reuters.com
www.reuters.com

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.

  • enkers@sh.itjust.works
    0·
    1 month ago

    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.

    • Zaktor@sopuli.xyzEnglish
      0·
      1 month ago

      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.

      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.

      • enkers@sh.itjust.works
        0·
        1 month ago

        The problem in this is that you can substitute either the Harris campaign or the Muslim voters for “they”

        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.