That’s kinda the point. It says something about your principles when you just kind of ignore that your guy is just as bad as Trump on any issue.
Dems have a primary candidate who would oppose Israeli genocide: Marianne Williamson. Her stated principles fall far more in line with what Democrats claim to support, but she’s gotten zero delegates in the primary, whereas Genocide Joe is already the presumptive nominee.
Yes, but she’s not going to be part of this election, for all sorts of reasons both cultural (misogyny, Democratic fear-based-voting pushing people to only unify behind the Party candidate even when they can’t win, her anti-doctor statements [1], etc), and structural ones like primary and debate rules being set by the Party to favor its candidates.
Check my post history if you think I’m pro-Biden; I am most assuredly not.
[1] she has insisted she is anti- pharma-industry, which is totally correct to be, but many of her statements are not actually attacking just pharma companies, but doctors for prescribing things like antidepressants. It’s one thing to question the influence of pharma in medical decisions, but attacking whole classes of treatments is the same as attacking the doctors doing them, and she’s not qualified to be making those kind of statements based on her personal experience with depression.
I mean, you can argue for irrelevance, but it doesn’t change the fact that 49% of the voters are likely to look at Genocide Joe, who is facilitating Israeli pogroms, and lie to themselves about the kind of people they are in order to vote for him.
That’s kinda the point. It says something about your principles when you just kind of ignore that your guy is just as bad as Trump on any issue.
Dems have a primary candidate who would oppose Israeli genocide: Marianne Williamson. Her stated principles fall far more in line with what Democrats claim to support, but she’s gotten zero delegates in the primary, whereas Genocide Joe is already the presumptive nominee.
Yes, but she’s not going to be part of this election, for all sorts of reasons both cultural (misogyny, Democratic fear-based-voting pushing people to only unify behind the Party candidate even when they can’t win, her anti-doctor statements [1], etc), and structural ones like primary and debate rules being set by the Party to favor its candidates.
Check my post history if you think I’m pro-Biden; I am most assuredly not.
[1] she has insisted she is anti- pharma-industry, which is totally correct to be, but many of her statements are not actually attacking just pharma companies, but doctors for prescribing things like antidepressants. It’s one thing to question the influence of pharma in medical decisions, but attacking whole classes of treatments is the same as attacking the doctors doing them, and she’s not qualified to be making those kind of statements based on her personal experience with depression.
I mean, you can argue for irrelevance, but it doesn’t change the fact that 49% of the voters are likely to look at Genocide Joe, who is facilitating Israeli pogroms, and lie to themselves about the kind of people they are in order to vote for him.