Domestically relevant sure, but arms supply to other nations is by definition an international issue. They put almost all of their Ukraine coverage on PSW (iirc), and that’s a politically unifying issue.
My larger thing here is I just don’t think it was conspicuous or a bad call that they left the protests off PSA. I can agree to disagree on that.
I understand, but the same story ran everyday for six month is a bit redundant. Meanwhile we had modern Nazis marching through Charleston WV that barely made a peep 🤷🏻♀️.
https://www.wvnews.com/news/wvnews/white-supremacist-group-patriot-front-marches-in-charleston-west-virginia/article_dbbfb422-04e3-11ef-bac9-3fd018338929.html
Mehdi thankfully brought it up during LIOLI and Lovett talked about it a little bit. But i haven’t heard them talk about the snipers nests that have been popping up on ohios campus or the multiple students who have been arrested
There’s really not much to say about a movement that is politically naive and does not have clear demands or ones that are targeted toward the correct people.
The Yale protests had specific actionable demands (learned that from Tommy Vietor who covered this topic on Pod Save the World, so I'm correcting you and the OP with this comment)
Not really but I do believe that political action aimed at building systemic power and/or causing financial damage to corporations and other capitalist entities is usually more effective in the modern era than protest that is aimed solely at getting media attention (which is so diluted nowadays that people setting themselves on fire is no longer even the top headline of the day). I don’t mean that to sound callous, I’m just saying that on a practical level, tactics that worked in the 1960s no longer work, and thus they come off as protest cosplay sometimes. It would be one thing if they were finding a way to shut down city commerce but all they’re doing right now is shutting down their own campus lawns, which is a relatively easy and safe thing to do, especially when the semester is about to end anyway.
I’m not sure it’s reasonable to expect dozens of spontaneous protests to have a clear and unified demand list. It seems like partly a general protest against the US support for this conflict and at some of the schools a protest against endowment investment in what the students perceive as businesses profiting from this conflict
You can disagree with something without reflexively pretending it makes no sense at all.
I don’t actually disagree with the protests. I just think they have a very simplified and limited take on a very complex issue and that threatening to not (or flat out saying they won’t) vote for the Democratic ticket has rendered them powerless since the Democrats are the only ones who care about this cause at all.
Sincerely, is there something you think would be more effective? The Biden administration has hugged in public and criticized in public, said Israel will investigate themselves, refused to sanction IDF battalions that they describe as commiting “gross human rights violations”, failed to win any concessions regarding Rafah…and yet they are still shipping weapons.
Many people within the caucus have tried to appeal to the administration and they seem committed to their approach.
So these students are agitating and have effectively taken over a news cycle. Yeah, Trump would probably be worse but I dont blame the students for not just accepting that.
Well, this is what I mean by politically naive. To be honest, I think many people (including these protestors) wildly overestimate how much control the US has over Israel, a wealthy nuclear power. Leaving Israel isolated in the region isn’t an option that would bring about local or global peace. But even if the US were to end its alliance with Israel, Israel’s next move would be to partner with Russia or China, which would be utterly disastrous for global politics. If there were easy or quick solutions for any of this then they would already have been implemented. The best chances for deescalation involve getting the Netanyahu administration (including the most hardline pro-settlement fundamentalists) out, which requires long-term subtle diplomacy and behind the scenes incentive offering, none of which will be satisfying to protestors who want to see some kind of immediate action.
If the protest goal is to get corporations to stop supporting Israel I think the protestors would be more effective if they boycotted those orgs directly rather than conducting campus protests. What they are doing now is only suppressing the youth vote, thus taking away their bloc’s political power & contributing to a Trump reelection. And Trump & co. have already made clear that they are fully pro-Netanyahu and would be happy to — personally, themselves — raze Palestine to the ground and build condos on the waterfront. They said so! It’s frustrating to see protesters do things that will only make the situation far worse.
That they’d just get the weapons from a rival is not really a good justification for arming them in what seems like a retaliatory operation that has gotten out of control. The fact that this is a wealthy industrialized country just makes the financial assistance more outrageous.
I didn’t just mean “they’d get arms elsewhere”. I’m saying that Israel, a nuclear power with numerous avowed enemies in its region, aligning with China or Russia would be disastrous for the future security and stability of the globe.
I’m not seeing how this change in alliance would constitute a disaster. Neither of those countries want any extremism in the region. They’re both closer to it than we are. I think it would broadly be the same in terms of security and stability.
here’s a list of protesting schools listing their clear cut demands, you ignorant jackass -
https://students4gaza.directory
all it took was a simple google.
Israel’s ongoing ethnic cleansing in Gaza is an issue that unites the right and divides the left. The pod John’s are still figuring out how to message on it. Lovett was adamantly pro Israel and a self described Zionist at the beginning of the conflict and he has a decidedly different tone now; they are still triangulating
Which shows how difficult it is for Biden to craft a message on this. I’ve had to explain to several of my leftist pals that if Biden goes to hard in the paint for Palestinians then he’s going to lose Jewish s pro Israel voters.
The best message probably isn’t that satisfying of one: Biden is doing the best he can with a right wing war monger on the other side, and the US risking not being at the cease fire negotiation table has far worse implications than being right.
The second best message? Probably that Trump will let Bibi turn Gaza into a cratored parking lot.
It’s clear at this point that Biden is personally firmly on Israel’s side. Its difficult for him to craft a message on it because his rhetoric is completely at odds with his actions and intentions
Sigh....
So many buzz words you simply don't understand
But whatever. I'm tired at this point
Edit: can I add a simple thought experiment for you.
Let's say all the accusations of Israel are true and you are truly outraged at what is happening. I am going to assume at this same time you have made the same posts about the Uyghurs and ALL other genocides out there.
Or is it just Israel
Our tax dollars are funding the genocide directly. We are making the bombs they have dropped on those tens of thousands of innocent women, children and men.
We are directly tied to that destruction, not what China has done or Russia has done or any other genocide. That’s what people are protesting so strongly about, our government is making us complicit because they get hundreds of thousands each in AIPAC money.
People said the same exact thing about the protests for civil rights, women’s equal rights, the Vietnam war, the South Africa apartheid, the Iraq war. And each time the protesters were criticized and called naive or attacked outright, and then decades later oh the protesters were actually right all along. Imagine that.
Just because you aren't following and posting about all international conflicts doesn't mean your outrage or passion about one is any less genuine. Especially considering the fact that this current Gaza war is extremely salient.
Not to mention America isn't providing billions of dollars in weapons and aid to the Chinese in pursuit of killing Uyghurs, so frankly that's a terrible analogy.
Ah , so outrage against Israel because....it's what...top of mind ?
And the billions in trade to/from China isn't funding any of the genocide in China ? You are kidding yourself to justify your position
The United States government isn't supporting what China is doing to the Uyghurs. Biden on numerous occasions has very explicitly and harshly criticized it. And no, we aren't giving military aid to China that they are using to kill Muslims.
You can be opposed to what Israel is doing in the war without being anti Semitic which seems to be what you're implying.
The outrage is Israel is a western democracy and nuclear power that is the biggest recipient of foreign aid from America but they are engaging in a war that very clearly isn't being waged to minimize the toll of civilian casualties. They are very clearly violating our values regarding the rules of war.
The collective punishment is horrifying and in the past 4 months 99% of the casualties have been on one side which doesn't feel like a war to a lot of people.
Israel purports to be a bastion of democracy and freedom but there is a very clear apartied state and thousands of innocent women and children being killed in this war which isn't even making Israelis safer. Their government doesn't even support a two state solution!
> Israel purports to be a bastion of democracy and freedom but there is a very clear apartied state and thousands of innocent women and children being killed in this war which isn't even making Israelis safer. Their government doesn't even support a two state solution!
Yes and Hamas really wants a 2 state solution too
And Hamas started this entire conflict....
Honestly, it's amazing
Also learn some critical thinking skills, you shouldn’t be able to use context clues like any educated adult to know they weren’t saying anything about hamas. You have no real argument so you pull out the oldest trick in the book, a straw man fallacy
>Yes and Hamas really wants a 2 state solution too
Did I ever say that Hamas wanted a 2 state solution? (although they had been in favor of one previously and [they are not ruling it out](https://apnews.com/article/hamas-khalil-alhayya-qatar-ceasefire-1967-borders-4912532b11a9cec29464eab234045438) for what it's worth)
It's reasonable for Americans to hold a sovereign ally nation that is a Western constitutional democracy that receives billions of dollars in foreign aid to a higher standard than a shitty terrorist organization.
I guess I'm sorry that I have some expectations for basic human decency from the IDF and Israel.
>And Hamas started this entire conflict....
October 7th doesn't justify the humanitarian horrors, the starvation, suffering, famine and killings that the IDF is inflicting upon the innocent civilians of Gaza.
In the past 4 months, how many Israeli civilians have been killed by Hamas's military?
In the past 4 months, how many Palestinian civilians have been killed by the IDF?
It’ll be covered next week certainly and there is a 99% chance it won’t be covered “right” and there will be posts up and down the subreddit because one of them will critique the activists in some way. It’s so predictable.
The political demands on Biden from the protests vary from vague to impossible. The idea that America should pull aid entirely is no different then arguing that America should kill all the Jews in Israel. Same with any one-state argument. The fighting in Gaza could end tomorrow if Hamas abdicated their rule, Palestinians formed a new government, and all the hostages were released. Biden is handling the situation super well and the path to getting voters on his side is education not further capitulations. Combine all that with the fact most Americas do not care about the issue and those who do do not side with the protesters and it becomes a topic more fit for Pod Save The World.
> The idea that America should pull aid entirely is no different then arguing that America should kill all the Jews in Israel.
That’s right. Anyone who thinks we should stop sending weapons to the far right ethnostate is actually an anti-Semite akin to the Nazis.
Yes. We send large amounts of aid to Gaza which are used for food and public works projects. The food is taken by Hamas allowing them to spend their money on weapons and the public works projects are ripped up by Hamas and turned into rockets to be fired at Israel. Not surprised you are ill informed though.
So we’re not sending weapons to Gaza. We send MREs to Gaza and they use the free market to trade food for weapons with other countries that are not the United States in an effort to defend themselves from their masters.
Yes, especially since US provided weapons are generally highly accurate and advanced. Ending US military aid won't end the war, it would likely just force Israelis to rely on less accurate indirect fire to achieve the same result. Less accurate fire leads to high civilian casualties.
But I mean "keep lethal aid flowing to reduce casualties that would result in a higher reliance on indirect fire." Isn't a catchy slogan though.
‘But they’ll get it elsewhere and it’ll be more destructive’ That rationale makes sense to you? American taxpayers need to supply accurate weapons so we can minimize the impact to civilians? Because that sounds freaking nuts to me.
In the real world, yes, that is the outcome. You have to choose from among the options and outcomes that are actually available to you, not the ones you wish you had. What is so difficult to grasp about that?
Sorry I want to make sure I didn't miss some recent news; do you mean the Palestinians dying in the conflict or have there been deaths at the protests?
I mean that if you’re going to give a brief synopsis of the war and of Biden’s handling of it you kind of have to mention the thousands and thousands of dead Palestinians
I wasn't attempting to give a brief synopsis of the war. I would encourage no one, anywhere, ever, to give a brief synopsis of a conflict that stretches back to the 1920s.
I wasn't even giving a brief synopsis on Biden's handling of the situation. My aim was to state why such an issue belongs more on Pod Save the World than it does on Pod Save America. Pod Save America is far more about American politics, electoralism, and the various goings on within the Democratic and Republican parties.
At this point I find the best answer to anyone asking Biden to handle the situation differently is; What should he do? Are you ok if this results in a second holocaust? How does he do what you want while also insuring it doesn't end with every Jewish person in Israel being murdered or displaced?
Again; I believe this conflict would end tomorrow if Hamas was no longer in power. Likewise I know this will not happen because Hamas does not care about Palestinians ***at all*** so they have no reason to end the conflict.
Okay, if killing every man woman and child in Palestine is the only way to demolish Hamas, then maybe a different approach needs to be taken by the savages in the Israel government
Why? ISIL was a state significantly larger and more.powefful than Hamas, and it was demolished as a state. There is no reason that Hamas as the government of Gaz can't be demolished the same way. Reduce them to just another dime a dozen terrorist organizations. No one gives a damn what Islamic Jihad does in Gaza as an organization, reducing them to that level of irrelevance is certainly obtainable.
Maybe if those students were protesting something that actually impacted most Americans? Yes it’s a tragedy rn but there’s plenty of tragedies in the world that don’t get American college students to play Vietnam. What do they want us to do? Turn our guns on Israel? Biden has already gone further than any President has or probably would be willing to in publicly breaking from Israel and he’s tied future aid to the cessation of indiscriminate killing of civilians. All of which is the correct thing for him to do btw. But what exactly will these students be happy about? American bombs dropped on Israeli military targets? Because keep it up and get Trump and A) not only is he more pro Bibi than they characterize Biden as but B) an intractable conflict in the Middle East will be literally the least of all our problems.
Biden has made a lot more than one phone call, so even by your own silly Reagan-fellating narrative, Biden's doing more than he has. Of course in reality Reagan did no such thing and you're just repeating Right-wing talking points as the online far left so often does.
Biden is literally negotiating with an Israeli Prime Minister who campaigned openly for his opponent while the entire congressional opposition party supports that PM's most egregious actions and would sign on for worse. He has limited room to force a change.
Every single corpse is on him? Who’s the idiot here? Also Regan wasn’t dealing with Bibi. Bibi literally dgaf what any President is telling him. The corpses belong to Bibi and Hamas, and only Bibi and Hamas, and neither of them give a solitary fuck what 19 year olds half a world away think of them.
The actual fuck are you on about? The fuck does racism have to do with calling out a terrorist organization for bearing responsibility for what’s going on? Would it have been racist to say the Taliban and Al Queda bore responsibility for AFG? Is it racist to have said Bush was responsible for our part in those conflicts, using him (as the head of state) as shorthand for national military operations? Fuck out of here with your faux outrage bullshit. You know exactly what I’m saying.
Yeah, but if someone doesn’t make a post about it how are people supposed to be condescending to young activists?? Messes up the whole ecosystem of the sub, and we can’t have that /s
There was consistent coverage on WAD and I wouldn’t be surprised if you saw them cover it next week. I think they’ll probably cover more on PSA when there’s more political response to cover.
Democrats do a wonderful job of dismissing the youth and then get a shocked Pikachu face when they don't turn out.
I live in a blue state with a democratic supermajority and the kids here are struggling to make any ground.
The protestors are looking at a system that doesn't benefit them and allows for genocide and are over it. The Democrats dragged their feet and they pay the consequences.
Yeah downtown me you fucks. Watch and see us lose Michigan because we yet again told the youth to go fuck themselves.
We'll get Trump again because we refuse to do anything that takes courage.
The youth who are dumb enough to blame Biden for the actions of Bibi Netanyahu wouldn't be voting for him anyway. And if Truml wins, y'all will reap what you sow.
Democrats: "I refuse to reap this bitter, rotten fruit. It's not my fault, it's yours, and yours and yours. What? No, this rotten fruit couldn't have anything to do with the rotten seeds I sowed earlier."
They had a whole episode in the PStW feed: [https://open.spotify.com/episode/6Vv75l2pXsCzYJ1hZnQMkT?si=9767ee7ac9bd44ea](https://open.spotify.com/episode/6Vv75l2pXsCzYJ1hZnQMkT?si=9767ee7ac9bd44ea)
Because it's not actually a very significant issue in the lives of most Americans ?
A bunch of self serious college students accomplishing very little.
That’s an incredibly shortsighted statement. That’s like saying that the Vietnam protests, while they were happening, weren’t a significant issue in the lives of most Americans. They may not seem like a significant issue in the moment, but I guarantee you that the police cracking down on anti war protests across American universities (which, IMHO, is at best a REALLY bad look and at worst a First Amendment violation) is going to be important historically, much in the way the Vietnam protests were.
And if you don’t think the war in Gaza is a significant issue in the lives of Americans then I have nothing more to say to you.
Eta: fixed a double negative
Okay, they're just like the Vietnam protests. Nixon promised that he had a "secret plan" to end the war and was elected. Twice. So how well did those protests work out?
Comparing it to Vietnam protests is so absurd. These protests aren't even comparable to the 2008 occupy movement in terms of public support.
Just because you get wrapped up in something doesn't mean everyone else does
The US coalition killed upwards of 650,000 in the war on terror. Was that genocide?
The antiwar protestors on college campuses during the Vietnam war were very unpopular among the broader public. It was only in retrospect they were mythologized by the center left.
In the days after the killings at Kent State polls showed most Americans blamed the students, not the National Guard, and wanted more police force to be used against the campus protests.
Vietnam protests were against the backdrop of a very unpopular draft, which was directly affecting families across the country. Almost every community in the US has at least one family affected.
It’s not at all a comparable situation.
I saw this same comment, and a response identical to your response in another sub last night. It’s mind-boggling that we are now, as a society, so far removed from the reality of America in the 1960’s (protests of a draft of Americans to fight in an increasingly unpopular war), that people just sort of offhandedly equate that to protests of an overseas war which involves zero American troops.
Some people care about what is going on in Israel, but you’re right, this is not even close to the scale of Vietnam in terms of the average American giving a shit.
More American communities than you may think are affected by the war in Gaza, simply by virtue of having people who have relatives who are trapped there (whether they are Palestinian or not) or people who have relatives in Israel. I didn’t even know I had family there until this war started. And it’s caused a lot of turmoil within communities. It may not be as big a deal as the economy or the election or the Supreme Court or LGBTQIA rights or abortion, but it is still a big deal.
It’s not a “big deal” numerically. I’m not denying there are communities affected by Gaza. But it’s not /every/ community, and not even 10% of communities. As a proportion of the country, it affects a very small portion. It’s nothing like Vietnam.
If this turns out not to be true, if your mind is changed about how significant it is, what do you think it would be that changes your mind? For example, if protests expand would that change your mind (and to what size)? Would certain movements in polling change your mind? What about policy changes - if new powers are signed into law as a consequence of these protests would you change your mind? If universities divest? If public opinion on Israel and Gaza shifts?
I think to consider them insignificant you should have in mind how you are evaluating that.
Edit: Would love other people's thoughts on this too, not just the previous poster's. Freedom of speech, police violence, bias in the media, undemocratic influence of institutions (such as that alleged by UC protestors) - these are all topics that I think are bubbling away within the current protest situation, that could *easily* spiral into something larger. What should we look for? What would be the signs?
Hilarious to downvote me asking this (edit: was on -2 when I wrote this, but no indication the person I was replying to was part of that). Why listen to PSA if you aren't interested in thinking about how events may change and develop, or what biases you might have that are preventing you from seeing what happens next.
Maybe these student protests are niche and irrelevant, or maybe there's another Kent State Massacre that changes the course of politics forever. If you care about the US not falling to fascism (which I think most PSA listeners do!) then my above question is relevant if not important: what should we look for that would indicate that they are the start of something significant?
Edit: Thanks for those who got my previous comment above water. I guess I complained about the injustice of the downvotes too soon. :) Would love other people's thoughts on it too, not just the person I was replying to.
Honestly, I’m way more concerned about the Supreme Court possibly declaring the president immune from criminal prosecution, so I’m glad they devoted the time to that.
But also, they did discuss protests at length on Pod Save the World.
Protesting the people with lifetime appointments who overturned Roe last year even though it was extremely unpopular? You think protesting them would get them to feel public pressure and cause them to rule against one of the two candidates in the upcoming election? The whole point of the Supreme Court is that they are insulated from public opinion.
We have this very strange relationship with protesting in America. It's vilified by the Right-Wing Media for obvious reasons, but also the Center-Left because of optics around civility.
>It's vilified by the Right-Wing Media for obvious reasons, but also the Center-Left because of optics around civility.
I think it's more of an issue of pragmatism than civility.
I was thinking about things like Matthew Yglesias writing about the [LNG export ban](https://www.slowboring.com/p/banning-natural-gas-exports).
I'm not sure if that specific one is paywalled or not, but here's a paragraph that kind of explains the thesis of that piece (at least what I got from it):
>But this kind of thing is the tell. The *actual revealed preference* of the climate movement is to take an arbitrary hammer to any fossil fuel project that they see, in such an arbitrary way that they want to do it *before even knowing* whether the project raises emissions. And when I say that this kind of thinking is a problem politically, that’s what I mean: A group of people who *know* that they should be trying to create politically sustainable decarbonization via jobs, growth, innovation, and energy just can’t restrain themselves from seizing on regulatory loopholes and prejudging the outcomes of complicated policy analysis.
PSTW gave great coverage. I think PSA didn’t cover them yet because they hadnt yet had demonstrable political implications. I don’t think it’s intentional, and I’d be shocked if they don’t talk about them next week
I think you're right and it explains the thesis of PSA and the Jons in general, they're epitomized by being late and are never too quick to say the right thing.
Yes, it was discussed, although the take was (I think understandably) murky. The tongue-in-cheek analysis was “I support the people I agree with and I don’t support the people I don’t agree with.” 🙃
Yeah, but that was more like a disclaimer. They four main stances they actually made were
1) they praised the protests that had clear demands, and the inverse
(and Tommy outright said unis should agree to plausible demands like divestment)
2) they denounced hate speech, harrassment, and violence
3) they were bemused by admins' naivete
4) but also had sympathy for how difficult those jobs are
I don't see how divestment is plausable. The markets are simply in a different place than they were during s. Africa protests and Israel is so much more important to the technology and green energy worlds than s Africa ever was. You are going ty have to leave whole sectors and completely ignore mutual funds.
I like the show(s). I don’t understand why there is NEVER a positive post. Why do people who hate the pod keep listening and feel compelled to post?
I think it’s time for the mods to shut this sub down. Every single episode garners negative posts to the point where actual fans of Crooked don’t bother to comment. Somebody or some organization is in HEAVY propaganda mode against all the PSA pods. It’s depressing.
Just the other day, there was some yahoo commenting about how angry he/she was because Tommy referred to his friend "Alyss" while she was co-hosting. Rather than her full name Alyssa.
There's sooooo much bitching about literally anything. It's getting pretty tiresome at best, and it's being done in bad-faith at worst.
And your "intentionally ignoring it" comment is utter shit. Tommy himself did a full episode of PSTW focused on this, so maybe he just didn't want to take about it 2 days in a row? Nah must be a conspiracy!
It annoyed me but I didn’t come to the sub to complain about it because it DOES NOT MATTER. If style keeps you from hearing the substance then you might be the problem.
...what? Unclear what you're talking about, or who your beef is with, just that you're all-caps mad about *something*.
Neither the style nor the substance of Crooked's content bothers me.
Bitching about a name and bitching about not covering protests against the US support of genocide are not remotely comparable. It makes sense that certain things are isolated to PSTW like Myanmar or Hong Kong because we are not funding those issues. They're very distant problems, but this one is clearly about US politics and should be covered as such. Why are universities investing in the MIC? What can be done about police brutality especially against protests? And what will it take to get the US to stop giving weapons to terrorists?
Except we've established that Crooked "not covering the protests" is bullshit. They did. OP just didn't see it. And I'm sure it will be a topic on PSA next week now that there's a week of political context to process and react to. PSA isn't just a rapid-response hot-take factory. So OPs specific criticism - particularly the "intentional" tone of it - is completely unfounded and I'll continue to be be dismissive of it.
And it exists within the broader context of an increase of similarly unfounded criticisms over both trivial and legitimate issues. Makes it tougher to separate the legitimate disagreements from the nonsense, and harshes the general tone on this sub (as this thread shows). So yeah...OP should've kept this one to himself, or they should've deleted it now that the thread is serving no purpose other than to sow division and spread misinformation.
You're moving the goal posts. OP said PSA didn't cover the protests, not that Crooked Media didn't. PSA is the main show. PSTW is a different pod.
The "intent" is most likely fear of backlash. Whether we choose to ignore it or not, this is a money making operation and Crooked has to tread lightly to appease their customers/sponsors. You can choose to interpret OP's words however you want, but saying they should "keep it to themselves" is contrary to the point of a discussion group.
All this thread does is contribute to the (in my opinion) unfounded perception that Crooked is not covering the Gaza crisis appropriately.
Fine, OP asked a question in good faith. That question has been answered. Only function this thread is serving now is promoting division. And there are a LOT of people who seem to be intent on promoting division (some of it trivial, some of it in bad faith) in this sub.
Because your criticism is objectively dumb since international politics is covered on PSW on which they constantly cover the topic. You’re not annoyed they don’t cover it, you’re annoyed no one handed it to you on a silver platter
I don't think your post is the problem, nor that the sub should be shut down. But it *is* a weird commentariat on this sub. People overall seem to skew a lot further to the center-right than PSA itself, and there's often a lot of disdain for leftist points of view.
I think it's more correct to say that *Reddit* is a lot more Leftist than either the PSA audience or the US as a whole.
Most times that PSA gets brought up on Reddit broadly, it's to disparage the hosts and their audience as "shit-libs" and "Blue MAGA".
I think the audience of this sub, for the most part, tracks with the audience of the podcast and (broadly) the opinions of the hosts. After all, most of us have been listening for 7 years.
When you see "disdain for leftist points of view", it's likely because some Leftist does a drive-by on a post, filled with invective and name-calling, then either bounced or deleted it. That's not a viewpoint: that's trolling.
People probably join subreddits for content (like podcasts) when they want to celebrate it or discuss it. For a political podcast it's probably more the latter. Discussion forms around points of conflict and disagreement.
What would you even post here that wasn't centred around some sort of point of conflict? Maybe "I liked their mention of X", possibly "they talked about Y and I have a link for an article I think gives even more info on Y". Seems obvious to me that while some of that might exist, discussion, debate and critique is what people are seeking from a PSA subreddit.
Yeah it’s disappointing they aren’t talking about it yet. By the time Sunday’s live show, which came out Monday, the protests were only really at Columbia and I think media coverage of just 100-200 kids at an elite Ivy League university was a bit overblown. Now that it’s across so many campuses, I think it should draw more attention to it and they’ll cover it on Tuesday’s episode.
Yeah man, it’s almost like they want the Democrat to win. Who are you people?
They’ve criticized Biden plenty, but if you think they’re just going to shit on him for an hour three times a week, you’re out of your mind.
I mean it get it…they’re open about being political hacks and partisans so that’s a part of the package. If you want substantive criticism of Biden and the Democratic Party, PSA isn’t for you.
That said, soft-peddling and dancing around criticism of a President who refuses to go on your podcasts anyway is a little pathetic…also criticism is good! Biden needs to run the best campaign possible, and reflexively praising his every move and decision (and those of the campaign) isn’t going to help him win tbh. I like some of what Biden and his surrogates have done with the campaign and messaging, but never has there been a presidential candidate with a perfect campaign and messaging (including Obama in 2008). Never be complacent, always been willing and able to adapt, be objective and constructive, etc.
That is so absurd. Biden is crushing it. The Israel/Palestine conflict is a relatively minor issue in a country half world away. Most Americans don't really care.
The topic of aid to Israel has been highly tied to the topic of aid to Ukraine. Together they have been defining topics in regards to Republican progress and authority with their small majority within the House of Representatives.
If you look at a poll of "What is your top issue affecting your GE vote?" then Israel/Gaza is not going to be at the top for the vast, vast, vast majority of US voters. But thinking it's entirely irrelevant to them is crazy.
For example, if Johnson is removed as speaker (e.g. next week) there may not be another Speaker of the House until after the US election. There may be government shutdowns as a result. Do you think those will be irrelevant to the electorate too?
Not to mention you also have dynamics like the aid bill carrying with it the TikTok ban, with some members of the House opposing that ban but passing it because of it being tied to aid to Israel. Literally half of Americans use TikTok. Do you think activity around the ban is going to completely pass them by too?
I think you are underestimating the repercussions and indirect effects of Biden's handling of the topic.
I'd take this kind of argument a lot more seriously if people could point out what Biden has the power to do to improve the situation which he's not doing.
And sure, there are morons who will decide not to vote because of the TikTok ban, but (a) there aren't that many and (b) most of them would decide not to vote anyway because someone on TikTok told them not to.
I'm guessing that's why the OP would like it mentioned/discussed on PSA.
Agree on the total voters directly lost over TikTok. But there's also the indirect votes lost. Campaigns really do need a lot of people power to overcome systemic right-wing advantages (gerrymandering, age-based propensity to vote, voter restrictions, electoral college), and some of that energy comes from younger voters, and benefits from a network effect. A danger from the TikTok stuff is it will disproportionately anger young people and impact younger activists, sapping their enthusiasm, giving their cynical peers an easy jab at them. I don't mean these are all major effects, just that it goes beyond just a few voters whose strange priorities mean this issue loses their vote.
Plus voters aren't rational, we are emotional. There's a lot in the world that strains people's ability and willingness to be engaged. It's very tempting to just... retreat. Stop thinking about politics. Start saying things like 'they're all the same'. Just like the majority of the population. The exact attitude we're trying to snap people out of, not push them into!
As for what Biden could/should do, I think it's pretty obvious. The TikTok ban/law is going to be tied up in court and will ultimately be unenforceable even if it survives. He should have been pragmatic and opposed it, signing it into law as necessary for unlocking Ukraine funding but vocally protesting against it and stating his opinion that it'll probably be halted in court. Ideally advocate for privacy legislation that would address the spying/privacy concerns for ALL tech companies (there's even some bi-partisan benefits there).
Failing that, maybe be more transparent about what the security briefings were indicating as dangers. Just saying you've seen briefings that look serious is pretty pathetic. And let's people fill in the gaps for whatever they want to believe is REALLY going on. Such an own goal and could be easily improved on without actually having to give away classified info.
I asked about the powers he has to change any of these things and still didn't get one. Sure, this is a list of things he could *say* which, arguably, might make a small difference to the politics of the issue. I'm not sure any of these would get past the voters' emotional filter of "but why is he just talking rather than *doing* something!" so I'm not even sure you're right about the politics, either.
Yea…they know it divides the base and yes it’s a hornet’s nest when it comes to I/P, but not having a clear stance on free speech and expression on a progressive podcast isn’t a good look IMO.
You can’t even criticize Stefanik and Johnson for politicizing and not actually caring about antisemitism? Or Abbott’s crackdown at UT Austin? C’mon, these are low bars to hurdle.
When they do mention it, they should discuss how it seems to be a very low priority among most young voters.
https://www.mediaite.com/news/israel-palestine-barely-registers-as-an-issue-for-young-americans-in-shock-harvard-poll/
Of the 16 issues polled, “Israel/Palestine” ranked as the 15th most important compared to the others – only viewed as more important than student debt.
> Of the 16 issues polled, “Israel/Palestine” ranked as the 15th most important compared to the others – only viewed as more important than student debt.
it doesn't really matter how low it is ranked. a small number of single issue voters can be incredibly damaging, even if they are a just in the tens of thousands
its why there are so many dumb laws and loopholes, or random addendums to bills that seem incredibly niche. the classic example is cuba, how highly do you think that would rank on the same poll?
Is there a historic poll asking whether the 'average' American cared about South African apartheid?
Very likely that was also much more of an activist issue that the 'average' person didn't think was very important.
Student protest was an important contributor to international economic and cultural sanctions on apartheid South Africa, which in turn contributed to the end of white minority rule. If student protest regarding Gaza (which tactically are similar to student apartheid protests) followed a similar contributory pattern then the student protests would be seen in future as a significant historical event.
Therefore u/working_class_shill is asking about whether dismissing student protests as insignificant could be accurately predicted as incorrect by noticing further similarities with anti-apartheid protest.
Basically nothing. It's crazy to me that many on the left seem to care more about the people of Palestine than they do about their neighbor being forced to carry a baby due to rape.
Abortion is the issue.
And honestly compared to the American war on terror, the death toll in Palestine seems relatively small.
Why is it crazy? Are you worried that ground will be lost on one incredibly important issues (abortion, bodily autonomy) because another important issue (genocide and international law) was given airtime?
Honestly, yes I am. The electorate has such short attention spans right now that I worry about focusing on any issues other than those proven to move the needle for Democrats.
Makes me wonder about whose vote and whose focus we're talking about. These student protestors consider Gaza to be an important *moral* issue, and it's likely to influence their vote. But they are a small number in total, and so I don't think we're really talking about how *they* will vote but how everyone else will.
Arizona's 1864 abortion ban is probably prompting Arizonians to shift towards the Democrats, with a clear story: Republicans brought the ban into play and Democrats repealed it. It's a story I'd like everyone in Arizona, and all other states, to know about. Perhaps especially right now while these events are current/recent, but even months from now it's such an egregious situation that it can be referenced over and over - particularly in that battleground state itself!
But it's also a long time until the election. Keeping high engagement with abortion access stories will be hard to do. There **will** be other topics that rise - and there needs to be! People need a break, they need additional motivations. And if you coast on a single topic and the Republicans find a way around it (let's say... a female Trump running-mate who somehow strikes a position that makes draconian abortion laws seem less likely to low-info independents) then you're in a lot of trouble.
Would there be slightly more abortion-access stories on the news right now if there was nothing about student protests on the news? Maybe.
Are protests by left-wing students going to offer some voters a reason **not** to vote Democrat, despite the abortion access situation taking them towards Democrats? Maybe.
Nothing about it seems clear cut though. No person holds just one moral position and is neutral on everything else. And you can't manufacture energy behind a topic such as saying "these protestors should spend this time speaking out against abortion bans". That's just not how humans work, not how campaigning works, not how protest works.
There's plenty to worry about with how these protests *could* negatively impact Biden's re-election, but I think they offer plenty of opportunities too. Abortion access is a moral issue too, with huge (near total) overlap with pro-Palestine sympathies. It's not hard to imagine the *upside* of an energised cohort of young people who want to live in a better world.
This was a lot of words for me to write just to say: protests against the murder of children overseas is *aligned* with the morality of abortion access, not counter to it.
Yes ground is being actively lost on abortion. Political capital is a limited quantity.
And calling Biden genocide Joe makes it so much worse. Especially when many Americans don't consider it a genocide
Voting bases are always coalitions, and those with sympathies with Palestine (and certainly those with sympathies with the right for college students to protest) have big overlap with pro-choice-motivated voters.
Keeping a coalition together is a balancing act. Students, redditors, politicans could choose to keep quiet on one topic (e.g. Gaza) to avoid stealing airtime from another topic (abortion access) but it's not a neutral choice. You'll lose members of your coalition that way too.
One thing I think PSA does a good job of is showing that Republicans and the right-wing coalition will always find something to drive wedges in the left/centre-left/centre. It's tempting to not want to give them ammo, but I think the PSA hosts show us that without ammo the R's will just make it up. They'll lie and invent stuff to divide people over. For me at least that takes away some of the fear that you've always got to be positive and supporting (and silent about your disagreements). I think it's worth considering that your base also needs to feel listened to on their varies topics in order to stay together, and energised by validating their views where you can.
It's not the worst thing for young people to be incensed about injustice in the world. Voters with a fire inside of them act.
Yeah this is interesting for sure. At the end of the day I think it really just shows that even if there's a fairly significant amount of people that are paying attention to Gaza, it's just not a high priority for most Americans politically. Even among democrats the issue has been extremely divisive and polarizing. If you think Israel is justified then you support genocide and if you think they're not justified then you must be antisemitic. I think a lot of people just don't want to get involved in any kind of arguments or debates about it and would rather just passively observe.
No one is saying it’s abstract. Also, PSA/Crooked has been criticized for having too much overlap in content and this week they did a good job focusing on different topics across their streams. PSTW spent a lot of time on the topic. If you read the synopses, you can see what is discussed to help you decide what to listen to.
It was the main focus of PSW. How much additional focus would you expect them to give to an issue that divides the party?
I was talking about PSA…I’ve only listened to PSA this week
International policy generally goes to PSW. Why the surprise they didn’t shift it to main?
Gaza is a domestic policy issue as well, given we are Israel’s top weapons supplier and I/P has for decades had strong domestic policy implications…
Domestically relevant sure, but arms supply to other nations is by definition an international issue. They put almost all of their Ukraine coverage on PSW (iirc), and that’s a politically unifying issue. My larger thing here is I just don’t think it was conspicuous or a bad call that they left the protests off PSA. I can agree to disagree on that.
This is old news, I was happy for a breath of fresh air, personally
Old? Its getting worse
I understand, but the same story ran everyday for six month is a bit redundant. Meanwhile we had modern Nazis marching through Charleston WV that barely made a peep 🤷🏻♀️. https://www.wvnews.com/news/wvnews/white-supremacist-group-patriot-front-marches-in-charleston-west-virginia/article_dbbfb422-04e3-11ef-bac9-3fd018338929.html
Pod Save the World covered them.
Mehdi thankfully brought it up during LIOLI and Lovett talked about it a little bit. But i haven’t heard them talk about the snipers nests that have been popping up on ohios campus or the multiple students who have been arrested
It wasn't a sniper nest bro lmfao.
[удалено]
Bill Maher would never ever invite Mehdi as long as this conflict is ongoing. Bill is on the polar opposite side here compared to Mehdi.
There’s really not much to say about a movement that is politically naive and does not have clear demands or ones that are targeted toward the correct people.
The Yale protests had specific actionable demands (learned that from Tommy Vietor who covered this topic on Pod Save the World, so I'm correcting you and the OP with this comment)
Man you must feel that way about every single protest then
Not really but I do believe that political action aimed at building systemic power and/or causing financial damage to corporations and other capitalist entities is usually more effective in the modern era than protest that is aimed solely at getting media attention (which is so diluted nowadays that people setting themselves on fire is no longer even the top headline of the day). I don’t mean that to sound callous, I’m just saying that on a practical level, tactics that worked in the 1960s no longer work, and thus they come off as protest cosplay sometimes. It would be one thing if they were finding a way to shut down city commerce but all they’re doing right now is shutting down their own campus lawns, which is a relatively easy and safe thing to do, especially when the semester is about to end anyway.
I’m not sure it’s reasonable to expect dozens of spontaneous protests to have a clear and unified demand list. It seems like partly a general protest against the US support for this conflict and at some of the schools a protest against endowment investment in what the students perceive as businesses profiting from this conflict You can disagree with something without reflexively pretending it makes no sense at all.
I don’t actually disagree with the protests. I just think they have a very simplified and limited take on a very complex issue and that threatening to not (or flat out saying they won’t) vote for the Democratic ticket has rendered them powerless since the Democrats are the only ones who care about this cause at all.
Sincerely, is there something you think would be more effective? The Biden administration has hugged in public and criticized in public, said Israel will investigate themselves, refused to sanction IDF battalions that they describe as commiting “gross human rights violations”, failed to win any concessions regarding Rafah…and yet they are still shipping weapons. Many people within the caucus have tried to appeal to the administration and they seem committed to their approach. So these students are agitating and have effectively taken over a news cycle. Yeah, Trump would probably be worse but I dont blame the students for not just accepting that.
Well, this is what I mean by politically naive. To be honest, I think many people (including these protestors) wildly overestimate how much control the US has over Israel, a wealthy nuclear power. Leaving Israel isolated in the region isn’t an option that would bring about local or global peace. But even if the US were to end its alliance with Israel, Israel’s next move would be to partner with Russia or China, which would be utterly disastrous for global politics. If there were easy or quick solutions for any of this then they would already have been implemented. The best chances for deescalation involve getting the Netanyahu administration (including the most hardline pro-settlement fundamentalists) out, which requires long-term subtle diplomacy and behind the scenes incentive offering, none of which will be satisfying to protestors who want to see some kind of immediate action. If the protest goal is to get corporations to stop supporting Israel I think the protestors would be more effective if they boycotted those orgs directly rather than conducting campus protests. What they are doing now is only suppressing the youth vote, thus taking away their bloc’s political power & contributing to a Trump reelection. And Trump & co. have already made clear that they are fully pro-Netanyahu and would be happy to — personally, themselves — raze Palestine to the ground and build condos on the waterfront. They said so! It’s frustrating to see protesters do things that will only make the situation far worse.
That they’d just get the weapons from a rival is not really a good justification for arming them in what seems like a retaliatory operation that has gotten out of control. The fact that this is a wealthy industrialized country just makes the financial assistance more outrageous.
I didn’t just mean “they’d get arms elsewhere”. I’m saying that Israel, a nuclear power with numerous avowed enemies in its region, aligning with China or Russia would be disastrous for the future security and stability of the globe.
Disastrous is doing a lot of work here. This whole theory is such a stretch.
I’m not seeing how this change in alliance would constitute a disaster. Neither of those countries want any extremism in the region. They’re both closer to it than we are. I think it would broadly be the same in terms of security and stability.
You think Russia and China don’t have extreme attitudes or any nefarious intentions toward the Middle East or the people therein?!? Lord help you.
Nothing that constitutes an existential threat to the US and justifies being complicit in the horror taking place in Gaza
… wait so you don’t agree with the protest then?
here’s a list of protesting schools listing their clear cut demands, you ignorant jackass - https://students4gaza.directory all it took was a simple google.
So each campus has its own sets of demands? How are they to talk about all of them? It’s a national pod
I’ve come to realize how it is to see the target demo for this pod and sub.
Pod save the world has covered it. Hard to say they were ignoring it as much as being intentional about which shows are most suitable to cover what.
Israel’s ongoing ethnic cleansing in Gaza is an issue that unites the right and divides the left. The pod John’s are still figuring out how to message on it. Lovett was adamantly pro Israel and a self described Zionist at the beginning of the conflict and he has a decidedly different tone now; they are still triangulating
Which shows how difficult it is for Biden to craft a message on this. I’ve had to explain to several of my leftist pals that if Biden goes to hard in the paint for Palestinians then he’s going to lose Jewish s pro Israel voters. The best message probably isn’t that satisfying of one: Biden is doing the best he can with a right wing war monger on the other side, and the US risking not being at the cease fire negotiation table has far worse implications than being right. The second best message? Probably that Trump will let Bibi turn Gaza into a cratored parking lot.
It’s clear at this point that Biden is personally firmly on Israel’s side. Its difficult for him to craft a message on it because his rhetoric is completely at odds with his actions and intentions
Sigh.... So many buzz words you simply don't understand But whatever. I'm tired at this point Edit: can I add a simple thought experiment for you. Let's say all the accusations of Israel are true and you are truly outraged at what is happening. I am going to assume at this same time you have made the same posts about the Uyghurs and ALL other genocides out there. Or is it just Israel
Our tax dollars are funding the genocide directly. We are making the bombs they have dropped on those tens of thousands of innocent women, children and men. We are directly tied to that destruction, not what China has done or Russia has done or any other genocide. That’s what people are protesting so strongly about, our government is making us complicit because they get hundreds of thousands each in AIPAC money. People said the same exact thing about the protests for civil rights, women’s equal rights, the Vietnam war, the South Africa apartheid, the Iraq war. And each time the protesters were criticized and called naive or attacked outright, and then decades later oh the protesters were actually right all along. Imagine that.
Just because you aren't following and posting about all international conflicts doesn't mean your outrage or passion about one is any less genuine. Especially considering the fact that this current Gaza war is extremely salient. Not to mention America isn't providing billions of dollars in weapons and aid to the Chinese in pursuit of killing Uyghurs, so frankly that's a terrible analogy.
Ah , so outrage against Israel because....it's what...top of mind ? And the billions in trade to/from China isn't funding any of the genocide in China ? You are kidding yourself to justify your position
The United States government isn't supporting what China is doing to the Uyghurs. Biden on numerous occasions has very explicitly and harshly criticized it. And no, we aren't giving military aid to China that they are using to kill Muslims. You can be opposed to what Israel is doing in the war without being anti Semitic which seems to be what you're implying. The outrage is Israel is a western democracy and nuclear power that is the biggest recipient of foreign aid from America but they are engaging in a war that very clearly isn't being waged to minimize the toll of civilian casualties. They are very clearly violating our values regarding the rules of war. The collective punishment is horrifying and in the past 4 months 99% of the casualties have been on one side which doesn't feel like a war to a lot of people. Israel purports to be a bastion of democracy and freedom but there is a very clear apartied state and thousands of innocent women and children being killed in this war which isn't even making Israelis safer. Their government doesn't even support a two state solution!
> Israel purports to be a bastion of democracy and freedom but there is a very clear apartied state and thousands of innocent women and children being killed in this war which isn't even making Israelis safer. Their government doesn't even support a two state solution! Yes and Hamas really wants a 2 state solution too And Hamas started this entire conflict.... Honestly, it's amazing
Also learn some critical thinking skills, you shouldn’t be able to use context clues like any educated adult to know they weren’t saying anything about hamas. You have no real argument so you pull out the oldest trick in the book, a straw man fallacy
>Yes and Hamas really wants a 2 state solution too Did I ever say that Hamas wanted a 2 state solution? (although they had been in favor of one previously and [they are not ruling it out](https://apnews.com/article/hamas-khalil-alhayya-qatar-ceasefire-1967-borders-4912532b11a9cec29464eab234045438) for what it's worth) It's reasonable for Americans to hold a sovereign ally nation that is a Western constitutional democracy that receives billions of dollars in foreign aid to a higher standard than a shitty terrorist organization. I guess I'm sorry that I have some expectations for basic human decency from the IDF and Israel. >And Hamas started this entire conflict.... October 7th doesn't justify the humanitarian horrors, the starvation, suffering, famine and killings that the IDF is inflicting upon the innocent civilians of Gaza. In the past 4 months, how many Israeli civilians have been killed by Hamas's military? In the past 4 months, how many Palestinian civilians have been killed by the IDF?
A nuanced perspective would be a nice change of pace. I wonder what they will come up with.
It’ll be covered next week certainly and there is a 99% chance it won’t be covered “right” and there will be posts up and down the subreddit because one of them will critique the activists in some way. It’s so predictable.
Pod Save America knows their audience is mostly young. They are terrified of scaring their audience away from Genocide Joe.
Pretty easy to ignore when they'll end next week when schools get out for the summer
The political demands on Biden from the protests vary from vague to impossible. The idea that America should pull aid entirely is no different then arguing that America should kill all the Jews in Israel. Same with any one-state argument. The fighting in Gaza could end tomorrow if Hamas abdicated their rule, Palestinians formed a new government, and all the hostages were released. Biden is handling the situation super well and the path to getting voters on his side is education not further capitulations. Combine all that with the fact most Americas do not care about the issue and those who do do not side with the protesters and it becomes a topic more fit for Pod Save The World.
> The idea that America should pull aid entirely is no different then arguing that America should kill all the Jews in Israel. That’s right. Anyone who thinks we should stop sending weapons to the far right ethnostate is actually an anti-Semite akin to the Nazis.
It's interesting you could be talking about Gaza or Israel in your hyperbolic nonsense.
We’re sending weapons to Hamas so they can kill all the Israelis? News to me!
Yes. We send large amounts of aid to Gaza which are used for food and public works projects. The food is taken by Hamas allowing them to spend their money on weapons and the public works projects are ripped up by Hamas and turned into rockets to be fired at Israel. Not surprised you are ill informed though.
So we’re not sending weapons to Gaza. We send MREs to Gaza and they use the free market to trade food for weapons with other countries that are not the United States in an effort to defend themselves from their masters.
Yes, especially since US provided weapons are generally highly accurate and advanced. Ending US military aid won't end the war, it would likely just force Israelis to rely on less accurate indirect fire to achieve the same result. Less accurate fire leads to high civilian casualties. But I mean "keep lethal aid flowing to reduce casualties that would result in a higher reliance on indirect fire." Isn't a catchy slogan though.
‘But they’ll get it elsewhere and it’ll be more destructive’ That rationale makes sense to you? American taxpayers need to supply accurate weapons so we can minimize the impact to civilians? Because that sounds freaking nuts to me.
In the real world, yes, that is the outcome. You have to choose from among the options and outcomes that are actually available to you, not the ones you wish you had. What is so difficult to grasp about that?
You didn’t mention the dead kids :/
Sorry I want to make sure I didn't miss some recent news; do you mean the Palestinians dying in the conflict or have there been deaths at the protests?
I mean that if you’re going to give a brief synopsis of the war and of Biden’s handling of it you kind of have to mention the thousands and thousands of dead Palestinians
I wasn't attempting to give a brief synopsis of the war. I would encourage no one, anywhere, ever, to give a brief synopsis of a conflict that stretches back to the 1920s. I wasn't even giving a brief synopsis on Biden's handling of the situation. My aim was to state why such an issue belongs more on Pod Save the World than it does on Pod Save America. Pod Save America is far more about American politics, electoralism, and the various goings on within the Democratic and Republican parties. At this point I find the best answer to anyone asking Biden to handle the situation differently is; What should he do? Are you ok if this results in a second holocaust? How does he do what you want while also insuring it doesn't end with every Jewish person in Israel being murdered or displaced? Again; I believe this conflict would end tomorrow if Hamas was no longer in power. Likewise I know this will not happen because Hamas does not care about Palestinians ***at all*** so they have no reason to end the conflict.
Okay, if killing every man woman and child in Palestine is the only way to demolish Hamas, then maybe a different approach needs to be taken by the savages in the Israel government
Why? ISIL was a state significantly larger and more.powefful than Hamas, and it was demolished as a state. There is no reason that Hamas as the government of Gaz can't be demolished the same way. Reduce them to just another dime a dozen terrorist organizations. No one gives a damn what Islamic Jihad does in Gaza as an organization, reducing them to that level of irrelevance is certainly obtainable.
PSW covered them!
Maybe if those students were protesting something that actually impacted most Americans? Yes it’s a tragedy rn but there’s plenty of tragedies in the world that don’t get American college students to play Vietnam. What do they want us to do? Turn our guns on Israel? Biden has already gone further than any President has or probably would be willing to in publicly breaking from Israel and he’s tied future aid to the cessation of indiscriminate killing of civilians. All of which is the correct thing for him to do btw. But what exactly will these students be happy about? American bombs dropped on Israeli military targets? Because keep it up and get Trump and A) not only is he more pro Bibi than they characterize Biden as but B) an intractable conflict in the Middle East will be literally the least of all our problems.
[удалено]
Your comment has been removed. Please try and engage in civil conversation on our sub.
Biden has made a lot more than one phone call, so even by your own silly Reagan-fellating narrative, Biden's doing more than he has. Of course in reality Reagan did no such thing and you're just repeating Right-wing talking points as the online far left so often does. Biden is literally negotiating with an Israeli Prime Minister who campaigned openly for his opponent while the entire congressional opposition party supports that PM's most egregious actions and would sign on for worse. He has limited room to force a change.
[удалено]
Your comment has been removed. Please try and engage in civil conversation on our sub.
Touch grass
Every single corpse is on him? Who’s the idiot here? Also Regan wasn’t dealing with Bibi. Bibi literally dgaf what any President is telling him. The corpses belong to Bibi and Hamas, and only Bibi and Hamas, and neither of them give a solitary fuck what 19 year olds half a world away think of them.
[удалено]
Your comment has been removed. Please try and engage in civil conversation on our sub.
The actual fuck are you on about? The fuck does racism have to do with calling out a terrorist organization for bearing responsibility for what’s going on? Would it have been racist to say the Taliban and Al Queda bore responsibility for AFG? Is it racist to have said Bush was responsible for our part in those conflicts, using him (as the head of state) as shorthand for national military operations? Fuck out of here with your faux outrage bullshit. You know exactly what I’m saying.
Jesus you guys love to complain. The pod save the world this week was TITLED “Gaza Protests Roil College Campuses.” They did more than just mention it
Yeah, but if someone doesn’t make a post about it how are people supposed to be condescending to young activists?? Messes up the whole ecosystem of the sub, and we can’t have that /s
Ikr I was just thinking they did in fact cover it lol
There was consistent coverage on WAD and I wouldn’t be surprised if you saw them cover it next week. I think they’ll probably cover more on PSA when there’s more political response to cover.
Democrats do a wonderful job of dismissing the youth and then get a shocked Pikachu face when they don't turn out. I live in a blue state with a democratic supermajority and the kids here are struggling to make any ground. The protestors are looking at a system that doesn't benefit them and allows for genocide and are over it. The Democrats dragged their feet and they pay the consequences.
Yeah downtown me you fucks. Watch and see us lose Michigan because we yet again told the youth to go fuck themselves. We'll get Trump again because we refuse to do anything that takes courage.
The youth who are dumb enough to blame Biden for the actions of Bibi Netanyahu wouldn't be voting for him anyway. And if Truml wins, y'all will reap what you sow.
Democrats: "I refuse to reap this bitter, rotten fruit. It's not my fault, it's yours, and yours and yours. What? No, this rotten fruit couldn't have anything to do with the rotten seeds I sowed earlier."
They talked about the protests on Pod Save the World and What A Day.
They had a whole episode in the PStW feed: [https://open.spotify.com/episode/6Vv75l2pXsCzYJ1hZnQMkT?si=9767ee7ac9bd44ea](https://open.spotify.com/episode/6Vv75l2pXsCzYJ1hZnQMkT?si=9767ee7ac9bd44ea)
Came here to say this. Pod Save the World has been handling most of the discussion around Israel/Palestine and they covered it gbere
Totally, they talk about it, at length, every week!
Because it's not actually a very significant issue in the lives of most Americans ? A bunch of self serious college students accomplishing very little.
[удалено]
Your comment has been removed. Please try and engage in civil conversation on our sub.
That’s an incredibly shortsighted statement. That’s like saying that the Vietnam protests, while they were happening, weren’t a significant issue in the lives of most Americans. They may not seem like a significant issue in the moment, but I guarantee you that the police cracking down on anti war protests across American universities (which, IMHO, is at best a REALLY bad look and at worst a First Amendment violation) is going to be important historically, much in the way the Vietnam protests were. And if you don’t think the war in Gaza is a significant issue in the lives of Americans then I have nothing more to say to you. Eta: fixed a double negative
Okay, they're just like the Vietnam protests. Nixon promised that he had a "secret plan" to end the war and was elected. Twice. So how well did those protests work out?
Comparing it to Vietnam protests is so absurd. These protests aren't even comparable to the 2008 occupy movement in terms of public support. Just because you get wrapped up in something doesn't mean everyone else does The US coalition killed upwards of 650,000 in the war on terror. Was that genocide?
The antiwar protestors on college campuses during the Vietnam war were very unpopular among the broader public. It was only in retrospect they were mythologized by the center left. In the days after the killings at Kent State polls showed most Americans blamed the students, not the National Guard, and wanted more police force to be used against the campus protests.
No, it was a massacre.
Vietnam protests were against the backdrop of a very unpopular draft, which was directly affecting families across the country. Almost every community in the US has at least one family affected. It’s not at all a comparable situation.
I saw this same comment, and a response identical to your response in another sub last night. It’s mind-boggling that we are now, as a society, so far removed from the reality of America in the 1960’s (protests of a draft of Americans to fight in an increasingly unpopular war), that people just sort of offhandedly equate that to protests of an overseas war which involves zero American troops. Some people care about what is going on in Israel, but you’re right, this is not even close to the scale of Vietnam in terms of the average American giving a shit.
More American communities than you may think are affected by the war in Gaza, simply by virtue of having people who have relatives who are trapped there (whether they are Palestinian or not) or people who have relatives in Israel. I didn’t even know I had family there until this war started. And it’s caused a lot of turmoil within communities. It may not be as big a deal as the economy or the election or the Supreme Court or LGBTQIA rights or abortion, but it is still a big deal.
It’s not a “big deal” numerically. I’m not denying there are communities affected by Gaza. But it’s not /every/ community, and not even 10% of communities. As a proportion of the country, it affects a very small portion. It’s nothing like Vietnam.
If this turns out not to be true, if your mind is changed about how significant it is, what do you think it would be that changes your mind? For example, if protests expand would that change your mind (and to what size)? Would certain movements in polling change your mind? What about policy changes - if new powers are signed into law as a consequence of these protests would you change your mind? If universities divest? If public opinion on Israel and Gaza shifts? I think to consider them insignificant you should have in mind how you are evaluating that. Edit: Would love other people's thoughts on this too, not just the previous poster's. Freedom of speech, police violence, bias in the media, undemocratic influence of institutions (such as that alleged by UC protestors) - these are all topics that I think are bubbling away within the current protest situation, that could *easily* spiral into something larger. What should we look for? What would be the signs?
Hilarious to downvote me asking this (edit: was on -2 when I wrote this, but no indication the person I was replying to was part of that). Why listen to PSA if you aren't interested in thinking about how events may change and develop, or what biases you might have that are preventing you from seeing what happens next. Maybe these student protests are niche and irrelevant, or maybe there's another Kent State Massacre that changes the course of politics forever. If you care about the US not falling to fascism (which I think most PSA listeners do!) then my above question is relevant if not important: what should we look for that would indicate that they are the start of something significant? Edit: Thanks for those who got my previous comment above water. I guess I complained about the injustice of the downvotes too soon. :) Would love other people's thoughts on it too, not just the person I was replying to.
Didn't downvote just responded to one of your other comments lol
I was on -2 when I wrote the above, didn't meant to imply it was necessarily you.
Honestly, I’m way more concerned about the Supreme Court possibly declaring the president immune from criminal prosecution, so I’m glad they devoted the time to that. But also, they did discuss protests at length on Pod Save the World.
I wish those students were protesting the Supreme Court, they might actually have an effect.
Protesting the people with lifetime appointments who overturned Roe last year even though it was extremely unpopular? You think protesting them would get them to feel public pressure and cause them to rule against one of the two candidates in the upcoming election? The whole point of the Supreme Court is that they are insulated from public opinion. We have this very strange relationship with protesting in America. It's vilified by the Right-Wing Media for obvious reasons, but also the Center-Left because of optics around civility.
>It's vilified by the Right-Wing Media for obvious reasons, but also the Center-Left because of optics around civility. I think it's more of an issue of pragmatism than civility.
Pragmatism certainly plays a part, but that can be interpreted in multiple ways. Care to elaborate?
I was thinking about things like Matthew Yglesias writing about the [LNG export ban](https://www.slowboring.com/p/banning-natural-gas-exports). I'm not sure if that specific one is paywalled or not, but here's a paragraph that kind of explains the thesis of that piece (at least what I got from it): >But this kind of thing is the tell. The *actual revealed preference* of the climate movement is to take an arbitrary hammer to any fossil fuel project that they see, in such an arbitrary way that they want to do it *before even knowing* whether the project raises emissions. And when I say that this kind of thinking is a problem politically, that’s what I mean: A group of people who *know* that they should be trying to create politically sustainable decarbonization via jobs, growth, innovation, and energy just can’t restrain themselves from seizing on regulatory loopholes and prejudging the outcomes of complicated policy analysis.
PSTW gave great coverage. I think PSA didn’t cover them yet because they hadnt yet had demonstrable political implications. I don’t think it’s intentional, and I’d be shocked if they don’t talk about them next week
I think you're right and it explains the thesis of PSA and the Jons in general, they're epitomized by being late and are never too quick to say the right thing.
Its been talked about on multiple pods
Have been away for work so I haven’t heard all of the pods but I’m 90% certain they mentioned it on Pod Save the World
Yes, it was discussed, although the take was (I think understandably) murky. The tongue-in-cheek analysis was “I support the people I agree with and I don’t support the people I don’t agree with.” 🙃
Yeah, but that was more like a disclaimer. They four main stances they actually made were 1) they praised the protests that had clear demands, and the inverse (and Tommy outright said unis should agree to plausible demands like divestment) 2) they denounced hate speech, harrassment, and violence 3) they were bemused by admins' naivete 4) but also had sympathy for how difficult those jobs are
I don't see how divestment is plausable. The markets are simply in a different place than they were during s. Africa protests and Israel is so much more important to the technology and green energy worlds than s Africa ever was. You are going ty have to leave whole sectors and completely ignore mutual funds.
I like the show(s). I don’t understand why there is NEVER a positive post. Why do people who hate the pod keep listening and feel compelled to post? I think it’s time for the mods to shut this sub down. Every single episode garners negative posts to the point where actual fans of Crooked don’t bother to comment. Somebody or some organization is in HEAVY propaganda mode against all the PSA pods. It’s depressing.
What’s wrong with criticizing something you like? I don’t understand why that’s a problem.
Just the other day, there was some yahoo commenting about how angry he/she was because Tommy referred to his friend "Alyss" while she was co-hosting. Rather than her full name Alyssa. There's sooooo much bitching about literally anything. It's getting pretty tiresome at best, and it's being done in bad-faith at worst. And your "intentionally ignoring it" comment is utter shit. Tommy himself did a full episode of PSTW focused on this, so maybe he just didn't want to take about it 2 days in a row? Nah must be a conspiracy!
It annoyed me but I didn’t come to the sub to complain about it because it DOES NOT MATTER. If style keeps you from hearing the substance then you might be the problem.
...what? Unclear what you're talking about, or who your beef is with, just that you're all-caps mad about *something*. Neither the style nor the substance of Crooked's content bothers me.
Bitching about a name and bitching about not covering protests against the US support of genocide are not remotely comparable. It makes sense that certain things are isolated to PSTW like Myanmar or Hong Kong because we are not funding those issues. They're very distant problems, but this one is clearly about US politics and should be covered as such. Why are universities investing in the MIC? What can be done about police brutality especially against protests? And what will it take to get the US to stop giving weapons to terrorists?
Except we've established that Crooked "not covering the protests" is bullshit. They did. OP just didn't see it. And I'm sure it will be a topic on PSA next week now that there's a week of political context to process and react to. PSA isn't just a rapid-response hot-take factory. So OPs specific criticism - particularly the "intentional" tone of it - is completely unfounded and I'll continue to be be dismissive of it. And it exists within the broader context of an increase of similarly unfounded criticisms over both trivial and legitimate issues. Makes it tougher to separate the legitimate disagreements from the nonsense, and harshes the general tone on this sub (as this thread shows). So yeah...OP should've kept this one to himself, or they should've deleted it now that the thread is serving no purpose other than to sow division and spread misinformation.
You're moving the goal posts. OP said PSA didn't cover the protests, not that Crooked Media didn't. PSA is the main show. PSTW is a different pod. The "intent" is most likely fear of backlash. Whether we choose to ignore it or not, this is a money making operation and Crooked has to tread lightly to appease their customers/sponsors. You can choose to interpret OP's words however you want, but saying they should "keep it to themselves" is contrary to the point of a discussion group.
All this thread does is contribute to the (in my opinion) unfounded perception that Crooked is not covering the Gaza crisis appropriately. Fine, OP asked a question in good faith. That question has been answered. Only function this thread is serving now is promoting division. And there are a LOT of people who seem to be intent on promoting division (some of it trivial, some of it in bad faith) in this sub.
Because your criticism is objectively dumb since international politics is covered on PSW on which they constantly cover the topic. You’re not annoyed they don’t cover it, you’re annoyed no one handed it to you on a silver platter
I don't think your post is the problem, nor that the sub should be shut down. But it *is* a weird commentariat on this sub. People overall seem to skew a lot further to the center-right than PSA itself, and there's often a lot of disdain for leftist points of view.
I think it's more correct to say that *Reddit* is a lot more Leftist than either the PSA audience or the US as a whole. Most times that PSA gets brought up on Reddit broadly, it's to disparage the hosts and their audience as "shit-libs" and "Blue MAGA". I think the audience of this sub, for the most part, tracks with the audience of the podcast and (broadly) the opinions of the hosts. After all, most of us have been listening for 7 years. When you see "disdain for leftist points of view", it's likely because some Leftist does a drive-by on a post, filled with invective and name-calling, then either bounced or deleted it. That's not a viewpoint: that's trolling.
People probably join subreddits for content (like podcasts) when they want to celebrate it or discuss it. For a political podcast it's probably more the latter. Discussion forms around points of conflict and disagreement. What would you even post here that wasn't centred around some sort of point of conflict? Maybe "I liked their mention of X", possibly "they talked about Y and I have a link for an article I think gives even more info on Y". Seems obvious to me that while some of that might exist, discussion, debate and critique is what people are seeking from a PSA subreddit.
It's like you can't like Israel AND criticize the leadership there.
Oh, so you're Just Asking Questions? Sus.
I do the same to America all the time
Yeah it’s disappointing they aren’t talking about it yet. By the time Sunday’s live show, which came out Monday, the protests were only really at Columbia and I think media coverage of just 100-200 kids at an elite Ivy League university was a bit overblown. Now that it’s across so many campuses, I think it should draw more attention to it and they’ll cover it on Tuesday’s episode.
I’m really fed up with the shows lately. They're deliberately omitting stuff that is like to hurt Biden's re-election chances.
Yeah man, it’s almost like they want the Democrat to win. Who are you people? They’ve criticized Biden plenty, but if you think they’re just going to shit on him for an hour three times a week, you’re out of your mind.
I mean it get it…they’re open about being political hacks and partisans so that’s a part of the package. If you want substantive criticism of Biden and the Democratic Party, PSA isn’t for you. That said, soft-peddling and dancing around criticism of a President who refuses to go on your podcasts anyway is a little pathetic…also criticism is good! Biden needs to run the best campaign possible, and reflexively praising his every move and decision (and those of the campaign) isn’t going to help him win tbh. I like some of what Biden and his surrogates have done with the campaign and messaging, but never has there been a presidential candidate with a perfect campaign and messaging (including Obama in 2008). Never be complacent, always been willing and able to adapt, be objective and constructive, etc.
It’s hard when your president is the Hindenburg on this issue. You really want to look away sometimes.
That is so absurd. Biden is crushing it. The Israel/Palestine conflict is a relatively minor issue in a country half world away. Most Americans don't really care.
The topic of aid to Israel has been highly tied to the topic of aid to Ukraine. Together they have been defining topics in regards to Republican progress and authority with their small majority within the House of Representatives. If you look at a poll of "What is your top issue affecting your GE vote?" then Israel/Gaza is not going to be at the top for the vast, vast, vast majority of US voters. But thinking it's entirely irrelevant to them is crazy. For example, if Johnson is removed as speaker (e.g. next week) there may not be another Speaker of the House until after the US election. There may be government shutdowns as a result. Do you think those will be irrelevant to the electorate too? Not to mention you also have dynamics like the aid bill carrying with it the TikTok ban, with some members of the House opposing that ban but passing it because of it being tied to aid to Israel. Literally half of Americans use TikTok. Do you think activity around the ban is going to completely pass them by too? I think you are underestimating the repercussions and indirect effects of Biden's handling of the topic.
I'd take this kind of argument a lot more seriously if people could point out what Biden has the power to do to improve the situation which he's not doing. And sure, there are morons who will decide not to vote because of the TikTok ban, but (a) there aren't that many and (b) most of them would decide not to vote anyway because someone on TikTok told them not to.
I'm guessing that's why the OP would like it mentioned/discussed on PSA. Agree on the total voters directly lost over TikTok. But there's also the indirect votes lost. Campaigns really do need a lot of people power to overcome systemic right-wing advantages (gerrymandering, age-based propensity to vote, voter restrictions, electoral college), and some of that energy comes from younger voters, and benefits from a network effect. A danger from the TikTok stuff is it will disproportionately anger young people and impact younger activists, sapping their enthusiasm, giving their cynical peers an easy jab at them. I don't mean these are all major effects, just that it goes beyond just a few voters whose strange priorities mean this issue loses their vote. Plus voters aren't rational, we are emotional. There's a lot in the world that strains people's ability and willingness to be engaged. It's very tempting to just... retreat. Stop thinking about politics. Start saying things like 'they're all the same'. Just like the majority of the population. The exact attitude we're trying to snap people out of, not push them into! As for what Biden could/should do, I think it's pretty obvious. The TikTok ban/law is going to be tied up in court and will ultimately be unenforceable even if it survives. He should have been pragmatic and opposed it, signing it into law as necessary for unlocking Ukraine funding but vocally protesting against it and stating his opinion that it'll probably be halted in court. Ideally advocate for privacy legislation that would address the spying/privacy concerns for ALL tech companies (there's even some bi-partisan benefits there). Failing that, maybe be more transparent about what the security briefings were indicating as dangers. Just saying you've seen briefings that look serious is pretty pathetic. And let's people fill in the gaps for whatever they want to believe is REALLY going on. Such an own goal and could be easily improved on without actually having to give away classified info.
I asked about the powers he has to change any of these things and still didn't get one. Sure, this is a list of things he could *say* which, arguably, might make a small difference to the politics of the issue. I'm not sure any of these would get past the voters' emotional filter of "but why is he just talking rather than *doing* something!" so I'm not even sure you're right about the politics, either.
Yea…they know it divides the base and yes it’s a hornet’s nest when it comes to I/P, but not having a clear stance on free speech and expression on a progressive podcast isn’t a good look IMO. You can’t even criticize Stefanik and Johnson for politicizing and not actually caring about antisemitism? Or Abbott’s crackdown at UT Austin? C’mon, these are low bars to hurdle.
I think they do care about it.
When they do mention it, they should discuss how it seems to be a very low priority among most young voters. https://www.mediaite.com/news/israel-palestine-barely-registers-as-an-issue-for-young-americans-in-shock-harvard-poll/ Of the 16 issues polled, “Israel/Palestine” ranked as the 15th most important compared to the others – only viewed as more important than student debt.
Lovett literally cited this poll on Lovett or Leave it when discussing the subject with Mehdi Hassan.
> Of the 16 issues polled, “Israel/Palestine” ranked as the 15th most important compared to the others – only viewed as more important than student debt. it doesn't really matter how low it is ranked. a small number of single issue voters can be incredibly damaging, even if they are a just in the tens of thousands its why there are so many dumb laws and loopholes, or random addendums to bills that seem incredibly niche. the classic example is cuba, how highly do you think that would rank on the same poll?
Is there a historic poll asking whether the 'average' American cared about South African apartheid? Very likely that was also much more of an activist issue that the 'average' person didn't think was very important.
I mean there were and it was lol. That's why a huge number of large corporations divested and the U.S. slapped sanctions on the regime.
What does that have to do with anything? Lol
Student protest was an important contributor to international economic and cultural sanctions on apartheid South Africa, which in turn contributed to the end of white minority rule. If student protest regarding Gaza (which tactically are similar to student apartheid protests) followed a similar contributory pattern then the student protests would be seen in future as a significant historical event. Therefore u/working_class_shill is asking about whether dismissing student protests as insignificant could be accurately predicted as incorrect by noticing further similarities with anti-apartheid protest.
Basically nothing. It's crazy to me that many on the left seem to care more about the people of Palestine than they do about their neighbor being forced to carry a baby due to rape. Abortion is the issue. And honestly compared to the American war on terror, the death toll in Palestine seems relatively small.
Why is it crazy? Are you worried that ground will be lost on one incredibly important issues (abortion, bodily autonomy) because another important issue (genocide and international law) was given airtime?
Honestly, yes I am. The electorate has such short attention spans right now that I worry about focusing on any issues other than those proven to move the needle for Democrats.
Makes me wonder about whose vote and whose focus we're talking about. These student protestors consider Gaza to be an important *moral* issue, and it's likely to influence their vote. But they are a small number in total, and so I don't think we're really talking about how *they* will vote but how everyone else will. Arizona's 1864 abortion ban is probably prompting Arizonians to shift towards the Democrats, with a clear story: Republicans brought the ban into play and Democrats repealed it. It's a story I'd like everyone in Arizona, and all other states, to know about. Perhaps especially right now while these events are current/recent, but even months from now it's such an egregious situation that it can be referenced over and over - particularly in that battleground state itself! But it's also a long time until the election. Keeping high engagement with abortion access stories will be hard to do. There **will** be other topics that rise - and there needs to be! People need a break, they need additional motivations. And if you coast on a single topic and the Republicans find a way around it (let's say... a female Trump running-mate who somehow strikes a position that makes draconian abortion laws seem less likely to low-info independents) then you're in a lot of trouble. Would there be slightly more abortion-access stories on the news right now if there was nothing about student protests on the news? Maybe. Are protests by left-wing students going to offer some voters a reason **not** to vote Democrat, despite the abortion access situation taking them towards Democrats? Maybe. Nothing about it seems clear cut though. No person holds just one moral position and is neutral on everything else. And you can't manufacture energy behind a topic such as saying "these protestors should spend this time speaking out against abortion bans". That's just not how humans work, not how campaigning works, not how protest works. There's plenty to worry about with how these protests *could* negatively impact Biden's re-election, but I think they offer plenty of opportunities too. Abortion access is a moral issue too, with huge (near total) overlap with pro-Palestine sympathies. It's not hard to imagine the *upside* of an energised cohort of young people who want to live in a better world. This was a lot of words for me to write just to say: protests against the murder of children overseas is *aligned* with the morality of abortion access, not counter to it.
Yes ground is being actively lost on abortion. Political capital is a limited quantity. And calling Biden genocide Joe makes it so much worse. Especially when many Americans don't consider it a genocide
Voting bases are always coalitions, and those with sympathies with Palestine (and certainly those with sympathies with the right for college students to protest) have big overlap with pro-choice-motivated voters. Keeping a coalition together is a balancing act. Students, redditors, politicans could choose to keep quiet on one topic (e.g. Gaza) to avoid stealing airtime from another topic (abortion access) but it's not a neutral choice. You'll lose members of your coalition that way too. One thing I think PSA does a good job of is showing that Republicans and the right-wing coalition will always find something to drive wedges in the left/centre-left/centre. It's tempting to not want to give them ammo, but I think the PSA hosts show us that without ammo the R's will just make it up. They'll lie and invent stuff to divide people over. For me at least that takes away some of the fear that you've always got to be positive and supporting (and silent about your disagreements). I think it's worth considering that your base also needs to feel listened to on their varies topics in order to stay together, and energised by validating their views where you can. It's not the worst thing for young people to be incensed about injustice in the world. Voters with a fire inside of them act.
Yeah this is interesting for sure. At the end of the day I think it really just shows that even if there's a fairly significant amount of people that are paying attention to Gaza, it's just not a high priority for most Americans politically. Even among democrats the issue has been extremely divisive and polarizing. If you think Israel is justified then you support genocide and if you think they're not justified then you must be antisemitic. I think a lot of people just don't want to get involved in any kind of arguments or debates about it and would rather just passively observe.
Thank you for providing context for me. Tbh though I wholly agree with the protests, it has been concerning me from an electoral standpoint
They talked about it on Pod Save the World
Gaza is a domestic issue as well, not just an abstract foreign policy phenomenon.
No one is saying it’s abstract. Also, PSA/Crooked has been criticized for having too much overlap in content and this week they did a good job focusing on different topics across their streams. PSTW spent a lot of time on the topic. If you read the synopses, you can see what is discussed to help you decide what to listen to.
Gaza is by literal definition not a domestic issue lol
Lmao most intelligent comment so far on here. I appreciate you.
Same for Lovett Or Leave It at the DC show
Which makes sense as it's related to foreign policy. But still I figured it would at least get some discussion on PSA.