this post was submitted on 07 Nov 2024
200 points (95.9% liked)

World News

39142 readers
2656 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Palestinians in the West Bank are largely pessimistic about Donald Trump’s re-election, viewing it as unlikely to significantly worsen their already dire situation, though some fear it could embolden Israeli actions.

Trump’s support for Israel’s far-right policies, including the potential dismantling of the UN agency Unrwa and backing of Israeli settlements, could deepen economic hardship and escalate violence against Palestinians.

While some Palestinians worry about increased oppression, others see a Trump presidency as a chance to expose brutal realities, possibly sparking stronger resistance.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 81 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (4 children)

But at least Democrats were taught a lesson right libs? Right??

.... Right?

[–] DudeImMacGyver@sh.itjust.works 12 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

The DNC and snatching defeat from the jaws of victory: Name a more iconic duo.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 56 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

The DNC didn't make anyone see a man who promised to be a dictator, who quoted Hitler, who said immigrants were poisoning the blood of our country, who promised 1500% tariffs, who chose Vance as a running mate and who shows very clear signs of significant cognitive decline and say, "I'm not going to stop that guy from getting into office."

There is not a single reason that an American voter can give me that would justify not voting for Harris and allowing this to happen.

I don't care how much you didn't like Harris. Trump is worse in every possible way.

But enjoy this gloating time now. You won't be gloating in four years when there's going to be a Putin-style election.

[–] jaggedrobotpubes@lemmy.world 17 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The is the correct energy, and exactly the correct thing to say. Thanks for saying it. Now I can type this shorter message instead!

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 11 points 2 weeks ago

You're welcome. The numbness is wearing off and the anger is setting in.

[–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 11 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

All very true.

I do think it's worth mentioning that the "lesser evil" politics that she ran on has never worked for anyone, not even once? She aligned herself with several popular conservatives positions (deportation, stronger border policy, continued financial and armaments support to Israel). But conservatives had no reason to vote for her over Trump. This swath of voters who wanted what she offered does not exist. The ones who want those things want other things too, things that Trump offers them.

So her best position was being the lesser of two evils, being better than Trump but still not a progressive candidate. That political angle failed the DNC in 2016, and it failed them again. This is entirely the failure of the DNC to be a progressive party. They chose neoliberal conservatism to the bitter end and threw us all under the bus with it.

The number of leftists and muslisms who didn't vote for Harris on principal is far lower than any amount that would have saved her. She resoundingly lost this election in every possible way. Blaming people who didn't vote for her on principal is ridiculously misunderstanding what happened here. The majority of America is okay with bigotry. The majority is fine with violence against women and minorities. Either that or they have constructed conspiracies that Trump hasn't actually said or done those things. Either way, they are unbothered by the things he has said and done.

[–] switchboard_pete@fedia.io 7 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

being angry at voters who didn't vote the way you wanted them to isn't going to actually achieve anything, though

harris didn't even win the popular vote. it wasn't even a particularly close election. you can't not blame the dnc after a defeat like this.

[–] JeffKerman1999@sopuli.xyz 16 points 2 weeks ago

I can and I will. If voters are ok with fascism, fuck them. And if women are ok with being considered objects to own, fuck them too. This "I didn't feel energised to go vote" bullshit is just bullshit to avoid take responsibility. You had a choice: fascism or not. You chose fascism.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 12 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

What do you think is achievable at this point? America is going to turn into a fascist dictatorship and lots of voters did not give enough of a shit to stop it.

You want to tell me being angry at voters achieves nothing? Neither does blaming the DNC. American democracy is over.

[–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I don't understand why you believe the DNC is deserving of some measure of protection from criticism.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I don't understand why you think that's what I believe. Criticize it all you want. It won't change a thing. The DNC is a non-factor from now on because there will be no more actual elections.

[–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 weeks ago

I think I better explained my response in my other comment.

[–] captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

What do you think the election of 2028 was going to look like after Kamala's term?

How many "possibly the last ever election"s were the Democrats planning to win in a row? There didn't seem to be any intention to back away from that precipice.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

What do you think the election of 2028 was going to look like after Kamala’s term?

I don't know. But I can tell you what it wouldn't look like: the last election in Russia.

It will now.

Enjoy.

[–] SkyNTP@lemmy.ml 8 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

In a democracy, the correct approach is to hold the majority accountable for their leader's actions, especially when the leader is doing exactly what they said they would do. Non voters are also complicit by standing by silently, so I'm not opposed to holding them accountable too.

[–] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

If you're voting on lunch and the choices are between an anchovy pizza and a shit sandwich, and your coworkers choose the shit sandwich, do you blame the people who told you to vote for the anchovy?

[–] switchboard_pete@fedia.io 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

if whoever suggested the anchovy pizza knew that most people there didn't like anchovies, and therefore wouldn't have a preference, allowing shit-sandwich to win, then yeah?

[–] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 weeks ago
[–] orclev@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

While everything you said is true the DNC is also equally to blame. For better or worse FPTP means we only have two parties, which means there's an onus on them to appeal to as many voters as they can (to do anything less is to guarantee their loss). The DNC for decades now has followed a policy of appealing not to the general public, but to a wealthy subset in order to maximize their own ~~bribes~~ campaign contributions. That has seen a steady rightward shift of their economic (and to a lesser extent social) policies. This rightward shift naturally alienates a large block of those that would otherwise support them. After all if you're a supporter of right wing policies you would already be a Republican, thus if you aren't it's because you're looking for left wing policies. Something the Democrats increasingly do not have.

There are three possible outcomes for each potential voter. You can vote Republican. You can vote Democrat. Or you can not vote (or vote 3rd party, the outcome is identical either way). Because voting isn't mandatory, the default state is not voting. Republicans have spent the last couple decades erecting roadblocks to voting, passing ID laws, closing polling places to increase lines, encouraging their followers to harass voters, purging voter rolls at the last minute, etc.

All that means that it takes actual effort to go out and vote. For an increasingly exhausted public, that is struggling just to survive day to day, that might have to take a precious day off from work to stand in an uncomfortable line for hours at a time while being menaced by unhinged MAGA, they need a strong encouragement to put up with all that.

From a purely logical standpoint the threat posed by Trump and MAGA should be sufficient motivation. But people are not always or even often logical. Republicans have spent decades fine tuning their propaganda. They've weaponized AM radio, and talking head "news" shows like Hannity, to convince their voters that Democrats are perpetually moments away from rounding them all up and having them executed. That's the reason Republicans always show up to vote, no matter how onerous the process becomes.

Democrats in contrast have been hesitant to call a spade a spade. They should have been blaring the threat posed by Trump from day one of his campaign in the most explicit language possible. Every opportunity should have been taken to replay highlights of every unhinged statement Trump made to highlight exactly how dangerous he was. Instead they use euphemisms, saying things like "extremists" rather than terrorists, or "Insurrection" instead of attempted coup.

Added to all of that is dissatisfaction with Democrats policies right when they needed to be doing everything they could to convince people that if they just got off their asses and voted things would significantly improve for them.

So yes, this is very much a failure of Democrats. The party failed not just themselves but the American public. Unfortunately now everyone pays the price for that, not just the apathetic voters that sat out, but even those of us that did the sane logical thing and voted for the lesser evil.

[–] sepi@piefed.social -2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

This is you: "look what the DNC MADE ME DO!"

[–] orclev@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

What? Vote for them? Be incredibly pissed they threw the election and now our democracy is fucked? Yeah.

[–] small44@lemmy.world -4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Even if all third party voters voted to Harris she would still lose. So the hell are you talking about? What I don't understand is how American can still vote to the same goddamn two parties

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Please quote where I mentioned third party voters. Because that was not the only way people let Trump win. Plenty of them didn't vote at all.

[–] WanderingVentra@lemm.ee 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

You can't just assume everyone who didn't vote is a leftist or did it for Palestine. That's kinda crazy, and you have no proof of that. You're just assuming that so you have an excuse to get mad at people who don't deserve it instead of your precious DNC. More realistically, they're just non-political people who don't do research, didn't care, and weren't charged enough to go vote by the Dems message and rhetoric, and did they probably have a short as hell memory because they weren't scared enough of Trump (maybe because he was a known quantity or something). Those people googling if Biden dropped out the night of the election or had no idea RFK dropped out? They're probably more like them.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world -3 points 2 weeks ago

Please stop putting words in my mouth.

[–] small44@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

You said that you can't understand how some people is not voting to Harris. So that include 3rd party voters

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

Please quote where I mentioned third party voters. Because that was not the only way people let Trump win. Plenty of them didn’t vote at all.

For fuck's sake, people are either putting words in my mouth or not reading what I write.

[–] maplebar@lemmy.world 12 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Ah the DNC, the classic boogieman of the geniuses who decide not to vote when a criminal who loves Hitler is running for office after already having tried overturning democracy once. Yes it's the DNC's fault you couldn't be bothered to lift a fucking pen against fascism.

[–] hemmes@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago

We’ll trade votes with non-swing state constituents!

Fucking morons

[–] chakan2@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago

If only Stein...or something like that.