More than 100 Arizona Palestinian, Arab, Muslim, and progressive Democrats and community leaders have signed a letter making the case for those reluctant to support Kamala Harris against Donald Trump.
“We know that many in our communities are resistant to vote for Kamala Harris because of the Biden administration’s complicity in the genocide,” the letter, published Thursday night, reads.
“Some of us have lost many family members in Gaza and Lebanon. We respect those who feel they simply can’t vote for a member of the administration that sent the bombs that may have killed their loved ones,” the letter continued. “As we consider the full situation carefully, however, we conclude that voting for Kamala Harris is the best option for the Palestinian cause and all of our communities.”
Good, I hope it does some good. Any other vote is a vote for Trump, intended or not, and Trump won’t just ignore the genocide. His track record makes it abundantly clear that he’ll absolutely make it worse.
I mean he is where money is and that is powerful zionist lobbies so yea you can bet money that he will be super enthusiastic to help Israel.
This is just factually incorrect. And easily demonstrated using math you should have learned in the 5th grade.
Trump: 5 votes
Harris: 5 votes
Any other vote: 5 votes
If i keep adding votes to ‘any other vote’ the ratio between trump / Harris will not change.
T: 5 H: 5 AOV: 10000
Ratio is still one see? In no way is Harris’ chances of winning impacted by a third party vote.
What you mean to say is ‘Harris having shitty policies that are abhorrent to the voting population causes her to be at risk of losing to a literal fascist.’
By trying to put the blame on other voters because you are willing to overlook genocide says more about you than it does them.
There is only one person who can fix Harris’ platform. Put the blame where it rightfully belongs, on harris.
Sure, but only fourth grade logic is required to see why that’s wrong.
Trump: 50,000,000 votes
Kamala: 50,000,000 votes
Other candidates: 1,000 votes + 3,000 votes + 7,000 votes + …
When an primitive voting scheme is used that says “winner takes all and you can only vote for one candidate,” a vote for any other candidate is essentially the same as not voting unless the masses gather behind a single third party (which will never happen, especially with the internet).
A voting scheme more sophisticated that allows people to pick multiple candidates, in something like a ranked list for example, would make third party votes worth something. But that disrupts the status quo and doesn’t help career politicians, so we’ll never see that unless heads start rolling.
I don’t know about that. I think he just doesn’t care about some “brown” people getting genocided. Unless there is graft he can profit from, then he will care. And I’m sure there will be a For Sale sign on the White House lawn about it.