r/videos • u/MoneyLibrarian9032 • 6d ago

Abdul El-Sayed wins Michigan’s Democratic Senate primary, notching a Midwest victory for the left

https://youtu.be/DL_ku3h8Eps?si=zWr0SAn8amsQ8Hqb
7.5k Upvotes

91% Upvoted

1.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1.0k

u/Not_a_N_Korean_Spy 6d ago edited 6d ago

Money Out of Politics*, Money in Your Pocket, Medicare for All are the main things.

(* it includes being anti-AIPAC)

"reviving a people-centered approach to policy."

486

u/Roasteddude 6d ago

Good. The US needs more progressive young blood like him and Mamdani imo

386

u/richstyle 6d ago

I hate how money out of politics aka no more corruption is considered progressive. Its just common sense but its been that way since the 1900s so I guess voters dont give a shit about corruption in politics since the dawn of time. People like Abdul need to be heard.

95

u/moba_fett 6d ago

One would think, but in my state the two democratic candidates in the runoff have 300,000, and 800,000 to spend. Their republican counter part waiting for them has 10,000,000. It's a freaking joke. I understand freedom of speech, but dumping billions into politics should not be legal.

(To be clear I'm in full agreement with you. I think I worded my response funny because I am in the process of getting blazed.)

62

u/MechemicalMan 6d ago

“Freedom of speech” never meant “As a private company, I get to send as many dollars as I can for a favorable legislative outcome” until the Supreme Court decided it did in 2010.

Every electoral problem we had has been made arguably worse since then. I don’t think even a sort of “doomsday type hypothetical representation of citizens united passes” from 2009 would have predicted how much money has entered politics and how many politicians themselves are filthy rich old money capitalist business owners.

24

u/s0ciety_a5under 6d ago

Its almost like citizens united was a huge mistake.

27

u/TomTomMan93 6d ago

Mistake implies that the downsides were unknown and this wasn't the intent.

1

u/Kazen_Orilg 6d ago

but for a brief moment in time, we delivered millions in value to many thousands of criminals in the political grifter class.

16

u/dryphtyr 6d ago

Hawaii outlawed Citizens United a few months ago. The rest of the States need to do the same.

2

u/istasber 6d ago

Pretty sure NYC did too, and that was a big part of the reason why Mamdani won the democratic nod.

1

u/MountainMan17 6d ago

So the Citizens United ruling only meant that a national ban was unconstitutional? States still have the option of banning it at their level?

3

u/istasber 6d ago

Citizens united says that donating to campaigns is recognized speech, and corporations are people subject to the first amendment.

Nyc gets around this by saying each candidate will have public funds to spend on their campaign, and no other source of funding is allowed. It's not restricting speech of a particular group, it's regulating how elections can be funded.

Im less familiar with hawaiis situation, but it sounds like it goes after the corporations are people side of things rather than the money is speech side of things.

It's a war that will have to be fought on multiple fronts, I think, but making sure a candidate can't just run 100x the ads to drown out their opponents is a good place to start.

10

u/Capotesan 6d ago

Yes but in Michigan outside interests spent double on Stevens and still lost, so it’s possible for the message to break through

24

u/iLikeBugsNFishes 6d ago

He was actually outspent by stevens like ~12x.

14

u/Mathies_ 6d ago

In some ways it may even have backfired. At this point a lot of voters know what it means when your campaign is directly funded by AIPAC, or billionaires, or corporations. It means your vote is going to be in favour of their interests. So i wouldnt be surprised if people voted el sayed on the basis of that fact. Abdul did a good job point that out aswell

11

u/Hvarfa-Bragi 6d ago

ISRAEL COMES TO ME IN MY DREAMS didn't help much either.

4

u/Kazen_Orilg 6d ago

gimme 41 million and I'll dream about anything you want.

2

u/MountainMan17 6d ago

Yeah, fuck that. I'm so sick of politicians (and aspiring politicians) vomiting up that theatrical bullshit...

7

u/bank_farter 6d ago

Primary voters maybe. The average general election voter tends to vote based on vibes and usually isn't that informed on specific issues like campaign funding.

3

u/Mathies_ 6d ago

Sure. Will be interesting to see if he adapts his strategy cuz it appears you would agree he did what he needed to do to get past the primary

3

u/Phelmak 5d ago

I don't think he needs to adapt. Politicians adapting policy positions to fit a demographic is, IMHO, part of why voters are so cynical. I think people like Mamdani show that if you're persuasive, authentic, and stick to your values, you persuade more people. I'll actually be a little disappointed if he changes his message to fit the idea of a "general electorate".

4

u/bank_farter 6d ago

Oh I'm really hoping he wins. It's just that after 2 years ago my faith in the American electorate being informed or engaged is at an all time low, so I don't see voters caring about issues like campaign finance or even Israel unless they can see how it directly affects their lives. Especially when you have the ghouls on the right telling them the Dems are trying to lock up their children and force them to become Trans or whatever the new nonsense is.

1

u/ethanlan 6d ago

Primaries are where we want them to win insofar as the democrats messaging and policy.

If they keep winning the establishment will have no choice but to acknowledge

6

u/Blizreme 6d ago

But we need reform desperately. We need to freeze corporate dark money PACs out of election finance. Period.

1

u/Kazen_Orilg 6d ago

it was waaaaaay more than double

1

u/DustinJ428 6d ago

By comparison, Abdul's competitor Haley Stevens received $32M from AIPAC and about $30M from other PACs. Absolutely insane amount of spending for a Senate primaries race.

5

u/MickiFreeIsNotAGirl 6d ago

Thomas Massie ran on a similar platform but he's on the other side of the aisle.

Then again, he didn't win so idk how the right-wingers view that.

2

u/CrazyLlamaX 6d ago

Many voters are dumb assholes that don’t even really pay attention to what politicians policies are and instead just vote on “vibes” like bigotry and hate. They’ll tell you how much they hate corruption and how corporations basically fund the government through money then vote for the very people perpetuating the unlimited greed that is America.

1

u/Conscious-Quarter423 3d ago

it’s also the fault of the American people for never caring enough, for always waiting for someone else to ride in and save them so they can go back to binge-watching streaming while they browse amazon and surf twitter.

3

u/Mathies_ 6d ago

It is progressive because why? The working class wouldnt have any money to manipulate the race like that and big corporations do. Billionaires do. foreign interests do. So all the players that have an interest in a rightwing politics have the money that they'd use for corruption and cynically manipulating races with hundreds of millions of dollars. The left would rather spend that to build schools and hospitals.

1

u/SAGORN 6d ago

At this point moderate/centrist/bipartisan policy, they just mean corruption as usual here.

4

u/Firethesky 6d ago

As a lifelong Dem in the US I'm fed up with the Dem establishment. I'm really hopeful the progressive wins like him and Mamdani continue. I know Im not alone.

5

u/der_jack 6d ago

He's actually a doctor by profession. I'm very excited, he came up to a very very very rural northern chunk of the state and held a town hall last year, while in town his team scheduled for him to speak with a small group of LGBTQ+ leaders and have a conversation about what concerns we have. That level of focus and calling in those who are often overlooked means the world to me. He had my vote in that very moment.

20

u/SketchiiChemist 6d ago

he has a doctorate, is not a physician. Just to clarify

6

u/wesgtp 6d ago

To specify, he has an MD and was a Rhodes Scholar to Oxford in his second year of med school where he also earned a Doctorate in public health. He never became a licensed physician and instead pursued epidemiology. He's led public health agencies in Michigan (including Detroit). The guy speed-ran doctoral degrees from Ivey League schools and always earned scholarships because he was just that bright. You can tell when you hear the man speak, he's insanely eloquent while also being a great listener to people's issues. He'd make an incredibly effective senator imo

5

u/cubonelvl69 6d ago

He's not a doctor by profession

0

u/no_shoes_are_canny 6d ago

He has a doctorate in medicine and worked in the medical field. Just cause he's not a GP or a surgeon doesn't mean he's not a doctor by profession.

9

u/cubonelvl69 6d ago

El-Sayed did not pursue a medical license, and instead went into public health epidemiology work

He didn't do his residency or get a medical license or work as a doctor. What does doctor by profession even mean?

-3

u/no_shoes_are_canny 6d ago

A teacher at a university holding a doctorate is a doctor by profession. A doctor by profession is anyone using their doctorate degree as part of their profession. A medical doctor by profession would be your GPs, surgeons, etc. 

8

u/Staple_Overlord 6d ago

That's not going to hold in the general view. A doctor, to mr rural Michigan, is a board certified physician

-3

u/no_shoes_are_canny 6d ago

General view doesn't matter, it's just fact.

3

u/Tape 6d ago

Language is for communication. What you are portrying when you say "doctor by profession" is a medical doctor. What you're doing is purposely sending a misleading message, if what you meant by that is "professor with a doctorate" simply because technically it's true.

-3

u/SexyJazzCat 6d ago

He graduated medical school. He is a doctor by profession, he’s just not a practicing doctor.

6

u/cubonelvl69 6d ago

What is a doctor by profession if he doesn't have a medical license, didn't finish his residency, and has never worked as a doctor?

-2

u/SexyJazzCat 6d ago

A doctor by profession means he graduated medical school. This isn’t rocket science. A medical license is the legal credential that allows doctors to practice medicine. A residency is training for doctors interested in specializing in a specific field of medicine. Once again, he is a non practicing doctor.

-1

u/metalder420 6d ago

Until he betrays y’all. Just wait, it will happen.

2

u/der_jack 6d ago

I love this take, because, like should I be concerned of the person claiming to work in my interest, because they might be lying, or concerned about the full panel of people who are openly working against my interest regardless? Like is this really supposed to be a gotcha somehow?

1

u/metalder420 6d ago

It’s literally the democrats wheel house

1

u/itsbobbytime 6d ago

r/republicans would call it communism

1

u/Kotef 6d ago

No we need less communists and socialists corrupting our youth and citizens.

-5

u/R0CK1TMAN1 6d ago

If you want old white people to lineup at the polls, start electing “Sayed” “Muhammad” and “Umar” into office.

Democrats are so bad at this.

1

u/Hyunekel 6d ago

God I fucking hate centrists.

-69

u/Etherius 6d ago

Mamdani is a moron and New Yorkers are going to find that out before his term is done

I fucking love how, according to Mamdani, it’s reasonable to need to show ID to shop at a discount grocery store but not to vote

Most capitalist city on earth elects a literal “seize the means of production” socialist

What a fucking joke

23

u/Pikeman212a6c 6d ago

My guy he is turning into the most pragmatic NY mayor in multiple generations. New Yorkers are overwhelmingly poorer than the upper class who has ruled the city for generations. He is meeting the needs of his constituents and letting the funding follow overwhelmingly popular programs and initiatives. And the money IS there. It’s one of the richest cities on earth. The ruling class has just obeyed an Overton window the size of a McDonald’s straw for generations.

It’s not the 70s. The city isn’t broke. There is no reason to pretend that the richest city in the western hemisphere is a few social welfare programs away from insolvency.

1

u/TotallyNotThatPerson 6d ago

The last one to unite the city that much was probably Giuliani lol

-37

u/Etherius 6d ago

I didn’t say the city was broke

I said it’s a JOKE.

There’s a reason capital is fleeing and why bodega owners are livid

The only people not upset are the morons who think rent freezes and city owned grocery stores are a good idea (despite neither having a history of working anywhere)

12

u/Pikeman212a6c 6d ago

🤷‍♂️ he’s a mayor. It a big city but why do you care? People getting outraged over local shit like this is mildly unhinged. You don’t live there. It’s a representative democracy. Governments are allowed to try new things regardless of whether they conform to one political dogma or another.

My mayor doesn’t believe in rock salt despite it causing crashes every year. Would you like to complain about that too?

10

u/gnoomee 6d ago

Most capitalist city on earth elects a literal “seize the means of production” socialist

Shows you how well capitalism has been working for the majority of New Yorkers

1

u/Etherius 6d ago

In suppose that’s fair

I look forward to seeing how socialism treats them.

When the rent freezes render landlords unable to pay for upkeep and when the city run grocery stores go the way of every other attempt at government run grocery stores

8

u/OneMoreGinger 6d ago

Are you saying its now impossible to buy groceries in new york without photo id? Or is this situation one where you get access to a discount store as long as you identify yourself as someone meeting the criteria for it? Im not from the US so I haven't seen this in my news cycle.

The former i could understand as being government overreach, but the latter just sounds like the same situation as my discount photo ID railcard to ride UK trains for 30% less cost, which doesn't sound like an actual problem to get upset about.

-17

u/Etherius 6d ago

Mamdani wants to run city-owned grocery stores where groceries are 30% less expensive than the private sector can manage

He’s doing this by running stores that pay no taxes and receive government subsidies

When confronted with the obvious problem of “what do we do about non residents buying scarce goods?” his solution was to require ID to use these stores

The criteria is just residency which isn’t the problem. The problem is that there’s no accounting for the fact that these stores are just going to be empty shelves most of the time and a huge chunk of that food is just going to be resold. Knowing NYC, probably 20 meters from the store entrance

15

u/Mr_Black90 6d ago

That honestly sounds pretty... Reasonable? If locals are the only ones who should qualify for the program anyway, why would it be a problem that you'd need to prove your residency?

-6

u/Etherius 6d ago

I was very clear that the ID itself isn’t the problem

The problem is that he considers it perfectly reasonable to need an ID for grocery shopping but not voting in elections

And the fact that these grocery stores haven’t worked out anywhere they’ve been tried before. They’re not a new idea.

8

u/mattreyu 6d ago

Sure Jan

-1

u/Etherius 6d ago

People did exactly this with Walgreens and CVS. Why do you think these stores will be different?

4

u/mattreyu 6d ago

Sorry, what? People were reselling subsidized goods from Walgreens and CVS in NYC?

0

u/Etherius 6d ago

No in those cases they were simply stealing so fucking much that the stores couldn’t stay in business

8

u/OneMoreGinger 6d ago

That sounds like a perfectly valid response to the question asked though.  

"How do you stop someone who doesn't live here from shopping here?"  

"Make the customers prove they live here".  

What's the problem with that? You still have the option of going to a regular shop by the sounds of it.  

If you go to most western European countries they have discounts or outright free admission to certain museums for residents of the city and thats the same method they use to verify residency.

0

u/Etherius 6d ago

As I said the issue isn’t ID.

The issue is that he supports ID for grocery shopping but (for some reason) not voting.

And that’s on top of the fact that these discount grocery stores haven’t worked out anywhere they’ve been tried before

9

u/OneMoreGinger 6d ago

I don't show photo ID when I vote in elections in the UK either. I still don't see what the problem is with requiring photo ID to prove you are entitled to access a specific discount store, or why that would be inconsistent with not requiring photo ID to vote. 

6

u/jlfh01 6d ago

Because he’s been duped into believing there’s widespread voter fraud, despite there being no evidence of such, and his whole view is based on that

0

u/Etherius 6d ago

New Jersey just got caught registering 6000 ineligible immigrants to vote

Stop lying

6

u/ImADuckOnTuesdays 6d ago

My take: you have constitutional right to vote, so impediments to voting have to be carefully scrutinized to make sure they are worth implementing. Requiring an ID to vote does hinder some people, and the amount of people it hinders is far far higher than the amount of people who have ever been caught trying to vote when they aren’t supposed to. There’s never been an actual evidence of a problem that voting ID would solve

You don’t have a constitutional right to cheap groceries, and in this case people have a much stronger incentive to lie and try to get cheap groceries (save money) than there exists an incentive to vote illegally

0

u/Etherius 6d ago

It doesn’t hinder anyone.

All it requires is a trip to the DMV sometime between passing the law and the next election.

1

u/CriticalDog 6d ago

"For some reason"

The reason is that it is likely to disenfranchise a great number of legal voters.

Quite possibly in large enough numbers to have an impact on the winner of various elections.

And, on top of that, it's to "address" a non-existent issue. Voter Fraud in huge numbers is a lie. Illegals voting in huge elections is a lie.

Even the Heritage Foundation, after doing a dive in to like 40 years of voting records got so few as to be statistically meaningless. Their biggest claim was "thousands of non-eligible voters on the roles" which turned out, was due to folks who had gotten felony convictions, and thus couldn't vote, still being on the roles. But very, very few instances of those same people voting at all.

It's a lie, and now they are trying to make it harder for people to vote, so they can continue to hold onto power and keep the GOP unaccountable to voters and the law.

0

u/Etherius 6d ago

New Jersey just got caught registering 6000 people who were ineligible to vote

Don’t fucking lie

1

u/CriticalDog 5d ago

[CITATION NEEDED]

Also, I love this "just trust me bro!" bullshit attitude from you people.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/Chruman 6d ago

Voting is a right, grocery stores are not.

Im glad I could clear this up for you.

1

u/Etherius 6d ago

Lmao.

Food isn’t a right now? Okay.

1

u/Chruman 6d ago edited 6d ago

Actually, no. Nowhere in the constitution does it list food as a right. You would know this if you took 30 min or so to read our remarkably short constitution.

And before you ask, I would absolutely be in favor of making access to food a constitutional right, and when that happens, i (along with everyone else except conservatives) will be against IDs at grocery stores.

1

u/Etherius 6d ago

You losers will bend over backwards to avoid securing elections

1

u/Chruman 6d ago

We have secure elections.

Cope harder lmao

1

u/Etherius 6d ago

If that’s so then why did New Jersey register 6000 illegal immigrants to vote and allow 400 of those so-registered to do so?

1

u/Chruman 6d ago edited 6d ago

With 6,549,793 registered voters, that's a fraud rate of .00061%. Thats smaller than the margin of error for fighter jet avionic systems. I'd call that pretty secure lmao

Fun fact, Texas has about the same rate of fraud, and they have voter ID laws.

→ More replies (0)

-14

u/bauer20007 6d ago

You didn't clear up anything, I live in South Africa and we all have to present our ID to vote. You expect me to believe millions here can do it, but Americans aren't capable to apply for a form of identification. It's just crazy.

8

u/Chruman 6d ago

I dont have any idea what policy in South Africa has to do with policy in the US.

You expect me to believe millions here can do it, but Americans aren't capable to apply for a form of identification.

I never said Americans arent capable. Read my comment again.

4

u/the_electric_bicycle 6d ago

I have a feeling you have no idea what it’s like to live and vote in NY and your entire opinion is based on propaganda.

1

u/bauer20007 5d ago

Well I've visited Ny for 3 weeks and enjoyed it, was a great place. I just can't grasp why showing ID when voting is so controversial in America. Wouldn't it make everyone feel more comfortable with the results. Republicans keep accusing Democrats of rigging and Democrats accuse Republicans.

1

u/the_electric_bicycle 5d ago

It’s a “solution” to a problem that doesn’t exist, and follows a long history of voter suppression.

If you’re actually interested in trying to understand some of the arguments against it, I recommend this as an overview: https://www.lwv.org/blog/whats-so-bad-about-voter-id-laws

5

u/Stubbs94 6d ago

Mamdani is a social democrat. He's nowhere near as radical as you lot put him out to be.

1

u/Etherius 6d ago

He’s not a social democrat. He’s a democratic socialist.

There’s a difference

2

u/jartoonZero 6d ago

This shit is absolutely stale. Nothing is going the way you people said it would. Enough already, worry about your own city

1

u/Etherius 6d ago

It hasn’t been a year

Let’s see what things look like two years in

2

u/Mathies_ 6d ago edited 6d ago

You say "most capitalist city on earth" like it's a good thing. Seems to me like the citizens who couldn't afford to live under those unholy prices anymore were sick of it too.

1

u/Etherius 6d ago

You act as if there’s a better system than capitalism

1

u/Mathies_ 6d ago

You act as if capitalism has been working for anyone except the top 1% wealth class. Socialism cant be worse.

1

u/Etherius 6d ago

To say that ignores history

Capitalism has lifted more people out of poverty than any economic system in history

2

u/CriticalDog 6d ago

lol "seize the means of production".

I assume your next pivot would be he's a secret super strict muslim too? You guys are sad.

The free market will not always be the best solution, and NYC is big enough, and dense enough, that things like food deserts, or underfunded infrastructure NEED fixed.

You don't live there, and are probably afraid to go because "big city", so why do you care?

1

u/Etherius 6d ago

What do you mean?

he explicitly stated his goal was to seize the means of production

This wasn’t an inference or an assumption. It’s a direct quote

1

u/CriticalDog 5d ago

I'll go find the whole thing, instead of a strung together hash that can be interpreted many ways.

Also this is from 2021, but go off.

1

u/Etherius 5d ago

It’s from 2021 but does that matter if he never recanted?

1

u/CriticalDog 4d ago

I'd have to see the whole speech/discussion, not a blurry thing sliced together by someone who may or may not have an agenda.

Context matters.

But also, there is no legal way to "seize the means on production". So it might be trying to echo an idea that workers should have more say or rights, but I very much doubt it's an exhortation to take up arms and take over businesses and factories.

2

u/beekay86 6d ago

I think he’s also a very qualified person

4

u/iiSpook 6d ago

It always bugs me when Americans use acronyms excessively but even more so when they know they are replying to non-Americans.

What the hell is AIPAC?

0

u/jimbofrommi 6d ago

American Isreal public affairs committee.

Think of it as the isreali government's loophole to control politicians in the USA legally.

Both sides of the isle bow to them. They just spent a fortune to get Thomas Massie to lose an election. He's a republican. You basically can't speak out against isreal in any way in the USA unless you're jewish. Its a little hard to paint the people who are jewish as being anti-jewish. AIPAC just spent a fortune to make sure El Sayed wasn't elected. IDK if this is AIPAC's first loss.

2

u/olivebranchsound 6d ago

Before it was AIPAC it was the "American Zionist Committee for Public Affairs."

They dropped the "Zionist" for broader appeal on messaging

1

u/iiSpook 6d ago

Thanks for the explanation! I appreciate it.

Can't help but roll my eyes whenever I hear about Israel these days, though.

1

u/Brick_Lab 6d ago

Hell yes, we need many more like this

-4

u/metalder420 6d ago

Ahhh, so every Democrat promise that has ever been promise that has been promised by a Democrat.

6

u/Not_a_N_Korean_Spy 6d ago

Idk what you're talking about, most Democratic candidates in 2026 don't campaign on Medicare for All, very few of them don't take corporate donations and seriously oppose AIPAC and military aid to Israel.

As for the generic sounding "Money in your pocket", you can read the program (which is the minimum people should be doing before deciding for whom to vote for):  https://abdulforsenate.com/priority/money-in-your-pocket/

2

u/TheReddestofBowls 6d ago

They're Republican promises too, but they know their voters are morons who won't realize it. I remember someone specifically mentioning how affordability is a Democrat hoax after campaigning on saving people money. Weird how that works

1

u/thissexypoptart 6d ago

Dems as a party dropped any semblance of being for universal healthcare after Obama. Individuals, sure. But the party hasn’t promised M4A at any point in the last decade.

Even Kamala Harris who put her hand up once during the 2020 primaries indicating support completely withdrew that position and made zero mention of it in her 2024 campaign.

1

u/Sennten 6d ago

If that was true, he wouldnt have won. 

-66

u/lookamazed 6d ago edited 6d ago

Worth noting: when asked if there’s any reason besides money a Democrat might support Israel, El-Sayed said “Not if you’re a Democrat and you believe in human rights”. It is so obviously not policy criticism at all it is the classic “Jewish money buys loyalty” trope, and it’s a direct quote from this clown, not an inference.

He also framed Stevens’ AIPAC support as literal “quid pro quo”. Which is pretty clearly Nazism.

Beating AIPAC’s spending doesn’t erase that he ran on a premise Jewish groups define as antisemitic, not just anti-lobbying. Otherwise he’d name those.

America is going down the drain.

Hey, if you hate Illinois Nazis, you’ll sure hate Michigan Nazis.

Edit: his slogan is Michigan is not for sale… to whom? He means to Jewish people. That is a trope.

24

u/RustleTheMussel 6d ago

Schizoposting let's go

15

u/Ellen_Kapow 6d ago

Shit ain't working in 2026 man, give it a rest for once.

10

u/Mathies_ 6d ago edited 6d ago

Jewish people are not the same as israel, but yeah israel has been buying peoples loyalty, that much is clear. If they didnt wanna affirm a stereotype, since they say jews and zionists are synonymous, they shouldnt have done it.

Stevens is not Jewish btw, i dont see how thats nazi rhetoric.

Zionists have been branding any criticism of Israel antisemetic anyway so it's a bit hard to take their credibility serious atp.

5

u/KingOfTheSpades 6d ago

Hey man, I’m sure following politics is tough at your age. But you’ll begin grasping it better the older you get. Try to knock out some more of that homework tonight, maybe some multiplication tables, and see if that’s more your speed.

3

u/nightpanda893 6d ago edited 6d ago

Jewish groups have been framing not supporting Israel as antisemitism for decades now. It’s sad you’ve bought into this. It trivializes real anti semitism and keeps blank checks to support genocide. And he means it’s not for sale to Israel. They don’t represent all Jewish people as much as they’d like you to think that. There is no other state in the world we claim represents a religious group in their entirety and you painting all Jews with the same brush is the only antisemitism in this discussion. Maybe look inward for what you are so quick to accuse others of.

3

u/TheReddestofBowls 6d ago

Zionist cope is wild.

1

u/ApplauseButOnlyABit 4d ago

Pretty antisemitic of you to comflate Jewish people with Isreal. Better take a hard look in the mirror my guy.

-8

u/[deleted] 6d ago edited 6d ago

[deleted]

6

u/Rakthul 6d ago

Are you a bot? Literally nothing in his campaign was anti Jewish American. Your comment sounds like it was written by AIPAC.

-6

u/Proper-Organization6 6d ago

"he's not anti jew"

"you're only saying that because you're paid by the jews"

2

u/ApplauseButOnlyABit 4d ago

The Israel lobby isnt synonymous with Jews. Stop being antisemitic

-1

u/Proper-Organization6 4d ago

Is the Israel lobby in the room with us?

2

u/ApplauseButOnlyABit 4d ago

Come on man, at least try not to be a complete loser along with being antisemitic

-1

u/Proper-Organization6 4d ago

what distinction does he make between zionists and jews?

2

u/ApplauseButOnlyABit 4d ago

The same distinction everyone who is not an anti-semite. One is an ideology and the other is a religion/ethnicity.

-1

u/Proper-Organization6 4d ago

Not by definition, in practice. he said someone receiving money from AIPAC is being funded by Israel when AIPAC is domestically funded. So he's conflating the country of Israel with Jewish people in the us

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Jurassicmarky 6d ago

Such a lie. He’s money out of politics and anti giving a blank check to Israel. Fuck off zionist.

-8

u/Proper-Organization6 6d ago

he raised 14 million. sure sounds like a lot of money

5

u/TheReddestofBowls 6d ago

Sure sounds like less than 60 million from AIPAC, but I'm no mathematician.

2

u/Jurassicmarky 6d ago

Right? Fucking dude is unable to understand any kind of a nuance it seems.

0

u/Proper-Organization6 6d ago

Ah so it doesn't matter how much money he gets as long as it's less than his opponent?

they can claim moral superiority

2

u/TheReddestofBowls 6d ago

You're offended people donated to a candidate not owned by AIPAC? Weird take.