State Department official resigns after Biden administration says Israel not blocking Gaza aid
State Department official resigns after Biden administration says Israel not blocking Gaza aid
Stacy Gilbert resigned in protest against State Department report that says Israel isn't blocking aid to Gaza
A career State Department official resigned from her post on Tuesday, saying she could no longer work for the Biden administration after it released a report concluding that Israel was not preventing the flow of aid to Gaza.
Stacy Gilbert, who served as a senior civilian-military advisor to the State Department's Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration (PRM), sent an email to staff saying she was resigning because she felt the State Department had made the wrong assessment, The Washington Post reported, citing officials who read the note.
The report was filed in response to President Joe Biden issuing a national security memorandum (NSM-20) in early February on whether the administration finds credible Israel's assurances that its use of US weapons do not violate either American or international law.
The report said there were reasonable grounds to believe Israel on several occasions had used American-supplied weapons "inconsistent" with international humanitarian law, but said it could not make a definitive assessment - enough to prevent the suspension of arms transfers.
You're viewing a single thread.
Not the first, and won't be the last.
Article mentions 5 other State Department employees have left over Biden's support of a genocide while pretending it's not a genocide.
It's not to late to ditch him for a candidate that represents the values of dem voters. And regardless of who it is, they probably have a better chance of stopping trump.
Sunk cost fallacy is a terrible way to run a political party, but especially when the stakes are this high.
Even if we win and get four more years of this, it's not winning, it's just losing less. Which is why Biden's numbers are so bad, he doesn't inspire voters due to his words and actions.
No, Biden has the brand recognition and is the party's best chance to win. His administration does do a terrible job of selling the good things he is doing and he is shooting himself in the foot by not following through on his 'red line' with Rafah, but that isn't enough of a negative to outweigh the lnown factor.
It sucks that winning a first past the post election based on the electoral college is how it works instead of something like ranked choice, but that is where we are at.
Biden isn't going to win dude. He's losing, hard L style right now.
Its not an issue with fptp, its not strategic voting.
He's a shitty candidate that was always a comprise/ most-least preferred candidate and he's not going to win.
Continuing to make the arguments that we need to stick with Biden is basically arguing to give the election to Trump.
He’s a shitty candidate [who] was always a [compromise?]/ most-least preferred candidate and he’s not going to win.
Shitty compared to whom? To the leading republican? Are you high?
"Generic Democrat" polls 12 points higher than Biden.
You are leaving 12 points on the table with Biden. Interestingly, this is also the differential polling error associated with a Biden/ Trump head to head.
12 points is about the number Biden needs to be leading Trump to be 'confident' in victory. So quite literally "Any generic Democrat" is a less shitty candidate than Biden.
I've concluded and am pretty sure of my conclusions that in this context yes, people be high as FUCK
So what's your solution? Who has a better shot at winning the election in November if they started campaigning today? I want a specific name and why you think it would work. You know better than everyone, this should be easy for you (everyone else, watch for this sidestep and refusal to actually answer or back up anything).
You're really good at claiming (almost to a point of preference) that Biden will lose and why we shouldn't support them but not once have you provided anything of value that people can take action on. Everything you post appears to be designed to make people more apathetic and less likely to be involved, why is that?
Its not my job to give you a solution. I just need you to be real about the probability of failure of the strategy that you seem to be pot-committed to. And to be clear, we haven't had a convention yet, so there is still time to change.
I'm offering you an analysis that makes a conclusion, that based on current polling, Biden can't win this election. You might find it unpalatable, but that's not my problem. Hope is a false
But this isn't new news'. Biden has been struggling in this way for over a year, before Israel/ Gaza became hot. Biden's chances have gone from "rough" to "very unlikely". He's actively working to distance himself from the positions of his base. Instead of rejecting Trump's policy positions, he adopts them. Biden is catering to a non-existent center. It seems like he genuinely thinks that some republican voters are going to show up for him. There is 0 evidence from the previous three elections that any voters are convertible.
On the other side, maybe he gets laughed at, but Trump is going to the places that voters are and trying to get them (the sneaker thing, libertarian convention). Trump is trying to win this election. You win elections post 2016 by growing a base and driving them out to vote. It worked for Trump in 2016. It worked for Biden in 2020: Biden took on the most progressive platform in recent history to grow his base to include progressives.
Whats Biden's platform in 2024? I don't know about you but I have no fucking clue based on the campaigns messaging. Its all, just like you are parroting here, about how bad Trump is. And while you might find that convincing enough, there are obviously enough voters out there (about 12%) who don't and that you can't win the election without.
So I'm sorry. It hurts if he's your hucklebee, but the guy can't win right now. He's statistically lost at this point. If beating Trump really is your goal, then you need to come up with a better candidate. Continuing to push for Biden when he can't win dooms us all.
You keep saying Biden needs to be replaced but there's literally no candidate to replace him with that beats Trump. If you're so sure we need to ditch Biden, and you're not advocating for Trump to win, it seems pretty fair to ask what you think should happen. Until you do that it's pretty clear you're just spewing bullshit in bad faith.
Until you do that it’s pretty clear you’re just spewing bullshit in bad faith.
Sigh.. Just because some one is pointing out the flaws in your approach to electoralism doesn't mean they are acting in bad faith. Pretending that everyone who has a perspective you disagree with is out to get you is a poor way to go through life.
Recognizing that Biden can't win is step one. There really is no point in a discussion around alternatives until that point is accepted. We can't turn this ship until collectively, people understand that this guy isn't going to win the election. It has to show up in mass, in the polling, and in the collective conversation.
As far as determining an alternative, there is a straightforward mechanism for that. Its called a convention, and conveniently, there is already one scheduled. Supreme court decided post 2016 that Dem's can do whatever the fuck they want. So delegates go to the convention unaffiliated and we figure it out there.
It really doesn't matter who the nominee is, so long as its neither Biden or Hillary. Any generic Democratic governor or senator will do fine. Trump is deeply unpopular. The problem we're up against is that some how, Biden has managed his presidency in such a way as to be more unpopular than Trump.
And I'm telling you, there is no viable candidate you can nominate that has a better chance than Biden. "Generic Democrat" isn't a candidate. Who's polling better and is willing to run?
That's the kind of take that gets Trump into office in 2024.
So then what take should I have to prevent Trump from winning? Specifics. You know what works, tell us. So far I've got:
- Biden is bad and will lose
- ???
Why can't you defend anything you say? Why do you need to try and dodge questions and play rhetorical games? I have had 1 simple question this entire time and you won't answer it.
So then what take should I have to prevent Trump from winning? Specifics. You know what works, tell us. So far I’ve got:
You should first accept that based on all the information we have currently, Biden isn't viable as a candidate, and that by continuing to promote the position that Biden is the only option when they obviously aren't even an option at this point.
So step one: Stop gaslighting people.
People know when they are being lied to, and they especially know when they are being lied to by some one who has fully deluded themselves into thinking they know whats going on. Its what you are doing here with the false choice dichotomy you continuously try to draw.
Step two: Stop supporting a failed strategy.
Biden can be moved, and the DNC can and will swap him out if its obvious he can't win. We need to show that this candidate can't win now by audibly making it clear they don't have enough support to win the election. This means ceasing to engage in apologetic for Biden. Put your criticisms where they belong: at the feet of Joe Biden and the DNC. They are the ones failing to do the work necessary this election cycle and if you think they aren't listening, you are wrong. They are. They hear you here and elsewhere. You need to connect the strategy of "Blue-No-Matter-Who" to exactly why Biden is shaping up to lose this election whole cloth. Biden won 2020 because he had to come get progressive voters, black voters, youth voters. He did so through surrogates and through his platform. In 2020 Biden basically did a lift and shift of Bernies entire suite of platform issues. He needed to do so to get Bernies voters to come to him. By relinquishing your consent and getting nothing in return, you are setting Biden up for failure. Stop promoting this approach to voting. It does not work. It will lose us the election.
Step Three: If you seek alternatives, you should propose them.
You seem like clever folk. Why don't you come up with some alternatives to Biden you find acceptable and which you think could be palatable to a broader audience. Present them here. We can have a conversation about them.
We only entered the reformed primary system ~40 years ago. Its completely reasonable to expect that if Biden steps back as candidate, we can decide the entire thing at the convention. Its how the primaries have worked in this country for the majority of its history. Wilding et al. vs. DNC Services Corporation et al. 2017: The DNC’s choice of how to conduct its presidential nominating process is protected by the First Amendment, which means they can do what-ever the fuck they want to decide a candidate. They could hold a potato sack race if they so choose. There is no requirement that they regard their own charter in this manner.
You seem to want to have an option before recognizing that the strategy you are committed to can't win. That's a personal preference of yours. And so if that's your preference, you should propose some alternatives. I don't feel the need to have an alternative in place once I recognize that the strategy I've selected doesn't work. I personally recognize the importance of 'empty space' ; that if something can-not work, I recognize the importance of abandoning a failed approach as-soon-as-possible to create room for another option to exist. Its not about knowing what I'll do instead, its about creating the space for another option to exist.
To put it into metaphor, you are basically arguing that if I have an abusive boyfriend/ girlfriend/ partner, someone its just not going to work out with, I shouldn't break up with them before I know who my next partner will be.
See… this is the problem with discussing these things with people like you. You were asked a simple question as a rebuttal to your suggestion that people not vote for Biden, and you have no answer.
I’ve asked this same question to nearly every one of you that I’ve spoke with on the subject.
None of you can answer it.
spoiler
asdfasfasfasfas
Yep. Predictably unbelievable. They think we don’t know what they’re up to and keep sticking to the bit. They’re like… bad telemarketers.
Do you sniff your own farts often or just frequently?
spoiler
asdfasfasfasfas
She’s not running. Try again.
Lol
That you can’t understand implied meaning isn’t my fault. You came in here with the intent to disrupt by answering a question unrealistically.
You’re proving my point for me.
None of you have anything to offer yet want even to not vote for Biden.
No one is wondering why anymore.
Making a criticism doesn't require that I have a solution to the problem that's been set up by the insistence that Biden be the nominee. If that leaves you feeling incomplete, that's your issue.
Complaining about something while offering no solutions and expecting to be taken seriously is about as fucking stupid as not voting and expecting things to change.
You were asked a simple question, that for all the talk you people seem to do here- should be simple to answer…
But NONE of you can answer it. It’s litetally your shut down code. And I’m going to ensure that everyone knows it.
I just don't think your attempt to derail the primary thrust of my point is worth answering. I didn't comment about who else might run or how well they would be doing.
You are trying to engage in a red-herring fallacy, and the royal "we" (since you used the royal "you") are dutifully ignoring it.
There being or not being other viable candidates is irrelevant to Bidens chances at winning. Its a non-sequitur. If its important to you, you should come up with an answer to that question. I would be interested to hear what you come back with.
Nope. That might work on the high school kids you’re used to arguing with, but I’m holding you to the wheelhouse of the topic:
Your inability to answer a simple question. You can either answer it, or admit your entire argument is flawed.
You come here and ask people to not vote for Biden, without suggesting an alternative. So either you’re actively trying to get Trump elected, or you don’t know how elections work.
Either answer the question, or admit to one of the aforementioned.
Your choice.
The answer is Gretchen Whitmer
I just did. Gretchen Whitmer
spoiler
asdfasfasfasfas
Oh fuck off. I don't need to be a pilot to know a plane crash when I see one.
Gretchen Whitmer, plus she can win Michigan, which has been lost to the genocide.
ROFL! She’s not even running. My god man… you people really need representation. You’re al over the place. How on earth can you expect to be taken seriously when you answer a question about who can beat Trump in the 2024 election….
And your answer is someone that’s not even running?
Get someone to speak for you if you want to be taken seriously.
The question:
So what's your solution? Who has a better shot at winning the election in November if they started campaigning today?
I answered it. Now, you’re moving the goalposts and they have to be running? And you want me to take you seriously? Lol
You’re mistaken, I never once said “if they start campaigning today.”
And even if she started campaigning, she STILL doesn’t have a chance.
Oh really:
Whitmer insists she has no interest in replacing Biden on the ticket this fall, but experts say the governor could be a top pick for Democrats should the president still decide — or be forced — to bow out of the race.
Really. That was written in January, and it’s essentially an op-ed piece.
Come on man. Do better.
Why? I don’t need to. I answered MegaUltraChicken’s question.
Exactly this. Ask them every time. And none of them ever have an answer. They’re not here to support third party candidates- they’re here to sway votes away from Biden.
And suggesting people vote third party when it is well known that not one of them have a remote chance to win, is purposefully trying to give the election to Trump.
Apparently what the Libertarians elected as their candidate is good for the Democrats
LOL it's hilarious once you find out who and what.
Yeah, but if we do that, then in four years they won’t be able to say “trump” and get everyone on their knees
Article mentions 5 other State Department employees have left over Biden’s support of a genocide while pretending it’s not a genocide.
It'd be nice if we could have a presidency where no one from the State or Justice Departments quits in disgust during their term. The last time was what? The first Bush?
Who is this candidate? Pick one and start saying their name! Would Sanders take the nomination? Whoever it is, you'll need their cooperation at least, so find your duck and get it in the row.
I don't mean to yell at you, it is frustrating and humiliating for the average citizen, and it's going to get worse.
Losing less is still better than losing more and if we're too late we have to accept that and look beyond the vote to damage control in the coming years. Yes, asking each other to "hold your nose and vote" sucks, but we've got to pair it with the idea that protest and disobedience and local government action is going to be an important factor for years to come, no matter who is president.
and if we’re too late
That argument worked in 2016, it's been 8 years of trump...
If the party can't find a single better candidate, than maybe there should be different people leading it?
But pick any of the 49 senators that caucus with Dems (I'm not counting Manchin, he'd probably be just as hard to elect as Biden) and they'd all have a better shot.
Hell, AOC would get every single Dem vote that can't hold their nose for Biden. And while some "moderates" would campaign against her like they did Obama, as we saw back then increased turnout more than makes up for those conservatives who constantly claim compromise always means giving them exactly what they ask for Maybe less, but never more.
The main voter block this election will be under 40, we can't keep catering to boomers because our politicians are so old they can't realize their grandkids are now the biggest demographic.
We'll always be little kids to an 82 year old.
spoiler
asdfasfasfasfas
She turns 35 in October. She only has to be 35 before assuming the presidency.
It's strange that the founding fathers of the USA were mostly in their 20s at the time of the founding, but you can't be a POTUS until you're over 35(?) now.
They weren’t that young.
Biden is part of the old boys club where all the monied interests hang out. If you think AOC will get their support you're not thinking of the current USA. Politics in USA is owned by corporations and I haven't seen her back corps, why would they back her?
If you think AOC will get their support
Bernie showed us you don't need them if voters support you...
He ran a competitive race against Hillary and she had corporate donors and the full weight of the party. Hell, her campaign manager controlled DNC purse strings during the primary against Bernie.
Biden might have needed a billion last election. And he's projected to need 2 billion this year
But that's not how much it takes for a popular candidate to run a campaign, that's how much it costs to convince Americans Biden is better than trump and they should hold their nose and vote Biden even tho he's an 82 year old conservative genocide enthusiast who disagrees with most of his own party's platform.
You don't need corporate donations to convince Dem voters to vote for someone they agree with.
And the moderates tried to protest vote Republican against Obama for being "too progressive". Do you remember how that worked out?
Progressives are the future of the party, and this election most voters will be Millenials or younger.
It's cheaper if the people want what we're selling
I remember this, but Bernie failed to get his own party to support him as a candidate, is that not so?
Bernie is an independent, he caucuses with the Dems.
Pick 2016 or 2020.
But I've explained both already today, and I'm 90% sure it was in this comment chain...
So pick one or look at my post history for both.
It’s not to late to ditch him for a candidate that represents the values of dem voters. And regardless of who it is, they probably have a better chance of stopping trump.
I've been saying this for months. Years even. If you want Trump to lose, its not going to be with Biden.
If you want Trump to lose, its not going to be with Biden.
...again. Trump has already lost to Biden once in 2020. If anything Biden has a 100% track record of beating Trump in presidential elections. Trump has a 100% loss rate against Biden in Presidential elections.
Biden wasn't supporting a genocide of the Palestinian people in 2020.
Things are different for incumbents than they are for challengers, especially those without a recent track record.
In 2020, right now in terms of days till voting day, Biden had something like a 15 point lead on Trump.
Biden barely won going into election day with a massive lead.
Its 2024. Biden lags Trump by 3-6 points.
Its over. Biden loses. He can't make up that kind of polling deficit.
Biden wasn’t supporting a genocide of the Palestinian people in 2020.
Trump is also a supporter of Israel. Trump (and GOP lawmakers) actively criticized Biden for stopping delivery of weapons to Israel. So Trump comes out looking no better than Biden on Gaza.
Things are different for incumbents than they are for challengers, especially those without a recent track record.
Biden was in the Executive Branch for VP for 8 years and was in the US Senate for 36 years. Trump has 4 years as an twice impeached President.
Its over. Biden loses. He can’t make up that kind of polling deficit.
Thats funny, that's what people said in Hilary's favor, and then Trump won. So which is it?
Thats funny, that’s what people said in Hilary’s favor, and then Trump won. So which is it?
You might consider that those were the same people who have been telling you to not worry about/ apologizing for Biden.
The world isn't a monolith. There were plenty of people, myself included, saying in 2016 that Trump had a far better shot than they were being led to believe.
You might consider that those were the same people who have been telling you to not worry about/ apologizing for Biden.
No, they're the same people saying the polls conclude Trump is a shoe in that you are citing yourself.
Bro you don't know who I'm citing. I've been doing ground up analysis on polling data for years. Biden showed a 12 point polling deficit to Trump in 2020, and hasn't led (unweighted) in 15 months.
So...you're citing...yourself?
Biden showed a 12 point polling deficit to Trump in 2020, and hasn’t led (unweighted) in 15 months.
Didn't you yourself point out that polling data analysis lead to the incorrect conclusion in 2016?
you’re citing…yourself?
Yeah bruh that's how shit works. Here is a link:
https://lemmy.world/post/15291274?scrollToComments=true
You put analysis out publicly and people can engage with it. Polling isn't "wrong" it just has biases. It over samples some populations and under-samples others. Polling is only one approach to modeling political outcomes, but its generally pretty consistent. Trump was and is clearly an exception. But because we have the 2020 data, we can correct for some of these issues, especially because its consistent.
The best data we have is that in a Biden / Trump head to head, Biden needs to be +12 on Trump to be secure and overcome the spread he has been shown to demonstrate between polling values and performance. And its pretty good data, its a years worth of scientifically conducted polls and an actual election. In-terms of data sources, it doesn't get much better than this.
Here it is in map form:
https://lemmy.world/post/15294268?scrollToComments=true
Another way to think of this map would be "how much so does a given candidate outperform local polling".
And this is the big takeaway. Biden was CRUSHING it in the polls prior to November 2020, and like, squeaked out a W.
Even if you cut the polling differential in half (and we don't have evidence for that), Biden is still failing dramatically.
