Even inside the Harris campaign, there was dissent about whether she needed to take a more aggressive stance for Gaza.
A Harris organizer who worked on youth turnout said that senior campaign officials gave them an order: When they sent out mass volunteer or fundraising emails and people replied by asking about Gaza, they were told to mark it as “no response.” The result? They seldom ended up engaging with voters on that issue.
“We also didn’t create a new category for Gaza responses out of fear that category would be leaked. Instead we were told to mark them as ‘no response,’” the organizer said, faulting top Harris campaign leaders for failing to address the issue. “The only ‘clowns’ out there are those who were in senior leadership and decided to abdicate on this issue, who silenced a Palestinian speaker at the DNC, and who told us to ignore it every time a voter asked us about Gaza.”
It’s also possible to criticize genocide support without bein’ like “sure genocide is bad when we support it or whatever, BUT…”
Some people will not vote to give genocide a mandate. Only a centrist can hate that.
People really need to vote. There is never going to be a candidate that meets 100% of what you want. If you don’t vote, you don’t care.
Genocide support is a big deal to some people.
It sure is, and since all of the people running had no plans to stop it, they chose to elect Trump… who has plans to speed it up for land development. Real brainiacs.
And here we see that genocide is no big deal to some people.