Democrats should pay attention to Kristen McDonald Rivet's election postmortem

[u/cathbadh]

https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/kristen-mcdonald-rivet-democrats-win-rcna184010

[u/wes424]

You are probably the only person on earth who thinks liberals, including Biden and Harris, supported Jews in the US after October 7th. The only reason those soft statements went out was because they knew it was politically toxic to ignore but nothing was really done. University presidents went in front of congress and refused to say that calls for genocide against Jews are against university codes of conduct. Students on campuses set up Jew free zones and waved flags of terrorist organizations.

Replace Jews with any other minority in the US in this scenario. You think their little press release a few months later would be enough?

[u/blewpah → u/wes424]

You are probably the only person on earth who thinks liberals, including Biden and Harris, supported Jews in the US after October 7th.

You're very wrong. They've directly supported Israel throughout the war. And regarding messaging I just gave you evidence of it but it doesnt seem to matter what they did. It will be discounted no matter what.

The only reason those soft statements went out was because they knew it was politically toxic to ignore but nothing was really done.

Okay so now even the statements and messaging aren't good enough. First off - they did outline the actions they took. Second - what would you have had them do? Send in the national guard to shut down protests on college campuses?

University presidents went in front of congress and refused to say that calls for genocide against Jews are against university codes of conduct.

Now you're moving goalposts away from anything Biden or Harris even did.

That question was obviously posed in such a way to force the presidents into an awkward position and ragebait no matter what they said, because "calls for genocide against Jews", does not have an objective definition and some people's opinion what that means includes things things that overlap with things that would fall under protected free speech. If a university president tried to discipline students for supporting BDS for example that would definitely violate the 1st amendment.

Students on campuses set up Jew free zones and waved flags of terrorist organizations.

Replace Jews with any other minority in the US in this scenario. You think their little press release a few months later would be enough?

Waving the flag of a terrorist organization is protected free speech. A presidential administration can not stop that without violating the constitution. I'm only aware of one instance of a so called "Jew free zone", in April 2024, and they issues several statements denouncing antisemitism then as I linked above.

[u/wes424 → u/blewpah]

And here we go again. Supporting Israel in the war is different than supporting US citizens that are Jewish. I was told that many times when people were trying to justify their antisemitism by saying they are anti zionist.

If college students put up a black free zone, you think they'd shrug it off like they did for weeks? Oh but it was only one that you know of, no big deal, right?

[u/blewpah → u/wes424]

And here we go again. Supporting Israel in the war is different than supporting US citizens that are Jewish. I was told that many times when people were trying to justify their antisemitism by saying they are anti zionist.

They did that too as I have shown you above.

If college students put up a black free zone,

This isn't a good analogy because it wasn't exactly a "Jew free zone" - it was targeting Zionism. It's still unacceptable to deny people entry to places they have a right to be but who they were targeting is a bit more complicated because of the intersection of religion and politics.

you think they'd shrug it off like they did for weeks? Oh but it was only one that you know of, no big deal, right?

Exactly how many weeks did they "shrug it off" for? I never said "no big deal" but obviously there's a difference between one time and multiple times.

[u/wes424 → u/blewpah]

Haha yikes. So "one time" there is a racially exclusionary zone and you're fine with it. You're pretending it was anti zionist but there were jewish people getting assaulted for being jewish and you know it.

Linking to a white house press release versus acknowledging what actually happened is not proving your point. These are things that people notice Dems are super soft on and cave to their radical elements. That's the whole point of this conversation.

[u/blewpah → u/wes424]

Haha yikes. So "one time" there is a racially exclusionary zone and you're fine with it.

?? I explicitly described it as unacceptable. You're just saying complete bullshit about my position now.

These are things that people notice Dems are super soft on and cave to their radical elements. That's the whole point of this conversation.

They didn't cave, it's not "their" radical elements (these people largely fucking hate Dems and often argue they're even worse than Republicans), and they denounced this stuff repeatedly. The only thing you've shown is that this is about pre conceived notions and narratives as opposed to what actually happened.

[u/wes424 → u/blewpah]

You said "I'm only aware of one Jew free zone" and said that the president / VP "addressed it with a statement". Seems like you thought that was sufficient.

We all know how different the response would have been for any other racial group. Dems absolutely have an antisemitism problem in the extremes of their party and have done nothing about it. That's the issue.

[u/blewpah → u/wes424]

You said "I'm only aware of one Jew free zone" and said that the president / VP "addressed it with a statement". Seems like you thought that was sufficient.

Yeah that's not the same as being fine with it. You've constantly resorted to moving goalposts and really lame strawmen this entire conversation.

We all know how different the response would have been for any other racial group.

Again this is a bad analogy because of the political aspect of Zionism. If people set up an anti-Palestinean-statehood zone and disproportionately targeted Arabs no I don't see anything being treated differently. There was also harassment of Arab and pro-Palestinean people throughout all of this but apparently that is all fine and dandy in your book.

Dems absolutely have an antisemitism problem in the extremes of their party and have done nothing about it. That's the issue.

Republicans have an antisemitism problem in the extremes of their party too - but you'd never let that represent them on the whole, and any statement or denouncement they give you accept at face value, while you refuse to accept or even recognize the same from Dems.

But I don't think you'll recognize the double standards here. Have a nice day.

[u/wes424 → u/blewpah]

Keep saying I'm moving the goalposts. That'll eventually work i bet!! Or you could actually respond to, you know, the point you keep missing.

Listen to yourself spin. You KNOW it's not anti zionism driving this. Again, you legit think an anti black zone on a college campus would be treated the same as an anti jew zone was by Democrats...? That's delusional or intentionally dishonest.

Republican antisemitism comes from hick militia in rural Idaho. Democrat antisemitism is in Congress and Ivy League universities and Hollywood. But yeah, same thing...

All your arguments boil down to "Republicans are bad too". Have some standards.

[u/blewpah → u/wes424]

Keep saying I'm moving the goalposts. That'll eventually work i bet!!

I'll keep calling it out if you keep doing it.

Or you could actually respond to, you know, the point you keep missing.

I haven't missed anything, I've been directly responding to your points.

You KNOW it's not anti zionism driving this.

What?

Republican antisemitism comes from hick militia in rural Idaho.

Trump accused a Jewish member of congress of being a "proud member of Hamas" for not shaking Bibi's hand. And has expressly not just dealt in the antisemitic trope of dual loyalties (that I'd imagine you'd criticize Rep Omar for but actively supported it, arguing not just that Jews are expected to be loyal to Israel but by extension to him personally.

Democrat antisemitism is in Congress and Ivy League universities and Hollywood. But yeah, same thing...

Yes everything bad that has ever happened in Hollywood is the direct responsibility of all Democrats, but even if a Republican president is explicitly antisemitic it just gets shrugged away. As usual.

All your arguments boil down to "Republicans are bad too". Have some standards.

Funny you bring up standards, the whole point in cases where I am doing that is I'm pointing out your double standards.

All you're doing is "Dems bad dems bad dems bad" while plugging your ears and ignoring anything to the contrary.