It’s clear you didn’t read a single damn word I wrote and just wanted to rant. Unless you respond to literally anything I said, this conversation is over.
I read it, I just disagreed with it. A continuation of the status quo under Harris would have been better than a descent into fascism under Trump and Netanyahu feeling emboldened with an ideological ally in the White House. Given that AOC is polling worse than other potential Democratic frontrunners against Vance and Rubio, letting Trump enact Project 2025 is likely to push other issues to the forefront in 2028, rather than hold Israel accountable for its genocide in Gaza—waiting four years is unlikely to have any positive impact on that issue.
Progressivism under a candidate like AOC would be the ideal, including a platform that cuts off arm sales to Israel and supports the conviction of Netanyahu for war crimes under the auspices of the ICC, but progress on every other issue at stake shouldn’t be held back because a candidate that is not progressive on that singular issue is chosen.
Ultimately, there’s nothing wrong with agreeing to disagree.
It’s clear you didn’t read a single damn word I wrote and just wanted to rant. Unless you respond to literally anything I said, this conversation is over.
I read it, I just disagreed with it. A continuation of the status quo under Harris would have been better than a descent into fascism under Trump and Netanyahu feeling emboldened with an ideological ally in the White House. Given that AOC is polling worse than other potential Democratic frontrunners against Vance and Rubio, letting Trump enact Project 2025 is likely to push other issues to the forefront in 2028, rather than hold Israel accountable for its genocide in Gaza—waiting four years is unlikely to have any positive impact on that issue.
Progressivism under a candidate like AOC would be the ideal, including a platform that cuts off arm sales to Israel and supports the conviction of Netanyahu for war crimes under the auspices of the ICC, but progress on every other issue at stake shouldn’t be held back because a candidate that is not progressive on that singular issue is chosen.
Ultimately, there’s nothing wrong with agreeing to disagree.