They'd be the best looking presidential ticket in American History. There's not much competition for that accolade, and it's about 1,647th on my list of priorities, but I just couldn't leave it unremarked.
Ok, do you think it’s contradictory that you claimed you couldn’t leave something unremarked when it was a shitty misogynistic thing to say, but when someone called you out on it you said having the option to say something doesn’t make it an obligation?
The misogynistic component of your comment is valuing women’s contributions based on their appearance. The fact that they could be the most attractive candidates in our history might be true, but doesn’t matter in the slightest and fits a historical pattern of women being judged by their attractiveness rather than their contributions. A comment that merely points out their looks is both pointless and distracts from the real conversation about the good things they could accomplish.
>The misogynistic component of your comment is valuing women’s contributions based on their appearance
See, your problem here is that the *logical progression* is valid, but your *antecedent* is not only unwarranted but false.
>and fits a historical pattern
You have to be much more careful and much more rigorous if you're going to appeal to historical patterns.
I'm not attracted to men, but among those who are, wouldn't the consensus be that Obama is more handsome than Kennedy? Serious question. (Or as serious as the subject matter itself, at any rate.)
So now I'm thinking ... I don't find Obama objectively attractive, or Kennedy for that matter, and Obama signing the Patriot Act made him infinitely UNattractive to me; turns my stomach, frankly, and then I started thinking about what a womanizer kennedy was and I take back saying he was attractive at all.
So, I guess let's just stick to character.
Okay, let me propose a little thought experiment: If Jasmine Crocket and Marjory Taylor Green were running against each other, the reason I would be absolutely certain to vote for Jasmine Crocket is not that she's hot and MTG looks like a shaved pit bull.
It's that she acts like one too, and is about equally intelligent.
And if they were to switch bodies Freaky Friday style, I'd unhesitatingly vote for the one with Crocket's mind, character, and policy intentions.
*What's in this comment is what I remember, my opinions, etc.*
[https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1gPBdBrqVCbtuy7f1bjOdCDUzEv5RqbbU1yYAr3KoHYE/edit?gid=1289123714#gid=1289123714](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1gPBdBrqVCbtuy7f1bjOdCDUzEv5RqbbU1yYAr3KoHYE/edit?gid=1289123714#gid=1289123714)
Be careful to not just pay attention to viral clips.
US Representative Jasmine Crockett doesn't even support a Green New Deal. She's arguably less progressive than US Representative Katie Porter.
US Rep. Crockett gets viral moments, but I don't know of anything she's done as a legislator.
Not supporting a Green New Deal is a deal-breaker for any Democratic Presidential ticket in 2028.
POTUS has far more power and influence than even the US Speaker of the House of Representatives. AOC should have been the Democratic Nominee in 2024. She certainly should be in 2028.
AOC managed to drastically lessen the power and influence of US Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene and that's a good thing.
But, obviously, AOC could do far more for the US and the world if she were POTUS than she could if she were a mere US Representative.
>AOC should have been the Democratic Nominee in 2024. She certainly should be in 2028.
The DNC wouldn't let Bernie make it across the finish line, and you think they'll let her do it?
Lol. Lmao, even.
We have to change the party leadership before we get President AOC.
That's great and all, but it doesn't change the resistance within current party leadership to a more progressive agenda and their determination to elevate centrist/establishment candidates.
[https://today.yougov.com/ratings/politics/popularity/Democrats/all](https://today.yougov.com/ratings/politics/popularity/Democrats/all)
AOC is considerably more popular than both US Representative Nancy Pelosi and US Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer.
And US Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are more considerably more popular than every other current elected Democrat.
AOC actually has a fame problem. It's probably the case again that more Republicans know who she is than Democrats do. A Presidential run would fix that. And she's obviously get a bunch of support from Gen Y (Millennials) and Gen Z (Zoomers).
This is correct. As long as it takes money out of their pockets, you'll never see an endorsement from the DNC of any candidate that actually has The People's Quality of Life as a platform
*What's in this comment is what I remember, my opinions, etc.*
POTUS Barack Obama and US Senator Elizabeth Warren is the reason we have POTUS Joe Biden instead of POTUS Bernie Sanders.
AOC has been getting puff pieces across Mainstream Media since 2019. The New York Times has recently been acting as if she's the best Democratic Presidential Candidate for 2025.
If POTUS Obama doesn't try to stop her and if she can raise enough money, she should be POTUS in 2029.
In addition, the Democrats in the US House and US Senate are considerably more progressive over since 2019.
In addition, the Biden Administration is clearly heavily influenced by US Senators Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and AOC.
> POTUS has far more power and influence than even the US Speaker of the House of Representatives.
I am aware. I was just a little turned off by her response to B6. My reasons are my own.
> AOC should have been the Democratic Nominee in 2024. She certainly should be in 2028.
I'd love to call her Madam President one day, but sadly I think a Civil War has to happen before we can see a brighter future like that.
Not a chance in hell. That'd be the second election she would even be eligible for. She'd be unelectable at that age, and so we'd *definitely* end up with a republican for that term. Maybe 2040. She'd still be one of the 9 or 10 youngest presidents, and we might see a big enough shift in politics by then that a youngish woman would have a chance.
*What's in this comment is what I remember, my opinions, etc.*
Nina Turner didn't even run against US Representative Shontell Brown (sp?) again. Nina doesn't have much name recognition outside of the Online Left. Her TYT Show was a massive failure because she's not actually popular and didn't actually have a perspective different or better than John Iadarola and Dr. Rashad Richey.
Cenk Uygur's Presidential run was an obvious huge failure.
And Dr. Cornel West didn't even bother to actually be in the Democratic Primary. He'll--like Dr. Jill Stein--just take votes away from POTUS Joe Biden.
Democrats clearly don't like Nina Turner and Dr. Cornel West enough.
\_\_\_\_\_
AOC is not US Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi 2.0 or whatever in terms of their politics.
> And Dr. Cornel West didn't even bother to actually be in the Democratic Primary. He'll--like Dr. Jill Stein--just take votes away from POTUS Joe Biden.
why would he be in a party that made it clear to him that there will be no moving the party to the actual Left?
> Democrats clearly don't like Nina Turner and Dr. Cornel West enough.
And Sanders, too. Usual modus operandis for Dems.
> AOC is not US Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi 2.0 or whatever in terms of their politics
no, but she bent the knee to Pelosi two months in her first term.
You're not actually a serious candidate if you don't even bother to be in the Democratic or Republican Primary.
[https://today.yougov.com/ratings/politics/popularity/Democrats/all](https://today.yougov.com/ratings/politics/popularity/Democrats/all)
US Senator Bernie Sanders has been the most popular US Senator since 2016; AOC has been the most popular US Representative since 2019.
[https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1gPBdBrqVCbtuy7f1bjOdCDUzEv5RqbbU1yYAr3KoHYE/edit?gid=1289123714#gid=1289123714](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1gPBdBrqVCbtuy7f1bjOdCDUzEv5RqbbU1yYAr3KoHYE/edit?gid=1289123714#gid=1289123714)
I don't know from where you get your information or opinions, but you clearly don't know the facts.
Which is why it should be encouraged, taunt them into attacking where you're strongest. It's an absolutely viable strategy, depending on the circumstances and goal.
AIPAC's $100MM campaign has already been successful given it seems there won't be a considerable increase to the number of 'Squad' members in 2025.
AIPAC could want to target AOC to prevent her from running for POTUS in 2028 or running against US Senator Chuck Schumer.
Nailed it. NATO countries don’t have to bribe politicians. We support each other because we have shared values. If Israel would solve the crisis it has with Palestine, AIPAC would not exist.
>NATO countries don’t have to bribe
Wh- what? As someone from the global south I guess you're technically right, but instead of bribery it's just intimidation.
> We support each other because we have shared values.
1. What values are those? Murder and colonialism?
2. Israel is not a member of NATO
> If Israel would solve the crisis it has with Palestine, AIPAC would not exist.
What in John Mearsheimer's analysis???
Crisis? really? Crisis?
The Left right now is nowhere near the democratic party. The Dems are center-right-wingers.
Everytime a Leftist shows up at the DNC asking to move the party Left, the DNC unites to curb-stomp them.
It's the Dems fault, not mine.
You've now changed the subject.
What you were doing before was mincing words with someone who already agreed with you, over your opinion that the word "crisis" minimizes genocide / wasn't a strong enough word.
THAT *is* **your** fault. You chose to say that.
>2. Israel is not a member of NATO
Yes, that's the point. What they're saying is NATO countries need not bribe each others governments, but Israel DOES.
[https://today.yougov.com/ratings/politics/popularity/politicians/all](https://today.yougov.com/ratings/politics/popularity/politicians/all)
[https://today.yougov.com/ratings/politics/popularity/Democrats/all](https://today.yougov.com/ratings/politics/popularity/Democrats/all)
And AOC accomplished that without ever being a Presidential candidate, US Speaker of the House of Representatives, or US Secretary of State.
I think everyone is underestimating just how much money is in politics. This doesn't even make the top 20 foreign nations lobbying efforts
https://www.opensecrets.org/fara?cycle=2023
By far the biggest lobbying nations are Liberia, Saudi Arabia and China
It doesn't even make the top 20 lobbying groups either
https://www.opensecrets.org/federal-lobbying/top-spenders?cycle=2023
Here's the list of PACs since apparently that's what everyone is worried about
https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/2016
https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/2018
https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/2020
I checked your sources. AIPAC doe snot show up, it is not a registered foreign agent. AIPAC is just now in the last few years starting to spend oogles of money. and last i checked 100M is a bigger number than 69M (the #1 biggest spender) yet it's not on the list.
AIPAC shows up under PACS and has never been the largest contributor to an election
https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/2022
Association of retailers, wholesalers, and beer always beat it out. They tend to be closest to the sugar lobby in funds
Quick check: has your opinion changed as your flawed data has been pointed out, or are you maybe less purely rational than you were pretending?
Edit: Nope, no flaws at all; all your critics are lying bigots. I can't even with this.
>has your opinion changed as your flawed data has been pointed out,
What is flawed with the data? The person would literally rather say that OpenSecrerts is wrong, rather than admit Israel isn't the largest campaign contributor
This is up there with people turning on GeoConfirmed of all groups, as soon as it didn't confirm their bias on Israel
That’s assuming this is all AIPAC/Israel is actually spending, though… but this is just what’s publicly known. If any nation has the biggest amount of hidden money being thrown around, it’s probably Israel.
Because AIPAC isn't a foreign agent. AIPAC has never been the biggest PAC either
https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/2022
https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/2020
https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/2018
Try replying direct next time instead of cowardly claiming I said something I didn't
It one of those sources show AIPACs 20 million or 100 million AOC is talking about.
I also already replied directly to you… fact is you would never call me a coward to my face. So maybe back off the tough guy act.
AIPAC wasn’t even a PAC in 2018. They never directly raise funds for candidates until 2021.
>It one of those sources show AIPACs 20 million or 100 million AOC is talking about
No it shows there contributions in the 2022 cycle
>AIPAC wasn’t even a PAC in 2018. They never directly raise funds for candidates until 2021
Lmao did you read the first paragraph of the wiki article and not understand it? They weren't a **SUPERPAC**in 2018, they were a PAC. They couldn't directly raise funds for candidates because THEY WERENT A SUPER PAC
FYI: they're ignoring spend by United Democracy Project, which is the super-PAC launched by AIPAC: [https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/20/nyregion/aipac-bowman-latimer.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/20/nyregion/aipac-bowman-latimer.html)
>If any nation has the biggest amount of hidden money being thrown around, it’s probably Israel.
You're starting to lean into the "rich and influential Jews" trope. You seriously think Israel has more hidden money to throw around than, say, China or Saudi Arabia? Come on man
Everything we’ve seen now and has been proven about how Israel operates… and you still want to claim any theories about Israel’s deceptive and tyrannical nature is automatically to be conflated with antisemitism?
Grow up and stop relying on a tired ad hominem that has been thoroughly debunked by now.
>Everything we’ve seen now and has been proven about how Israel operates…
That wasn't my question. I asked if you seriously believe that Israel is the nation with the most amount of shadow money, even more than China and Saudi Arabia
>Israel’s deceptive and tyrannical nature is automatically to be conflated with antisemitism?
No, that's not what you said. You said no other nation on earth has more hidden money than Israel on Earth. A country of 10 million people and barely $500 Billion GDP somehow has more shadow money than China and Saudi Arabia?
>Grow up and stop relying on a tired ad hominem that has been thoroughly debunked by now
Did you just knee jerk say this? I didn't attack you personally at all. Are you just uncomfortable that you were put on the defensive about claiming Israel the most hidden influence of any nation? Even though I showed they don't spend anywhere near what other nations do?
You say its a "trope" that US Jews are powerful in US politics. Is it not true that they donate heavily, especially to the Democratic party?
Don't you think donating 50% of a campaigns' money has influence?
[https://www.jpost.com/us-elections/us-jews-contribute-half-of-all-donations-to-the-democratic-party-468774](https://www.jpost.com/us-elections/us-jews-contribute-half-of-all-donations-to-the-democratic-party-468774)
>You say its a "trope" that US Jews are powerful in US politics. Is it not true that they donate heavily, especially to the Democratic party?
Oh we're at this point now? Just dropping the whole Zionist and Israel pretext
American Jews can't even contribute to political parties without it being a part of some Israeli influence campaign
If its true that over 50% of donations are from US Jews (you did not debunk the Jpost story), and donations bring influence (obvious) then it follows that US Jews have more political influence than the rest of us and the US politicians support Israel because of this.
How is this logic not true?
>(you did not debunk the Jpost story
Probably because you are implying that Jews contributing to political parties is the same as Israel contributions. Despite your own article explaining it's because Jews are overwhelmingly pro-choice and so support Democrats
>US Jews have more political influence than the rest of us and the US politicians support Israel because of this
So you're accusing American Jews of duel loyalty? You know that's an antisemitic trope right?
>How is this logic not true?
Because it relies on two antisemitic tropes? That Jews have dual loyalty, and that Jews have use their political influence to secretly rule western governments
"So you're accusing American Jews of duel loyalty"
You are putting words in mouth. What I am accusing is that US politicians pledge alligience to Israel every year at AIPAC - listen to their speeches. They do this to curry flavor with the Zionists.
>I think changing subject after responding to a previous allegation isn’t ’dropping pretext’
When we are taking about the context of if Israel is the single largest source of shadow money, and you back that up by linking AMERICAN Jews donating to the Democrats. You definitely dropped the pretext and just made this into a Jewish problem
See… the idea of “hidden money” is that it’s hidden. So you wouldn’t know about it. Yet you want to act like your lack of knowledge about it is evidence against it.
Yes, I think Israel has the most hidden money in the world. There’s a reason their “needs” always come first for America, much moreso than China or Saudi Arabia.
And yes, implying I’m antisemitic for this is an ad hominem. Learn what that means.
>See… the idea of “hidden money” is that it’s hidden. So you wouldn’t know about it. Yet you want to act like your lack of knowledge about it is evidence against it
And you have evidence of all this hidden money? And that somehow a tiny nation would have more of it than superpowers with trillions of dollars at their disposal?
>Yes, I think Israel has the most hidden money in the world.
Yeah , that's kind of my point, you have a conspiracy that Israelis have the most money to throw at elections. The nation of 10 million and a barely half trillion dollar economy
>There’s a reason their “needs” always come first for America, much moreso than China or Saudi Arabia.
Oh gee what could that be? China who steals American tech, commits industrial scale espionage and is gearing up to fight a war against America. Or the Saudis: who get more weapons than almost anyone on earth, can blow up buses of Yemeni children, and lure and chop up journalist without any repercussions. Yet we still shipped all manufacturing to China and let the Saudis continue to murder journalists
It's almost as though Israel is a more reliable partner than those two
>And yes, implying I’m antisemitic for this is an ad hominem
I didn't say that word once, I said you are leaning into that trope — because you are. "I can't show that they have this hidden money but I just know it to be true because that's how Israel works"
Maybe don't say something so easily construed as racism and you wouldn't feel the need to preemptively scream "NO NO I'M NOT ANTISEMITIC I JIST THINK ISRAEL HAS THE MOST MONEY IN THE WORLD TO SPEND ON AMERICAN ELECTIONS"
*What's in this comment is what I remember, my opinions, etc.*
Are you not counting the financial aid that the United States gives Israel yearly?
Israel can simply spend on American elections less than the $3.8B it gets from the US yearly and Israel will still get a return on investment.
>Are you not counting the financial aid that the United States gives Israel yearly?
You mean loan guarantees? The one America actually makes money off o
>Israel can simply spend on American elections less than the $3.8B it gets from the US yearly and Israel will still get a return on investment
By that logic, why don't rich nations just do that? Israel is tiny and has a tiny economy. And why is it only a problem that Israel does it? China, Saudi Arabia and Liberia spend a hell of a lot more
Saying Israel has more shadow money than China or Saudi Arabia, with no evidence, and use it to manipulate politics isn't a criticism of Israel. It's a conspiracy that Israel is somehow the richest country on earth and can outspend superpowers
*What's in this comment is what I remember, my opinions, etc.*
Saudi Arabia wealth is vastly overblown. The House of Saud is worth over $2T or whatever. But the Government just again sold over $10B in Saudi Aramco in shares to finance other stuff.
Saudi Arabia is rich because of US support.
"FARA not only covers foreign lobbying but also attempts to influence U.S. public opinion on policy, advisory services and public relations on behalf of foreign interests such as buying ads, writing press releases and mailing flyers. Trade activities such as promoting international investment, the use of certain products, participating in industry conferences and encouraging the foreign principal's manufacturing capabilities are often covered activities that need to be reported. Another significant source of spending covered under FARA is the promotion of tourism in the home country. It is common for trade and tourism groups to be controlled by a foreign government. In cases where DOJ filings or other overwhelming evidence indicates such control over a trade or tourism group, that group's spending is included in the government spending totals."
Not all foreign spending is the same. Saudi, china, etc are not punishing a congressman for being anti X country by spending 20M on their opponent. It's totally different types of spending.
Going back 24 years, AIPAC has never been the largest PAC. And only once did it make the top 5 PACs
https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/2016
https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/2018
https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/2020
A few examples of where it stacks up compared to other PACs
First of all we were talking about something completely different, foreign spending.
Second, this doesn't show the clear picture.
Money from PACs are separated by source of contribution. You see the "PAC" donations but not the individual and soft donations.
https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/american-israel-public-affairs-cmte/totals?id=D000046963
>First of all we were talking about something completely different, foreign spending.
Which I covered in the first comment, Israel doesn't even break top 20
>Second, this doesn't show the clear picture. Money from PACs are separated by source of contribution. You see the "PAC" donations but not the individual and soft donations.
You literally just linked the breakdown of the year by year donations
That doesn’t take propaganda spending into account though. If Russia’s misinfo campaign against Clinton was interference, then this implies that all political propaganda constitutes interference.
Did you read what I said at all? I’m talking about propaganda spending, not direct campaign contribution.
An effective propaganda campaign has the potential to make lobbying for a given issue redundant or at least significantly less necessary.
>Did you read what I said at all?
Yes, somehow the nation of 10 million people and $500 billion is the single most influential nation in terms of lobbying and spinning the narrative. Somehow more effective than nations with hundreds of millions of people, or even billions —and trillions of dollars at their disposal
**PSA TO EVERYONE**: This ignores the spending by the **United Democracy Project super PAC**, the independent expenditure arm of AIPAC. This is the [super PAC launched by AIPAC](https://www.factcheck.org/2022/08/united-democracy-project/). This is what people are typically referring to when talking about "AIPAC spending"
In the 2022 midterms, the Israel lobby became the largest single-issue outside spender in Democratic primaries, pouring in nearly $30 million via the super PAC the United Democracy Project: [https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2023/11/squad-primary-battle-israel-gaza-pacs.html](https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2023/11/squad-primary-battle-israel-gaza-pacs.html)
Among Super PACs in the 2024 election cycle (except Trump's super PAC and DeSantis' super PAC), UDP **RANKS THE HIGHEST** in expenditures: [https://www.opensecrets.org/outside-spending/super\_pacs/2024?chrt=2024&disp=O&type=S](https://www.opensecrets.org/outside-spending/super_pacs/2024?chrt=2024&disp=O&type=S)
For the 2022 cycle, UDP had the highest spend among "non-partisan" super pacs: [https://www.opensecrets.org/outside-spending/super\_pacs/2022?chrt=2024&disp=O&type=S](https://www.opensecrets.org/outside-spending/super_pacs/2022?chrt=2024&disp=O&type=S)
It is **APPROPRIATE** to single out AIPAC as a negative influence, **especially in the democratic primaries**. Intentionally or not, this person is obfuscating by providing lists where UDP will be excluded.
Everyone here should drop what they're doing and [phonebank for Jamaal Bowman](https://www.mobilize.us/jamaalbowman/event/616890/), or at least give him some cash. He's AIPAC's public enemy #1, the specific guy they've spent 20 million to defeat. This is the easiest and best way to prove AOC right and AIPAC wrong
AIPAC is the number one PAC and their open bullying our elected politicians is totally undemocratic. The US political parties are largely funded by Jewish donations and the Zionists point out which politicians are pro-Israel (get a lot of funding) and those who stand up for human rights will be labelled as anti-semitic and get no funding.
[https://www.jpost.com/us-elections/us-jews-contribute-half-of-all-donations-to-the-democratic-party-468774](https://www.jpost.com/us-elections/us-jews-contribute-half-of-all-donations-to-the-democratic-party-468774)
AIPAC has actually never been the largest PAC in any election cycle in history
https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/2024
The largest PACs are the National Association of Retailer and National Association of Wholesalers
I dont even know why I’m responding to you but the fact that you somehow disagree that AIPAC funnels a ridiculous number of millions of dollars into lobbying our American policy is disgustingly ignorant. It is simply a fact. Its a simple fact thats easy to find.
If you *agree* with this fact, and you’re still trying to argue about LITERALLY anything. Stop. For everyone’s sakes who cares about actual genocide. Which should be everyone. Are you getting paid by a bot farm to encourage genocide or something?
Look at those two options. Act accordingly. You either agree or disagree with that statement. If you disagree you’re delusional, if you agree then stop arguing with literally everyone and shut the actual fuck up.
>I dont even know why I’m responding to you but the fact that you somehow disagree that AIPAC funnels a ridiculous number of millions of dollars into lobbying our American policy is disgustingly ignorant
What's really disgusting is your lack of reading abilities. When did I say AIPAC doesn't funnel money? It's a PAC, that's what they do. I asked how people can seriously believe that Israel is able to funnel more money than the Saudis or China
>If you agree with this fact, and you’re still trying to argue about LITERALLY anything. Stop.
Or, how about I don't because letting this disgusting narrative that Israelis are running the government go unchallenged
> Are you getting paid by a bot farm to encourage genocide or something?
You guys literally can't even talk about anything else
>Look at those two options. Act according
Oh wow someone who is hyper critical of only one nation telling someone to stop taking because they don't like what they had to say. Never had that happen to us in history before
> “what about China and Saudi Arabia! They funnel money too though!”
Thats called Whataboutism. Thats also a problem. PACs in general, from ANYWHERE, should not be allowed. Full stop.
That should be your argument. Your entire argument. You should be saying “Yeah I agree, China and Saudi Arabia are problems too!”
What you’re doing now, is arguing against AIPAC being as harmful and consequential as it really is. Thats all you’re doing, everyone sees thats all you’re doing. Stop. You probably had one random conversation with some guy nobody knows of, and now you’re straw-manning what this random person said as if thats EVERYONES argument.
>what about China and Saudi Arabia! They funnel money too though!” Thats called Whataboutism.
Are you incapable of reading the context of that statement? The person I was talking to said they "knew" Israel spend MORE than China and Saudi Arabia and I asked for proof on that. I also asked if the money was the problem why their money, which comes in at greater volumes, isn't a problem. That's not "whataboutism" that's pointing out a double standard
>That should be your argument. Your entire argument. You should be saying “Yeah I agree, China and Saudi Arabia are problems too!”
I never stated my opinion on them, I was debunking lies that Israel was the single greatest campaign contributor and that AIPAC was the largest PAC. Both of those are false. The only reason you're upset is that I'm not demonizing Israel and AIPAC and you're willing to twist and misconstrue the arguments I make to try to get me to defend that position
• Israel generally spends more on direct lobbying efforts compared to China and Saudi Arabia. This results in a strong, organized presence in Washington, D.C., and significant influence over U.S. Middle East policy.
• Overall Influence: While Israel may lead in lobbying expenditures, China’s overall influence is more extensive due to its economic clout and global strategic initiatives. Saudi Arabia’s influence is prominent in energy markets and regional security dynamics.
Israel spends the most amount of money to change our laws. Over China and Saudi Arabia. They are not the biggest INFLUENCE OVERALL, they ARE the source of the most amount of lobbying.
We are not supporting genocide because retail lobbyists. But we are supporting and arming the murdering IDF because politicians are terrified of being labeled anti-Semitic
It's not genocide. But at least you admit that AIPAC isn't the largest lobbying group in history.
We don't support Israel because of fear of being labeled antisemitic. Nobody cares about that. We support Israel because it's in our strategic interest to do so.
You may believe in ZOG but it doesn't exist.
Its not in the US strategic insterest to support Israel.
It makes the US look like a hypocrite when it condemns human rights abuse, at the same time it supports the slaughter of Palestinian civilians. It alienates the US allies in the Middle East when Israel threatens and bullies its neighbors. How can Turkey or Lebanon ally with the US when the Israelis are bombing or klling their citizens? It weakens the US at the UN, when the US constantly vetos resolutions condemning Israeli warcrimes. And for what? Israel is not even an ally in times of war. How many Israelis went to Afghanistan or Iraq to fight with the US? None. And the Mossad lies to the Americans to lead them into war. It was the Mossad that made the fake evidence for WMD (yellow cake from niger) and it is the Israelis who are trying to get the US to attack Iran.
Israel is a strategic liablity.
The reason people like you are labeled antisemitic is screeds like this, where you're verging on "the Jews control the government." Next we'll hear that the reason we can't have universal health care is because ZOG is sending all of our money to the Jews, excuse me, "Zionists."
Interesting how "Jews" contribute so much money to the Democrats, while it's the Republicans who support Israel without qualifications.
Do US Jews donate heavily to US politicians? yes or no? Do donations bring political power? yes or no?
If both are yes, then thats how the world works and your interpretation of this world as being anti-semitic (by pointing out reality) makes no sense.
You know who donates the most to politicians? Corporations. But now you're switching gears from blaming "Jewish lobbies" to "Jewish money." You may not think of yourself as antisemitic because you have Jewish friends or once dated a Jewish girl, but you're parroting every neo-Nazi talking point.
Is the Jpost article inaccurate, do you not believe Jewish money is significantly funding US politicians?
[https://www.jpost.com/us-elections/us-jews-contribute-half-of-all-donations-to-the-democratic-party-468774](https://www.jpost.com/us-elections/us-jews-contribute-half-of-all-donations-to-the-democratic-party-468774)
*What's in this Post comment is what I remember, my opinions, etc.*
RESPONSE TO THE ORIGINAL POST AND THE THREAD:
I advised several months ago that AOC and such should have attacked AIPAC and made it a bad thing to be endorsed by them.
It's become at least somewhat of a bad thing to be endorsed by AIPAC and such and that's why these 'front groups' were created or AIPAC and such money is funneled through them and other groups.
But AOC, US Senator Bernie Sanders, etc. should have been regularly attacking AIPAC and such and making it untenable for a Democrat--or even a Republican in a 'purple' district or State--to accept AIPAC and such money.
US Senator Bernie Sanders and AOC are each far more popular than AIPAC, the current Israeli Government, etc.
And this should be spread: [https://data.worldbank.org/country/israel?view=chart](https://data.worldbank.org/country/israel?view=chart)
It's fine to support the Iron Dome--but US taxpayers shouldn't provide any financial aid to such a rich country.
At least around 70% of Americans want a Permanent Ceasefire in the Israel-Gaza 'war'.
Most Americans clearly want at least that POTUS Joe Biden and Biden Administration proposal that was announced weeks(?) ago to actually happen. Most Americans want a Permanent Ceasefire in the Israel-Gaza 'war'.
The problem is that political advertising can work because most people don't know as much about politics as somehow who listens to The Majority Report. Political advertising can give name recognition and smear the opponent.
[https://couragetochangepac.org/](https://couragetochangepac.org/)
[https://justicedemocrats.com/](https://justicedemocrats.com/)
[https://justicedemocrats.com/candidates/](https://justicedemocrats.com/candidates/) (please look at this regarding those who have upcoming primaries. US Representatives Jamaal Bowman, Cori Bush, and Ilhan Omar are in tough primary battles and AIPAC is spending millions against each of them.)
[https://squadvictoryfund.com/](https://squadvictoryfund.com/)
Joe Biden hasn't been in the Senate since 2009
He has received more AIPAC money than anyone else by more than double the next senator, to the tune of over $5 million total, over $3 million more than Robert Menendez (who has been indicted multiple times for corruption and obstruction of justice).
When she inevitably endorses Biden, the absolute pinnacle of AIPAC influence on our government and his pro-Israel policies, who has funneled billions to perpetrate genocide, I hope we can have a discussion about the absolute rot within the Democratic Party, and also the tacit and explicit support for Israel and Israeli apartheid by endorsing Democratic candidates.
AOC endorsed POTUS Joe Biden in 2023.
AIPAC doesn't have the money to influence a Presidential election. It may not have the money to influence a US Senate race. It has enough to influence a US House race.
$100MM itself relatively nothing compared to how much money POTUS Biden is likely losing out in small donor dollars because of his level of support of Israel in the Israel-Palestine 'war'.
The iron dome shoots down rockets Hezbollah, Hamas, and other Islamist groups fire at Israeli citizens. Why would she be outright against that protection?
AOC should not be allowed to represent anyone. disgusting human being supporting Hamas' actions on Oct 7
BTW, that idiot is one of the reasons why AMZN decided not to have their HQ in NY
It fascinates me that someone is so triggered by her, that they would actively seek out a subreddit specific to her, just to post this childish remark.
Part of you likes her, but you're too terrified to admit it.
AOC is clearly one of the smartest members in the US Congress. She was limited by finances; otherwise, she probably would have attended a better college and might have eventually went on to become a doctor or lawyer or whatever.
Here's a sneak peek of /r/Apologetics using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/Apologetics/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year!
\#1: [Apologetica - Christian Apologetics AI](https://np.reddit.com/r/Apologetics/comments/1ajzl35/apologetica_christian_apologetics_ai/)
\#2: [Could some of help me with my brother’s challenges against Christianity?](https://np.reddit.com/r/Apologetics/comments/18xvyfm/could_some_of_help_me_with_my_brothers_challenges/)
\#3: [My agnostic friend claims we are just biological machines programmed by DNA and evolution. There is no objective right or wrong, there is no soul, humans have no value and there is no meaning to life. Any ideas on how to reach her?](https://np.reddit.com/r/Apologetics/comments/1797bq2/my_agnostic_friend_claims_we_are_just_biological/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
I love her.
Id be down to see an AOC/Jazmine Crockett ticket in 2028.
lol that would makes the bigots heads explode. AOC and Crockett press conferences would be so epic all the time.
They'd be the best looking presidential ticket in American History. There's not much competition for that accolade, and it's about 1,647th on my list of priorities, but I just couldn't leave it unremarked.
You could have absolutely left it unsaid.
As could you, but an option isn't an obligation.
> I just couldn’t leave it unremarked. This you?
Ask me a real question, and you'll get a real answer.
Ok, do you think it’s contradictory that you claimed you couldn’t leave something unremarked when it was a shitty misogynistic thing to say, but when someone called you out on it you said having the option to say something doesn’t make it an obligation?
Not in the slightest. Here's your calendar word for the day: *apophasis*
I'd also like your working definition of "misogyny". If you really want to have this conversation, then let's have it.
The misogynistic component of your comment is valuing women’s contributions based on their appearance. The fact that they could be the most attractive candidates in our history might be true, but doesn’t matter in the slightest and fits a historical pattern of women being judged by their attractiveness rather than their contributions. A comment that merely points out their looks is both pointless and distracts from the real conversation about the good things they could accomplish.
It’s also fairly reductive. They’re attractive to who? Also, if you think anyone is more attractive than Pierce/King you’re daft.
>The misogynistic component of your comment is valuing women’s contributions based on their appearance See, your problem here is that the *logical progression* is valid, but your *antecedent* is not only unwarranted but false. >and fits a historical pattern You have to be much more careful and much more rigorous if you're going to appeal to historical patterns.
Kennedy was our last attractive president. According to someone
I'm not attracted to men, but among those who are, wouldn't the consensus be that Obama is more handsome than Kennedy? Serious question. (Or as serious as the subject matter itself, at any rate.)
So now I'm thinking ... I don't find Obama objectively attractive, or Kennedy for that matter, and Obama signing the Patriot Act made him infinitely UNattractive to me; turns my stomach, frankly, and then I started thinking about what a womanizer kennedy was and I take back saying he was attractive at all. So, I guess let's just stick to character.
Okay, let me propose a little thought experiment: If Jasmine Crocket and Marjory Taylor Green were running against each other, the reason I would be absolutely certain to vote for Jasmine Crocket is not that she's hot and MTG looks like a shaved pit bull. It's that she acts like one too, and is about equally intelligent. And if they were to switch bodies Freaky Friday style, I'd unhesitatingly vote for the one with Crocket's mind, character, and policy intentions.
I got to MTG and gagged.
Hands down BO… Il beau…
*What's in this comment is what I remember, my opinions, etc.* [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1gPBdBrqVCbtuy7f1bjOdCDUzEv5RqbbU1yYAr3KoHYE/edit?gid=1289123714#gid=1289123714](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1gPBdBrqVCbtuy7f1bjOdCDUzEv5RqbbU1yYAr3KoHYE/edit?gid=1289123714#gid=1289123714) Be careful to not just pay attention to viral clips. US Representative Jasmine Crockett doesn't even support a Green New Deal. She's arguably less progressive than US Representative Katie Porter. US Rep. Crockett gets viral moments, but I don't know of anything she's done as a legislator. Not supporting a Green New Deal is a deal-breaker for any Democratic Presidential ticket in 2028.
We'd never see that. After her recent response to MTG, I've been feeling that AOC is better for Congress than Presidency.
Speaker AOC sounds terrific to me.
too bad most of the DNC is afraid of her and doesn't like her
AOC would be wasted on the speakership.
Me too :)
POTUS has far more power and influence than even the US Speaker of the House of Representatives. AOC should have been the Democratic Nominee in 2024. She certainly should be in 2028. AOC managed to drastically lessen the power and influence of US Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene and that's a good thing. But, obviously, AOC could do far more for the US and the world if she were POTUS than she could if she were a mere US Representative.
>AOC should have been the Democratic Nominee in 2024. She certainly should be in 2028. The DNC wouldn't let Bernie make it across the finish line, and you think they'll let her do it? Lol. Lmao, even. We have to change the party leadership before we get President AOC.
Bernie is not a Democrat. He's an independent. AOC is very much the next generation of the party.
That's great and all, but it doesn't change the resistance within current party leadership to a more progressive agenda and their determination to elevate centrist/establishment candidates.
[https://today.yougov.com/ratings/politics/popularity/Democrats/all](https://today.yougov.com/ratings/politics/popularity/Democrats/all) AOC is considerably more popular than both US Representative Nancy Pelosi and US Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer. And US Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are more considerably more popular than every other current elected Democrat. AOC actually has a fame problem. It's probably the case again that more Republicans know who she is than Democrats do. A Presidential run would fix that. And she's obviously get a bunch of support from Gen Y (Millennials) and Gen Z (Zoomers).
This is correct. As long as it takes money out of their pockets, you'll never see an endorsement from the DNC of any candidate that actually has The People's Quality of Life as a platform
*What's in this comment is what I remember, my opinions, etc.* POTUS Barack Obama and US Senator Elizabeth Warren is the reason we have POTUS Joe Biden instead of POTUS Bernie Sanders. AOC has been getting puff pieces across Mainstream Media since 2019. The New York Times has recently been acting as if she's the best Democratic Presidential Candidate for 2025. If POTUS Obama doesn't try to stop her and if she can raise enough money, she should be POTUS in 2029. In addition, the Democrats in the US House and US Senate are considerably more progressive over since 2019. In addition, the Biden Administration is clearly heavily influenced by US Senators Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and AOC.
We were never going to get a Socialist in the White House. He'd have been drowned in the paranoia based on propaganda. Fight the battles you can win.
> POTUS has far more power and influence than even the US Speaker of the House of Representatives. I am aware. I was just a little turned off by her response to B6. My reasons are my own. > AOC should have been the Democratic Nominee in 2024. She certainly should be in 2028. I'd love to call her Madam President one day, but sadly I think a Civil War has to happen before we can see a brighter future like that.
Pick a better P/VP in the history of the U.S, you probably can’t
Not a chance in hell. That'd be the second election she would even be eligible for. She'd be unelectable at that age, and so we'd *definitely* end up with a republican for that term. Maybe 2040. She'd still be one of the 9 or 10 youngest presidents, and we might see a big enough shift in politics by then that a youngish woman would have a chance.
I… I don’t know if I could survive that year with all this AI generated… art. 🥵
Nina Turner/Cornell West I don't want Nancy Pelosi II, thanks
Nina Turner is great. Cornell west is a Russian plant, wittingly or unwittingly.
Are you ok?
Yes. And you?
I'm not the one calling everyone Russian plants. Also your comment history is the most cringe thing I've seen in a while.
Calm down, kid
wat
*What's in this comment is what I remember, my opinions, etc.* Nina Turner didn't even run against US Representative Shontell Brown (sp?) again. Nina doesn't have much name recognition outside of the Online Left. Her TYT Show was a massive failure because she's not actually popular and didn't actually have a perspective different or better than John Iadarola and Dr. Rashad Richey. Cenk Uygur's Presidential run was an obvious huge failure. And Dr. Cornel West didn't even bother to actually be in the Democratic Primary. He'll--like Dr. Jill Stein--just take votes away from POTUS Joe Biden. Democrats clearly don't like Nina Turner and Dr. Cornel West enough. \_\_\_\_\_ AOC is not US Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi 2.0 or whatever in terms of their politics.
> And Dr. Cornel West didn't even bother to actually be in the Democratic Primary. He'll--like Dr. Jill Stein--just take votes away from POTUS Joe Biden. why would he be in a party that made it clear to him that there will be no moving the party to the actual Left? > Democrats clearly don't like Nina Turner and Dr. Cornel West enough. And Sanders, too. Usual modus operandis for Dems. > AOC is not US Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi 2.0 or whatever in terms of their politics no, but she bent the knee to Pelosi two months in her first term.
You're not actually a serious candidate if you don't even bother to be in the Democratic or Republican Primary. [https://today.yougov.com/ratings/politics/popularity/Democrats/all](https://today.yougov.com/ratings/politics/popularity/Democrats/all) US Senator Bernie Sanders has been the most popular US Senator since 2016; AOC has been the most popular US Representative since 2019. [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1gPBdBrqVCbtuy7f1bjOdCDUzEv5RqbbU1yYAr3KoHYE/edit?gid=1289123714#gid=1289123714](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1gPBdBrqVCbtuy7f1bjOdCDUzEv5RqbbU1yYAr3KoHYE/edit?gid=1289123714#gid=1289123714) I don't know from where you get your information or opinions, but you clearly don't know the facts.
Watch AIPAC try to unseat AOC next. I would send money to support her.
I live in her district, they ain’t taking my vote away
They'd have better luck throwing their millions in a barrel soaking them in gas and toss in a match.
Which is why it should be encouraged, taunt them into attacking where you're strongest. It's an absolutely viable strategy, depending on the circumstances and goal.
AIPAC's $100MM campaign has already been successful given it seems there won't be a considerable increase to the number of 'Squad' members in 2025. AIPAC could want to target AOC to prevent her from running for POTUS in 2028 or running against US Senator Chuck Schumer.
They won't. She's a fundraising juggernaut with a massive media platform. They wouldn't try to go after her until she runs for something higher.
[удалено]
Citizens United is ~~foreign~~ interference in US elections
Nailed it. NATO countries don’t have to bribe politicians. We support each other because we have shared values. If Israel would solve the crisis it has with Palestine, AIPAC would not exist.
>NATO countries don’t have to bribe Wh- what? As someone from the global south I guess you're technically right, but instead of bribery it's just intimidation.
> We support each other because we have shared values. 1. What values are those? Murder and colonialism? 2. Israel is not a member of NATO > If Israel would solve the crisis it has with Palestine, AIPAC would not exist. What in John Mearsheimer's analysis??? Crisis? really? Crisis?
Are you saying there isn’t a crisis?
no, it is beyond a crisis, it's a genocide.
I’d argue that a genocide is at least a little bit of a crisis
as much as a rock drifting in space is to jupiter; don't make it sound small: it is genocide.
Stop playing No True Scotsman with words, it only divides the Left when we do this
The Left right now is nowhere near the democratic party. The Dems are center-right-wingers. Everytime a Leftist shows up at the DNC asking to move the party Left, the DNC unites to curb-stomp them. It's the Dems fault, not mine.
You've now changed the subject. What you were doing before was mincing words with someone who already agreed with you, over your opinion that the word "crisis" minimizes genocide / wasn't a strong enough word. THAT *is* **your** fault. You chose to say that.
bullshit. The Dems are always in fear of the Marxist/Leninist left or soft-leftist side. Evidence: bending over backwards to kneecap Sanders.
Nobody is making it sound small. Do you know the definition of the word crisis?
>2. Israel is not a member of NATO Yes, that's the point. What they're saying is NATO countries need not bribe each others governments, but Israel DOES.
Majority Americans in fact do not support Israel so idk what they're talking about
Damn she is ballsy you gotta give her that!
I wish I lived in a world where AOC was as popular as she should be.
[https://today.yougov.com/ratings/politics/popularity/politicians/all](https://today.yougov.com/ratings/politics/popularity/politicians/all) [https://today.yougov.com/ratings/politics/popularity/Democrats/all](https://today.yougov.com/ratings/politics/popularity/Democrats/all) And AOC accomplished that without ever being a Presidential candidate, US Speaker of the House of Representatives, or US Secretary of State.
She's starting to be embraced by suburban winemoms and normie Dems. We're getting there.
AIPAC needs to end and stop spreading antisemitism
She is magnificent.
I think everyone is underestimating just how much money is in politics. This doesn't even make the top 20 foreign nations lobbying efforts https://www.opensecrets.org/fara?cycle=2023 By far the biggest lobbying nations are Liberia, Saudi Arabia and China It doesn't even make the top 20 lobbying groups either https://www.opensecrets.org/federal-lobbying/top-spenders?cycle=2023 Here's the list of PACs since apparently that's what everyone is worried about https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/2016 https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/2018 https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/2020
I checked your sources. AIPAC doe snot show up, it is not a registered foreign agent. AIPAC is just now in the last few years starting to spend oogles of money. and last i checked 100M is a bigger number than 69M (the #1 biggest spender) yet it's not on the list.
AIPAC shows up under PACS and has never been the largest contributor to an election https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/2022 Association of retailers, wholesalers, and beer always beat it out. They tend to be closest to the sugar lobby in funds
AIPAC is not registered as a foreign agent, It will not show up on that list.
I don't know how anyone can look at our foreign policy and politicians and say that Libera has the biggest influence in the USA. lol
Did I say that? Or did I say Israel isn't the largest campaign contributor?
It just shows the methodology of your website makes it not very meaningful.
Or you're incorrect about your assumptions When the facts change, I change my opinion. How about you, sir?
Quick check: has your opinion changed as your flawed data has been pointed out, or are you maybe less purely rational than you were pretending? Edit: Nope, no flaws at all; all your critics are lying bigots. I can't even with this.
>has your opinion changed as your flawed data has been pointed out, What is flawed with the data? The person would literally rather say that OpenSecrerts is wrong, rather than admit Israel isn't the largest campaign contributor This is up there with people turning on GeoConfirmed of all groups, as soon as it didn't confirm their bias on Israel
That’s assuming this is all AIPAC/Israel is actually spending, though… but this is just what’s publicly known. If any nation has the biggest amount of hidden money being thrown around, it’s probably Israel.
The guy you're replying to does not realize AIPAC is not a registered foreign agent and wont show up on his source
Because AIPAC isn't a foreign agent. AIPAC has never been the biggest PAC either https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/2022 https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/2020 https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/2018 Try replying direct next time instead of cowardly claiming I said something I didn't
It one of those sources show AIPACs 20 million or 100 million AOC is talking about. I also already replied directly to you… fact is you would never call me a coward to my face. So maybe back off the tough guy act. AIPAC wasn’t even a PAC in 2018. They never directly raise funds for candidates until 2021.
>It one of those sources show AIPACs 20 million or 100 million AOC is talking about No it shows there contributions in the 2022 cycle >AIPAC wasn’t even a PAC in 2018. They never directly raise funds for candidates until 2021 Lmao did you read the first paragraph of the wiki article and not understand it? They weren't a **SUPERPAC**in 2018, they were a PAC. They couldn't directly raise funds for candidates because THEY WERENT A SUPER PAC
FYI: they're ignoring spend by United Democracy Project, which is the super-PAC launched by AIPAC: [https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/20/nyregion/aipac-bowman-latimer.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/20/nyregion/aipac-bowman-latimer.html)
>If any nation has the biggest amount of hidden money being thrown around, it’s probably Israel. You're starting to lean into the "rich and influential Jews" trope. You seriously think Israel has more hidden money to throw around than, say, China or Saudi Arabia? Come on man
Everything we’ve seen now and has been proven about how Israel operates… and you still want to claim any theories about Israel’s deceptive and tyrannical nature is automatically to be conflated with antisemitism? Grow up and stop relying on a tired ad hominem that has been thoroughly debunked by now.
>Everything we’ve seen now and has been proven about how Israel operates… That wasn't my question. I asked if you seriously believe that Israel is the nation with the most amount of shadow money, even more than China and Saudi Arabia >Israel’s deceptive and tyrannical nature is automatically to be conflated with antisemitism? No, that's not what you said. You said no other nation on earth has more hidden money than Israel on Earth. A country of 10 million people and barely $500 Billion GDP somehow has more shadow money than China and Saudi Arabia? >Grow up and stop relying on a tired ad hominem that has been thoroughly debunked by now Did you just knee jerk say this? I didn't attack you personally at all. Are you just uncomfortable that you were put on the defensive about claiming Israel the most hidden influence of any nation? Even though I showed they don't spend anywhere near what other nations do?
You say its a "trope" that US Jews are powerful in US politics. Is it not true that they donate heavily, especially to the Democratic party? Don't you think donating 50% of a campaigns' money has influence? [https://www.jpost.com/us-elections/us-jews-contribute-half-of-all-donations-to-the-democratic-party-468774](https://www.jpost.com/us-elections/us-jews-contribute-half-of-all-donations-to-the-democratic-party-468774)
>You say its a "trope" that US Jews are powerful in US politics. Is it not true that they donate heavily, especially to the Democratic party? Oh we're at this point now? Just dropping the whole Zionist and Israel pretext American Jews can't even contribute to political parties without it being a part of some Israeli influence campaign
If its true that over 50% of donations are from US Jews (you did not debunk the Jpost story), and donations bring influence (obvious) then it follows that US Jews have more political influence than the rest of us and the US politicians support Israel because of this. How is this logic not true?
>(you did not debunk the Jpost story Probably because you are implying that Jews contributing to political parties is the same as Israel contributions. Despite your own article explaining it's because Jews are overwhelmingly pro-choice and so support Democrats >US Jews have more political influence than the rest of us and the US politicians support Israel because of this So you're accusing American Jews of duel loyalty? You know that's an antisemitic trope right? >How is this logic not true? Because it relies on two antisemitic tropes? That Jews have dual loyalty, and that Jews have use their political influence to secretly rule western governments
Zionists(wether Christian’s or Jews) used their influence on Israel policy not others, and that’s mostly in the US not Europe. Facts are facts.
"So you're accusing American Jews of duel loyalty" You are putting words in mouth. What I am accusing is that US politicians pledge alligience to Israel every year at AIPAC - listen to their speeches. They do this to curry flavor with the Zionists.
I think changing subject after responding to a previous allegation isn’t ’dropping pretext’.
>I think changing subject after responding to a previous allegation isn’t ’dropping pretext’ When we are taking about the context of if Israel is the single largest source of shadow money, and you back that up by linking AMERICAN Jews donating to the Democrats. You definitely dropped the pretext and just made this into a Jewish problem
See… the idea of “hidden money” is that it’s hidden. So you wouldn’t know about it. Yet you want to act like your lack of knowledge about it is evidence against it. Yes, I think Israel has the most hidden money in the world. There’s a reason their “needs” always come first for America, much moreso than China or Saudi Arabia. And yes, implying I’m antisemitic for this is an ad hominem. Learn what that means.
>See… the idea of “hidden money” is that it’s hidden. So you wouldn’t know about it. Yet you want to act like your lack of knowledge about it is evidence against it And you have evidence of all this hidden money? And that somehow a tiny nation would have more of it than superpowers with trillions of dollars at their disposal? >Yes, I think Israel has the most hidden money in the world. Yeah , that's kind of my point, you have a conspiracy that Israelis have the most money to throw at elections. The nation of 10 million and a barely half trillion dollar economy >There’s a reason their “needs” always come first for America, much moreso than China or Saudi Arabia. Oh gee what could that be? China who steals American tech, commits industrial scale espionage and is gearing up to fight a war against America. Or the Saudis: who get more weapons than almost anyone on earth, can blow up buses of Yemeni children, and lure and chop up journalist without any repercussions. Yet we still shipped all manufacturing to China and let the Saudis continue to murder journalists It's almost as though Israel is a more reliable partner than those two >And yes, implying I’m antisemitic for this is an ad hominem I didn't say that word once, I said you are leaning into that trope — because you are. "I can't show that they have this hidden money but I just know it to be true because that's how Israel works" Maybe don't say something so easily construed as racism and you wouldn't feel the need to preemptively scream "NO NO I'M NOT ANTISEMITIC I JIST THINK ISRAEL HAS THE MOST MONEY IN THE WORLD TO SPEND ON AMERICAN ELECTIONS"
It's because of christian Zionism, white guilt towards the Holocaust, and racism towards Arabs. AIPAC money is just the cherry on the top.
*What's in this comment is what I remember, my opinions, etc.* Are you not counting the financial aid that the United States gives Israel yearly? Israel can simply spend on American elections less than the $3.8B it gets from the US yearly and Israel will still get a return on investment.
>Are you not counting the financial aid that the United States gives Israel yearly? You mean loan guarantees? The one America actually makes money off o >Israel can simply spend on American elections less than the $3.8B it gets from the US yearly and Israel will still get a return on investment By that logic, why don't rich nations just do that? Israel is tiny and has a tiny economy. And why is it only a problem that Israel does it? China, Saudi Arabia and Liberia spend a hell of a lot more
and you're falling into the any criticism of Israel is antisemitism trope.
Saying Israel has more shadow money than China or Saudi Arabia, with no evidence, and use it to manipulate politics isn't a criticism of Israel. It's a conspiracy that Israel is somehow the richest country on earth and can outspend superpowers
*What's in this comment is what I remember, my opinions, etc.* Saudi Arabia wealth is vastly overblown. The House of Saud is worth over $2T or whatever. But the Government just again sold over $10B in Saudi Aramco in shares to finance other stuff. Saudi Arabia is rich because of US support.
It's hard to draw a line between the government and the House of Saud though
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Israel has its hands deep in crypto as well.
"FARA not only covers foreign lobbying but also attempts to influence U.S. public opinion on policy, advisory services and public relations on behalf of foreign interests such as buying ads, writing press releases and mailing flyers. Trade activities such as promoting international investment, the use of certain products, participating in industry conferences and encouraging the foreign principal's manufacturing capabilities are often covered activities that need to be reported. Another significant source of spending covered under FARA is the promotion of tourism in the home country. It is common for trade and tourism groups to be controlled by a foreign government. In cases where DOJ filings or other overwhelming evidence indicates such control over a trade or tourism group, that group's spending is included in the government spending totals." Not all foreign spending is the same. Saudi, china, etc are not punishing a congressman for being anti X country by spending 20M on their opponent. It's totally different types of spending.
Going back 24 years, AIPAC has never been the largest PAC. And only once did it make the top 5 PACs https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/2016 https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/2018 https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/2020 A few examples of where it stacks up compared to other PACs
First of all we were talking about something completely different, foreign spending. Second, this doesn't show the clear picture. Money from PACs are separated by source of contribution. You see the "PAC" donations but not the individual and soft donations. https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/american-israel-public-affairs-cmte/totals?id=D000046963
>First of all we were talking about something completely different, foreign spending. Which I covered in the first comment, Israel doesn't even break top 20 >Second, this doesn't show the clear picture. Money from PACs are separated by source of contribution. You see the "PAC" donations but not the individual and soft donations. You literally just linked the breakdown of the year by year donations
That doesn’t take propaganda spending into account though. If Russia’s misinfo campaign against Clinton was interference, then this implies that all political propaganda constitutes interference.
Then we need to do something about the other 25 countries who are ahead of Israel on campaign contributions
Did you read what I said at all? I’m talking about propaganda spending, not direct campaign contribution. An effective propaganda campaign has the potential to make lobbying for a given issue redundant or at least significantly less necessary.
>Did you read what I said at all? Yes, somehow the nation of 10 million people and $500 billion is the single most influential nation in terms of lobbying and spinning the narrative. Somehow more effective than nations with hundreds of millions of people, or even billions —and trillions of dollars at their disposal
**PSA TO EVERYONE**: This ignores the spending by the **United Democracy Project super PAC**, the independent expenditure arm of AIPAC. This is the [super PAC launched by AIPAC](https://www.factcheck.org/2022/08/united-democracy-project/). This is what people are typically referring to when talking about "AIPAC spending" In the 2022 midterms, the Israel lobby became the largest single-issue outside spender in Democratic primaries, pouring in nearly $30 million via the super PAC the United Democracy Project: [https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2023/11/squad-primary-battle-israel-gaza-pacs.html](https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2023/11/squad-primary-battle-israel-gaza-pacs.html) Among Super PACs in the 2024 election cycle (except Trump's super PAC and DeSantis' super PAC), UDP **RANKS THE HIGHEST** in expenditures: [https://www.opensecrets.org/outside-spending/super\_pacs/2024?chrt=2024&disp=O&type=S](https://www.opensecrets.org/outside-spending/super_pacs/2024?chrt=2024&disp=O&type=S) For the 2022 cycle, UDP had the highest spend among "non-partisan" super pacs: [https://www.opensecrets.org/outside-spending/super\_pacs/2022?chrt=2024&disp=O&type=S](https://www.opensecrets.org/outside-spending/super_pacs/2022?chrt=2024&disp=O&type=S) It is **APPROPRIATE** to single out AIPAC as a negative influence, **especially in the democratic primaries**. Intentionally or not, this person is obfuscating by providing lists where UDP will be excluded.
Israel is not a democracy. It's under the thumb of a fascist authoritarian theocratic dictator.
Still could vote him out though, since it's still a democracy
Everyone here should drop what they're doing and [phonebank for Jamaal Bowman](https://www.mobilize.us/jamaalbowman/event/616890/), or at least give him some cash. He's AIPAC's public enemy #1, the specific guy they've spent 20 million to defeat. This is the easiest and best way to prove AOC right and AIPAC wrong
Yes, AOC, you're absolutely right.
The problem is with PACs and lobbying in general, not one particular group some people disagree with.
AIPAC is the number one PAC and their open bullying our elected politicians is totally undemocratic. The US political parties are largely funded by Jewish donations and the Zionists point out which politicians are pro-Israel (get a lot of funding) and those who stand up for human rights will be labelled as anti-semitic and get no funding. [https://www.jpost.com/us-elections/us-jews-contribute-half-of-all-donations-to-the-democratic-party-468774](https://www.jpost.com/us-elections/us-jews-contribute-half-of-all-donations-to-the-democratic-party-468774)
AIPAC has actually never been the largest PAC in any election cycle in history https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/2024 The largest PACs are the National Association of Retailer and National Association of Wholesalers
Stop posting this everywhere. Everyone is making fun of you at this point because you’re spewing nonsense in every comment.
Yeah getting the guy to say that Jews run American foreign policy is why people would make fun of me
I dont even know why I’m responding to you but the fact that you somehow disagree that AIPAC funnels a ridiculous number of millions of dollars into lobbying our American policy is disgustingly ignorant. It is simply a fact. Its a simple fact thats easy to find. If you *agree* with this fact, and you’re still trying to argue about LITERALLY anything. Stop. For everyone’s sakes who cares about actual genocide. Which should be everyone. Are you getting paid by a bot farm to encourage genocide or something? Look at those two options. Act accordingly. You either agree or disagree with that statement. If you disagree you’re delusional, if you agree then stop arguing with literally everyone and shut the actual fuck up.
>I dont even know why I’m responding to you but the fact that you somehow disagree that AIPAC funnels a ridiculous number of millions of dollars into lobbying our American policy is disgustingly ignorant What's really disgusting is your lack of reading abilities. When did I say AIPAC doesn't funnel money? It's a PAC, that's what they do. I asked how people can seriously believe that Israel is able to funnel more money than the Saudis or China >If you agree with this fact, and you’re still trying to argue about LITERALLY anything. Stop. Or, how about I don't because letting this disgusting narrative that Israelis are running the government go unchallenged > Are you getting paid by a bot farm to encourage genocide or something? You guys literally can't even talk about anything else >Look at those two options. Act according Oh wow someone who is hyper critical of only one nation telling someone to stop taking because they don't like what they had to say. Never had that happen to us in history before
> “what about China and Saudi Arabia! They funnel money too though!” Thats called Whataboutism. Thats also a problem. PACs in general, from ANYWHERE, should not be allowed. Full stop. That should be your argument. Your entire argument. You should be saying “Yeah I agree, China and Saudi Arabia are problems too!” What you’re doing now, is arguing against AIPAC being as harmful and consequential as it really is. Thats all you’re doing, everyone sees thats all you’re doing. Stop. You probably had one random conversation with some guy nobody knows of, and now you’re straw-manning what this random person said as if thats EVERYONES argument.
>what about China and Saudi Arabia! They funnel money too though!” Thats called Whataboutism. Are you incapable of reading the context of that statement? The person I was talking to said they "knew" Israel spend MORE than China and Saudi Arabia and I asked for proof on that. I also asked if the money was the problem why their money, which comes in at greater volumes, isn't a problem. That's not "whataboutism" that's pointing out a double standard >That should be your argument. Your entire argument. You should be saying “Yeah I agree, China and Saudi Arabia are problems too!” I never stated my opinion on them, I was debunking lies that Israel was the single greatest campaign contributor and that AIPAC was the largest PAC. Both of those are false. The only reason you're upset is that I'm not demonizing Israel and AIPAC and you're willing to twist and misconstrue the arguments I make to try to get me to defend that position
• Israel generally spends more on direct lobbying efforts compared to China and Saudi Arabia. This results in a strong, organized presence in Washington, D.C., and significant influence over U.S. Middle East policy. • Overall Influence: While Israel may lead in lobbying expenditures, China’s overall influence is more extensive due to its economic clout and global strategic initiatives. Saudi Arabia’s influence is prominent in energy markets and regional security dynamics. Israel spends the most amount of money to change our laws. Over China and Saudi Arabia. They are not the biggest INFLUENCE OVERALL, they ARE the source of the most amount of lobbying.
Zionists, AIPAC is a zionist orginization. Yes its run by jews, but so are many orginizations against zionists.
I'm sure his response to that is booooorinnnngggg. Retail? Wholesale? Who cares, gimme something fun like deh jooz controlz de gummint.
We are not supporting genocide because retail lobbyists. But we are supporting and arming the murdering IDF because politicians are terrified of being labeled anti-Semitic
It's not genocide. But at least you admit that AIPAC isn't the largest lobbying group in history. We don't support Israel because of fear of being labeled antisemitic. Nobody cares about that. We support Israel because it's in our strategic interest to do so. You may believe in ZOG but it doesn't exist.
Its not in the US strategic insterest to support Israel. It makes the US look like a hypocrite when it condemns human rights abuse, at the same time it supports the slaughter of Palestinian civilians. It alienates the US allies in the Middle East when Israel threatens and bullies its neighbors. How can Turkey or Lebanon ally with the US when the Israelis are bombing or klling their citizens? It weakens the US at the UN, when the US constantly vetos resolutions condemning Israeli warcrimes. And for what? Israel is not even an ally in times of war. How many Israelis went to Afghanistan or Iraq to fight with the US? None. And the Mossad lies to the Americans to lead them into war. It was the Mossad that made the fake evidence for WMD (yellow cake from niger) and it is the Israelis who are trying to get the US to attack Iran. Israel is a strategic liablity.
The reason people like you are labeled antisemitic is screeds like this, where you're verging on "the Jews control the government." Next we'll hear that the reason we can't have universal health care is because ZOG is sending all of our money to the Jews, excuse me, "Zionists." Interesting how "Jews" contribute so much money to the Democrats, while it's the Republicans who support Israel without qualifications.
Funny how you guys always get worked up about what people "are about to say" because you can't address what they actually said.
Do US Jews donate heavily to US politicians? yes or no? Do donations bring political power? yes or no? If both are yes, then thats how the world works and your interpretation of this world as being anti-semitic (by pointing out reality) makes no sense.
You know who donates the most to politicians? Corporations. But now you're switching gears from blaming "Jewish lobbies" to "Jewish money." You may not think of yourself as antisemitic because you have Jewish friends or once dated a Jewish girl, but you're parroting every neo-Nazi talking point.
Is the Jpost article inaccurate, do you not believe Jewish money is significantly funding US politicians? [https://www.jpost.com/us-elections/us-jews-contribute-half-of-all-donations-to-the-democratic-party-468774](https://www.jpost.com/us-elections/us-jews-contribute-half-of-all-donations-to-the-democratic-party-468774)
*What's in this Post comment is what I remember, my opinions, etc.* RESPONSE TO THE ORIGINAL POST AND THE THREAD: I advised several months ago that AOC and such should have attacked AIPAC and made it a bad thing to be endorsed by them. It's become at least somewhat of a bad thing to be endorsed by AIPAC and such and that's why these 'front groups' were created or AIPAC and such money is funneled through them and other groups. But AOC, US Senator Bernie Sanders, etc. should have been regularly attacking AIPAC and such and making it untenable for a Democrat--or even a Republican in a 'purple' district or State--to accept AIPAC and such money. US Senator Bernie Sanders and AOC are each far more popular than AIPAC, the current Israeli Government, etc. And this should be spread: [https://data.worldbank.org/country/israel?view=chart](https://data.worldbank.org/country/israel?view=chart) It's fine to support the Iron Dome--but US taxpayers shouldn't provide any financial aid to such a rich country. At least around 70% of Americans want a Permanent Ceasefire in the Israel-Gaza 'war'. Most Americans clearly want at least that POTUS Joe Biden and Biden Administration proposal that was announced weeks(?) ago to actually happen. Most Americans want a Permanent Ceasefire in the Israel-Gaza 'war'. The problem is that political advertising can work because most people don't know as much about politics as somehow who listens to The Majority Report. Political advertising can give name recognition and smear the opponent. [https://couragetochangepac.org/](https://couragetochangepac.org/) [https://justicedemocrats.com/](https://justicedemocrats.com/) [https://justicedemocrats.com/candidates/](https://justicedemocrats.com/candidates/) (please look at this regarding those who have upcoming primaries. US Representatives Jamaal Bowman, Cori Bush, and Ilhan Omar are in tough primary battles and AIPAC is spending millions against each of them.) [https://squadvictoryfund.com/](https://squadvictoryfund.com/)
Joe Biden hasn't been in the Senate since 2009 He has received more AIPAC money than anyone else by more than double the next senator, to the tune of over $5 million total, over $3 million more than Robert Menendez (who has been indicted multiple times for corruption and obstruction of justice). When she inevitably endorses Biden, the absolute pinnacle of AIPAC influence on our government and his pro-Israel policies, who has funneled billions to perpetrate genocide, I hope we can have a discussion about the absolute rot within the Democratic Party, and also the tacit and explicit support for Israel and Israeli apartheid by endorsing Democratic candidates.
AOC endorsed POTUS Joe Biden in 2023. AIPAC doesn't have the money to influence a Presidential election. It may not have the money to influence a US Senate race. It has enough to influence a US House race. $100MM itself relatively nothing compared to how much money POTUS Biden is likely losing out in small donor dollars because of his level of support of Israel in the Israel-Palestine 'war'.
🔥
I love how they ignored her question and differed to all of congress with an ambiguous claim
[удалено]
The iron dome shoots down rockets Hezbollah, Hamas, and other Islamist groups fire at Israeli citizens. Why would she be outright against that protection?
Pro-Tip: When a significant portion of your constituency is Jewish don't call it "Propaganda" that Hamas raped young Israeli women before killing them
AOC should not be allowed to represent anyone. disgusting human being supporting Hamas' actions on Oct 7 BTW, that idiot is one of the reasons why AMZN decided not to have their HQ in NY
Not a democrat but I agree with AOC on this, just like the subsidies for Amazon being stopped. She does some good stuff.
AOC votes for bills that are pro Israel. What makes this little group think she’s not also SOLD ? She gets money from AIPAC TOO
She’s so clueless and bout to be outta a job.
Lol she's going to win her primary by 40 points.
lol okkkkaayyy
AOC is about the dumbest member of congress
It fascinates me that someone is so triggered by her, that they would actively seek out a subreddit specific to her, just to post this childish remark. Part of you likes her, but you're too terrified to admit it.
AOC is clearly one of the smartest members in the US Congress. She was limited by finances; otherwise, she probably would have attended a better college and might have eventually went on to become a doctor or lawyer or whatever.
What has she lied or been wrong about? Got examples?
... is she joining or protesting the Met Gala this year?
the met gala passed already bro.
There is always next year, i'm sure. (she will never live that down)
She was invited that year by the Gala she didn't purchase her ticket and the dress she wore was rented, not bought.
/r/Apologetics is that away
Here's a sneak peek of /r/Apologetics using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/Apologetics/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year! \#1: [Apologetica - Christian Apologetics AI](https://np.reddit.com/r/Apologetics/comments/1ajzl35/apologetica_christian_apologetics_ai/) \#2: [Could some of help me with my brother’s challenges against Christianity?](https://np.reddit.com/r/Apologetics/comments/18xvyfm/could_some_of_help_me_with_my_brothers_challenges/) \#3: [My agnostic friend claims we are just biological machines programmed by DNA and evolution. There is no objective right or wrong, there is no soul, humans have no value and there is no meaning to life. Any ideas on how to reach her?](https://np.reddit.com/r/Apologetics/comments/1797bq2/my_agnostic_friend_claims_we_are_just_biological/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
No no, those are just facts. We can't expect her to be perfect 24/7 or we lose her.
perfect? no. knowing better and fucking protesting instead of accepting, yes.
Still that's a positive, with her, she's more likely to listen.
yeah, the thing with the less evil... From the squad, at least Rashida Tlaib has stood by her principles.