Muslim and Arab Americans say their support was critical to Biden’s winning Michigan in 2020. Some warn they won’t back him again over his blanket support for Israel.
Wonder what they think Trump would have done differently.
Seriously. Trump is advocating turning Gaza into a parking lot.
And it's not like Democrats have exactly been shy of their general support of Israel, if you've paid any attention at all. They just also happen to acknowledge that Palestinians are people, unlike most Republicans.
It's possible to be angry at both Republicans and Democrats.
But you still must vote for the one likely to do you the least harm if you don't want to get fucked. White Biden sucks he's objectively better than Trump for Muslim Americans. Trump was talking about deporting and blocking them from entering.
Not everyone thinks from a position of harm reduction. If you see a president stand up and speak out in favor of (in your eyes) genocide then you may not react to that ”rationally".
If you're protest voting on principle but not also joining more… radical… organizations that are actually working towards your desires, you're just being foolish.
Lots of voters ate foolish. And there's something to be said for the fact that voting for the lesser evil keeps evil in power. Not saying that's me but I do understand the sentiment.
Which is why you either do something about it or suck it up and vote for the lesser.
Just don't do nothing and then pretend you're taking a stand.
deleted by creator
Sure, but that's not the topic of the article, which is about not voting for Biden. I'm not Muslim and I think the blind support for Israel is super shitty too, but I'll still be voting for Biden when the time comes without hesitation, because not voting and the opposition is worse.
I'm not convinced having a lost Roomba who utters racist bullshit and hands countries over to terrorist organizations is a good pick. If it's Biden and Trump again, I am either not going to vote or go third party. I cannot in good conscience vote for either of them.
In a First Past the Post voting system, refusing to vote, or voting 3rd party, is numerically the same as an extra vote for the candidate you hate the most. It's just one more vote closer to victory that your opposition gets.
Neither party is great, there's plenty to dislike about both, but it's patently obvious that one is far more harmful than the other.
Well it's not really numerically the same as voting for the candidate you hate the most, it's numerically the same as not voting. And to be honest, it really only matters if you're in a potential swing state. And I'm saying this as someone who still votes despite having lived in a deep red state where my presidential vote always doesn't matter (but I go anyway because down ballot votes do matter and I might as well vote the whole ballot).
Muslim population is significant in certain swing states.
I agree, any loss of votes in a swing state could theoretically be significant.
Same, but a blue state. It really doesn't matter who I vote for, or if I vote at all, when it comes to the president. I can't remember the last time I enjoyed voting for president, and I've voted for decades. I often think about just bowing out of the whole voting scam, but then there's always local shit that gets me to do the deed.
In the sort of two-party system they have in the US, it really is one or the another
And yet they both do the shit they accuse the other side of.
The Republicans attempted a coup.
So since Trump exists, we should be happy with mediocrity? Nothing will ever get fixed in this country with this binary political system.
Well, geopolitics often go beyond party politics, or at least they should
Others have heard from constituents who are planning to vote Republican because they feel that at least Republicans were honest with them about their carte-blanche support for Israel, while they feel duped and used by Democrats.
But Republicans have tried to make new alliances with culturally conservative Muslim voters. In the 2022 campaign, Michigan's GOP nominee for governor, Tudor Dixon, embraced a push by some Muslim officials in Dearborn and other towns to remove LGBTQ-themed books from public libraries.
Mark Mellman, a Democratic pollster who runs Democratic Majority for Israel, said he sees more political upside for Biden on his stance on Israel than danger, especially in a likely Biden-Trump rematch.
“We’re in the white heat of this moment, but I think as we get closer to the election, it’s going to be clear that if you might otherwise be a Biden voter, staying home is going to be a vote for Donald Trump,” he said. “It would be strange to see people lend any support to a racist, Islamophobic candidate like Donald Trump because they differ, perhaps very strongly, on this one issue.”
Michigan's GOP nominee for governor, Tudor Dixon, embraced a push by some Muslim officials in Dearborn and other towns to remove LGBTQ-themed books from public libraries.
Well, as long as they can find a common group to oppress.
Isn't that fucked up?
They'll find out what happens when you vote for the face eating leopards sooner or later.
So it goes.
but also to encourage them to leave the top of the ticket blank in protest
Per the article. They do the protest vote.
And if that gets them Trump 2024, what do the smoothbrains think will improve for either Palestinians or Muslims in America?
Considering the guy is literally supporting deporting pro-Palestinian students, I think they've given it the typical amount of thought a modern theist gives anything.
That's effectively a vote for whoever who hate most in the ticket. Not voting has consequences
Grab em by the pussy?
Somehow he would have found a way to discriminate against all religions involved. He would have tried to make money from Israel over this situation and he would have stationed US troops in Gaza.
deleted by creator
You're ascribing an awful lot of foresight and planning and purpose into their actions. Trump is, and was, anything but deliberate and goal-oriented beyond the myopic motivations of the moment. While the Republican party might some day possibly feel that Israel is in some vague form no longer to their benefit, they are vastly more motivated by a perceived Enemy. The Republicans, and Trump especially, will gravitate much more strongly toward "Blow up Palestine and nuke Iran if they get involved" than they will to "The current world order favors Israel, and we want to shake up the global status quo, so we're pulling our support from Israel."
They want a simple message with a clear enemy, that's what brings out their voters, not vague ideas of world politics 3D chess.
evidently some "leftists" feel very uncomfortable being told that in many respects they and the die hard MAGA crowd want exactly the same thing.
You speak the truth. American politics has become way too tribal for anything to ever get done. People will do anything to avoid agreeing or considering the idea that they may agree with someone on the opposing team.
Are you serious? You Americans have a brain worm
The next election will likely be a choice between Biden and Trump. So you can either vote for Biden or decide that you don't mind Trump wins.
And as a reminder Trump recognized Jerusalem as the Israeli capital, recognized the Golan heights as being part of Israel, had an Iranian general assassinated, and announced a peace plan which suggested the Israelis should be allowed to annex another 30% of the West Bank. In recent weeks, he's been banging on about there being no better US ally than Israel and how if he's elected Israel will be safer than ever.
You can be critical of Biden, but the republicans are religiously pro-Israel. They don't give a shit about Palestinians. Biden is the better option.
It's like all the idiots who make excuses for Hamas, because they're unaware that for a long time Hamas was supported by Israel, and that by supporting terrorists they're effectively undermining any chance of a Palestinian state.
Us Americans recall the Muslim ban, and the increase in hate crimes after 45 took office. There are no good answers and the protest vote only gets you the worst candidate elected. Do you prefer passive or active genocide?
Some americans make decisions on single issues instead of considering the full voting record and position of a candidate. Some even approve or disapprove for sillier reasons.
deleted by creator
So instead of diminished aid for Palestine, you’d rather… checks notes… travel bans for all middle eastern people trying to go to the US, except for people from a handful of governments who are actively giving Trump money?
Don't forget Trump's son-in-law's middle east foreign policy plan for Israel that Palestinian supporting groups rejected and weren't consulted with further. Israel was to be allowed to annex existing settled positions, and no further expansion from either side. Israeli settlers haven't adhered to this "peace plan" anyway.
Any Americans staying home at elections, this type of foreign policy is what they tacitly support.
Tbh, Israeli West Bank “settlers” really shouldn’t be considered non-combatants.
Sure don't vote Biden. Just vote for the fascist Republicans that previously banned people from muslim countries. That will work, right gaiz? Plus any Republican president won't ever send Gaza aid. Biden is sending aid.
https://www.npr.org/2023/10/18/1206897197/biden-makes-deal-on-aid-delivery-to-gaza
Yeah. Does anybody else think that this "One strike and you're dead to me, regardless of how complex the issue is" thing is getting a little out of hand? The only winning move here is not to play, but then he would be attacked from both sides for appearing apathetic.
It's hilarious because it's happening to both sides, like the extreme Republicans saying they won't vote for their representative because they didn't vote for Jim Jordan or Pence because he didn't agree to coup an election for Trump. The purity tests are so intense and instaneous nowadays.
Since Trump is going the Nazi way, it's a win-win, innit?
Name a democratic Muslim country with free elections.
E: the fact I only got one response should be proof enough. when you have societies that tend to gravitate towards dictators, strong men, or are hostage to royal families, that’s what you’re gonna get.
Indonesia.
Single issue voters are myopic
Eh. I’d argue that if your single issue is climate change, you’re rather sharp sighted. But I take your point in general.
The exception that proves the rule 🙂
Two party voters are making sure the ship stays on course for a full impact crash
Islam and far right Christianity have a lot in common. Wouldn't surprise me that the Muslim community would side with the party that wants to limit women's rights and LGBTQ rights.
Honestly it's shocking how most religions veer right in the most extreme groups. Ultra orthodox anything tends to lead to traditional but extreme sexism, cultishness, and xenophobia, or in other words, the GOP.
Not shocking at all. If your religion encourages open mindedness, people will open their minds. This gives them the opportunity to leave whenever they want.
But a religion that exerts control over its members tends to trap people into it, therefore growing over time. So we see that successful religions tend towards extremism, because they are more “fit”, in a Darwinist sense.
It's not shocking. The right, conservatism, can be explained by asking what it is they want to conserve. What do conservatives want to conserve?
The answer is traditional societal norms, hierarchies and power structures. From here it isnt a big jump to understand why religions and conservatism often go hand in hand.
Yep, it certainly isn't the environment they're attempting to conserve.
No, it's the traditional societal norms of environmental exploitation for immediate personal and private gain they want to conserve.
Extreme religious groups are the most controlling. Authoritarianism is the defining characteristic of the right. It's no surprise they go together.
From my reading of history, authoritarianism is the defining feature of the extremes of any part of the political spectrum. Why? Because the average person, almost by definition, is a moderate within the context of their own society. Once an extreme ideology takes power, it either has to use authoritarian techniques to maintain power, or it will lose power fairly quickly if the people are allowed a say. That's true regardless of political stripe, which is why democracy is so important.
My dude Arab and Muslim Americans vote for Democrats by like, a 5 to 1 margin, and the Muslims in Congress are among the most progressive in the country. They're saying they don't want to vote for a president enabling ethnic cleansing and THIS is what you're taking from that?
Arab and Muslim activists are currently working with the Conservative party in my jurisdiction to institute clear anti trans laws so yes, I'm taking reality away from this article. I'm literally watching it happen right in front of me, thankfully saner votes prevailed in our last election.
So, like, are they going to vote for the guy that literally has "banning Muslims" as a platform?
They might vote for neither.
So a half vote for the party that wants them banned. Smart.
Same difference
Not really.
Either your vote matters, or it doesn't. You can't have it both ways.
Your vote always matters, especially if you don't vote. The progressives who couldn't bring themselves to vote for Hilary voted for a generation of conservative control over the Supreme Court. The American Muslims who can't bring themselves to vote for Biden are voting for persecution.
Every Muslim voter is going to choose between 'not their ally' and 'their enemy'. They can skip the polls, but they're going to vote whether they like it or not.
Nothing says “land of the free” like being forced to vote against your own interests no matter what.
Best. System. Ever.
You could vote for pink balloons, does that matter?
Ok, but then don‘t cry when Trump gets reelected
Welp…good lucky with that other guy, whomever that might be.
My feeling is that this "betrayed" part of Muslim is the socially conservative one that voted left because the right was racists and pro Israel. But if the left is pro Israel as well, then they might as well vote right to get conservative (pro life, misogynistic) policies forward
TBH, the bizarre cognitive dissonance in all these religious types (pick one) bypasses all rational thought processes.
Yep nothing is rational about "I'm not voting at all if I don't get my way!" That's how it is when you're a baby but doesn't work out in the real world. Not voting is a vote for the alt right. All they'll get as a result is a Republican dictatorship where they'd have to end up leaving the country.
this is beyond islamophobic lmao the people supporting palestinians are a massive front of liberal muslims. Just because they don't support endless bombing by an islamophobic apartheid regime doesn't mean they're misogynistic. Fuck outta here.
this is beyond islamophobic
liberal muslims
doesn’t mean they’re misogynistic
Bruh.
Sorry dont know why I bother on subs like this its a bunch of "democrat = left wing and conservative = right wing" dullards. Feel free to disregard. x
“I am willing to vote for a much worse actual fascist monster who will 100% use his presidency to destroy democracy and those that tried to hold him accountable, all because Biden… stood with an ally during a horrendous terrorist attack even though because of Biden Israel has slowed its roll and allowed aid in”
The full brainless take from that moron. What an emotionally stunted bullshit opinion
Or they could just not vote at all like most Americans
In a two party system, abstention is a vote for the person you hate most.
That is why you stop using that system on the first place.
If most third party voters or vote boycotters were actively working on, in one way or another, opening avenues for ending the two party hegemony, I'd be all ears. But as it stands most are just being idealists and hoping that works out for them.
If only.
I agree and I always vote
Where did they say who they were voting for instead?
They didn't. Most people don't understand the concept that politicians should earn your vote by their own merits, not just against the worse option of their competitor. Refusing to vote for a candidate who goes against your best interests is a part of your civic duty, even if the alternative is no better.
I totally agree.
There will never be a candidate that exactly matches your best interests. You need to consider the overall and cast yourself your vote for the one who comes closest to your interests.
It doesn't have to exactly match, but there should be enough overlap that you don't feel as though you're just supporting the 'lesser oppressor.'
Unfortunately, most people like being oppressed or controlled so we don't get any politicians that fight back against it.
Not to mention Trump or any of the republican contenders would be far more extreme on middle east issues.
Totally agree with you. I'm impressed with Biden's strategy. This is what expert diplomacy looks like. The US is acting like a true friend to Israel by supporting them while also moderating their thirst for revenge, which of course also helps the Palestinians and may prevent the wider Middle East from escalating into a regional war. Biden may be old, but he actually learned something about statecraft during all those years in politics.
So their option would be…what?
I will simply not vote, unless I get another decent option like Bernie Sanders. Any other genocide denying piece of shit can kick rocks.
Bernie did a speech about his support of Israel just last week.
It seems like he supports keeping an ally and also minimizing human suffering. Curious where I can find that speech of his? Is it in line with these press releases of his?
It was during the senate debate about support for Israel and Ukraine
Good statements. Condemning Hamas while acknowledging the suffering in Gaza. And I read it in his voice lol.
I will simply not vote
You may not see a choice that gets better in your single issue, but not voting may be a choice for the worse on many issues you also care about
Yeah, I don't think people understand that elections are a zero sum game (especially in a two party system). Not voting essentially becomes a vote for the other party, since one less vote lowers the threshold for one party to win over the other.
What if you don't like either side equally? Which side does your non-vote go to? Or, by your logic, are you technically voting twice for the negative aspects of both sides?
Since Republicans can and do win the presidency without a popular majority, I'd say not voting at all favors them. They understand this and it's why they always try to reduce voter turnout.
That's honestly a fair argument, and stated well.
I can't not upvote a Simpsons reference.
Upvoted to offset the inevitable downvotes you'll get from our (hive) minders.
No amount of mental gymnastics is going to convince me to vote for someone who actively aided a genocide.
Genocide denying? Best I can tell Biden is in support of stopping the violence and negotiating peace which would be a two state solution.
He referred to the calls for a ceasefire as "abhorrent"
100% sounds like you're talking out your ass right now, but if you have a source I'll change my mind.
Sorry he said "disgraceful" not abhorrent, but, yeah I feel you on the cognitive dissonance, it's a bizarre take.
deleted by creator
Not choosing is still making a choice
A man giving up his life for the USA is not enough to stop Trump from berating that soldier's surviving family publicly.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khizr_and_Ghazala_Khan
If Arab and Muslim want to choose that over Biden because of Palestine well then I'll not contribute ever again to a rebuilding of the mosque in my community.
Consider my face eaten, leopards.
How many times have you contributed to a rebuilding of the mosque in your community?
Twice. Once in the town I live near here in the PNW another the town another family member lives in the Midwest.
I give money to temples when I see antisemitic stuff in the news. And when African American churches are targeted I donate to them, too.
I am a pagan, and I sacrifice to my gods all the time food, spice, and liquor. I throw them coins, but the gods never take those so I usually pick up the coins and go inside.
If I have to choose between eating a shit sandwich and a shit sandwich with broken glass, I'm gonna choose the one without the broken glass every time. So many people seem to think that eating the one with broken glass, or letting someone else choose, is somehow taking a stand against shit sandwiches.
is somehow taking a stand against shit sandwiches.
If enough people get angry and vote third party, it can change the outcome of an election.
This incentivizes both parties to minimize the amount of people they anger in a close race.
If enough people get angry at one time they can change the outcome in a way that's essentially random. Come on, the math is really not that hard.
religion makes people do the dumbest shit
So who are they going to vote for then? I cannot believe that they would imagine Trump to be more sympathetic to their cause, if anything, Israel would receive even stronger backing were he the President
Didn't he basically put a fire to the whole conflict by moving the embassy to Jerusalem?
Well, they do have third-party options, so technically it's not an either/or.
Edit: Downvoted, apparently for acknowledging that third parties exist. That's f**ked up.
…which have no chance of being anything other than just spoilers.
Well, third-parties do have a place. If it's a close election and you piss people off, you could lose due to their protest votes.
Maybe not quite the same, but I do believe the strong showing for Progressives in primaries last time around did influence the platform for the moderate that won the nomination for the Democrat party.
That’s arguably similar to voting for a third party and it did make a difference
…assuming their voters would've shown up to vote Democratic or Republican in the first place, if they had no other options.
So many American voters believe that if they vote for someone who doesn't win then they wasted their vote. I really don't get it. Wasting your vote is voting for a candidate you do not support.
If you are voting for someone who doesn't win, that's just the way it goes. Not everyone can win. However, in a first past the post system, if you are voting for someone with no chance of winning you are absolutely throwing away your vote. Until there is voting reform in America we all need to vote for the lesser of two evils. Preferably ones who are open to changing the system.
Nope, this isn't true. If a candidate can get at least 5% of the popular vote for the presidency, they will secure federal funding for their party in the next election cycle. Access to the debates, visibility, and legitimacy—factors that could make people who think like you consider it as a viable option—are all key aspects of how a party gets started. If everyone who didn't vote instead voted third party, well, the third party would probably win. However, 'everyone' is a big stretch, so let's consider people who want to vote but dislike the two major choices. They can get the ball rolling towards becoming an actual option.
Were votes for Gary Johnson or Jill Stein worth it in the 2016 election? Neither candidate secured 5% of the vote. So nobody got funding and the nation got Trump as president.
In my opinion those votes were thrown away. They will continue to be thrown away until we get rid of first past the post voting.
You still don't get it. Unfortunately most voters think like you and that's why we are stuck.
Yes if EVERYONE was able to vote 3rd party knowing there was a chance it would help we could be out of this situation. First past the post doesn't encourage that though. Until we adopt a system of voting that encourages people to actually vote with their heart instead of holding their noses, we will be stuck
for the amount of free salt from democrats, alone, my vote for jill stein was definitely worth it. can you nominate hilary again, please?!
…or, to quote the late Eugene V. Debs:
"It is better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it."
They obvioualy haven't heard what Trump and the right said about Hamas then, or they wouldnt be thinking that way.
This is a best case scenario.
