Well, I get what you’re saying, but I think Harris’ failure to negotiate with these groups is entirely on her. The Uncommitted movement’s goals were very lofty, but their demands were small. They wanted State Rep. Ruwa Romman to give a speech at the DNC, and a leaked draft showed it was a very mild speech that didn’t even condemn Israel. It just called for an end to the war. After the DNC declined, they asked her to meet with families who’d lost loved ones in Gaza, and she ignored the request. Finally, they gave her until September 15th to hold a meeting with them, and she again ignored them, so they decided not to endorse her.
The Uncommitted movement didn’t create the problems Harris had with the Muslim community; Biden’s handling of Gaza did that. The Uncommitted movement just took that anger, organized it, and put it towards productive action. That’s what activist leaders are supposed to do. The Uncommitted leadership was clearly looking for any gesture towards the Palestinian community that they could take to their supporters, and Harris just wouldn’t do it. You have to do something to win an activist groups’ support. Endorsing her after she snubbed them wouldn’t have convinced the Uncommitted members to vote for Harris, if would have convinced them their leaders were pushovers.
And that sentiment, writ across the country, handed the election on a platter to the Republican party. Who will be arguably worse for Palestine that the Democrats.
Ultimately none of the Uncommitted arguments are wrong - I would go so far to say they are reasonable - but they presume that the alternative is better than the incumbent. Which I believe is manifestly misplaced in the 2024 election. All well and good to withhold support because you’ve been ignored, but this is a prime example of cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Anyway. I respect that you’re clarifying and I appreciate that.
Well, I get what you’re saying, but I think Harris’ failure to negotiate with these groups is entirely on her. The Uncommitted movement’s goals were very lofty, but their demands were small. They wanted State Rep. Ruwa Romman to give a speech at the DNC, and a leaked draft showed it was a very mild speech that didn’t even condemn Israel. It just called for an end to the war. After the DNC declined, they asked her to meet with families who’d lost loved ones in Gaza, and she ignored the request. Finally, they gave her until September 15th to hold a meeting with them, and she again ignored them, so they decided not to endorse her.
The Uncommitted movement didn’t create the problems Harris had with the Muslim community; Biden’s handling of Gaza did that. The Uncommitted movement just took that anger, organized it, and put it towards productive action. That’s what activist leaders are supposed to do. The Uncommitted leadership was clearly looking for any gesture towards the Palestinian community that they could take to their supporters, and Harris just wouldn’t do it. You have to do something to win an activist groups’ support. Endorsing her after she snubbed them wouldn’t have convinced the Uncommitted members to vote for Harris, if would have convinced them their leaders were pushovers.
And that sentiment, writ across the country, handed the election on a platter to the Republican party. Who will be arguably worse for Palestine that the Democrats.
Ultimately none of the Uncommitted arguments are wrong - I would go so far to say they are reasonable - but they presume that the alternative is better than the incumbent. Which I believe is manifestly misplaced in the 2024 election. All well and good to withhold support because you’ve been ignored, but this is a prime example of cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Anyway. I respect that you’re clarifying and I appreciate that.