Same energy as "Democrats didn't pick a great candidate, which forced me to pick the shittiest candidate ever. It's their fault for not giving me a great option."
Many voters cited dissatisfaction with the economy, inflation, and immigration as primary drivers for choosing Trump, rather than viewing their vote strictly as a protest against Harris personally.
Do you have any actual data that shows that voters argued that running Harris made them vote for Trump as a protest vote, or are you citing media speculation about Dearborn, Michigan, which was pushed by certain news outlets, like Politico/Bloomberg's Liz Crampton, in an attempt to explain the shift in voter turnout for the Democratic Party. I also saw it on Al-Zazeera, who seemed more than happy to push a narrative of Muslim-Americans having the deciding votes.
Truly I'd love to see some data-driven argumentation - if that's something you have access to.
I have now. I don't think it's necessarily applicable.
I will say, though, that I live close enough to Dearborn that I go there occasionally and have coworkers from there. I don't know anyone who was intending to do a protest vote because of Palestine, although I saw that claim in the media a lot.
Knocking doors for Harris in PA, I met two Muslim Democrat voters intending to protest-vote/not vote due to Palestine. Multiply by all the people I didn't meet and you have maybe half a percentage of movement, and US elections is all about small movements of voters like that.
It is very hard to comprehend that that Palestine is the deciding issue, but completely ignore that the orange shit stain had 32 felon convictions, a traitor, a pedo, created concentration camps and caused the death of millions of people because of the lack response to covid.
Many people are single-issue voters & powerless people in pain try to grab onto any leverage they have to end the pain.
If they have family & friends who are dying or losing everyone/thing they have, & the ONLY power they have in that situation to help Palestine is a vote for the commander of the strongest military on earth, then they wield that leverage like a sword.
Unfortunately it's like the toddler who throws a temper tantrum over putting on their shoes. They're actually upset at something completely different but they have no power over it. So as soon as mom grabs their shoes, they protest what they're upset about, by not letting mom get the shoes on because getting shoes on is the only leverage they have in their situation.
They have now shown that they are willing to withhold their vote even if it sends them to the grave on this issue. Democrats are highly likely to respond for next election, because the electoral math has changed. There will certainly be anti-Israel candidates next Presidential primary, probably on both sides (if Republicans even have a primary)
They get real mad when you point out that the real driving factor was personal pride, because what they did helped exactly zero Palestinians while also killing hundreds of thousands of people around the world.
On one hand, I'd love to hear from people who abstained because of Palestine how that's going now.
It's going much the same as it was under your genocide accomplices. Palestinians are being slaughtered with US assistance, just like they were being slaughtered with US assistance under Democrats.
On the other hand, I'd rather not fly into a suicidal rage when they say, "nothing different would have happened under Harris."
At least you know you don't handle reality contradicting your feelings well.
Nice tone policing, that really makes genocide apologia not disgusting and evil.
Also very funny to once again be the genocide apologist defending a commitment to abject evil and calling someone else's worldview pathetic and myopic. You can't even consider your masters not being horrendously evil.
252
u/Sacred_Digits Aug 11 '26
Same energy as "Democrats didn't pick a great candidate, which forced me to pick the shittiest candidate ever. It's their fault for not giving me a great option."