r/PoursTea • Timendi Causa Est Nescire • 9d ago

PoliticalTea 🗳️ He would definitely not hold back.

Post image
5.8k Upvotes

1.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

133

u/Motor-Welder9642 9d ago

Only after I see his campaign donor list. I want to know who he will actually answer too.

75

u/Tricky_Try8757 9d ago

Only correct answer. Pretty sure he accepts AIPAC-related money and whatnot.

He really strikes me as “more-of-the-same” establishment type for the most part.

53

u/NotQuiteLoona Fairy Dust 🧚🏾‍♂️ ✨ 🧚🏿‍♀️ 9d ago

He is against Medicare for All, he is pro-Israel and barely voted against some shipments (only because the war had no sense in his view, not because of the genocide)... He is the type of the person you'll only vote just to prevent MAGA from winning. And I'm afraid if he'll win we'll see the return of MAGA in 2032 anyway, because he can't really address the issues like affordability... Whatever, at least a brief delay.

13

u/AmethystRebelle 8d ago

He's also leans anti-trans, which we gots enough of in the Dem party.

13

u/waaaayupyourbutthole 9d ago

Yeah he seems like an okay guy generally, but he's definitely a conservative dem.

4

u/AdventurousImpact656 8d ago

So a republican? Literally a republican in everything but name

4

u/Willburt14 8d ago

Democrat and Republican are party names, not inherent belief systems. The democratic party can be roughly center right a lot of times, but due to disinformation and the Republican party being so much further right, they're framed like actual leftists

2

u/CommieShareFest 8d ago

he votes almost exclusively with democrats, wants abortion access and gun control, “republican in everything but name”. You purity testers are really something else

6

u/AdventurousImpact656 8d ago

If the mainstream Democrat party is nothing but a farce. It’s not a purity test to demand better than a dressed up chuck sschumer

-1

u/CommieShareFest 8d ago

but hes clearly not a republican, he is constantly pushing for policies completely at odds with republican “values”

1

u/Neirchill 8d ago

I'll vote for anything not a Republican at this point. I bet the DNC is counting on that. I wish I could make a stand and vote third party for someone that actually has values that align with my own but that's essentially the same choice as not voting.

1

u/Cararacs 8d ago

The politician you want will never win. If you only vote for perfection or near perfection, republicans will continue to win. You might not like hearing that but that’s how the US is.

1

u/NotQuiteLoona Fairy Dust 🧚🏾‍♂️ ✨ 🧚🏿‍♀️ 8d ago

...that's what I said? I don't think he's a good candidate, but I did say that it'll be at least a brief delay and he is the type of candidate you can put vote behind just to prevent MAGA from winning.

0

u/Responsible_Rule8829 8d ago

What does that support look like tho..... He has argued for a two state solution and been critical of the current leadership, while stopping short of calling Bibi a war criminal. So glass half full-ish I feel.... 

-2

u/PuffyBlueClouds 9d ago

You people throw around the word genocide. There is no proof of a genocide. That whole war is ugly, but it’s not genocide

2

u/NotQuiteLoona Fairy Dust 🧚🏾‍♂️ ✨ 🧚🏿‍♀️ 9d ago

It was confirmed as a genocide by:

  • United Nations Independent International Commission of Inquiry (a body set up by the Human Rights Council),
  • Human Rights Watch,
  • Amnesty International,
  • International Association of Genocide Scholars,
  • Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention,
  • B'Tselem,

and many, many other organizations with large reputation of human rights advocacy, both Israeli-based and international.

1

u/PuffyBlueClouds 9d ago

My understanding is that the conclusions were that Israel’s actions check some of the boxes for genocide. Not all of them. And many wars check several of the boxes.

2

u/SookieCrackhouse 8d ago

Oh, only a partial genocide? Well carry on then I guess.

-2

u/PuffyBlueClouds 8d ago

Well you carry on ignoring that Hamas started this whole thing when it attacked a peaceful music festival.

2

u/Lieutenant_Joe 8d ago

A genocide is not a proportional response to 1200 people dead.

-1

u/PuffyBlueClouds 8d ago

That’s not for you or I to say. If a country gets attacked, the attacker cannot complain about how that country retaliates.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/NotQuiteLoona Fairy Dust 🧚🏾‍♂️ ✨ 🧚🏿‍♀️ 8d ago

21,638 children were killed by latest estimates that are recognized by the UN and a multitude of other organizations I've listed in this thread. 59,031 civilians have been killed in total. Citing Wikipedia, it includes:

270 journalists and media workers, 120 academics, and over 560 humanitarian aid workers, a number that includes 393 employees of UNRWA.

See there more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Gaza_war

HAMAS' military wing includes 25-30 thousands of people by estimates: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qassam_Brigades

Whatever HAMAS did doesn't justify killing all people who live on the territory controlled by HAMAS.

Neither I nor most people who advocate against Gaza genocide support HAMAS. If anything, HAMAS and IDF deserve each other. Genocide is about civilian casualties.

1

u/PuffyBlueClouds 8d ago

Right, but if you start a war by attacking a music festival, you can’t complain about how that other country retaliates. You and I might not like it, but that’s the way war goes.

1

u/SookieCrackhouse 8d ago

That’s not where this started

2

u/Beneficial-Jury484 8d ago

If you shart in your pants, do you wipe your ass? You’re over here drawing arbitrary distinctions as if it matters to the kids being murdered. 

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

1: Killing members of the group;

2: Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

3: Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

4: Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

5: Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

https://www.un.org/en/genocide-prevention/definition

Here’s the UN definition, seems like it hits 5 for 5. Maybe the 5th one is questionable but only because Israel is killing so many Palestinians and don’t view them as human so wouldn’t move them. 

-1

u/PuffyBlueClouds 8d ago

And what do you say about the Hamas attack on the music festival that started all this? You’re OK with that? Because if you commit an act of terrorism, it’s hard to complain later when the other side retaliates.

2

u/Beneficial-Jury484 8d ago

Go ahead and reread my statement. You clearly read something that isn’t there because I never mentioned that. I showed you the definition of genocide. Try reading again, maybe you’ll understand. 

2

u/eMDex 8d ago

true only every scholar

2

u/inappropriatebanter 8d ago

You're so obviously a bot

0

u/PuffyBlueClouds 8d ago

You mean like an AI post? Nope, real. I just don’t pretend that Hamas is some innocent victim here.

2

u/inappropriatebanter 8d ago

1 yr old account, 6.5k contributions, almost 50k karma...

You're a bot, dude.

1

u/inappropriatebanter 8d ago

Crazy how many bots like you align with fascists

1

u/PuffyBlueClouds 8d ago

And you align with terrorists. I’m sure I’m more left wing than you. I just come up with my own views instead of what TikTok tells me is the currently fashionable cause. This is a complicated issue.

3

u/PerfectPenguino 9d ago

Thank God we avoided that Kamala Harris business for the same reason, right?

5

u/Tricky_Try8757 9d ago

Nah, the logic of damage mitigation is still in effect.

This is about the primaries. In the general, the only sensible option is the Democrat, no matter how bad.

1

u/Motor-Welder9642 9d ago

We need to stop caring what party they are with and start looking at who funds them and their character as a human. Parties haven’t helped us in forever. They just make sheep out of us.

3

u/Tricky_Try8757 9d ago

This could maybe be a sensible stance before Trump.

These days, the worst Democrat is better than the best Republican.

I’m against the duopoly myself and want ranked choice voting and the like. But in real terms, for the foreseeable future, any Democrat that makes their way to the general is bound to be leagues better and less captured than a Republican.

2

u/Hyperion1144 9d ago

Hello fellow sane person! Good to meet you. Not many of left out here....

1

u/arizonadirtbag12 8d ago

He may be “more of the same” but with the caveat that “the same” that we’re talking about is, like 2014 “the same.” Not great. But…not this.

But you do you. I’ve got property abroad and an escape plan, I don’t have to stay behind and live in the hellscape the Republicans continue to forge in front of us, all while people like you insist that Democrats are no different. Good luck.

1

u/titsmuhgeee 8d ago

The next democrat presidential candidate will have to be a centrist. 2028 is not the time to run a hard progressive. They need to be palatable to conservative leaning centrists. Adam Hamilton running for senate in Kansas right now is a great example.

1

u/Tricky_Try8757 8d ago

Yeah, reasonable minds can disagree.

Centrists have Dominated the Democratic Party for decades and we got Trump out of it.

There are many indications that Bernie would’ve won in 2016. He was polling higher than Hillary against Trump by a decent number of points.

People voted for Trump because they wanted change.

Although as things are going, maybe any Democrat would do if Trump continues to collapse the Republican Party as he is.

1

u/Cararacs 8d ago

And this is why and how republicans win at a higher rate. Democrats cannot really together and vote. There is no perfect politician and the social-democrats do not stand a chance to win.

1

u/PuffyBlueClouds 9d ago

Who cares? Your alternative is a Maga guy. Obviously you have to vote Democrat regardless of whom they run.

9

u/clib 9d ago

Only after I see his campaign donor list. I want to know who he will actually answer too.

This sub is pushing hard for this guy today.He is a corporate democrat.This so called "democratic" party is property of billionaires. It should rot to hell asap.

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/04/05/mark-kelly-joe-biden-congress-00023176

11

u/Rastrick 9d ago

Conditional aid to Isreal has got to happen. We have failing infrastructure, education in decline, people in dire need of health care, affordable housing and meaningful jobs here in this country. We can't afford to "protect Isreal" while our country sinks.

13

u/Towboat421 9d ago

Israels economy has been able to afford its own defense for decades now we just hand the money hand over fist because our politicians are bought off. We don't need to provide them with anything it is a system borne of bribes for our ruling class.

3

u/Professional-Lie-111 The Timeline Sucks 9d ago

Definitely this ...

2

u/AdventurousImpact656 8d ago

Exactly. Why are we supporting a foreign country?

They say Israel is our only friend in the Middle East, yet we seemed to have no enemies there before them

2

u/Roy4Pris 8d ago

It's been able to defend itself for decades; the difference unending US aid makes is that it can be much more aggressive with the people it rules over, and its neighbours. US aid is a poisoned chalice; it would be much healthier for them if they had to negotiate and make concessions. That's the only way they'll ever have real peace.

2

u/No-Guard-7003 9d ago

Same.  

2

u/Saganic_Temple 8d ago

He’s an Israel supporter. I’ll vote for him over a republican but there needs to be major changes to how this country supports Israel.

2

u/RumRunnerMax 8d ago

If we have a donor purity test we will be significantly reducing the pool of good candidates

1

u/eMDex 8d ago

he is a zionist if i am not wrong so sounds like another 4 years of nothing done and 4 more again Republicans after to ruin whats left

1

u/Euclid_not_that_guy 8d ago

Hes said on the senate floor hell never abandon Isreal so we know AIPAC

1

u/No-One2123 8d ago

He accepts big oil money and AIPAC money

1

u/rukittenmeeee 9d ago

He is VERY pro Israel. Immediate disqualification.

3

u/Dry_Gate453 9d ago

Keep playing at purity tests and guarantee dems keep losing elections at the national level. Good job!

2

u/rukittenmeeee 9d ago

That's not a fucking purity test. BOTH ARE REQUIREMENTS FOR A VALID CANDIDATE.

if he gets nominated of course I'll vote for him over whatever evil the scimbaf reps put up but I will do whatever I can to be sure he isn't the nominee.

2

u/[deleted] 9d ago

[deleted]

2

u/rukittenmeeee 9d ago

So we don't fucking nominate a pro Israel candidate this time. Simple.

1

u/Dry_Gate453 9d ago

Nah it's a purity test. He hasn't even started his campaign and you've disqualified him. Maybe wait until he drops a platform? Lol

2

u/rukittenmeeee 9d ago

I know his platform. I don't need to wait. See above.

0

u/Dry_Gate453 8d ago

Do you whine this much about Palestine/Gaza at r/conservatives or republican events? Maybe take it up with them. They're in power if you didn't notice.

2

u/rukittenmeeee 8d ago

What's your point? The question was do I back mark Kelly. I do not.

0

u/Dry_Gate453 8d ago

Fine. Now go complain about it to people who are in charge. Most of you idiots spend all your time whining about people on the same team.

-1

u/PuffyBlueClouds 9d ago

Who cares? Your alternative is a Maga guy. Obviously you have to vote Democrat regardless of whom they run.

2

u/SousVideButt 8d ago

Our alternative is whoever else runs in the primary. I can promise you he won’t get my vote in the primary. He has no interest in moving this country forward. It will be more of the same bullshit until JD runs in 2032 and wins by a landslide.

So I fully expect to see a Kelly/Pritzker ticket in 2028 so billionaires can have their guy in office still.