The illusion of choice, whoever you vote for, Israel will always come first.
It’s shitty, but you will get one of them in power, and it’s encumbent on you to vote for the obvious lesser of two evils.
If you like the Greens (or whoever else’s) policies, work to fight for them the other 1,458 days of the election cycle - polling day is for buying a few more years of moribund US democracy - not for pissing away your vote and letting the fascists in.
I don’t vote for genociders and you shouldn’t either. Voting for genocide es makes you as evil as they are.
You keep telling people not to tell you who to vote for
Stop telling me who to vote for 😘
Of course I am going to keep telling people not to vote for a genocider. What is wrong with you?!
Your “freedom” to vote does not extent to be permitted to just ethnic cleanse millions of people.
I recognize your anger, I am also distraught about Palestine and I wish we had a candidate who was adamant about not giving more aid to Israel. I’m not saying you need to give up on your ideals nor am I telling you to shut up about it. But let’s be real here, as much as we hate it, we only have 2 choices in November, and one of them will cause much MUCH more damage to Palestinians, Americans, and quite possibly the entire globe if he gets elected. We CANNOT let Trump win, so again, as much as I don’t like many of Kamala’s stances, she is undeniably receiving my vote
One of them is also much less competent and intelligent, which means he’s more likely to fuck things up and cause a US/Israel loss.
Theoretically, sure, it’s possible. I think what’s more likely to happen if Trump fucks up is that Israel will just keep up the attack maybe with slightly less support. It’s not like they are a U.S. State that has to abide by a SCOTUS decision; they are (for good and bad) their own sovereign nation and
couldWOULD MOST LIKELY make the choice to continue their abhorrent actions, regardless of whatever Trump himself might do.The state of Israel is not a “puppet” of the U.S., only able to make a movement when given a command from the White House; it is closer to Frankenstein’s Monster, fully capable of making its own decisions, and sometimes they choose to do evil things (regardless of how ‘justified’ they tell themselves it is). It’s not a 1-to-1 comparison, but I think it’s a better way to understand the whole situation
An Israel with less support is one that is in more danger of inviting retaliation from its neighbors.
Of particular interest to me is Egypt, which only cooperates with Israel because of the US. e
True, but why not post a link to an article from a reputable source than just a low-effort image?
Removed by mod
There not even being vague about it.
“WE ENCOURAGE the U.S. government to enact specific policies that create a strong, enduring and mutually beneficial relationship with our ally Israel.”
How is that not foreign election interference?
At what point can we just call it and say the USA is an asset of Israel?
Israel does not own the US, the US allows AIPAC to exist to maintain its own interest among congresspeople (etc.). Only one of them is existentially dependent on their working together, and it’s not the US (though the US massively benefits).
The US and Israel are part of the same joint imperial project.
Do you think AIPAC can operate without permission?
Nah, Israel is just the 51st state. It is part of the USA by this point. It just wants preferential treatment.
We fund Israel so much more than any other state. Imagine if all that money went towards public infrastructure in the US instead
If ever a site begged to be hacked with pictures of war crimes…
Although it wouldn’t do shit for those demons
Wow. I guess we all just need to start a human rights company and then we’d be golden.
Absolutely hilarious to watch Americans bleat about Russian interference when this goes on completely in the open.
I can be mad about two things.
Sure, but one thing is a way bigger problem than the other. Meanwhile, the media ignores the elephant in the room.
Russia is much more dangerous to us than Israel is
lol
You can’t talk about that elephant without being called an “antisemite”.
Pretty much yeah.
Yup, and with good reason. Thanks “Citizen’s United!”
https://www.commondreams.org/news/progressives-lose-oregon-primaries
https://apnews.com/article/cori-bush-aipac-house-race-missouri-568c1a84974b8ba176a8d27a8375de42
I used to think lobby groups are influential in determining the outcome of these elections but I think the reality is they align themselves with candidates that are slated to more likely win. Sometimes they even fund both candidates. Money just doesn’t seem to translate to effective victory. Look at Bloomberg in 2016. That guy spent an ungodly amount of money on his campaign - - - more than all the candidates combined or something close.
Cory Bowman was already waning in popularity. From your article:
Bowman had several compounding low-level mistakes and scandals that could easily be hammered home to voters, like pulling the fire alarm at the Capitol or his controversial hip-hop lyrics. Beyond that, Latimer is a popular politician who has represented most of the district’s voters for years. Add in more money than any group has ever spent on a congressional primary by an enormous margin, and you have the conditions for a win.
I think it all depends. I’m not saying AIPAC is not influential. I just don’t think it’s so clear cut. I think the money in more to get access. The reality is Israel is popular with boomers, and Dem boomers vote. We are starting to see a shift with younger voters but it’s just not there yet.
I think the money in more to get access
Access to what and for what purpose?
Access to influence policy and legislation. But they seem to get mixed results. There have been a few studies that looked at the actual effects of lobbying. I may have to dig around but i can track them down. It’s very interesting because it upturned what my assumptions were about lobbying.
It seems they find candidates that are already somewhat aligned and work no push the scale further. Like, someone like Latimer wouldn’t need a lot to push the scale in favor of AIPAC objectives.
It’s very interesting to read up on this.
It certainly goes some way to explain why lobbyists buy politicians for pennies in the grand scheme of things, but ultimately you’re saying the same thing with a different inflection.
Sort of. It’s a mixed bag is what I’m saying. It’s just not as impactful as we all imagine it to be. Some politicians are very corrupt obviously. But it’s not this prevalent “corporations own congress” kinda thing.
Correct
