Maybe more voters than you think actually want the turd. Most Americans can’t find Gaza on a map let alone give a shit about it.
But of those who do, faced with a choice between Israelis or Palestinians controlling that region, they’re probably going to choose Israel every time. Neither side wants to coexist. And when you lose a war, you don’t typically get much agency.
Entirely possible, but the argument strikes me… oddly Republican. As in it’s on a surface level short-sighted, in that it’s pandering to the base and calling it “will of the people”, regardless of long term repercussions, and deep-level ideological, in that it anchors this “will of the people” on a presupposed silent majority, that just so happens to always agree with the party heads.
I find it interesting how the agency and duty is always with the voters to swallow a turd, rather that with the politicians to offer non-turds.
Maybe more voters than you think actually want the turd. Most Americans can’t find Gaza on a map let alone give a shit about it.
But of those who do, faced with a choice between Israelis or Palestinians controlling that region, they’re probably going to choose Israel every time. Neither side wants to coexist. And when you lose a war, you don’t typically get much agency.
Entirely possible, but the argument strikes me… oddly Republican. As in it’s on a surface level short-sighted, in that it’s pandering to the base and calling it “will of the people”, regardless of long term repercussions, and deep-level ideological, in that it anchors this “will of the people” on a presupposed silent majority, that just so happens to always agree with the party heads.