Reading through this article, I doubt this satisfies those who want as a hard line, a cease fire called for, or demanded, by use of halting all support until Israel concedes, but I think it does...
The area where Harris is most likely to differ from Biden, allies and analysts say, is on Israel. Despite her public support for Biden’s position, her private comments and concerns as the war has unfolded suggest she would be open to challenging Israel more directly, according to people familiar with her views who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private conversations.
“The best-developed [policy] in terms of what could change is on the Middle East, because they know what’s not working,” said Ivo Daalder, a former U.S. ambassador to NATO who has known and worked with Gordon for decades. “There is plenty of evidence that a Harris administration and Phil would urge a fresh look at how we approach our overall Middle East policy, which they’re pretty clear now has to have an end state for the Palestinians at its core.”
Reading through this article, I doubt this satisfies those who want as a hard line, a cease fire called for, or demanded, by use of halting all support until Israel concedes, but I think it does make folks like me feel better. I want a cease fire too, but I think both negotiating parties are fucking around and the Palestinians are being screwed by them and I'm more realistic about the presidential policy, I think
I thought about that and I do contribute to that thread. I also considered putting it in the Gaza Israel thread. I don't and won't spam the front page with politics. However, I thought there might...
I thought about that and I do contribute to that thread. I also considered putting it in the Gaza Israel thread.
I don't and won't spam the front page with politics. However, I thought there might be some here who would appreciate this insight into likely changes to the US approach to this tricky geopolitical problem.
I'm sure there are, but my guess is that if someone is engaged enough to give a cogent opinion, they probably pay attention to the weekly thread. I'm as wary of siloing and opinion bubbles as the...
I'm sure there are, but my guess is that if someone is engaged enough to give a cogent opinion, they probably pay attention to the weekly thread.
I'm as wary of siloing and opinion bubbles as the next guy, but I completely understand it if people want an easier way to isolate themselves from the neverending torrent of anxiety-inducing politics that the US has become. It's one thing to stay abreast of political developments, but that can quickly spiral into obsession and paralysis for some people. I think that's why the weekly thread exists.
It's also good to remember that this site is based in Canada, run by one near-saintly Canuck with a dream of having even one civil place on the Internet. If @Deimos thinks US politics needs to be silo'd unless there's some exceptional reason, I think it's best we follow his lead.
Honestly to me, "megathread" comments are nails on a chalkboard. And coming into a thread that seems to have conversation and the only convo is "megathread meta" is frustrating. But, I'm not the...
Honestly to me, "megathread" comments are nails on a chalkboard. And coming into a thread that seems to have conversation and the only convo is "megathread meta" is frustrating. But, I'm not the boss of folks.
The megathread isn't mandatory and I highly encourage people to use filters or ignore a post. This one spans the topics of two megathreads! And at the end of a week, the megathreads will stop appearing for folks who don't keep at least a 1 week timeframe on their view.
@boxer_dogs_dance was very thoughtful and is a frequent poster. I'd rather see more trust that they're aware of what they're doing with their posts. And probably we need a meta megathread conversation as the election nears.
But which megathread? Personally I don't read the US politics one because I'm not interested, but I do read the Israel/Hamas one. Depending on which thread you choose, I wouldn't have seen it. And...
But which megathread? Personally I don't read the US politics one because I'm not interested, but I do read the Israel/Hamas one. Depending on which thread you choose, I wouldn't have seen it. And if your put it in both, you split the discussion.
Comments insisting posts about US politics be put into the megathread are more disruptive than those posts ever are. Someone who really doesn't want to see US politics can use tag filtering. The...
Comments insisting posts about US politics be put into the megathread are more disruptive than those posts ever are. Someone who really doesn't want to see US politics can use tag filtering. The megathread exists to avoid the front page being overrun by posts about US politics, so if that's not happening, there's no plus side to leaving comments on any front page posts about US politics.
Mirror: https://archive.is/Ua36N
Reading through this article, I doubt this satisfies those who want as a hard line, a cease fire called for, or demanded, by use of halting all support until Israel concedes, but I think it does make folks like me feel better. I want a cease fire too, but I think both negotiating parties are fucking around and the Palestinians are being screwed by them and I'm more realistic about the presidential policy, I think
This should probably go in the weekly US politics thread. It's not particularly momentous, though it may prove important in the long run.
I thought about that and I do contribute to that thread. I also considered putting it in the Gaza Israel thread.
I don't and won't spam the front page with politics. However, I thought there might be some here who would appreciate this insight into likely changes to the US approach to this tricky geopolitical problem.
I'm sure there are, but my guess is that if someone is engaged enough to give a cogent opinion, they probably pay attention to the weekly thread.
I'm as wary of siloing and opinion bubbles as the next guy, but I completely understand it if people want an easier way to isolate themselves from the neverending torrent of anxiety-inducing politics that the US has become. It's one thing to stay abreast of political developments, but that can quickly spiral into obsession and paralysis for some people. I think that's why the weekly thread exists.
It's also good to remember that this site is based in Canada, run by one near-saintly Canuck with a dream of having even one civil place on the Internet. If @Deimos thinks US politics needs to be silo'd unless there's some exceptional reason, I think it's best we follow his lead.
Honestly to me, "megathread" comments are nails on a chalkboard. And coming into a thread that seems to have conversation and the only convo is "megathread meta" is frustrating. But, I'm not the boss of folks.
The megathread isn't mandatory and I highly encourage people to use filters or ignore a post. This one spans the topics of two megathreads! And at the end of a week, the megathreads will stop appearing for folks who don't keep at least a 1 week timeframe on their view.
@boxer_dogs_dance was very thoughtful and is a frequent poster. I'd rather see more trust that they're aware of what they're doing with their posts. And probably we need a meta megathread conversation as the election nears.
But which megathread? Personally I don't read the US politics one because I'm not interested, but I do read the Israel/Hamas one. Depending on which thread you choose, I wouldn't have seen it. And if your put it in both, you split the discussion.
Comments insisting posts about US politics be put into the megathread are more disruptive than those posts ever are. Someone who really doesn't want to see US politics can use tag filtering. The megathread exists to avoid the front page being overrun by posts about US politics, so if that's not happening, there's no plus side to leaving comments on any front page posts about US politics.