this post was submitted on 06 Nov 2024
200 points (100.0% liked)

Politics

10176 readers
217 users here now

In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.


Guidelines for submissions:

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.


Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

[alt text: a screenshot of a tweet by @delaney_nolan, which says, "Biden/Harris saw this polling and decided to keep unconditionally arming Israel". Below the tweet is a screenshot from an article, which states: "In Pennsylvania, 34% of respondents said they would be more likely to vote for the Democratic nominee if the nominee vowed to withold weapons to Israel, compared to 7% who said they would be less likely. The rest said it would make no difference. In Arizona, 35% said they'd be more likely, while 5% would be less likely. And in Georgia, 39% said they'd be more likely, also compared to 5% who would be less likely."]

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TheAlbatross@lemmy.blahaj.zone 11 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Got a link to the quoted article, by chance?

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

I don't use Xitter so all I can see is the single tweet and it's just an image, no attribution.

Found an article but it doesn't link to the source either.

https://zeteo.com/p/poll-harris-democrats-gaza-ceasefire-arms-embargo

[–] theangriestbird@beehaw.org 8 points 2 weeks ago

There's this for methodology, at the end of the article:

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] nickwitha_k@lemmy.sdf.org 11 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Having trouble seeing those who (non-)voted for ending democracy, women's rights, and oppression of LGBTQ+ and non-christians as allies. Not enthusiastic about the candidate? I don't care. If they're going to do less harm, they're the only ethical choice. The basic numbers showed that one of two candidates would win. Ignoring that and the suffering that would be caused to vulnerable groups by one candidate for ideological purity is a hard thing to forgive.

[–] theangriestbird@beehaw.org 11 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Then get used to losing elections, I guess. You generally can't change a person's mind unless they already respect you.

[–] nickwitha_k@lemmy.sdf.org 12 points 2 weeks ago

And I can't respect those that are willing to selfishly sacrifice others for their own sense of moral purity, rather than pragmatically save as many as possible. Actions and choices speak louder than any philosophical statement and allowing fascism, all-out genocide of the Palestinian and Ukrainian peoples, and oppression of women and LGBTQ+ to win speaks loudly of one's character.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Sorry but is there a source for this poll? I’m curious how this data was collected? (And am always skeptical of data cited in a toot without a source).

Edit: Just saw it is said to be YouGov survey from June with a small sample size, although no link is provided.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›