A handful of Jews (some of whom were always going to oppose him) are not remotely “the Jewish community”.
If he had said that Gaza under Hamas has behaved (insert your preferred pejorative), but it is not just under this regime that we’ve seen such behavior,” or words similar to that, I’d have the same reaction. I don’t see how there’s any other reasonable read of the quote you provided.
Then the parallel statement would be that the problems with Hamas extend beyond the current leadership. I don’t think that’s even a little controversial.
How about you sub in Palestinians instead? We cool with saying that Palestinian bloodthirst goes “far beyond Hamas”? That sounds like how Ben Gvir talks.
“Hanas is a big reason Palestine has gotten so bloodthirsty under their reign but for a long time we’ve been funding the people in Palestine who have been trying to cut off the 2 state solution and live in peace with a Jewish state” would be completely inoffensive to say.
If he had said that Gaza under Hamas has behaved (insert your preferred pejorative), but it is not just under this regime that we’ve seen such behavior,” or words similar to that, I’d have the same reaction. I don’t see how there’s any other reasonable read of the quote you provided
So all of the articles I linked about this reaction come from what, MAGA Islamophobes? Is the Jewish Democratic Council of America full of insane idiots?
Our concerns are valid. There’s a reason why they are so widespread.
Because if he takes those actions those same people will just demand more things. You can’t win with people who think you are secretly associated with a terrorist group. I think is absolutely the right approach to ignore disingenuous requests and criticism.
Any other Senate races looking interesting today?
Then the parallel statement would be that the problems with Hamas extend beyond the current leadership. I don’t think that’s even a little controversial.
Yeah, if you strip out the term “bloodthirsty” and replace it with the milquetoast “problematic”, I agree it wouldn’t be even a little bit controversial.
“Hanas is a big reason Palestine has gotten so bloodthirsty under their reign but for a long time we’ve been funding the people in Palestine who have been trying to cut off the 2 state solution and live in peace with a Jewish state” would be completely inoffensive to say.
I guarantee you that if you said anything about “the reason why Palestine has gotten so bloodthirsty” you would immediately be branded Islamophobic.
Mississippi and Louisiana are both showing absolutely massive Black turnout (per social media posts I’ve seen). Probably not enough to flip, but if that combines with depressed MAGA turnout, then it’s possible…
Because if he takes those actions those same people will just demand more things. You can’t win with people who think you are secretly associated with a terrorist group. I think is absolutely the right approach to ignore disingenuous requests and criticism.
So again, you think that the Jewish Democratic Council of America is disengenuous?
I’ll defer to your research that this interpretation is not a fringe one, I guess. But an appeal to the crowd doesn’t make it reasonable. No need for you to construct a straw man. His words are what they are.
I guarantee you that if you said anything about “the reason why Palestine has gotten so bloodthirsty” you would immediately be branded Islamophobic.
Says you. I mean, you’re actually going to guarantee it? Your made-up statement has nothing to do with American Arabs/Palestinians/Muslims. Some of us are able to separate a foreign nation’s actions from people living here.
Moderating:
Yeah, if you strip out the term “bloodthirsty” and replace it with the milquetoast “problematic”, I agree it wouldn’t be even a little bit controversial.
So again, you think that the Jewish Democratic Council of America is disengenuous?
Take this discussion elsewhere. Yet again, you’re much too far afield of the thread topic.
Both voting for Turek and abstaining is a reasonable response, IMO, based on his transphobic statements (I would do the former).
Sitting on your ass is making a choice and has impact. Pretty much a half vote impact. Sometimes the choice is voting against the worse choice, not voting for someone. If you don’t want the worst choice in your vote for the less bad option.
Abstention is trying to fool yourself into thinking that you then are not part of the result. But you are.
So again, you think that the Jewish Democratic Council of America is disengenuous?
ETA: Deleted after seeing mod note.
Thank you, @Aspenglow!
Thanks, both @Procrustus and @Railer13.
I agree with this sentiment.
I think it’s pretty disturbing who he has this kind of heat for and who he doesn’t.
What is disturbing about him condemning a MAGA supporter and ignoring the obvious bullshit? This is EXACTLY what he needed to do.
Didn’t you just say two hours ago that you thought abstaining from a race where you consider the Democrat unacceptable is a reasonable choice?