- Joined
- Jul 28, 2010
- Messages
- 80,967
- Reaction score
- 68,099
That doesn't make much sense. What is more damaging to her brand? Publicly professing a whole bunch of love and sympathy for Palestine, and then voting to give more weapons to Israel, or actually standing behind what she supposedly believes in and has sold to her base? I don't think Republicans attacking her for voting against Israel would have much of an effect on her politically(in terms of public support). Pissing off her base by what will be viewed as a great betrayal? That might do some damage.So you would rather a person like AOC, a person who already gets smeared by right wingers, liberals, and the media, she should have given them a free shot at her over a meaningless bill that was never going to pass?
But if she truly believes that, and believes that is what Israel is responsible for, she would not be voting for more military aid for Israel. That goes for anybody who voted for it, while talking out the side of their mouths over this shit. It's quite the contradiction.For what? To show she is against a genocide she has repeatedly said she is against?
I think the point is that if you profess to hold certain principles, a thing like politics shouldn't get in the way of them. The bill was gonna pass with or without her vote, so what would be the downside of her voting against it? Getting attacked by the pro-Israel crowd like she already has?Are we not aware that people like her, Bernie, or Omar are an extremely tiny majority of elected government and don't have much power to change things by vote?
Seems to me she's more concerned with outside factors that could hurt her, like donors. To that end, it would be fair to call her a two faced politician bowing down to the almighty dollar, rather than some renegade that is trying to actually change things.

