Atleast you agree that these votes are important but you should also understand that republicans can get votes by committing “wars and genocides” but dems voters are not comfortable with these things. Dems should acknowledge the demands of their voters.
Harris is not in a position where she can do that until after the election. I’m not arguing that she will or won’t… only that she can’t right now regardless of her actual stance.
I’m not arguing that she will or won’t… only that she can’t right now regardless of her actual stance.
You’re not ‘arguing’ anything at all. You’re just declaring it to be the case with so much as a scrap of evidence offered.
All the evidence provided indicates a sizeable demographic of ex-Democrat voters who would readily vote Democrat again if they changed policy on arms sales.
No polling data from anywhere indicates that keeping arms sales is the key to the swing states.
All polling data that’s been provided indicates that banning arms sales is the key to the swing states.
So what is tying Harris’s hands exactly? Spell it out.
Just because you’re not following the argument nor participating in the conversation doesn’t mean I’m not making one.
Trump will be far worse for Gaza than Harris by every possible measure
For this reason, anyone who cares about Gaza must vote for Harris, no matter how repulsive they might find that choice to be
Harris must beat Trump
To do this Harris needs to take away voters from Trump
Harris coming out against Israel will give voters to Trump, not take them away from Trump
Harris must not come out against Israel before elected or she won’t get elected
Anyone who cares about Gaza and doesn’t vote for Harris doesn’t actually care about Gaza and are just attention seeking, trolling, and/or fucking stupid.
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.
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.
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.
Well a vice president can’t just change policy against the wishes of the president. Nor do they regularly deviate in public opinion. That’s not something that needs to be looked up.
As to weather she would actually do that, well, only the future knows that.
a vice president can’t just change policy against the wishes of the president. Nor do they regularly deviate in public opinion.
Apologies for my lack of clarity. I was using ‘Harris’ as shorthand for ‘the Harris campaign’. I mean to ask why they wouldn’t change policy… The campaign team.
Atleast you agree that these votes are important but you should also understand that republicans can get votes by committing “wars and genocides” but dems voters are not comfortable with these things. Dems should acknowledge the demands of their voters.
Harris is not in a position where she can do that until after the election. I’m not arguing that she will or won’t… only that she can’t right now regardless of her actual stance.
You’re not ‘arguing’ anything at all. You’re just declaring it to be the case with so much as a scrap of evidence offered.
All the evidence provided indicates a sizeable demographic of ex-Democrat voters who would readily vote Democrat again if they changed policy on arms sales.
No polling data from anywhere indicates that keeping arms sales is the key to the swing states.
All polling data that’s been provided indicates that banning arms sales is the key to the swing states.
So what is tying Harris’s hands exactly? Spell it out.
Just because you’re not following the argument nor participating in the conversation doesn’t mean I’m not making one.
Anyone who cares about Gaza and doesn’t vote for Harris doesn’t actually care about Gaza and are just attention seeking, trolling, and/or fucking stupid.
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.
Again. No evidence, and all the available evidence is to the contrary.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
No. Again, there’s no evidence from polling of a significant group who would do this.
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.
Well a vice president can’t just change policy against the wishes of the president. Nor do they regularly deviate in public opinion. That’s not something that needs to be looked up.
As to weather she would actually do that, well, only the future knows that.
Apologies for my lack of clarity. I was using ‘Harris’ as shorthand for ‘the Harris campaign’. I mean to ask why they wouldn’t change policy… The campaign team.