this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19134 readers
5485 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The Kamala Harris campaign kicked out a prominent Muslim Democrat from the vice president’s rally in Royal Oak on Monday, further driving a wedge between the Democratic Party and Arab and Muslim Americans.

Ahmed Ghanim, a Democrat, says he accepted an invitation to the event and was seated in the Royal Oak Music Theatre when a campaign organizer ordered him to leave.

“She took me to the door, and she closed it, and I found two police officers waiting there, and she said, ‘You have to leave right now,’” Ghanim tells Metro Times. “I asked why she was kicking me out. She wouldn’t answer. I was very calmly asking why I was being kicked out.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

These are questions only the Democratic party can answer, and the fact that they didn't answer them in their statement is very telling. It's very clear they do not want any Arab party members to speak up and are actively silencing them.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I mean... I think it's more nuanced than that, but let's say I'm on board with that. That doesn't explain why they would make an unforced error here. It's not logical. Whoever invited him when they didn't want him there or kicked him out when they did, that person has royally fucked up. Feasibly cost her the election, perhaps.

So why protect them? Until someone can provide a narrative that makes some kind of sense, it looks to me like jumping to conclusions without enough facts to paint a coherent picture. And I'm not going to accept any "clear" conclusions until the pieces add up.

Which isn't to say you're wrong but I don't have facts to support that you're right. It doesn't add up and when it doesn't it always seems fishy to me that folks claim to draw clear narrative in murky water.

But I'll also cop to a certain amount of distrust of any anti-Harris message these days. I don't think she's perfect, but I do think an awful lot of the people making hay over her imperfections are not being honest about their reasons for doing so.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I'd be inclined to agree with you and give her, and the Democrats, the benefit of the doubt if this was an isolated incident. It's not, there's a pattern here, and this was just the most recent one.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Okay. I think we've probably taken this discussion as far as we can given what information we have now. I hope you feel I've acknowledged and respected your position. I hope you can respect mine. Have a good night.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago

Fair. Have a good night as well.