The poll found 50% of Democrats approve of how Biden has navigated the conflict while 46% disapprove — and the two groups diverge substantially in their views of U.S. support for Israel. Biden’s support on the issue among Democrats is down slightly from August, as an AP-NORC poll conducted then found that 57% of Democrats approved of his handling of the conflict and 40% disapproved.

  • cabron_offsets@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    It’s Biden vs trump, and there’s zero chance I’m voting for a waste-of-carbon republican traitor. Now or at any time in the future. I don’t like our stance on Israel/Palestine, but that is immaterial to the choice I must make.

    • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      When voting between two parties that support genocide the only moral option is not to vote.

      Fuck the stupid lesser evil thing. You are choosing and supporting genocide the moment you vote for it

      • nonailsleft@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        If you’re voting in the US you’re living on and benefitting from land that was stolen by a full on genocide. Unless you’re voting for someone that wants to vacate the land and hand it back to the Native Americans, then you’re already voting to support genocide. So I wouldn’t really hold onto that argument to rationalize giving the bigger evil a better chance

        • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Self reporting Americans be like "we did genocide in the past, we should stick with it with pride. Keep bombing women and children and steal their land!"Fucking mask off moment right here.

          Shows how strong the moral backbone the west has always been. Whine about Putin for 3 year and then do the exact same thing without shame. Then put a little rainbow flag outside and cry about abortion rights. Then back bombing kids.

      • Roboticide@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        If you’re in the US, with a two party system, not voting for the less evil is actively enabling the greater evil.

        You think Trump or any GOP candidate wouldn’t do the same? Or worse? They’re certainly not going to do anything better than Biden.

        Voting on principles is for the Primaries. Try and get the best candidate possible that you actively believe in into the race. Election Day however is when it’s time to put your adult pants on, accept the world is messy, and vote for the least worse option possible, because otherwise you’re just abetting the worst option.

        • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          You guys are just trolley probleming but you can add a third rails that says “if enough people pull this lever nobody dies”.

    • kava@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      If it’s a choice between one geriatric who endorses genocide and another geriatric who endorses genocide, why should I be voting for either?

      I still haven’t decided but atm I’m leaning towards 3rd party

      This “lesser evil” thing is smoke and mirrors.

      • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Unfortunately when you have to pick between two lesser evils, even deciding not to choose is a lesser evil. Inaction can sometimes lead to the greatest evil.

        Refusing to make a decision doesn’t absolve you of culpability for the consequences.

        • kava@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          i didn’t say i’m not going to vote. i’m leaning towards 3rd party.

          if enough people voted 3rd party, we could break free from this quasi one-party state we have

          in the early 1900s we actually had a socialist/communist presidential candidate get over a million votes

          it’s possible if people stopped towing the democratic party line. they are not our friends. they will do the bare minimum necessary and oftentimes they won’t even do that, just promise to do it. i’ve been waiting for immigration reform my entire life. NADA is the total value of what has come out from Democrats beside’s Obama’s DACA which was a stopgap measure. we’ve had democratic majorities multiple times since then. how many times could they have put abortion into law? how many times could they have gotten in universal healthcare?

          it’s a joke. they don’t actually want to do anything. we have 1 party and 2 factions. business faction A and business faction B.

          and now Biden goes out and gives Netanyahu a big hug after Israel announced to the world they were about to slaughter tens of thousands of civilians?

          What world do you live in where this is OK? What kind of men does our country breed? It’s ridiculous

          • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            how many times could they have put abortion into law? how many times could they have gotten in universal healthcare?

            This right here tells me you haven’t been paying attention to the details. There are 0 times in modern history where this was possible. The closest was the first few months of Obama’s term, which is when they hammered out Obamacare. And it would’ve had a public option if not for needing Lieberman for the 60th Senate vote. It was removed in return for his vote.

            There were not 60 Democrat senators at the time willing to overturn the filibuster. Some of those senators were further right than Manchin. This is also why abortion couldn’t be signed into law – you didn’t have 60 senators in favor of abortion.

            That was the only time in modern history where Democrats had 60 Senate votes, and they used it to pass the furthest left healthcare policy possible at the time. And Democrats were eviscerated in the following midterms because it was seen as too far left.

            Aside from all that, there is no serious third party in the US. None of them are actually trying to win. It’s a grift, they just want your money. If they actually wanted to win, they wouldn’t spend so much on the presidency. They’d be building up a powerful ground game to win local across the country, and then take state legislatures and governorships, and then take Congressional seats, and finally the presidency. A president without any allies in Congress is powerless, and all the third parties try to do is win a presidency without any allies in Congress. And then you have their ridiculous beliefs, like WiFi causing cancer and vaccine skepticism.

            Third parties align much more closely with Republicans culturally. They trick voters so they can get money and power, they adopt feel-good phrases and policies they’ll never enact, and they give anti science conspiracy theorists a platform.

            • natarey@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              This reply sort of makes the point for the OP though – the American system appears to be broken at levels so fundamental that it’s not worth engaging with, much less saving. It’s amazing the evil that people are comfortable shrugging at.

              • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                You’re not wrong. Our government is inherently conservative in how difficult it is to change things. It’s a flaw by design, unfortunately. Still, as broken as it is, there’s people I still care about a lot. There’s a lot of good people worth fighting for. So even if it’s fundamentally broken, I’m going to keep maintaining hope that we can fix the fundamentals. If I’m lucky, maybe my grandkids will get the government that I wish we had.

                Not to mention, liberals in the past struggled against worse odds to get just basic dignity. Things must’ve seemed more hopeless for women’s suffragists and civil rights marchers. But through tenacity, they succeeded. Abolitionists succeeded, gay people succeeded – and then for some fucking reason Republicans decided to bring it back up again when it was seemingly settled. But LGBT rights will succeed once more.

                I guess being almost 30, talking about how things were when I was kid isn’t quite as impactful as it used to be, but still over my lifetime, a lot has changed with gay rights. In middle school, gay jokes were all insults and slurs. It was all “I love you dude, no homo”. Now though? Gay jokes are homoerotic insinuations that you and the guys are all banging. We say “I love you dude, full homo” to laugh at how ridiculous the “no homo” era was.

                Where I’m going with this, we’ve lived to see real progress. And it’s progress that was previously unimaginable and just a dream. Civil rights, voting rights, they all seemed like much more hopeless causes in the past. What we face now is no less serious, but certainly less difficult. And we owe it to our forbearers to keep carrying their torch.

  • givesomefucks@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s especially hurting him with the demographic he’s always struggled with:

    Majorities of Democrats younger than 45 (65%) and nonwhite Democrats (58%) say they disapprove of Biden’s handling of the conflict. Most Democrats 45 and older (67%) and white Democrats (62%) say they approve.

    "Knowing that our tax money could be paying for the weapons that are murdering children by the thousands over there, it’s getting harder to be supportive of our president and our country in general,” said Brie Williamson, a 34-year-old Illinois resident. Williamson said she “couldn’t see voting for a Republican” but would consider other options next year.

    And being forced to pick between this and trump will depress turnout, and depressed turnout is how Republicans become presidents.

    And I know Biden’s supporters will say “he’s still better than trump” and that’s true. But it doesn’t change the fact that this is a fucked up situation where voters do t have a say in this issue because the only two options for president both support this genocide.

    • fosiacat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      no. running shit candidates is how they lose. no one is entitled to someones vote or support.

      dnc wants to win? then look at what your base wants. their approach has always been “you take what we give you” and that resulted in donald fucking trump.

  • RedditReject@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I love how the headline sounds so negative, and yet looking at the Numbers they could have easily just said “more Democrats approve of his handling of the crisis”.

    • SkepticalButOpenMinded@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I mean, almost half the members of his own party disagree with him, not the nation as a whole. If this doesn’t go away, it is not good news.

      The old adage come to mind that, “The left fall in love, and the right fall in line.” The right will more reliably vote for “their guy”, but I’ve seen so many losses on the left because of disenchantment.

      • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s part of the problem, though: the left never fell in love with him. He got elected by a small margin in a few key states similar to that of Trump 2016 mainly due to not being Trump rather than any merit of his own.

        It might not work a second time since voters have ridiculously short memories and “not the other one” tactics are much less effective for incumbents.

    • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Or they could have been brutally honest and said “more than half of democrats approve of enabling genocide”.

      And before you say “but Trump and the Republicans are much worse”, yes that’s obviously true but that’s besides the point.

      • abraxas@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Or they could have been brutally honest and said “more than half of democrats approve of enabling genocide”.

        Actually, if they were being genuinely honest, it would be more like “more than half of democrats think Biden’s making the best choice in an all-round shitty situation”. None of us approve of enabling genocide.

        Some people actually think “pushing Israel to set rules of engagement” is some of the best we’re going to get if we can’t get the entire world on-board. Nobody wants to invade Israel to stop this (do they), and Israel is out for blood right now. Trying to focus them towards Hamas and not “destroying Palastine” might be the only win we can have 7,000 miles away.

        I’m a fence-sitter on this issue, but I think the majority that supports Biden’s plan do so for reasons that have nothing to do with “enabling genocide”.

        I get that you want us to condemn Israel. And I’m sure it’s been considered. I also undersetand there are ramifications to the US of doing that, and it won’t necessarily save a single Palestinian life.

        • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Actually, if they were being genuinely honest, it would be more like “more than half of democrats think Biden’s making the best choice in an all-round shitty situation”. None of us approve of enabling genocide.

          That’s a self-contradiction since what you guys think is the “best choice” is objectively enabling genocide by unquestioningly supporting the government committing it while punishing those that speak up against it.

          Some people actually think “pushing Israel to set rules of engagement” is some of the best we’re going to get

          It isn’t, though. Israel has been setting their own rules the whole time and that’s the majority of what caused the whole thing.

          Nobody wants to invade Israel

          Of course not.

          Israel is out for blood right now. Trying to focus them towards Hamas and not “destroying Palastine” might be the only win we can have 7,000 miles away.

          That’s not being done, though. Unless there’s consequences such as withholding military (but not humanitarian) aid and possibly targeted sanctions, the apartheid regime is going to continue committing atrocities.

          I think the majority that supports Biden’s plan do so for reasons that have nothing to do with “enabling genocide”.

          Yes and no: I believe that most of the people who supports his genocide-enabling are under- or misinformed enough to not know that they’re indirectly supporting genocide.

          I get that you want us to condemn Israel.

          Of course. Anything else is being complicit.

          And I’m sure it’s been considered.

          Probably not seriously, no. The neoliberal Dem leadership depend too much on bribes from AIPAC and others like them.

          I also undersetand there are ramifications to the US of doing that, and it won’t necessarily save a single Palestinian life

          I guarantee you that no longer getting the financial and political support of the US would force them to be less aggressive, which would save thousands of lives.

          • abraxas@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            That’s a self-contradiction since what you guys think is the “best choice” is objectively enabling genocide

            I think objectively doesn’t mean what you think it means. But more importantly, even if you’re right about there being a better response than Biden’s (and you might be; it’s a complicated issue), that doesn’t mean people who support Biden’s position agree that you’re right. Which means, NO, objectively, they do not “approve of enabling genocide”. Just look at literally the other reply to me that agreed with me at length. And if there are at least two people who support Biden’s decisions in this thread alone that do not “approve of enabling genocide”, then I bet you any money there’s at least 2 more out in the US. “Perhaps more than that!”

            I called you on your bad-faith accusation that Democratic voters “approve of enabling genocide”, and nothing in your reply to me reduces the accuracy of what I called you on. You’re just getting into the weeds arguing politics now.

            If you want, I’d be happy to join that conversation as well. As soon as you concede that the “approve of enabling genocide” thing was excessive and bad faith.

            • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              It’s a fact that the tack Biden is taking amounts to enabling genocide. Whether you know that or not, saying you approve of his handling of the situation is saying that you approve of enabling genocide no matter if you know it or not.

              In other words:

              1. Biden’s plan is objectively enabling genocide

              2. Some people who don’t consider themselves in favor of enabling genocide support Biden

              3. The thing that those people say they support is enabling genocide, no matter how ignorant of reality or in denial they are.

              • abraxas@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Curious who made Viking Hippie the sole arbiter of truth. How many experts disagreeing with you makes it less “we’re all objectively enabling genocide”?

                What if I think Viking Hippie is “objectively enabling genocide”? It’s a fact (ok, it’s just a thought experiment). That means I get to say anyone that agrees with you is “objectively enabling genocide”, right?

                • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  3 days to come back with “you’re wrong because it’s arrogant to be confident that you’re you’re right when people are paid to be wrong”? Damn, you’re really bad at this! 😂

    • Fades@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      If so, that’s fucking ridiculous. Jesus fucking Christ democracy will die because Joe Biden didn’t force Israel to stop their genocide and only told them to stop instead???

      Fuck this goddamn retarded existence just fucking kill me already Jesus fucking Christ

      FUCK THIS GODDAMN PLANET

      • DaBabyAteMaDingo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Tankies aren’t humans. They hated voting for Biden the first time but did so because Trump was the literal devil. Now Hassan Piker has riled up his masses of dumbasses to completely turn on what is the best president we had since Obama (I’m only speaking economically, so shut up).

        Please vote. No matter what anyone tells you, vote. Get your idiot friends to vote. Remind them of what’s at stake.

          • DaBabyAteMaDingo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Meh I use Tankies as a term for the “far right” of the left.

            Might not be the most accurate term but these Israel hating leftists are almost always Tankies. But the rest of the comment is pretty clear and I’m glad you were able to focus on something benign. Typical tankie.

            • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Benign, maybe in an irrelevant way? But certainly not benign by its content though, right?

              I just found it to be a strange usage because presumably the criticism being cast against Israel is for their judicious use of force against unarmed civilians, and as far as I know ‘tankie’ was originally used to describe people in support of the state’s judicious use of force against unarmed civilians.

              I would have thought the word would have been more appropriately used to describe Zionists in this situation, but I wouldn’t pretend to know.

  • MuuuaadDib@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I have a very strong don’t blow up kids policy, that doesn’t care what religion or political party you subscribe to or even race. If you do blow up kids, we feel strongly that you should just fuck right off and we should do whatever we can to stop those killing kids.

      • Sambarkjand@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        “The terrorists are using schools as shields though!”

        “Oh damn that’s a genius strategy. Better just give up every military advantage I have and send in my soldiers to be ambushed.”

          • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Nope, by definition isn’t.

            Still more dangerous for the IDF and less vengeance-effective than just raining death on thousands of civilians on the off-chance that you might also kill a handful of terrorists that Hamas can easily replace.

            • dx1@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Yes, and that touches on the core problem, unequal regard for human lives.

              • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Yeah, to quote Rashida Tlaib from right before they censured her for speaking truth to power:

                I can’t believe we have to say this, but Palestinian people are not disposable. We are human beings just like anyone else. Speaking up to save lives no matter faith, no matter ethnicity should not be controversial. The cries of the Palestinian and Israeli children sound no different to me. What I don’t understand is why the cries of Palestinian children sound different to you all.

  • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Less than half? That’s depressing, given that he’s pretty much all in on the genocide enabling and other whitewashing of the apartheid regime 😮‍💨