I don’t think a progressive politician would have a slam-dunk move here either since it’s causing friction in a lot of circles… and that’s not even starting to get into the shenanigans needed to get a plan through Congress.
The friction goes both ways. The problem is… who do you appeal to? Older Americans who are gonna die off in the next decade, or “younger” (read: everybody else) who has to live with the policies bejng made for the next several decades?
Sorry, but old boomers are dying off. The party needs to adapt and stop pretending like it’s the late eighties early nineties.
The only reason Biden was “electable” was because he was so boring as to be inoffensive- which is why he made a great choice for VP.
He was the compromise candidate that happened because Hilary already lost to trump, and Bernie is a ScArY SoCIaLiSt, and there was nobody else with the name recognition on the national level.
“Blue no matter who” can go both ways, you know. Why is it always the mantra of conservatives pretending to not be. (If you haven’t noticed corpo dems happily slid into the conservative space as republicans slid into being regressive asshats).
As much as the Israel/Palestine problem exists it’s going to draw ire from somebody. Might as well go for people who actually have a future in politics.
I agree it’ll be difficult to converge the older Democrats with progressive ones and the party ought to defer to the younger generation. But I was referring to friction within some progressive groups, specifically with what the end-state of this conflict looks like.
While elements such as the need to provide humanitarian aid seem universal and something almost everyone can agree on, that’s about where the cohesion ends
It’ll be substantially more difficult to navigate the spectrum of opinions about who should be considered at fault for Oct 7th, as well as what the end-result of this conflict should look like with who has control over what territory or in what capacity.
I think this issue is far from “all progressives believe xyz” and has the potential to alienate at least a chunk of people.
While it’s awful, it’s nevertheless true that he will always do better being seen as Islamophobic rather than as antisemitic. The amount of shit he’d get from all sides if he supported the Palestinians from the start would dwarf the current amount of shit by an order of magnitude.
I mean, this has become more than just islamophobe vs antisemite. What Biden is facing is being rightly called accomplice to genocide, at a time when support for Palestine has already overtaken that for Israel among democrat voters.
Biden can’t win here. Whatever he does, he’s going to alienate a huge voting bloc. The best option could just be for him to choose not to run.
I’d be okay with that if he started grooming somebody for it. preferably a progressive.
won’t happen, though. zombie politicians. they just won’t die.
I don’t think a progressive politician would have a slam-dunk move here either since it’s causing friction in a lot of circles… and that’s not even starting to get into the shenanigans needed to get a plan through Congress.
The friction goes both ways. The problem is… who do you appeal to? Older Americans who are gonna die off in the next decade, or “younger” (read: everybody else) who has to live with the policies bejng made for the next several decades?
Sorry, but old boomers are dying off. The party needs to adapt and stop pretending like it’s the late eighties early nineties.
The only reason Biden was “electable” was because he was so boring as to be inoffensive- which is why he made a great choice for VP.
He was the compromise candidate that happened because Hilary already lost to trump, and Bernie is a ScArY SoCIaLiSt, and there was nobody else with the name recognition on the national level.
“Blue no matter who” can go both ways, you know. Why is it always the mantra of conservatives pretending to not be. (If you haven’t noticed corpo dems happily slid into the conservative space as republicans slid into being regressive asshats).
As much as the Israel/Palestine problem exists it’s going to draw ire from somebody. Might as well go for people who actually have a future in politics.
I agree it’ll be difficult to converge the older Democrats with progressive ones and the party ought to defer to the younger generation. But I was referring to friction within some progressive groups, specifically with what the end-state of this conflict looks like.
While elements such as the need to provide humanitarian aid seem universal and something almost everyone can agree on, that’s about where the cohesion ends
It’ll be substantially more difficult to navigate the spectrum of opinions about who should be considered at fault for Oct 7th, as well as what the end-result of this conflict should look like with who has control over what territory or in what capacity.
I think this issue is far from “all progressives believe xyz” and has the potential to alienate at least a chunk of people.
While it’s awful, it’s nevertheless true that he will always do better being seen as Islamophobic rather than as antisemitic. The amount of shit he’d get from all sides if he supported the Palestinians from the start would dwarf the current amount of shit by an order of magnitude.
I mean, this has become more than just islamophobe vs antisemite. What Biden is facing is being rightly called accomplice to genocide, at a time when support for Palestine has already overtaken that for Israel among democrat voters.