opposite.

    The vast majority of Democrat voters and a smaller group of Republican voters want to stop arms sale to Israel.

    A huge proportion of key voters in swing states want to stop arms sales to Israel.

    Voters angry at the Democrats for not stopping arms sales to Israel are actively saying they will abstain or vote Trump.

    No group, poll, or campaign has come out to claim they’ll vote Trump if the Democrats stop arms sales to Israel.

    All this evidence supports the view that stopping arms sales to Israel will gain Democrats a massive number of additional votes, some of which will be from otherwise Trump voters.

    You’ve provided no evidence to the contrary.

    • @echo
      link
      21 month ago

      To do this Harris needs to take away voters from Trump You’ve provided no evidence at all for this, and all the available evidence demonstrates the contrary.

      Perhaps you don’t understand how elections work? In this case, either Harris or Trump is going to win. That will be based on which one gets the most votes. Every vote cast that is not for Harris automatically helps Trump. There is really nothing to debate here.

      Voters angry at the Democrats for not stopping arms sales to Israel are actively saying they will abstain or vote Trump.

      And that makes them fucking stupid because they’d rather put in someone who will definitely destroy Gaza than someone who might not help Gaza as much as they’d like.

      No group, poll, or campaign has come out to claim they’ll vote Trump Because there doesn’t need to be a poll to say this. It’s blindingly obvious.

      Trump’s voters want Gaza gone. They would be perfectly fine with just dropping a nuke on them an calling it a day. For Harris to come out now to support Gaza over Israel would mean two things. Those who might have been leaning away from Trump for other reasons will have cause to go ahead and vote for him. Harris will lose votes from those who support Israel. Believe it or not, there are plenty of Democrats who also wouldn’t mind if Gaza would just go ahead and die, already. You will have religious zealots who might have otherwise voted for Harris instead vote for Trump.

      • @Ephoron@lemmy.kde.social
        link
        fedilink
        01 month ago

        So just doubling down on blind assertions? The lack of intellectual integrity is astounding.

        To win, Harris does not need to take votes from Trump. She can win by taking votes from Independents and currently non-voters.

        The evidence is that this group would vote for her if she changed policy on arms sales to Israel.

        There is no evidence of a similar sized group of currently committed Democrats who would not vote for her if she changed policy on arms sales to Israel.

        As such, there is no evidence for your claim that she needs to keep this policy to win and what evidence there is suggests the opposite.

        That’s how evidence works, your theory is supposed to respond to it.

        Trump’s voters want Gaza gone

        No they don’t. The polls suggest they are about 50/50 on the matter. Again, evidence helps us here rather than just spewing whatever we reckon.

        For Harris to come out now to support Gaza over Israel would mean two things. Those who might have been leaning away from Trump for other reasons will have cause to go ahead and vote for him.

        No. Again, there’s no evidence from polling of a significant group who would do this.

        Harris will lose votes from those who support Israel. Believe it or not, there are plenty of Democrats who also wouldn’t mind if Gaza would just go ahead and die, already

        No. Again the actual evidence shows over 60% of Democrats want arms sales to Israel banned, and only a tiny percentage actually want them maintained (the rest undecided). The figures are even higher in Michigan, as an example of a key swing state.

        • @echo
          link
          21 month ago

          The evidence is that this group would vote for her if she changed policy on arms sales to Israel.

          The evidence is that if they don’t vote for her then they’re going to get Trump who will absolutely destroy Gaza (and the U.S.) If they don’t vote for her or don’t vote at all then they are fucking morons. They will take their moral convictions to their graves.

          • @Ephoron@lemmy.kde.social
            link
            fedilink
            01 month ago

            The evidence is that if they don’t vote for her then they’re going to get Trump

            Yes. That’s right. And it’s entirely Harris’s fault. No one else’s. She could change policy and earn their vote. She doesn’t, and so hands the election to Trump.

            Yet you’re such a sycophant that instead of outrage at her, you’re outraged at the voters whom you think somehow owe her a vote. You’re outraged at the people practising democracy for not falling into line with the authoritarians trying to undermine it.

            Harris will win more votes than she will lose if she changes policy on arms sales to Israel. That is what the evidence shows - overwhelming support for such a policy among previously Democrat voters and abstainers in key states.

            Candidates changing policy to meet voter’s expectations is exactly how democracy functions, even flawed ones like the US normally vaguely track voter preferences.

            So if Harris changed policy she would not worsen her support, nor would she be doing anything other than her job.

            The fact that she isn’t will be the single fact responsible for a Trump win, if he wins. Nothing else. Every other person involved would have been acting accordingly, only the Harris team are out of line.

            They are acting undemocratically, and probably illegally, backing a genocide. And you’re defending them, and attacking the people supporting democracy and peace…

            • @echo
              link
              11 month ago
              The evidence is that if they don’t vote for her then they’re going to get Trump
              

              Yes. That’s right. And it’s entirely Harris’s fault. No one else’s. She could change policy and earn their vote. She doesn’t, and so hands the election to Trump.

              Oh fuck off with that… They’d rather vote for the fascist who has outright said he’d destroy Hamas? That’s on them for being stupid fucking morons. Don’t blame Harris for their stupidity.

              At the general election for POTUS is the wrong fucking time to plant your stake in the ground. Anyone who wants a different candidate in 2028 that supports their views needed to get really involved in 2020, at the latest. The next best time to do that is right now for 2028. I’m not defending Harris. I’m saying the people you’re talking about are fucking morons and need to suddenly get smart.

              • @Ephoron@lemmy.kde.social
                link
                fedilink
                11 month ago

                Anyone who wants a different candidate in 2028 that supports their views needed to get really involved in 2020, at the latest.

                They did.

                Again, your blind faith that the system will work if only the people just tried harder is sycophantic at best, if not downright insulting.

                And besides, you’re the one imploring them to just vote without any regard to policy, so what exactly is “getting involved”?

                Why would the Democrats listen to anything anyone says if they’re guaranteed your vote come election day anyway?

                • @echo
                  link
                  01 month ago

                  And besides, you’re the one imploring them to just vote without any regard to policy, so what exactly is “getting involved”?

                  No, I’m saying that at this point in time that the next POTUS is either going to be Harris or Trump. Which of those two do you want it to be? Vote accordingly.

                  • @Ephoron@lemmy.kde.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    1
                    edit-2
                    1 month ago

                    That’s the same thing.

                    Your claim is that, come election time, we should always vote for the least worst party which has a chance of getting in. That’s always the Democrats and always will be if we follow your system.

                    So the corollary of your system is that one party runs America for ever.

                    So why bother with elections at all?

              • @Ephoron@lemmy.kde.social
                link
                fedilink
                -11 month ago

                And let’s be clear here what you’re advocating.

                In the case that the Republicans are worse than the Democrats, people should vote Democrat and no other party.

                The Republicans will always be worse than the Democrats.

                Therefore, people should always vote Democrat in all cases and no other party.

                That’s exactly the Chinese totalitarian system. One party which you must vote for regardless of what you think of their policies.

                • @echo
                  link
                  11 month ago

                  I’m saying that Harris or Trump will be the next POTUS and all you can do right now is express your preference on which one you want it to be.

                  If you’re driving down the road and you come to a situation where you can either run over a person or hit a telephone pole then you have to decide what to do. You can gripe and moan about your situation and how you don’t want to either one, but that doesn’t change the reality. If you choose to not make a choice then the choice will be made for you and you’ll have to live with the consequences.

                  • @Ephoron@lemmy.kde.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    0
                    edit-2
                    1 month ago

                    you’ll have to live with the consequences.

                    That’s true of all decisions. You’re advocating a single party autocracy. One whose opening policy is to support genocide. You’ll have to live with the consequences of that decision too.