this post was submitted on 07 Feb 2025
303 points (90.8% liked)

United States | News & Politics

7518 readers
437 users here now

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

During negotiations with the DNC and the Harris campaign, we were repeatedly told by interlocutors that Harris couldn’t meet any of our basic requests (a policy shift from Biden, a Palestinian speaker at the DNC, a statement distinguishing herself from Trump on Israel, or even a meeting with Michigan families who lost loved ones to Israeli bombs) because of AIPAC-aligned politicians like Fetterman, who might take to TV, rile up suburban white and Jewish voters, and fracture the party’s coalition in a swing state.

That political calculus alienated a key voting bloc, although likely not large enough to have shifted the ultimate election outcomes, that should be part of a durable Democratic majority. But few will ever be held accountable for that choice.

A Fetterman staffer condemning Uncommitted for not advocating for Palestinians 'the right way' is like an arsonist scolding the fire department for using the wrong hose.

Source

(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

This was my thoughts all along. By condemning the genocide they would have lost more votes than gained. It sucks that politicians have to choose votes over morality (the ones that actually have morality). The system is definitely broken.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›