I think you miss one thing about Harris possibly changing her mind, which is really just the passage of time and the changing situation. With Israel continuing attacks in Gaza with Sinwar dead, expanding the war aggressively into Lebanon and now maybe into some form of open conflict with Iran, the situation is different. At least some of us. At some point, even the most pro-Israeli Democrats may lose the stomache for bankrolling an ever expanding war in the Middle East. Well, maybe not the most pro-Israeli ones, but enough more to change the consensus. Maybe the left can't accept a win that is about these broader issues and not about the atrocities in Gaza, but it should be willing to.
Well, of course he does! Once Netanyahu stops killing brown people, he'll have to face justice for corruption and (stop me if you've heard this one before) trying to overturn democratically-held elections to hold onto power so he won't go to jail for corruption.
Part of it appears to be, outside the hostage protestors, the lack of news that lets the Israeli people truly understand the horror their leadership is creating. From listening to Israeli journalists, there is little if any Israeli version of MSM either choosing or being allowed** to see what the rest of the world sees daily. There certainly ARE Israeli voices raised; you can find them in Haaretz, but I gather that is considered left wing; I have no idea how many people it reaches.
It reminds me of the cheerleading that led to our involvement in Vietnam, not to mention Afghanistan and Iraq.
---------------------------
*** Israel has shut down Al Jazeera both in Israel proper and the West Bank. I don't know what pressures are being brought on their own MSM, but the shutdowns with the commensurate howling about "supporting terrorists" must have a dampening effect.
One other reason for Harris to make changes with regard to Israel and Gaza is just to remind Netanyahu who is the superpower in this relationship. Not saying that this will mean huge changes in US policy, but given Biden’s apparent frustration with Bibi, I think Harris will want to change the tone.
For people considering voting their conscience, there is one thing to consider. Which candidate is likeliest after inauguration to try to get tougher with Bibi? We all know the answer. She may or may not, but she is by far the most PERSUADABLE on the issue.
So consider the question: what vote is likeliest to result in action we would support? No brainer as to trump; as to third party candidates, the chances of action are zilch.
So: what can we do to stop the evil we agree is washing over Gaza, the West Bank, and Lebanon? We individually, zippo. We can take a moral stance. That is sort of like thoughts and prayers without the needed ACTION by someone who has the power. A lot of people deplored Jim Crow when I was growing up, but it wasn't until people took ACTION that it was (for a while) mitigated--and even in this alarmingly racist redivivus country, it is way better than it was. LBJ was a Southern Democrat, but he was willing to listen to the people as a whole and pushed it past the filibuster of his own party.
At least Harris has the empathy. If the people take action, she is likeliest to listen. So your individual choice is: stand on principle and take no part in any action to achieve your goal. Or leaven your principal with hope, and make sure trump isn't the result of your principles.
For people considering voting their conscience, there is one thing to consider. Which candidate is likeliest after inauguration to try to get tougher with Bibi? We all know the answer. She may or may not, but she is by far the most PERSUADABLE on the issue.
So consider the question: what vote is likeliest to result in action we would support? No brainer as to trump; as to third party candidates, the chances of action are zilch.
So: what can we do to stop the evil we agree is washing over Gaza, the West Bank, and Lebanon? We individually, zippo. We can take a moral stance. That is sort of like thoughts and prayers without the needed ACTION by someone who has the power. A lot of people deplored Jim Crow when I was growing up, but it wasn't until people took ACTION that it was (for a while) mitigated--and even in this alarmingly racist redivivus country, it is way better than it was. LBJ was a Southern Democrat, but he was willing to listen to the people as a whole and pushed it past the filibuster of his own party.
I think you miss one thing about Harris possibly changing her mind, which is really just the passage of time and the changing situation. With Israel continuing attacks in Gaza with Sinwar dead, expanding the war aggressively into Lebanon and now maybe into some form of open conflict with Iran, the situation is different. At least some of us. At some point, even the most pro-Israeli Democrats may lose the stomache for bankrolling an ever expanding war in the Middle East. Well, maybe not the most pro-Israeli ones, but enough more to change the consensus. Maybe the left can't accept a win that is about these broader issues and not about the atrocities in Gaza, but it should be willing to.
Yes, Sinwar’s death provides a chance for a ceasefire..though Netanyahu probably still wants to keep killing people. So just hard to know…
Well, of course he does! Once Netanyahu stops killing brown people, he'll have to face justice for corruption and (stop me if you've heard this one before) trying to overturn democratically-held elections to hold onto power so he won't go to jail for corruption.
Yeah. It’s bleak.
kind of unclear that that's the case now; his popularity has rebounded, and he's in a pretty good position to win reelection, is my understanding.
nightmarishly, the genocide has been quite popular, and has helped him regain standing.
Great Merciful Goddess!
What is WRONG with people...?
Part of it appears to be, outside the hostage protestors, the lack of news that lets the Israeli people truly understand the horror their leadership is creating. From listening to Israeli journalists, there is little if any Israeli version of MSM either choosing or being allowed** to see what the rest of the world sees daily. There certainly ARE Israeli voices raised; you can find them in Haaretz, but I gather that is considered left wing; I have no idea how many people it reaches.
It reminds me of the cheerleading that led to our involvement in Vietnam, not to mention Afghanistan and Iraq.
---------------------------
*** Israel has shut down Al Jazeera both in Israel proper and the West Bank. I don't know what pressures are being brought on their own MSM, but the shutdowns with the commensurate howling about "supporting terrorists" must have a dampening effect.
One other reason for Harris to make changes with regard to Israel and Gaza is just to remind Netanyahu who is the superpower in this relationship. Not saying that this will mean huge changes in US policy, but given Biden’s apparent frustration with Bibi, I think Harris will want to change the tone.
For people considering voting their conscience, there is one thing to consider. Which candidate is likeliest after inauguration to try to get tougher with Bibi? We all know the answer. She may or may not, but she is by far the most PERSUADABLE on the issue.
So consider the question: what vote is likeliest to result in action we would support? No brainer as to trump; as to third party candidates, the chances of action are zilch.
So: what can we do to stop the evil we agree is washing over Gaza, the West Bank, and Lebanon? We individually, zippo. We can take a moral stance. That is sort of like thoughts and prayers without the needed ACTION by someone who has the power. A lot of people deplored Jim Crow when I was growing up, but it wasn't until people took ACTION that it was (for a while) mitigated--and even in this alarmingly racist redivivus country, it is way better than it was. LBJ was a Southern Democrat, but he was willing to listen to the people as a whole and pushed it past the filibuster of his own party.
At least Harris has the empathy. If the people take action, she is likeliest to listen. So your individual choice is: stand on principle and take no part in any action to achieve your goal. Or leaven your principal with hope, and make sure trump isn't the result of your principles.
For people considering voting their conscience, there is one thing to consider. Which candidate is likeliest after inauguration to try to get tougher with Bibi? We all know the answer. She may or may not, but she is by far the most PERSUADABLE on the issue.
So consider the question: what vote is likeliest to result in action we would support? No brainer as to trump; as to third party candidates, the chances of action are zilch.
So: what can we do to stop the evil we agree is washing over Gaza, the West Bank, and Lebanon? We individually, zippo. We can take a moral stance. That is sort of like thoughts and prayers without the needed ACTION by someone who has the power. A lot of people deplored Jim Crow when I was growing up, but it wasn't until people took ACTION that it was (for a while) mitigated--and even in this alarmingly racist redivivus country, it is way better than it was. LBJ was a Southern Democrat, but he was willing to listen to the people as a whole and pushed it past the filibuster of his own party.
At least