- cross-posted to:
- usa@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- usa@lemmy.ml
Summary
U.S. Muslim leaders who backed Trump to protest Biden’s support for Israel’s war in Gaza and Lebanon feel betrayed by Trump’s Cabinet picks.
Trump named staunch pro-Israel figures, including Marco Rubio as Secretary of State, Mike Huckabee as Israel ambassador, and Elise Stefanik as UN ambassador, sparking discontent.
Muslim voters hoped for peace-oriented leaders, but critics say the administration reflects “Zionist overdrive” and “neoconservative” priorities.
While some leaders feel “played,” others believe Trump’s peace promises remain valid despite concerns over his appointments. Trump’s campaign has not commented.
Sure seems weird that this level of glee over predictable bad things happening seem hyperfocused on the racial out group with the best reason to vote emotionally.
My dude my feed is literally just leopards eating faces right now. It will continue to be for the next four years. Trump’s presidency only benefits the worst of our society, it will just take some voters longer to feel the pain than others
In my feed this story has shown up multiple times (more than any other group), each with a cavalcade of engagement, and “haha, more genocide” statements show up on every story about Palestine. They’re the group with the best excuse for “well that was dumb, but I get it” (their families are literally being killed by American weapons), but despite being marginalized as small and unimportant for months are now being covered as the post facto cause of failure, without anyone even recognizing that this was being predicted by Democratic party members well in advance as the obvious result of just trying to ignore the genocide.
Well that certainly isn’t happening on Lemmy, so maybe you should stay out of such a toxic environment. It’s Twitter, isn’t it?
In the last day this story has been posted 4 times with heavy engagement on each post. And whenever every anything related to Israel and Gaza has a glib “told-ya-so”/“it’s going to be worse in January!” comment.
Can you please link to and quote one of two of the people you think are laughing about more genocide?
That’s what I did. Here’s two in easy form:
Topic: “Israeli drones shooting children in Gaza deliberately ‘day after day’, UK surgeon tells MPs”:
Topic: “Continuing ‘Ethnic Cleansing’ Campaign, Israel Blows Past US Deadline for Gaza Aid”
Current genocide happening, but let’s instead talk about how it’s somehow going to be worse in January because the real importance is the election.
Neither of those people are laughing about more genocide. In any way. You do know the difference between laughing about something and cynicism, right? Because those are both the latter.
“Hey, I hear an absolutely horrible and heartbreaking thing is happening, time to get in some election commentary” isn’t cynicism, it’s “told ya so”.
Where are they blamed for the failure of the campaign here, again?
The obvious result was that a not-insignificant part of the country is stupid enough to vote for ‘more genocide’ instead of less?
The whole premise of this being a news story, and a story that receives reliable engagement and gets injected into every story about Lebanon and Palestine is that these votes of these people have meaningfully caused the problems we’re all going to experience. A similar amount of ink is not being spread about any other group, and certainly not about all the mundane white assholes who have been voting for the people who harm their communities year after year.
And be honest, we’re looking at like 5% more genocide than Biden. We aren’t exactly going from Gandhi to Hitler on this issue. The Harris opportunity was always a secret hope that she was better than what she was willing to say. And like, a hope is better than none at all, but if she just followed what she said and didn’t change anything, none of us would be seriously asking ourselves how we could have missed the signs.
That’s a lot of reading in to a common post-election story of buyer’s remorse that’s all over the place, about multiple demographics, right now.
Lord.
Junkies’ll do some crazy shit for some o’ that sweet, sweet righteous indignation…
There are over a million Gazans still alive. That is a very large number of people barely hanging on from starvation that can still be mercilessly wiped out. You really sure about that 5% figure?
Biden literally isn’t stopping the starvation tactic now. There was a red line, they crossed it, and he said “nevermind”. So what exactly is going to be different under Trump? From another story, Trump is going to release the 2000 lb. bomb shipments. It’s literally the only thing Biden has denied them. I’d estimate 5% is the difference is between killing people with starvation, disease, and 500 lb. bombs and starvation, disease, and 2000 lb. bombs.
I hope I’m wrong, but I expect the difference being going from a small handful of aid trucks a day to zero aid trucks a day. That would be a big difference to the people of Gaza.
I’m more disturbed by the fact that they think that 5% figure is irrelevant. Even if they’re right, that’s 5% more innocent people. That’s literally thousands of people.
Let’s say that’s true. I don’t believe it’s true, but let’s say it is… that’s worse, right? Would you go to Palestine and tell people there “only 5% more of you will die now that Trump has been elected, so it’s about the same as before?”
What a crazy bit of hand waving away a huge problem of your own admission.
I’m not counting bodies, I’m saying the relative dedication to genocide is not significantly different in impact. The material difference from Biden is literally just the 2000 lb. bombs, with an unquantifiable and unreliable hope that Democrats would snap out of it and start doing better. Hope meant it was worth trying for, because a change could be a big deal, but very likely the real difference in death come January 20th is going to be minimal compared to the death that Biden has already overseen and allowed.
That’s literally counting bodies. Even if your 5% figure is right, that’s a difference in thousands of deaths.
Again, would you say such a thing to someone in Gaza? That thousands more dead than there would have been otherwise is not significantly different in impact? Would you say it to a parent who’s child was amongst those thousands?
It’s not a “right” figure, it’s an expression of small differences. Stop trying to do math and just read what I’m writing. 99 vs. 100, 99.9 vs. 100, really bad vs. slightly more bad, whatever expression you’d prefer. The difference in impact is limited because Biden has presented practically no restriction or resistance.
Then maybe they should have listened when they were told that this was the exact literal consequence of voting emotionally.
And people in the community were warning for months that this was the consequence of refusing to denounce genocide. But somehow you only want to blame the racial and religious out group who can’t even be credibly blamed for losing the election. You guys were claiming for months they weren’t important and should be ignored, and now that the election is over and the thing Democratic leaders were warning of happened, suddenly it’s all their fault?
I personally agreed with undecided in principle and was sympathetic that Harris largely ignored them. The problem is that trying to leverage their position for actual good policy outcomes made for this nasty prisoner’s dilemna situation where both parties chose the bad option.
I honestly thought that they’d eventually come around because of just how bad Trump was going to be for democracy, and moreover for the people they cared about. Sadly, they were so devoted to their game of chicken that some of their loved ones will pay for it.
I also don’t think it’s that callous to engage in a little bit of “I fucking told you so.”
Most people I saw here were just trying to achieve the most favourable outcome, given the reality at the time.
The problem in this is that you can substitute either the Harris campaign or the Muslim voters for “they”, and far too few people are applying it to the people with power. It seems inconceivable to these people that politicians actually need to address the concerns of the people they want to vote for them. They’re like some sort of unknowable force without agency or responsibility. It’s always the little guy’s fault for not coming around to the whims of the politician.
What makes it all worse is that on one side you have a population with good reason to be acting emotionally and the other you have someone just making a calculation that they just didn’t think they were worth it. Everyone shares blame for this result, but I get acting emotionally when you’re being ignored by power while they send weapons to kill your families. I don’t have any grace for sociopathic Democrats who would rather chase Republicans than take a moral stance for a constituency that voted for them in the past.
Lol! You’re absolutely right. From my point of view, though, the democratic party is so fully captured and out of touch with actual issues that they’re beyond being reasoned with, so it should almost go without saying who I’m referring to. And yes, I acknowledge how completely fucked that is.
They’ve created this absolutely monstrous situation where we always have to choose between letting people we care about get hurt, or a tiny glimmer of hope of something better, and even though I pushed to avoid the former, I’m fully sympathetic to both sides.
And they were told, repeatedly, that Trump would be worse. Guess what happens now?
Trump improved his margin across nearly every single demographic, so there’s plenty of blame to go around. But in a comment thread about Muslim voters feeling buyer’s remorse, I’m not going to talk about the white men who get fed shit from the manosphere podcast space, or the ghost of Phyllis Schlafly infecting women across this country to vote for the party that wants to take their rights away, or that when Trump was talking about Latino immigrants he was talking about them and not those other immigrants. It’s called “context.”
Nope, didn’t say that. I said that when your choice is token lip service about maybe stopping Palestinian genocide, and making the genocide worse, that you should vote for the former, because otherwise you’ll get the latter. Which is what happened. Congratulations, you told the Dems you weren’t going to vote for them, and now are surprised they ignored what you wanted.
This is such a completely broken and backward way to think about politics, but even so, the entire time representatives from that community (Democrats trying to get Harris elected) were trying to get them to do anything to head this off. At no point was there a “well, we’re just never going to vote for you so look elsewhere”, but that didn’t stop the campaign for prioritizing literal Republicans over previously Democratic constituencies with unsurprisingly bad results.
And I am a non-Muslim Harris voter, but this liberal tendency to blame minorities for the failures of existing power structures cannot be suppressed.
So they should’ve listened to Bill Clinton instead, why went to Dearborn and essentially said Israel can do whatever they want to their faces? There were no good options to vote for.
My dude, nobody said there was a good option. The choice was a bad option, and a much worse option. Bill Clinton doesn’t matter since he has nothing to do with the government. Harris at least paid lip-service to stopping Israel; Trump said he wants Bibi to “finish the job.”
And the kicker is, one of those two choices was going to win and if you don’t vote for the bad option, the much worse option wins by default.
Unfortunately, this whole election can be summed up as: everyone not named Trump voted against their best interests.
When it comes to this issue, you can’t really say that Trump is that much worse. Either way Gaza and the West Bank were heading to oblivion. Rhetoric aside, there is no evidence that Harris would have ever stood up to Israel in any meaningful way.
Oh my sweet summer child… It can always be worse.
I didn’t think Bill Clinton could run for a third term.
He was a campaign surrogate.
And he’s also a human being with his own opinions.
Maybe they should have listened to the woman running for president instead. I’m not sure why that idea didn’t occur to you.
If the campaign didn’t want Bill Clinton there, he wouldn’t have gone. This was their campaign strategy, along with hanging out with Cheney.
The Democrats ran an awful campaign again, and they need to stop blaming the voters for reacting negatively to this.
You asked who they should have listened to. I told you the person they should have listened to. The person actually running for office.
I have no idea why you think they should have not paid attention to what the person running for office said and just took for granted what her surrogate said agreed with what she said. That’s a pretty ignorant thing to do, not take a few moments to check and see what her actual beliefs on this are and if they’re being represented accurately.
So I guess we’ll put you down on the “pro-ignorance” list. I guess that’s why you seem to be okay with Trump winning.
https://x.com/DropSiteNews/status/1857620963522658570
It’s like they were trying to lose Michigan.