it's good to look in the mirror and understand the material outcomes of voter behavior
it's good to look in the mirror and understand the material outcomes of voter behavior
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/9cb468fe-ef90-4ea3-a97b-b6436a8be84e.webp?format=webp&thumbnail=128)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/9cb468fe-ef90-4ea3-a97b-b6436a8be84e.webp?format=webp)
I have problems with people who abstained. The hard thing is, how do you change voter behavior?
You're viewing part of a thread.
She didn't add as many republicans as Trump did. Trump want to put American boots on the ground in Gaza for the US to take control. How many Palestinians did Trump allow to speak?
If those are your concerns, you chose poorly.
3 3 ReplyNice deflecting from your rebutted "factually untrue"
To answer this new prompt, just because Trump supports genocide doesn't mean you needed to accept Kamala supporting genocide
3 3 ReplyI chose not to engage with your strawman. It was not a rebuttal. She tried to negotiate peace. That's a fact. Trump wants to remove all Palestinians from Gaza and take it for the US. That is a fact.
3 1 ReplyThere was no strawman. What did I say that was untrue?
Also
“True peace is not merely the absence of tension: it is the presence of justice.” ― Martin Luther King Jr.
edit
I decided to go ahead and provide sources
The only thing she wanted to change about bidens administration was to add more Republicans,
https://www.cnn.com/politics/harris-2024-campaign-biden/index.html
the same administration that was regularly sending arms to Israel.
Palestinians weren't allowed to speak at the dnc.
She had plenty of opportunities to show support for the Palestinian people, every time she supported Israel instead.
Can't really cite a source for this, I would actually need you to find an instance where she had an opportunity and didn't support Israel.
3 2 ReplyA strawman isn't untrue. It's just irrelevant to the argument.
1 0 Reply