Yeah that was the argument girding the Bernie Bro argument back in the day, that fortunately few listened to.
It is theoretically possible that there will in fact be a knife edge result in Michigan that is won or lost on the strength or lack of Arab support there.
But when your power depends on such a circumstance, and comes with risks of losing more support elsewhere in other likely tipping points, such as Pennsylvania, it won’t larn anyone to make you happy next time.
This is a key point against @puzzlegal’s argument of saying you won’t vote for Harris but doing so anyways.
If Harris wins without you (or with you but you take no credit for helping her along), the logical conclusion is that Democrats don’t need your tepid, conditional support; they can ignore you entirely and focus on policies to appear to larger numbers of Americans.
Yeah, if the only thing they can see is,
GOP policy: We will let Israel do whatever it wants. We will send them weapons and materiel to support their objectives.
Dem policy: We will let Israel do whatever it wants. We will send them weapons and materiel to support their objectives. However, we will occasionally make noises expressing our sadness and reluctance.
and not the backers of Trump who are making it very clear that this will be a Christian country by any means, with everything that that implies. Then I won’t be risking anything to prevent what they refused, by the least of things, voting in their own interest, to prevent.
And what if you DO NOT have the power to cost Harris the election? You’ve given up whatever limited influence you had by sitting inside the tent when you stormed out in a huff, and now you’re in the rain by yourself.
(fixed typo)
This is really the answer, right? It’s possible that Harris loses due to Arab anger for being too pro-Israel, or not sufficiently supportive of Arab or Palestinian interests. However, if she had come out strongly pro-Arab, pro-Muslim, or pro-Palestinian, and consequently perceived as anti-Israel, she wouldn’t even be in the running at this point.
It’s a needle that Democrats have to thread and Republicans don’t, because Dems are a bigger tent party. If she loses because she didn’t properly thread that needle in the minds of Arabs or Palestinians or Muslims, well, it’s only close because she tried to thread that needle.
FWIW, a Harris win will very likely result in an administration much tougher on Netanyahu’s administration and much more willing to pull some levers of influence than the Biden administration has been (and of course much more so than a Trump one would be). Whether she wins with or without Arab American voter support. Even if she loses Michigan but still wins the election.
Heck, I think another Biden term would see an increase in pressure, but Harris clearly believes such is necessary to a much greater degree. She will do it because she believes it is the best course of action, including for American interests (agree or disagree is irrelevant), not to pander for future votes in Michigan in 2028.
The sentiment here seems to be that if the Arab vote doesn’t cost Hatris the election, they will have undercut their power. I donct think that is true at all. Almost costing the Dems the vote is the best outcome for the community, because that means they get the administration they want, and there is the threat that next time, it could be the tipping point.
Right now, Democrats go to the Arab community and say “look, you need to understand that we have to keep the pro-Israeli faction happy. We can’t get elected wirhout them”. It would be better if the Democrats continued to say that, but also had to say to the pro-Israeli faction "Look, you need to understand we also can’t get elected if we ignore human rights in Palestine completely ".
If Harris does not have the political capital earned by a landslide election to spend on the best outcome for their community, then what do they get for their tantrum?
Nah. At least not from me. It’s more that on the scale of election result impacts their power is not worth pandering to, not compared to the votes a candidate would lose in other states as a result. Even the much larger and powerful “progressive wing” has learned that.
It is simply more effective to be inside the tent of power having the ear of someone sympathetic to your arguments than outside of it.
ETA that a good many of us American Zionists are sympathetic to their arguments to some extent and also believe that Bibi needs a good slap down.
There is no way they can help create a landslide. The issue is even having a place at the table for the next generation or two.
Look, I’m not saying this is the outcome I want. But its absolutely true that the Democratic party basically relies on the other guys being worse to keep minority groups trapped. That may actually be the best strategy, when all the terrible math is done: use your capital to court the groups that might leave. But its bullshit when we turn on these groups and expect them to be greatful that at least we won’t allow a genocide over here.
I absolutely challenge that assertion. I don’t think the Democratic party relies on keeping minority voters trapped. I think they genuinely try to do things that appeal to minority voters.
Yes, these people are attempting to play 11-dimensional chess and are doing it so badly.
These types of shenanigans may work in a European style multi-party democracy. In America’s binary-choice winner-take-all system, it’s an irresponsible game of chicken.
Yeah. In real life that sort of attempted Machiavellian tactic seldom works, because of the unpredictable nature of the world and the fact that the people you are trying to manipulate have agency too.
How about expecting them to act in their own rational self interest by looking at the policies that Democrats support and seeing that they’re genuinely better?
This “Democrats just pander to minorities and expect them to be grateful for it” narrative is right out of the Republican playbook.
They aren’t leaving the tent. We are talking about individuals voting, party realignments. It would be madness for say, US Reps to leave the party over this.
I know a lit of American Zionists would like a different approach. I appreciate that. Can you not see that thise boices will be amplified if they wishes of Arab Americans also cary weight?
All these arguments also apply to those pro-Israeli Americans who would withdraw their votes and their funding over the issue, and they don’t get called stupid or accused of having a tantrum.
If the “other guys” stopped being worse then no one would be trapped and people could vote FOR someone instead of against them.
Y’all, I have to go work. I am tapping out, since this will lilwly be 500 posts long byt he time Im free.
OK, here ya go:
Pro-Israeli Americans who vote against their own self-interest in support of a foreign war are stupid.
There won’t. Ok, glad we settled that one.
No, the Democratic Party, et al, is trapped by an electorate that is worse.
See: LBJ’s “I think we just delivered the South to the Republican party for a long time to come.” for enshrining into law, things that had been promised for at least a century, that are still actively opposed more than half a century later.