238

US Muslim leaders who supported Republican Donald Trump to protest against the Biden administration’s support for Israel’s war on Gaza and attacks on Lebanon have been deeply disappointed by his cabinet picks, they tell Reuters.

“Trump won because of us and we’re not happy with his Secretary of State pick and others,” says Rabiul Chowdhury, a Philadelphia investor who chaired the Abandon Harris campaign in Pennsylvania and co-founded Muslims for Trump. Muslim support for Trump helped him win Michigan and may have factored into other swing state wins, strategists believe.

(page 2) 48 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Dadifer@lemmy.world 33 points 10 hours ago

Ahha hahahahahhaa hahahahaaha

[-] Backlog3231@reddthat.com 2 points 5 hours ago

Woah hey, it's too soon to know which specific minority to blame yet!

[-] ThePyroPython@lemmy.world 22 points 9 hours ago

Enjoy watching the genocide of your people, you'll be next, so instead of crying crocodile tears why don't you do something PROACTIVE about it.

All the information is on the task card, you have two months, your time starts now.

[-] Jas91a@lemmy.world 14 points 9 hours ago

How could any Muslim think Trump would not be bad for them.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] WrenFeathers@lemmy.world 6 points 7 hours ago

It’s not like they weren’t warned.

[-] Loduz_247@lemmy.world 22 points 10 hours ago

Muslims were scammed in this election for voting for Trump or Jill Stein

[-] adarza@lemmy.ca 27 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

that's what musk was selling. to muslims and middle-easterners in michigan harris was a pro-israel, for pennsylvania's jewish population she was pro-palestine. and they were hyper-local with the targeting.. down to individual city blocks.

[-] Ioughttamow@fedia.io 8 points 8 hours ago

In the few days leading up to the election I got two texts, definitely crafted to seem like they were from a Harris aligned pac, but it was saying she was unreservedly behind Israel, and seemed off. I told them to fuck the selves and reported as spam

[-] pycorax@lemmy.world 4 points 6 hours ago

Wow that's actually insane with how blatent that is. I imagine shit like this has a huge effect on the politically ignorant.

[-] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 6 points 7 hours ago

were scammed

You spell 'failed critical thinking' with a w. Okay.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] WaxiestSteam69@lemmy.world 8 points 8 hours ago

What were they expecting? He showed everyone who he was and they still voted for him.

[-] Talaraine@fedia.io 9 points 9 hours ago

Oh no! It's the consequence of my actions!

[-] Ep1cFac3pa1m@lemmy.world 10 points 9 hours ago
[-] EleventhHour@lemmy.world 7 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

When someone has a dog shit for brains, you do not pity them. You just put them outside, so they don’t stink up the house.

[-] eran_morad@lemmy.world 6 points 9 hours ago
[-] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 6 points 9 hours ago

At this point I'm worried about the leopards. Those guys are going to be battling chronic obesity very soon.

[-] ZagamTheVile@lemmy.world 5 points 8 hours ago

At least they'll have access to health care.

Shit, wait.

[-] mp3@lemmy.ca 5 points 9 hours ago

Oh no, the consequences of my choice!

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 6 points 9 hours ago
[-] Keeponstalin@lemmy.world 3 points 9 hours ago

It's crazy how many prefer to blame the uncommitted movement, people who fought the hardest to change the Democratic Party's unconditional support for genocide through every democratic channel possible, over the Democratic Party for refusing to change position, at the cost of critical voters in swing states.

I would expect a campaign who's key concern is winning against a fascist to do everything in their power to win as many votes as possible.

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 5 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

You forget why trump is even a thing in national politics...

In 2015 when the primaries happened Hillary's campaign controlled the DNC and pushed for trump because he was the worst possible opponent and they thought it would scare people into voting for Hillary despite her being wildly unpopular.

They're 1 out of 3, but the DNC leadership loves trump because he lets them run even less popular moderates and take bribes from even worse industries/billionaires while still having a 33% chance of winning.

To them, it's a smart bet.

Which is why we shouldn't let them anywhere near the DNC.

They could have easily beat trump, but the want the awful "compromises" they say they have to do to win elections. It's why they keep saying it despite it never helping

[-] Keeponstalin@lemmy.world 5 points 8 hours ago

Neoliberalism has been dragging this country to Fascism since Democrats went the way of Third Way Politics

[-] fluxion@lemmy.world 1 points 7 hours ago

This wasn't a no-brainer. There were far more Jewish people who'd tank the election toward Trump and give us this same shit show. The only viable hope was intense pressure afterward. Trump was always far more likely to backstab than Kamala, at least with her there was a chance of stronger pressure than Biden, vs. zero pressure from Trump.

[-] Keeponstalin@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago

That's not true either. The polls I linked take into consideration votes that would be lost, and it's still a net +6.

For example, 79% of Jewish Americans voted for Harris. Or just shy of 4.6 million voters

25% considered Israel a major policy item. Or just shy of 1.15 million Harris voters.

Looking at how Jewish Americans views on a permanent ceasefire and conditioal military aid, a majority support it

52.5% support withholding military aid compared to 23% to disagree with that decision.

23% of the 1.15 Million that consider Israel a top issue leaves us with 230,000 Jewish Americans.

Even if we assume all of these Jewish Americans are Democrat, which we have no way of confirming one way or the other, let's compare that to the uncommitted movement. Total uncommitted in the Primary was 706,591 (Which may have been undercounted). On average, general turnout is twice that of primary turnout. Which would reflect over 1,400,000 uncommitted votes in the general as an estimate. Considering how widespread anti-genocide sentiment is, I would expect more than that. But it's not like we have any data, other than the current results.

[-] fluxion@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

Interesting data, but you also gotta factor in the AIPAC rat-fucking that would work overtime to overturn opinions not just amongst Jewish voters but by exploiting anti-"terrorist" sentiments in general from both parties.There's a lot of political machinery in place that's deeply embedded. Trump would also be piling on with his own campaigning to exploit that.

But we'll never know for certain i guess.

[-] Keeponstalin@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago

That's why the best way to counteract that as a campaign would be to message about conditional military aid for a permanent ceasefire just before voting begins. That way AIPAC doesn't have time to counter with attack ads. For context, it took AIPAC 25 million and 8 months to unseat 2 members of The Squad for being anti-genocide. Less people would hear about the pivot since it would have happened so late, but it's still enough time to galvanize grassroots support and convince others to go out of their way to vote.

[-] fluxion@lemmy.world 2 points 5 hours ago

That's fair, would have been impressive to see that.

[-] theuniqueone@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 4 hours ago

Stop blaming minorities that their families being killed by you make them reluctant to vote for you is my message to the blue MAGA ghouls in the comments.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 0 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

This is just islamophobic. Why not ask white people who overwhelmingly voted for Trump?

[-] banshee@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago

This doesn't make any sense in the context of the article. And we're all deeply disappointed in the white people too.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›
this post was submitted on 15 Nov 2024
238 points (95.8% liked)

politics

19096 readers
3230 users here now

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

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS