I’m not talking about Israel’s motivations, I’m taking about Hamas. The US has sway over Israel, but not so much Hamas. If we’re to bring an end to the conflict, it’ll require talks between Hamas and Israel, so an external facilitator needs to be trusted by at least Hamas. I think Bernie Sanders has some fundamental issues there, and him being old isn’t helping matters (though he’s certainly a better option than Biden).

Yeah, I know Sanders isn’t a hawk, and I probably would’ve voted for him in 2016 largely on that issue despite disagreeing with him on most other policies. But that doesn’t mean he’d pull funding from Israel, he’d just put conditions on it (only used for defense, and maybe require not targeting humanitarian aid trucks), but money is fungible so I don’t think it would help much.

And to say the issue has nothing to do with religion is fanciful thinking. Yeah, Hamas claims that in their manifestos, but their manifestos are absolutely religious. They’re not necessarily anti-Judaism, but they’re justifying the conflict in religious terms. They’re anti-Zionist, and Bernie sharing a religion (on paper at least) with the US’ Zionist ally could be a significant issue for credibility if the US is to try to get involved in peace talks.

At the end of the day, Hamas wants Jerusalem, which isn’t happening because it’s such an important site to both Judaism and Islam. That has everything to do with religion, and it’s why neither Israel or Hamas are interested in a two-state solution. Ending the occupation and freeing hostages wouldn’t end the conflict, things would just go back to how they were: terrorist attacks by Hamas against Israel. That won’t end until Hamas controls Jerusalem, and it might require elimination of the state of Israel.

It’s certainly an issue. How is he going to negotiate peace if he’s physically impaired?

I also don’t think Bernie Sanders would do anything meaningful to change things in Gaza. His statements on the matter have basically been, “there’s no easy solution, so let’s just push for a temporary ceasefire to get humanitarian aid in.” He doesn’t have a plan to end the conflict, nor do I think he could do the job of a diplomat to bring both sides to the table (and would Hamas even listen to him, he’s a Jew and, even if he doesn’t have ties to Israel, that’s still likely an issue for them).

He’s even older than Biden…

Who? They have to be:

• well known - they’re only getting a few months to build a campaign
• relatively centrist - a lot of people in the middle dislike Trump, so that’s who you need to court
• no major red flags - Trump will rip people apart, if the candidate has failings, they need to be conservative-friendly failings
• well-funded - perhaps the most important, and Kamala has the Biden-Harris money to use

She’s a terrible candidate, but I think she ticks the boxes above. I’m not voting for her or Trump, but I do think she’s the best option for the DNC, unless some billionaire decides to run.

I 100% agree. In 2016, she got dead last in my preference for Democrat candidates, and that was completely validated when Tulsi Gabbard completely wrecked her. In the last 4 years, she did absolutely nothing to gain my confidence in her. I don’t believe she’s a good person, a good politician, or even a good candidate.

But somehow she’s better than Trump. Maybe. I’m actually not sure anymore, because police and prison reform are really high on my list of priorities.

I’m definitely not voting for Trump, that’s a given, but I’m most likely not voting for Harris. If I lived in a swing state, maybe I’d reconsider, but I don’t so I’m not throwing my vote away to a candidate I strongly dislike. I hope Trump loses, but I don’t necessarily hope Harris wins. Screw them both, Trump should be locked up and Harris should stay home.

So Barack would be the second gentleman?

Many of those have nothing to do with Biden’s performance (this covers almost half):

• job growth etc - this is just the pandemic “ending” and NCOV2019 becoming endemic, it has absolutely nothing to do with what Biden did
• American Rescue Plan - sure, and I’m pretty sure Trump would’ve done the same, given that he pushed for getting the vaccine available
• Americans are no longer deployed overseas - are we not counting Iraq and surrounding regions? Also, Trump initiated the withdrawal from Afghanistan, Biden’s only real contribution here was to delay but still withdraw, but he did withdraw (that’s a fantastic thing)

Then the “meh”:

• judges confirmed - isn’t that just… business as usual? When positions open, they need to be filled
• black women in Court of Appeals, LGBT/Native American in cabinet - okay? Assuming they were the best people for the job, it’s not really something I’d reelect a president for
• climate investments - how effective have those investments been? I don’t know the specifics, but 8 charging stations have been built; that’s… not great

And the notable:

• infrastructure bill - I’m not super familiar with it, but I’m guessing a lot of the rest are related to this
• most Americans with health care - is this related to something he did? If so, that’s cool.
• clean water - aside from random horror stories like Flint, MI, clean water really isn’t something I think about

But the majority of those are legislative actions, not something the president does directly, other than sign bills into law. Here’s what I do expect the president to do:

• diplomacy - diplomacy with Hamas and Israel, Ukraine and Russia, Iran, and China has been pretty bad; we’re closer than ever to war with China and Iran
• balance the budget - yes, the president doesn’t control what Congress authorizes, but the executive branch has a lot of say in what that budget ought to be; the deficit is still massive, and I haven’t seen a lot of evidence of cuts (2023 was higher than 2022), and borrowing rates are quite high
• pardons - resolving Julian Assange’s legal issues was a good start, but what about Edward Snowden? Ross Ulbricht?

Trump is, perhaps, worse on the above (though he promised to free Ross Ulbricht), but that doesn’t make Biden good. And Biden being older and less capable means he’ll probably have a harder time doing the first two.

Biden is… mediocre at best, he doesn’t really excite anyone. Trump is different, so maybe he’s appealing to undecided voters, idk. For me, I live in a state that’s essentially fixed on who will win here, so I’ll be voting third party because I think that’s the most valuable use of my vote.

From the article:

This includes 62 percent of self-described Democrats or Democratic-leaning voters. Even 54 percent of people who call themselves Biden supporters think he should no longer be the party’s nominee.

I didn’t see a description of the methodology, so I don’t know if this represents the general public, or if they have flaws in the methodology. But it does seem to specifically separate Democrats and Biden supporters from the total.

We tried that on Jan 6, 2021. It didn’t go over very well.

Well, the Libertarian Party (Chase Oliver’s party) doesn’t run a primary, it runs a national caucus. He was selected as the nominee by delegates, and if you felt so inclined, you could help choose your local delegates (or become one yourself).

Jill Stein also seems to be in favor of peace in Gaza, so she’s an option as well, though she likely has less ballot access (we’ll see come November).

Chase Oliver, and he’s probably on the ballot in your state already.

That’s nuts. It’s just amazing to me how bad both major parties are on this issue.

This infographic looks super sus. How is Jill Stein leading in anything? Also, why isn’t LP candidate Chase Oliver on the list? Is there a link to the polling methodology? The result is surprising enough that I really can’t take it at face value.

Sure. The only “blanket” statements I’m willing to give are limited to his work on Free Software. His statements on pretty much everything else should probably just be ignored.

Nah, I truly believe he is that awkward and tone-deaf.