Making the best decision given two options is one of those adulting skills that one must learn.

AND WHY DO YOU NOT APPLY THAT TO DEMOCRATIC LEADERS WHO HAD THE CHOICE BETWEEN GENOCIDE AND NO GENOCIDE

Holy fuck, I have had enough of you pathetic morons who never ask basic fucking questions and never make basic fucking demands of people who hold and wield actual power and are the ones making the choices, you absolute fucking cretin. Every fucking thing you say applies just as much and moreso to those who actually run the fucking party and decide its policy. Fucking hell, do all the dumbest motherfuckers congregate on these threads just to repeat the same bullshit over and over with no critical thinking or introspection?

These stupid excuses and others have made is like not having enough money to cover all your bills so you spend the money on drugs and alcohol.

You don’t even make any fucking sense. You’re saying random shit that has no relation to anything.

It’s not cute that you choose escapism and I’m not the bad guy for calling you out.

Oh my fucking God, shut the fuck up. You aren’t doing anything lashing out at random people online because you’re mad you saw someone criticise Democratic leadership. In what world is engaging seriously with understanding the party, what it does, how it works, how its leadership makes decisions, what they do and what they don’t do, more “escapism” than wasting everyones fucking time litigating which random people you encounter online did or did not vote correctly and which demographics you can single out to blame for an election loss WHILST REFUSING TO ENGAGE IN ANY UNDERSTANDING OF THE LEADERSHIP AND ITS OWN DECISIONS IN THE POLICIES THEY ENACT AND THE CAMPAIGN THEY RAN TO WORK TO CONVINCE PEOPLE TO VOTE FOR THEM?

Your ass talking about escapism when you’re on a niche forum trying to litigate random nobodies about who they did or didn’t vote for because someone pointed out Democratic leadership had choices they made too, choices that you refuse to ask basic fucking questions about because it’s easier to comfort yourself in the idea that you’re a good citizen that did everything you could possibly do solely by putting a tick next to a Democrats name, to then spend your time trying to hold that above other random nobodies rather than think about difficult questions regarding how your political system and the party you support actually fucking operates and why it operates that way that might leave you with significantly less easy answers but a more serious understanding of the world.

Or, y’know, just shut the fuck up, baby brained dipshit.

There was absolutely zero chance that any politician with a chance of winning was going to side will Palestine. Full stop. The Harris campaign was the best option anyone had for any semblance of a peaceful resolution to this.

So there it is. You just get to declare genocide as inevitable to suggest other people shouldn’t or can’t care. It’s always the same fucking bullshit - you’re the noble Palestinian defender with their best interests at heart, whilst declaring them an acceptable target we should just not have to really care about or show any interest in. The typical Democrat approach of “I care about minorities only as far as I can throw them”.

Trump wants to speed run the genocide so he can build a resort.

And according to yourself, Democrats were going to genocide them anyway. So what’s with the faux concern? It was inevitable regardless. Anybody who cared just needed to suck it up and accept mass murder and expulsion of a people. Actually the Democrats lost because you cared too much.

As always, there’s a scapegoat to show the Democrats can never fail. They can only be failed. It was Bernie bros in 2016 that singularly caused the Democrats to lose. Now in 2024 it’s anybody who cared about Palestinians.

If Palestine was your single issue that caused you not to vote against fascism, you’re a moron and are complicit in the upcoming genocide in the US. Full stop.

Again, wild that dipshits like yourself don’t hold Democrats in power to account. Are the Democrats not morons for refusing to budge on genociding Palestinians? Are Democrats not complicit in their actions and their campaigning? Democrats signed on to the Laken Riley act. Fetterman spent months taunting people who cared about Palestinians and calling everyone who criticised Israel terrorist supporters and Hamas. Democrats ran ads saying they’re against trans people whilst also claiming to be defending and speaking for them. They ran anti-immigrant ads talking about immigrants stealing welfare. Kamala when asked about anti-trans laws answered “they should follow the law”.

Because look what happened. Did sticking it to the Harris campaign change anything for the better at all?

Did Democratic leadership sticking it to their base and their voters change anything for the better at all? Look what happened. They still lost even after caping for genocide!

People aren’t controlled by political leaders. Choosing not to support the only legitimate option that wasn’t fascism is a stupid way to stick it to the leaders.

Who said they were?

Yes, the democrats ran a bad campaign, but that’s a shit excuse to not fight against fascism.

And the democrats had the most means to do so, including as part of an election campaign they fucked.

People like you lack any concept of prioritization. If someone throws a molotov cocktail through your window, you don’t try to fix the window before putting out the fire. If you let the house burn down you can never fix the window.

People like you lack any concept of power and responsibility, or systems and systemic thinking. You’re right dude, it’s me, the only person in the world who could have stopped fascism in the US by voting for Democrats, despite the actual voting numbers severely outnumbering me, and despite the fact that the campaign wasn’t even (singularly) decided by people voting with regards to Palestine, and also despite me literally being in the UK and not having the legal or practical ability to vote in US elections, fucking numbnuts.

The only concept, and the only thing you seem to have the brain power for, is thinking exclusively in terms of individuals who you encounter online that you can shout at for criticising Democrats by suggesting it was their fault Democrats lost. Liberals right now are like someone who sees news of a horrific accident involving a lorry’s brakes malfunctioning, crashing into oncoming traffic, who then go about roaming the streets lashing out at random lorry drivers shouting “YOU DID THIS!!!” as the appropriate response. And if anyone says “people who are in charge of the vehicles should bear some responsibility for the functioning of the lorries” you lash out at the person who says that and claim it’s actually their fault now.

What drugs are you on?

Why is it so hard for you to hold people with power accountable for their own actions, as compared with incessantly lashing out at random voters online? Why are you liberals so head in the sand delusional that you refuse to engage with any insight or critique of the Demcoratic party, how it operates, and the decisions that leadership are clearly responsible for keep making?

I didn’t decide what Kamalas campaign message was. I didn’t decide how she spent the money. I didn’t decide that ethnically cleansing Palestinians was too important a position to sacrifice after their own base and literally people within the state department told them repeatedly it was bad policy and bad electorally. No one single person or voter who you decide to fixate on and lash out at online because you got mad at seeing criticism of Democrats meaningfully changed the outcome of the election themselves. How Democrats chose to campaign did.

I don’t know, ask the Democratic party if ushering in fascism was the solution to not wanting to move away from endorsing genocide. Ask the Democratic party if ushering in fascism was the solution to not wanting to run a campaign that might have put them at odds with the lobbyists who pay them, including Kamalas brother-in-law, Ubers chief legal counsel who helped run the campaign. Ask the Democratic party if ushering in fascism was worth moving right on immigration and trans rights only to lose anyway.

There’s also the idiot Arabic groups that helped get Trump in power by demonizing Harris then are all shocked Pikachu when Trump turned out to be exponentially worse.

“Demonising Harris” here is a shitty euphemism for “Democrats refused to stop supporting genocide then told any and all voters, but especially Arab voters who might have particularly cared, to fuck off”, with the shocked pikachu in practice being Democrats who are surprised when telling voters to fuck off over concerns about genocide did not help them turn out the vote to beat Trump.

Then being racist about those same minorities by blaming the election loss on “Arabic groups” after monstering them as saboteurs and belittling their concerns repeatedly.

Almost like anyone with 2 brain cells could have told you that’s both bad policy and bad campaign strategy.

In an Oct. 16 memo, the leading super PAC supporting Ms. Harris raised alarms about being outspent on television. The group, Future Forward, said in the memo, which was first reported by The Washington Post, that it would be “difficult for anyone” but the Harris team to close the gap because of the higher ad rates that super PACs pay.

It was hardly Future Forward’s only frustration. Another memo, issued days later, pointed out “very high-performing ads that have yet to get a big spend.” One ad, Future Forward said, had ranked in the “100th percentile” — meaning it was the most effective — yet it had virtually never been aired.

Campaign officials, meanwhile, were frustrated that Future Forward sat on so much of its money until the final weeks, forcing the campaign to spend more on the airwaves earlier.

Another Harris challenge: After raising $1 billion in less than three months, a bevy of consultants, allies and others were often angling for a cut, including the chairman of the Democratic Party in Philadelphia. In September, the Harris operation contributed almost $25 million to other party committees, in part to quiet those demands.

Some media allies of Ms. Harris were also paid. Areva Martin, who hosts a talk show, was paid $200,000 as a media consultant, and she went on a battleground-state tour in October.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/17/us/politics/harris-campaign-finances.html

Typical left-wing economic agenda items like “living wage,” “affordable housing,” “paid family leave,” or “union jobs” dropped out of Harris’s vocabulary in the weeks after Labor Day. Tracking the use of more neutral terms relating to the economy — like “wages,” “jobs,” and “workers” — we see a trend line that slopes upward into early September before declining over the following weeks. By October, Harris was spending less of her time campaigning with Shawn Fain and Bernie Sanders than she was with Republican Liz Cheney and billionaire Mark Cuban, unlikely candidates to push any kind of progressive economic message, let alone a populist one. Cuban was gleeful enough to declare that the “progressive principles . . . of the Democratic Party . . . are gone. It’s Kamala Harris’s party now.”

This pivot wasn’t merely rhetorical: donors, consultants, and business-connected campaign staff pushed Harris to “clarify” or de-emphasize previous statements indicating support for a slate of popular policies on price controls; capital gains, corporate, and wealth taxes; and a host of other issues. Harris’s vague suggestions that she would engage in price controls to bring down inflation were watered down into a policy that already exists in most states that prevents businesses from profiteering on natural disasters. Her gestures toward taxing the wealthy became a capital gains tax proposal of 28 percent, far lower than the Biden administration’s proposed 40 percent; and she never took a position on Biden’s proposal to tax unrealized capital gains. And as time went on, the candidate spoke less and less frequently about her watered-down price-gouging proposal or her commitment to taxing the rich.

https://jacobin.com/2024/11/harris-campaign-economic-populism-democracy/

While in Michigan, Clinton criticized Palestinian and Arab-Americans who oppose the Biden-Harris Administration’s support for Israel’s war on Gaza, which has killed at least that 43,000 Palestinians, most of them women and children, and rendered much of Gaza uninhabitable.

In a speech yesterday, Clinton argued that Israel was justified in not keeping “score” of civilian casualty counts in Gaza due to Hamas’ October 7th attack. He also claimed civilians have been killed because they were used as human shields despite the fact the Israeli government has engaged in what even President Biden admitted was “indiscriminate” bombing, destroying mosques, churches, schools, hospitals, and refugee camps.

He also justified Biden administration’s support for the Israeli government’s genocide in Gaza by arguing that Israelis had lived near Gaza since “before [Islam] existed,” citing King David and referring to the Holy Land as “Judea and Samaria,” a term used by far-right Israelis who oppose a Palestinian state. Clinton stated that President Biden was fulfilling his “duty” to Israel by providing unconditional military support.

https://www.cair.com/press_releases/cair-condemns-bill-clintons-insulting-and-islamophobic-justification-of-gaza-genocide/

“Arabic groups” didn’t decide the Democratic parties campaign message. “Arabic groups” didn’t decide where Democrats spent their campaign money. “Arabic groups” didn’t ask for Bill Clinton to lecture them about Judea and Samaria and how it belongs to Israel, nor did “Arabic groups” emphasise running an entire slate of Republicans at the DNC, whilst refusing just one Palestinian American speaker that would have effectively endorsed Harris on behalf of the uncommitted movement on stage. “Arabic groups” didn’t tell Democrats to downplay their economic messaging for fear of upsetting lobbyists and rich donors feelings.