Not an apples to apples comparison of primary elections and general election. Regardless that isn’t an argument against my point that an 11% undecided vote is hardly a “fairly significant public statement”. The point you’re addressing is if I said 11% hardly made a difference. Which I didn’t.
Sure I wish we had those votes, though I don’t think “the gaza protest vote” would have won the election for Kamala if it went the other way. Way too many other reasons she lost.
I also hope you don’t find yourself wishing you had those votes go to Kamala as well. Which is to say, I hope you don’t realize the leopard has eaten your face, because that would mean the incoming administration actually enacting policy that moves the needle in the direction of less violence in Gaza.
We’ll both find out the answer in the coming months if it was really worth it or not.
Moving past the joke of de-gendering a gendered colloquialism; yes I do agree with you on both of your points.
You’re not wrong. But if you want to 1) eliminate any chance of assumed gender in “Boss” due to cultural history, and 2) have a little fun with moving the mark into the absurd, you’d appreciate what I’m saying.
I don’t agree that 11% undecided in the primary is a “fairly significant public statement”, I mean, literally 11% is like, you know, small. Nor does a lack of policy change during the election cycle (which has a lot more factors than just Gaza to consider) immediately mean Kamala wouldn’t be open to changing tactics post election. But we’ll never know because, like I said, Trump won and now we get to find out if voting for him was net good or net bad for the Gaza cause.
But I can appreciate the emotional investment you have in “both sides-ing” this and ignoring the material differences between a narcissist that is already talking about lifting arms restrictions to Israel and Kamala.
Weather you agree with me or not is immaterial. On the issue of both parties being the same, you’re wrong. See how easy that is to say and it means nothing to an actual debate?
-Cheers
I didn’t ask which has the different policy now (ignoring my opinion about the truth of your assertion) but which is most likely to be responsive to public opinion; and I’d add, which one actually cares about the plight of others and which is an unofficially diagnosed narcissist.
But I’m fairly certain we won’t agree and sadly we’ll never know what Kamala coulda/woulda done. But with trump we’re about to Find Out. I hope we’re both wrong about him.
Exactly.
And the real irony is that of the two candidates, which one is most likely to respond to post-election pressure to adjust the policies?
Sure sure sure, Trump can be influenced by money and flattery, but the people that are going to pay and flatter him are not exactly the ones arguing to save the lives of innocent civilians.
So the irony remains, of the two candidates to choose from, the people complaining about what is happening in Gaza picked the one least likely to do anything helpful once elected (“do” as opposed to what they said to get elected).
Well like, that’s just your opinion man.
The problem is you didn’t just call out their shitty identity
Check the usernames. Someone that claims misandry as their identity,
you also tried to use it to negate their assertion
is just spreading it.
Or said another way, you made an ad hominem attack and I called you YOU out on it.
If that’s the role-play you need from your partner and she agrees to it and you reciprocate; then sure. But it isn’t society’s, or your co-workers’, job to do that.
man up boss up emotional-fortitude up, morer gender neutral.
That holds true from all genders to all genders, it isn’t a uniquely “man” thing.
No. That’s just what makes a good person. Pretty much the same with every other “Being a man means yadda yadda yadda” I’ve ever heard so far. Every time, what follows are a list of qualities that make a good person/human, and are neither exclusive to men, nor counterfactual for women. To think otherwise would be to imply that women don’t/can’t/shouldn’t possess those qualities (I’m not saying you thought otherwise Hadriscus; I’m just taking my thought to the next logical step).
I don’t have a satisfying answer for what “makes a man” because I reject the entire concept that there is any list of qualities of what makes a [gender]; or that one is even needed. The closest could be a pair of testicles (per Laser’s reply), but then we’d enter into a trans debate and frankly I support trans-rights.
Or to really sum it all up, the entire debate is just a bunch of gatekeeping and social identity politics (“man” and “woman” both) that really is just stupid and counterproductive to us all getting along.
It’s possible for two things to be true at the same time. A misandrist can say something that’s not misandry. And OP is not misandry.
Hmmm perhaps I wasn’t totally clear. I have never claimed Kamala ran a great campaign. Or that her and the Dems did a great job engaging a very vocal part of the party concerned with what’s happening in Gaza or the US’s policy in Gaza.
I have however been attempting to consistently argue that 1) they had a LOT of other constituencies to court so it was never as simple as “Gaza policy bad = lost election; Gaza policy good = win election”, 2) the general election protest vote (or abstention) is going to find out here fairly soon if their protest was worth it once Trump takes office and 3) That so far, Trumps rhetoric SINCE THE ELECTION, and his appointment choices are not giving great indications that he intends to do anything to stop the dying of innocents.
But we might just find out that the most recent developments concerning a cease fire agreement preempts us all Finding Out just what Trump might do in Gaza.