State Department official resigns after Biden administration says Israel not blocking Gaza aid
A career State Department official resigned from her post on Tuesday, saying she could no longer work for the Biden administration after it released a report concluding that Israel was not preventing the flow of aid to Gaza.
Stacy Gilbert, who served as a senior civilian-military advisor to the State Department's Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration (PRM), sent an email to staff saying she was resigning because she felt the State Department had made the wrong assessment, The Washington Post reported, citing officials who read the note.
The report was filed in response to President Joe Biden issuing a national security memorandum (NSM-20) in early February on whether the administration finds credible Israel's assurances that its use of US weapons do not violate either American or international law.
The report said there were reasonable grounds to believe Israel on several occasions had used American-supplied weapons "inconsistent" with international humanitarian law, but said it could not make a definitive assessment - enough to prevent the suspension of arms transfers.
Biden isn't going to win dude. He's losing, hard L style right now.
Its not an issue with fptp, its not strategic voting.
He's a shitty candidate that was always a comprise/ most-least preferred candidate and he's not going to win.
Continuing to make the arguments that we need to stick with Biden is basically arguing to give the election to Trump.
Shitty compared to whom? To the leading republican? Are you high?
"Generic Democrat" polls 12 points higher than Biden.
You are leaving 12 points on the table with Biden. Interestingly, this is also the differential polling error associated with a Biden/ Trump head to head.
12 points is about the number Biden needs to be leading Trump to be 'confident' in victory. So quite literally "Any generic Democrat" is a less shitty candidate than Biden.
I've concluded and am pretty sure of my conclusions that in this context yes, people be high as FUCK
So what's your solution? Who has a better shot at winning the election in November if they started campaigning today? I want a specific name and why you think it would work. You know better than everyone, this should be easy for you (everyone else, watch for this sidestep and refusal to actually answer or back up anything).
You're really good at claiming (almost to a point of preference) that Biden will lose and why we shouldn't support them but not once have you provided anything of value that people can take action on. Everything you post appears to be designed to make people more apathetic and less likely to be involved, why is that?
Its not my job to give you a solution. I just need you to be real about the probability of failure of the strategy that you seem to be pot-committed to. And to be clear, we haven't had a convention yet, so there is still time to change.
I'm offering you an analysis that makes a conclusion, that based on current polling, Biden can't win this election. You might find it unpalatable, but that's not my problem. Hope is a false
But this isn't new news'. Biden has been struggling in this way for over a year, before Israel/ Gaza became hot. Biden's chances have gone from "rough" to "very unlikely". He's actively working to distance himself from the positions of his base. Instead of rejecting Trump's policy positions, he adopts them. Biden is catering to a non-existent center. It seems like he genuinely thinks that some republican voters are going to show up for him. There is 0 evidence from the previous three elections that any voters are convertible.
On the other side, maybe he gets laughed at, but Trump is going to the places that voters are and trying to get them (the sneaker thing, libertarian convention). Trump is trying to win this election. You win elections post 2016 by growing a base and driving them out to vote. It worked for Trump in 2016. It worked for Biden in 2020: Biden took on the most progressive platform in recent history to grow his base to include progressives.
Whats Biden's platform in 2024? I don't know about you but I have no fucking clue based on the campaigns messaging. Its all, just like you are parroting here, about how bad Trump is. And while you might find that convincing enough, there are obviously enough voters out there (about 12%) who don't and that you can't win the election without.
So I'm sorry. It hurts if he's your hucklebee, but the guy can't win right now. He's statistically lost at this point. If beating Trump really is your goal, then you need to come up with a better candidate. Continuing to push for Biden when he can't win dooms us all.
You keep saying Biden needs to be replaced but there's literally no candidate to replace him with that beats Trump. If you're so sure we need to ditch Biden, and you're not advocating for Trump to win, it seems pretty fair to ask what you think should happen. Until you do that it's pretty clear you're just spewing bullshit in bad faith.
Sigh.. Just because some one is pointing out the flaws in your approach to electoralism doesn't mean they are acting in bad faith. Pretending that everyone who has a perspective you disagree with is out to get you is a poor way to go through life.
Recognizing that Biden can't win is step one. There really is no point in a discussion around alternatives until that point is accepted. We can't turn this ship until collectively, people understand that this guy isn't going to win the election. It has to show up in mass, in the polling, and in the collective conversation.
As far as determining an alternative, there is a straightforward mechanism for that. Its called a convention, and conveniently, there is already one scheduled. Supreme court decided post 2016 that Dem's can do whatever the fuck they want. So delegates go to the convention unaffiliated and we figure it out there.
It really doesn't matter who the nominee is, so long as its neither Biden or Hillary. Any generic Democratic governor or senator will do fine. Trump is deeply unpopular. The problem we're up against is that some how, Biden has managed his presidency in such a way as to be more unpopular than Trump.
And I'm telling you, there is no viable candidate you can nominate that has a better chance than Biden. "Generic Democrat" isn't a candidate. Who's polling better and is willing to run?
That's the kind of take that gets Trump into office in 2024.
So then what take should I have to prevent Trump from winning? Specifics. You know what works, tell us. So far I've got:
Why can't you defend anything you say? Why do you need to try and dodge questions and play rhetorical games? I have had 1 simple question this entire time and you won't answer it.
You should first accept that based on all the information we have currently, Biden isn't viable as a candidate, and that by continuing to promote the position that Biden is the only option when they obviously aren't even an option at this point.
So step one: Stop gaslighting people.
People know when they are being lied to, and they especially know when they are being lied to by some one who has fully deluded themselves into thinking they know whats going on. Its what you are doing here with the false choice dichotomy you continuously try to draw.
Step two: Stop supporting a failed strategy.
Biden can be moved, and the DNC can and will swap him out if its obvious he can't win. We need to show that this candidate can't win now by audibly making it clear they don't have enough support to win the election. This means ceasing to engage in apologetic for Biden. Put your criticisms where they belong: at the feet of Joe Biden and the DNC. They are the ones failing to do the work necessary this election cycle and if you think they aren't listening, you are wrong. They are. They hear you here and elsewhere. You need to connect the strategy of "Blue-No-Matter-Who" to exactly why Biden is shaping up to lose this election whole cloth. Biden won 2020 because he had to come get progressive voters, black voters, youth voters. He did so through surrogates and through his platform. In 2020 Biden basically did a lift and shift of Bernies entire suite of platform issues. He needed to do so to get Bernies voters to come to him. By relinquishing your consent and getting nothing in return, you are setting Biden up for failure. Stop promoting this approach to voting. It does not work. It will lose us the election.
Step Three: If you seek alternatives, you should propose them.
You seem like clever folk. Why don't you come up with some alternatives to Biden you find acceptable and which you think could be palatable to a broader audience. Present them here. We can have a conversation about them.
We only entered the reformed primary system ~40 years ago. Its completely reasonable to expect that if Biden steps back as candidate, we can decide the entire thing at the convention. Its how the primaries have worked in this country for the majority of its history. Wilding et al. vs. DNC Services Corporation et al. 2017: The DNC’s choice of how to conduct its presidential nominating process is protected by the First Amendment, which means they can do what-ever the fuck they want to decide a candidate. They could hold a potato sack race if they so choose. There is no requirement that they regard their own charter in this manner.
You seem to want to have an option before recognizing that the strategy you are committed to can't win. That's a personal preference of yours. And so if that's your preference, you should propose some alternatives. I don't feel the need to have an alternative in place once I recognize that the strategy I've selected doesn't work. I personally recognize the importance of 'empty space' ; that if something can-not work, I recognize the importance of abandoning a failed approach as-soon-as-possible to create room for another option to exist. Its not about knowing what I'll do instead, its about creating the space for another option to exist.
To put it into metaphor, you are basically arguing that if I have an abusive boyfriend/ girlfriend/ partner, someone its just not going to work out with, I shouldn't break up with them before I know who my next partner will be.
This is pure conjecture. You have not provided any viable alternative. Once you do that we can discuss other options and if Biden is actually less viable.
Can you point to a single misleading or inaccurate statement I've made about Joe Biden or the Democrats? Where have I ignored criticism? Everything else you say is based on this false and misleading premise that you've created and continuously cycle back to. You're claiming that my strategy is flawed without providing evidence of alternatives. It's amusing that you've written the same thing this many times to avoid backing up your claim but I think I'm good for now. You're just going to keep playing games. Luckily it's pretty obvious at this point.
See you later!
Its not a false premise whatsoever that Biden will not be the next president. Its the constant theme in all the data we have available to us on the matter.
First approval polls:
On this date of Trumps presidency, he was dick deep in covid and maybe the most uncertain period of time in recent history.
Even with all that, he had five points on Biden: 42.6 to 37.8. Trump remained a one term president.
Same date of George H.W. Bush's presidency, Bush had 3 points on Biden, at 40.
Jimmy Carter, another one term president. 40.7 on today's date in his presidency.
Literally every single one term President of the last 60 years was polling higher than Joe Biden is currently polling, at this exact point in their presidency.
Presidents that won a second term? ALL of them were beating Bidens currently approval by 10 points or better on this date of their presidency. And more importantly, their polling percentage over time was rising, as in, going up and to the right. Bidens polling isn't going up and to the right. Its going down. He's not gaining traction, he's losing it.
Now onto head to head polls:
Biden over-polls by about 4%, Trump under-polls by about 8% when compared to real election results:
How is Biden polling in a head to head? He's losing to Trump, and has been losing to Trump in head to head polling for over 400 days. Out of the last 50 polls, Biden has lost 47 of them in a head to head with Trump. Thats not accounting for differential sampling error. If you account for the typical pattern of sampling error we would associate with a Biden v Trump head to head, Biden has won precisely 0 polls against Trump in the last 400 days.
If the election were tomorrow, it wouldn't even be close. Trump would win in a blow out.
You need to pull your head out of the sand.
See… this is the problem with discussing these things with people like you. You were asked a simple question as a rebuttal to your suggestion that people not vote for Biden, and you have no answer.
I’ve asked this same question to nearly every one of you that I’ve spoke with on the subject.
None of you can answer it.
Making a criticism doesn't require that I have a solution to the problem that's been set up by the insistence that Biden be the nominee. If that leaves you feeling incomplete, that's your issue.
Complaining about something while offering no solutions and expecting to be taken seriously is about as fucking stupid as not voting and expecting things to change.
You were asked a simple question, that for all the talk you people seem to do here- should be simple to answer…
But NONE of you can answer it. It’s litetally your shut down code. And I’m going to ensure that everyone knows it.
I just don't think your attempt to derail the primary thrust of my point is worth answering. I didn't comment about who else might run or how well they would be doing.
You are trying to engage in a red-herring fallacy, and the royal "we" (since you used the royal "you") are dutifully ignoring it.
There being or not being other viable candidates is irrelevant to Bidens chances at winning. Its a non-sequitur. If its important to you, you should come up with an answer to that question. I would be interested to hear what you come back with.
Nope. That might work on the high school kids you’re used to arguing with, but I’m holding you to the wheelhouse of the topic:
Your inability to answer a simple question. You can either answer it, or admit your entire argument is flawed.
You come here and ask people to not vote for Biden, without suggesting an alternative. So either you’re actively trying to get Trump elected, or you don’t know how elections work.
Either answer the question, or admit to one of the aforementioned.
Your choice.
The answer is Gretchen Whitmer
Neither will your rhetorical slight of hand.
If you think Biden can win this election, show me the receipts. Otherwise, you can take a seat.
So you refuse to answer. Predictable. Thanks for playing. We’re done here.
Nice rage quit kiddo.
Like I said, you are more than welcome to come up with alternatives. You can come back when you've reconsidered your position. Enjoy the ride home.
Rage quit? Dude… you’re the one refusing to answer a simple question. And then trying to pretend you’re on some more high ground?
You’re not.
If you don’t have an answer, then you have no reason to be telling people who to vote for, or not to vote at all. Simple as that. Well, you do have that right-
But no one in their right mind should take you seriously.
Since I guess you missed your bus, here is a little light reading for you:
https://learn.saylor.org/mod/page/view.php?id=64978
My argument: President Joe Biden has a diminished chance of winning the 2024 election based on the way his campaign is being conducted and current polling data. He's unlikely to win if the trends, which have persisted for over 600 days, stay consistent.
In response, you introduce an unrelated issue— that I need to posit an alternative candidate otherwise, I support Donald Trump. This is irrelevant to the original argument concerning Biden's campaign performance and polling.
By shifting the discussion to my perceived political preferences and pretending I owe you an alternative, you are diverting attention away from the actual argument about Biden’s campaign. This move aims to sidestep the evaluation of Biden's campaign effectiveness and polling issues.
You are not engaging with or refuting the evidence presented regarding Biden’s campaign strategy and polling numbers. Instead, you are focus on attacking or questioning my political stance, which is not the topic of discussion.
The goal of this is to move the conversation away from a factual analysis of Biden’s reelection chances based on objective criteria (campaign strategies and polling) to a subjective and unrelated debate about political allegiances.
Your binary thinking implies that not supporting Biden equates to supporting Trump, which is a logical fallacy itself—false dilemma. Neither this, or your previous fallacy are true or relevant to the discussion at hand.
I just did. Gretchen Whitmer
So your offering is someone that’s not even running..
My good man.
That was never your criteria, until I answered.
And, don’t even bother editing, I’m taking screenshots. Just kidding. But I could, and you still got clapped.
It’s implied. Otherwise, why not just say…. Darth Vader, or anyone else with zero chance to win. Because making suit up is SO fun!
I asked in good faith, who could win November if not Biden. It’s a given that I was talking CURRENTLY RUNNING candidates.
But you people never respond in good faith. Which is exactly why I asked what I did. To show to everyone how you cannot answer a simple question that challenges your agenda.
Thanks for adding your two cents.
And why would I edit? I’ve nothing to hide. It’s all there. You and your pal getting…. Clapped? Is that a thing? Sure…
let’s go with that.
Not entertaining trolls anymore. This has gone on long enough. You’re both out of gas.
My post was made quite clear. And proven.
Thanks.
It was not clear, otherwise I wouldn’t have answered— Gretchen Whitmer.
Gretchen Whitmer
She’s not running. Try again.
Lol
That you can’t understand implied meaning isn’t my fault. You came in here with the intent to disrupt by answering a question unrealistically.
You’re proving my point for me.
None of you have anything to offer yet want even to not vote for Biden.
No one is wondering why anymore.
I’m voting for Biden, but I’d rather vote for Gretchen Whitmer.
Fair enough. I don’t like him either. But I know what needs to be done.
I feel this same way. But I understand people that don’t want to vote for Biden because of the genocide. Their anger is justified. Maybe they’ll feel differently in 6 months, but if they don’t, I respect their decision. It’s their vote, not mine. All I can do is plead my case that Trump and Project 2025 is an existential threat.
On that we can agree.
Gretchen Whitmer, plus she can win Michigan, which has been lost to the genocide.
ROFL! She’s not even running. My god man… you people really need representation. You’re al over the place. How on earth can you expect to be taken seriously when you answer a question about who can beat Trump in the 2024 election….
And your answer is someone that’s not even running?
Get someone to speak for you if you want to be taken seriously.
The question:
I answered it. Now, you’re moving the goalposts and they have to be running? And you want me to take you seriously? Lol
You’re mistaken, I never once said “if they start campaigning today.”
And even if she started campaigning, she STILL doesn’t have a chance.
Oh really:
Really. That was written in January, and it’s essentially an op-ed piece.
Come on man. Do better.
Why? I don’t need to. I answered MegaUltraChicken’s question.
Exactly this. Ask them every time. And none of them ever have an answer. They’re not here to support third party candidates- they’re here to sway votes away from Biden.
And suggesting people vote third party when it is well known that not one of them have a remote chance to win, is purposefully trying to give the election to Trump.