So she didn't. She talked about a part of online campaigns that focused solely on the Democrats. That's not all activism. I also don't fully agree with her but there's no need to construct a strawman like this.
Replies
The Democrats were in charge at the time, how could they not focus on them?
jul 10, 2025, 4:44 pm • 2 0 • view
You see, it's not even clear as to what point of time she is talking about. Maybe don't assume the worst? Idk?
jul 10, 2025, 4:48 pm • 0 0 • view
What other point of time could she be talking about?
jul 10, 2025, 4:54 pm • 2 0 • view
Like, during the election? It was very clear that even Biden had no political leverage against Netanyahu at that point. Even if he had been against the genocide, which be wasn't.
jul 10, 2025, 4:57 pm • 1 0 • view
IOF firing nearly 100% "MADE IN USA" bullets and bombs : yeah no leverage
jul 10, 2025, 5:02 pm • 5 0 • view
Weapons contracts are done months in advance. Netanyahu could have sat out any negotiations until the election was over. Nothing would have been done even if he was against the genocide.
jul 10, 2025, 5:08 pm • 0 0 • view
are you really going to make me list out every single emergency arms sale during the biden admin during this crisis?
jul 10, 2025, 5:11 pm • 4 0 • view
www.stimson.org/2024/emergen... i mean they fucking did an executive order saying that we had to sell so urgently it would take too long for congress to oversee them
jul 10, 2025, 5:13 pm • 3 0 • view
i mean youre saying that biden was wholly a hostage to netanyahu then
jul 10, 2025, 5:14 pm • 1 0 • view
I was talking about the election season. Of course Biden had leverage in the time before that.
jul 10, 2025, 5:15 pm • 0 0 • view
Israel had plenty weapons short term anyway, but if the US had just signaled that they would stop support in the future it could have helped slow down the war
jul 10, 2025, 5:21 pm • 0 0 • view
But any signaling before the election wouldn't have mattered because the new incoming administration could have made a complete 180 on any promises.
jul 10, 2025, 5:24 pm • 0 0 • view
That is the time I was referring too, the Democrats were in charge then. The US has plenty leverage over Israel with the amount of money and weapons they give them, it's only with the support of US and a few other countries they are able to get away with it.
jul 10, 2025, 5:02 pm • 1 0 • view
He had a ton of leverage. Biden has been a full supporter of the genocidal project his entire career
jul 10, 2025, 4:58 pm • 12 0 • view
If the commander and chief felt he had no leverage over our most supplicant client state then that would also be a failure worth admonishing. Incredible how easy it is for people to squirt “it’s rude to expect dem politicians to do anything with their power” out their mouths.
jul 10, 2025, 5:02 pm • 3 0 • view
Trump can shift the global economy on its side by hallucinating international tax laws that don’t exist and making countries behave as if they did but Biden couldn’t make a frowny face at his best friend doing a genocide. He just could not, no way whatsoever. There are rules you see, with nuances!
jul 10, 2025, 5:05 pm • 2 0 • view
the president of the United States of America is a smol bean with anxiety, he couldn't have done anything
jul 10, 2025, 5:10 pm • 0 0 • view
He sent extra arms to the child exploding regime. As an executive action. More than once. Totally his call.
jul 10, 2025, 5:14 pm • 3 0 • view
If you want to split hairs like this then I didn't say "all activism" did I
jul 10, 2025, 4:39 pm • 18 0 • view
Oh, so you are able to recognise nuance. I thought I could trick you with this. Well, apply that skill again to Contrapoints' post. Sorry for being snarky, btw. I can't help it atm.
jul 10, 2025, 4:41 pm • 0 0 • view
Don't worry I'll tell anyone that cares about the genocide that they need to stop posting or protesting if they think it might hurt Chuck Schumer electorally. Seems like reasonable parameters for leftist discourse
jul 10, 2025, 4:44 pm • 31 0 • view
Again, all nuance gone. If that's the discourse you want then so be it.
jul 10, 2025, 4:45 pm • 0 0 • view
It wasn't a very nuanced position she took. You're adding nuance that isn't there
jul 10, 2025, 4:49 pm • 26 0 • view
You honestly think that if you were to ask her "is activism against genocide bad?" That she would say "yes"? Really?
jul 10, 2025, 4:53 pm • 0 0 • view
Of course she wouldn't. But it's bad to protest against the people actively aiding the genocide according to her, so there might be an issue here between how she would answer that hypothetical question and her actual position
jul 10, 2025, 4:56 pm • 17 0 • view
So her actual position is to be against protests but she wouldn't admit this to seem like a good person. If that's the person you think she is who am I to try to convince you otherwise? It seems like you perfectly captured her character by reading one statement of her without nuance. Well done.
jul 10, 2025, 5:05 pm • 0 0 • view
No, the actual problem is that her argument is sloppy, lacking nuance, and grounded in all sorts of unstated premises that I suspect she'd find untenable if she were forced to defend them. I think Breadtube is too niche a target for him, but Isaac Chotiner would have a field day with this post
jul 10, 2025, 5:10 pm • 3 0 • view
You could easily have convinced me otherwise if you made sense and had good arguments
jul 10, 2025, 5:19 pm • 5 0 • view
But I didn't, curious
jul 10, 2025, 5:21 pm • 0 0 • view