SDF Chatter
  • Communities
  • Create Post
  • Create Community
  • heart
    Support Lemmy
  • search
    Search
  • Login
  • Sign Up
return2ozma@lemmy.world to politics @lemmy.world · 1 year ago

Biden campaign speech on abortion rights disrupted 14 times by pro-Palestinian protesters

abcnews.go.com

external-link
message-square
197
fedilink
267
external-link

Biden campaign speech on abortion rights disrupted 14 times by pro-Palestinian protesters

abcnews.go.com

return2ozma@lemmy.world to politics @lemmy.world · 1 year ago
message-square
197
fedilink
Biden campaign speech on abortion rights disrupted 14 times by protesters
abcnews.go.com
external-link
His 2024 message was interrupted by pro-Palestinian demonstrators.
  • Blackbeard@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    I mean, even a significant majority of 18-24 year olds supports Israel, and half of them don’t vote, even in normal years. About 28% of voters who disapprove of Biden’s handling of this situation actually think he’s too supportive of Palestine, and independents are more supportive of Israel than registered Democrats The demographic with the highest turnout rate supports Israel over Palestine by a 6 to 1 margin.

    So yeah, the youth vote is absolutely critical if he hopes to win reelection, and turnout is a significant part of that, but the opinion of the youth, and further the opinion of the thin sliver of young people here on Lemmy, does not accurately reflect the opinion of the broader voting electorate. The fact is, people here care WAY more about the Israeli conflict than most of the rest of the country.

    • alvvayson@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      You are still thinking that winning elections is about convincing the center.

      That was true up to about 2008.

      Now, in the US, it’s about turning up the base.

      Your analysis is weak, and pandering to the elderly is not going to be a winning strategy.

      Up until now, Biden has been smarter than that. And I have some faith he will find a winning strategy.

      But an analysis like this will only lead to losing.

      • Blackbeard@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        You are still thinking that winning elections is about convincing the center.

        No, I’m saying elections are about convincing likely voters. And with Biden’s continued edge with independents, I might be right. Others who have done deep dives into the data agree with me, too. Clinton had a 30-point edge in the 18-29 demographic and exactly the same support in the 30-49 demographic, which means she did better among younger voters than Biden, and she still lost.

        Your analysis is weak

        Oh piss off. Yours is infantile and naive, and you’re not even a voter. People stop taking you seriously when you make this shit personal, and your sentence would have conveyed the same meaning without the invective.

        pandering to the elderly is not going to be a winning strategy.

        Nope, but pandering to likely voters might be. 68% of Jewish voters said they’ll vote Biden over Trump, and only 11% were undecided. Hell, even Bernie won’t call for a cease fire. And there’s a stupid amount of money that gets thrown at any Democrat who steps out of line to criticize Israel. Might depressed youth/base turnout lose him the election? Sure. Might also alienating a very powerful (and wealthy) ally who could further depress turnout among a hitherto reliable voting bloc? You fucking betcha.

        But an analysis like this will only lead to losing.

        Like what? Surveying likely voters? I pointed to actual poll numbers. The numbers are there if you care to look, and they’re likely the same numbers Biden’s team is reviewing to chart the best path forward in an election year.

        The fact that you seem so unwaveringly sure of yourself without a shred of evidence makes me significantly less inclined to engage, by the way. I might not respond further, so if you don’t want to waste your time formulating another quippish, vapid response, don’t.

        • alvvayson@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think it’s better you don’t respond. It’s not particularly productive to read your bad takes.

          You put way too much effort in providing links instead of actually thinking.

          • Blackbeard@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Removed by mod

            • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Removed, rule 3:

              Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (perjorative, perjorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (perjorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!

            • alvvayson@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              8
              ·
              1 year ago

              Lol, devolving to ad hominems.

              Good night.

              • Blackbeard@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                deleted by creator

politics @lemmy.world

politics@lemmy.world

Subscribe from Remote Instance

Create a post
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !politics@lemmy.world

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

Visibility: Public
globe

This community can be federated to other instances and be posted/commented in by their users.

  • 2.83K users / day
  • 7.05K users / week
  • 12.7K users / month
  • 28.3K users / 6 months
  • 194 local subscribers
  • 23.6K subscribers
  • 22.1K Posts
  • 611K Comments
  • Modlog
  • mods:
  • outrageousmatter@lemmy.world
  • aidan@lemmy.world
  • jordanlund@lemmy.world
  • 🌱 🐄🌱 @lemmy.world
  • Theonetheycall1845@lemmy.world
  • JuBe@lemmy.world
  • Lasherz@lemmy.world
  • BE: 0.19.8
  • Modlog
  • Instances
  • Docs
  • Code
  • join-lemmy.org