There are some polls that show roughly 35 to 60 percent of US voters backing the sale of arms to Israel, depending on demographics, but there is a very clear divide between Republican and Democrat support so it’s disingenuous to say a candidate will lose more support than they gain because that depends on which candidate.
A lot of these polls also use loaded questions like “who is responsible for this conflict” with the two choices being Hamas and Israel, which doesn’t really capture any of the nuance of the situation or represent the beliefs of the person answering the question.
I dont have them on hand, but I’ve seen a few polls in swing states where 5 or so percent more undecided voters would be more likely to vote for Harris if she promised an arms embargo, as opposed to less likely.
The problem of the US is that you might lose more voters by dumping Israel than you’d gain by supporting Palestine.
Not really. Jews generally are 1-2 percent of the population, split between dem and repub-- and not all jews beleive in this interpretation of zionism. Much more than half of the 335 million Americans want to at least be neutral in gaza. This would seem to indicate that thered be net votes to be gained by stopping the shipments. The rub is that theres a lot of money behind AIPAC, and usually whoever spends the most wins. It would be rational for Harris to pivot at the last second when money starts to lose its value to the immediate outcome. But it risks the monied donors lining up on the repub side for the next election. AIPAC funds both sides and doesnt care who wins as long as they get to puppet our government.
The problem of the US is that you might lose more voters by dumping Israel than you’d gain by supporting Palestine.
Is there actual polling to that effect?
There are some polls that show roughly 35 to 60 percent of US voters backing the sale of arms to Israel, depending on demographics, but there is a very clear divide between Republican and Democrat support so it’s disingenuous to say a candidate will lose more support than they gain because that depends on which candidate.
A lot of these polls also use loaded questions like “who is responsible for this conflict” with the two choices being Hamas and Israel, which doesn’t really capture any of the nuance of the situation or represent the beliefs of the person answering the question.
I dont have them on hand, but I’ve seen a few polls in swing states where 5 or so percent more undecided voters would be more likely to vote for Harris if she promised an arms embargo, as opposed to less likely.
As of september, 61 percent of 335 million Americans want to stop the shipments. https://theintercept.com/2024/09/10/polls-arms-embargo-israel-weapons-gaza/
Not really. Jews generally are 1-2 percent of the population, split between dem and repub-- and not all jews beleive in this interpretation of zionism. Much more than half of the 335 million Americans want to at least be neutral in gaza. This would seem to indicate that thered be net votes to be gained by stopping the shipments. The rub is that theres a lot of money behind AIPAC, and usually whoever spends the most wins. It would be rational for Harris to pivot at the last second when money starts to lose its value to the immediate outcome. But it risks the monied donors lining up on the repub side for the next election. AIPAC funds both sides and doesnt care who wins as long as they get to puppet our government.
No one actually votes with Gaza or Isreal as a core issue outside of NYC, and the state is eternally blue no matter what.
For better or worse the majority of America doesn’t even acknowledge(or even care) the conflict as an issue outside of the terminally online.