Vice President Kamala Harris' refusal to break with the Biden administration's support for Israel's assault on Gaza cost her millions of potential Democratic voters. Will the Democratic Party learn from this and listen to its voters who want leaders to oppose sending more weapons to Israel? #Gaza #ElectionImpact
To piggyback on this, left-leaning echo chambers tend to underestimate the impact of turning on Israel amongst older voters, who tend to be more religious.
From the other article covering the poll, Biden-Harris respondents were also asked how a change in policy would have affected their enthusiasm. 5% said it would make them less enthusiastic, 35% said more.
lol so this is cherry-picked data. They link to a source that shows if Kamala had been more conservative in these areas, she would’ve had more support:
It also said that 14% said her support of Israel made them more likely to vote for her. 9% said it made them less likely.
Maybe MOST importantly is that the issues the polled on, in order of importance to voters, shows Gaza ranks LAST in importance. Shame on Common Dreams, I expected better.
It’s so easy to lie with data, thanks for illustrating that
Edit: okay, this is hilarious. Even the source they linked is wrong: “New Poll Shows Gaza Was #1 Issue For Biden 2020 Voters Who Did Not Vote For Harris”
Then the actual data disproves this. Neither for Biden voters who switched or Biden voters who backed Harris, it was not the top. For those who switched, it was NEAR the top. For others, it was dead last.
I definitely agree with that. We can argue about whether Harris would have benefited from saying she’d stop arms being sent to Israel, but to say it wouldn’t have hurt her as well is ignoring how much of the public supports Israel. There’s also a lot of people on the left who would have simultaneously said they’re glad she supports stopping arms sales to Israel and yet still find some other reason not to vote for her. The decision on which way for the campaign to go on the Palestinian genocide isn’t as easy or clear cut as many seem to think.
To piggyback on this, left-leaning echo chambers tend to underestimate the impact of turning on Israel amongst older voters, who tend to be more religious.
From the other article covering the poll, Biden-Harris respondents were also asked how a change in policy would have affected their enthusiasm. 5% said it would make them less enthusiastic, 35% said more.
lol so this is cherry-picked data. They link to a source that shows if Kamala had been more conservative in these areas, she would’ve had more support:
Immigration Fossil fuels Ukraine (withdrawing support)
It also said that 14% said her support of Israel made them more likely to vote for her. 9% said it made them less likely.
Maybe MOST importantly is that the issues the polled on, in order of importance to voters, shows Gaza ranks LAST in importance. Shame on Common Dreams, I expected better.
It’s so easy to lie with data, thanks for illustrating that
Edit: okay, this is hilarious. Even the source they linked is wrong: “New Poll Shows Gaza Was #1 Issue For Biden 2020 Voters Who Did Not Vote For Harris”
Then the actual data disproves this. Neither for Biden voters who switched or Biden voters who backed Harris, it was not the top. For those who switched, it was NEAR the top. For others, it was dead last.
Also, the poll is exclusive to swing states.
Skimmed the article and I’m still confused. Why can’t people just link to the actual data?
I definitely agree with that. We can argue about whether Harris would have benefited from saying she’d stop arms being sent to Israel, but to say it wouldn’t have hurt her as well is ignoring how much of the public supports Israel. There’s also a lot of people on the left who would have simultaneously said they’re glad she supports stopping arms sales to Israel and yet still find some other reason not to vote for her. The decision on which way for the campaign to go on the Palestinian genocide isn’t as easy or clear cut as many seem to think.