A career State Department official resigned from her post on Tuesday, saying she could no longer work for the Biden administration after it released a report concluding that Israel was not preventing the flow of aid to Gaza.

Stacy Gilbert, who served as a senior civilian-military advisor to the State Department’s Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration (PRM), sent an email to staff saying she was resigning because she felt the State Department had made the wrong assessment, The Washington Post reported, citing officials who read the note.

The report was filed in response to President Joe Biden issuing a national security memorandum (NSM-20) in early February on whether the administration finds credible Israel’s assurances that its use of US weapons do not violate either American or international law.

The report said there were reasonable grounds to believe Israel on several occasions had used American-supplied weapons “inconsistent” with international humanitarian law, but said it could not make a definitive assessment - enough to prevent the suspension of arms transfers.

  • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    67
    arrow-down
    21
    ·
    6 months ago

    Not the first, and won’t be the last.

    Article mentions 5 other State Department employees have left over Biden’s support of a genocide while pretending it’s not a genocide.

    It’s not to late to ditch him for a candidate that represents the values of dem voters. And regardless of who it is, they probably have a better chance of stopping trump.

    Sunk cost fallacy is a terrible way to run a political party, but especially when the stakes are this high.

    Even if we win and get four more years of this, it’s not winning, it’s just losing less. Which is why Biden’s numbers are so bad, he doesn’t inspire voters due to his words and actions.

    • snooggums
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      44
      arrow-down
      19
      ·
      6 months ago

      No, Biden has the brand recognition and is the party’s best chance to win. His administration does do a terrible job of selling the good things he is doing and he is shooting himself in the foot by not following through on his ‘red line’ with Rafah, but that isn’t enough of a negative to outweigh the lnown factor.

      It sucks that winning a first past the post election based on the electoral college is how it works instead of something like ranked choice, but that is where we are at.

      • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        46
        ·
        6 months ago

        Biden isn’t going to win dude. He’s losing, hard L style right now.

        Its not an issue with fptp, its not strategic voting.

        He’s a shitty candidate that was always a comprise/ most-least preferred candidate and he’s not going to win.

        Continuing to make the arguments that we need to stick with Biden is basically arguing to give the election to Trump.

        • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          14
          ·
          6 months ago

          He’s a shitty candidate [who] was always a [compromise?]/ most-least preferred candidate and he’s not going to win.

          Shitty compared to whom? To the leading republican? Are you high?

          • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            19
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            6 months ago

            “Generic Democrat” polls 12 points higher than Biden.

            You are leaving 12 points on the table with Biden. Interestingly, this is also the differential polling error associated with a Biden/ Trump head to head.

            12 points is about the number Biden needs to be leading Trump to be ‘confident’ in victory. So quite literally “Any generic Democrat” is a less shitty candidate than Biden.

          • ghostdoggtv@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            6 months ago

            I’ve concluded and am pretty sure of my conclusions that in this context yes, people be high as FUCK

        • MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          6 months ago

          So what’s your solution? Who has a better shot at winning the election in November if they started campaigning today? I want a specific name and why you think it would work. You know better than everyone, this should be easy for you (everyone else, watch for this sidestep and refusal to actually answer or back up anything).

          You’re really good at claiming (almost to a point of preference) that Biden will lose and why we shouldn’t support them but not once have you provided anything of value that people can take action on. Everything you post appears to be designed to make people more apathetic and less likely to be involved, why is that?

          • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            16
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            6 months ago

            Its not my job to give you a solution. I just need you to be real about the probability of failure of the strategy that you seem to be pot-committed to. And to be clear, we haven’t had a convention yet, so there is still time to change.

            I’m offering you an analysis that makes a conclusion, that based on current polling, Biden can’t win this election. You might find it unpalatable, but that’s not my problem. Hope is a false

            But this isn’t new news’. Biden has been struggling in this way for over a year, before Israel/ Gaza became hot. Biden’s chances have gone from “rough” to “very unlikely”. He’s actively working to distance himself from the positions of his base. Instead of rejecting Trump’s policy positions, he adopts them. Biden is catering to a non-existent center. It seems like he genuinely thinks that some republican voters are going to show up for him. There is 0 evidence from the previous three elections that any voters are convertible.

            On the other side, maybe he gets laughed at, but Trump is going to the places that voters are and trying to get them (the sneaker thing, libertarian convention). Trump is trying to win this election. You win elections post 2016 by growing a base and driving them out to vote. It worked for Trump in 2016. It worked for Biden in 2020: Biden took on the most progressive platform in recent history to grow his base to include progressives.

            Whats Biden’s platform in 2024? I don’t know about you but I have no fucking clue based on the campaigns messaging. Its all, just like you are parroting here, about how bad Trump is. And while you might find that convincing enough, there are obviously enough voters out there (about 12%) who don’t and that you can’t win the election without.

            So I’m sorry. It hurts if he’s your hucklebee, but the guy can’t win right now. He’s statistically lost at this point. If beating Trump really is your goal, then you need to come up with a better candidate. Continuing to push for Biden when he can’t win dooms us all.

            • MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              6 months ago

              You keep saying Biden needs to be replaced but there’s literally no candidate to replace him with that beats Trump. If you’re so sure we need to ditch Biden, and you’re not advocating for Trump to win, it seems pretty fair to ask what you think should happen. Until you do that it’s pretty clear you’re just spewing bullshit in bad faith.

              • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                6 months ago

                Until you do that it’s pretty clear you’re just spewing bullshit in bad faith.

                Sigh… Just because some one is pointing out the flaws in your approach to electoralism doesn’t mean they are acting in bad faith. Pretending that everyone who has a perspective you disagree with is out to get you is a poor way to go through life.

                Recognizing that Biden can’t win is step one. There really is no point in a discussion around alternatives until that point is accepted. We can’t turn this ship until collectively, people understand that this guy isn’t going to win the election. It has to show up in mass, in the polling, and in the collective conversation.

                As far as determining an alternative, there is a straightforward mechanism for that. Its called a convention, and conveniently, there is already one scheduled. Supreme court decided post 2016 that Dem’s can do whatever the fuck they want. So delegates go to the convention unaffiliated and we figure it out there.

                It really doesn’t matter who the nominee is, so long as its neither Biden or Hillary. Any generic Democratic governor or senator will do fine. Trump is deeply unpopular. The problem we’re up against is that some how, Biden has managed his presidency in such a way as to be more unpopular than Trump.

                • MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  And I’m telling you, there is no viable candidate you can nominate that has a better chance than Biden. “Generic Democrat” isn’t a candidate. Who’s polling better and is willing to run?

            • JimSamtanko@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              9
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              6 months ago

              See… this is the problem with discussing these things with people like you. You were asked a simple question as a rebuttal to your suggestion that people not vote for Biden, and you have no answer.

              I’ve asked this same question to nearly every one of you that I’ve spoke with on the subject.

              None of you can answer it.

              • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                6 months ago

                Making a criticism doesn’t require that I have a solution to the problem that’s been set up by the insistence that Biden be the nominee. If that leaves you feeling incomplete, that’s your issue.

                • JimSamtanko@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  8
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 months ago

                  Complaining about something while offering no solutions and expecting to be taken seriously is about as fucking stupid as not voting and expecting things to change.

                  You were asked a simple question, that for all the talk you people seem to do here- should be simple to answer…

                  But NONE of you can answer it. It’s litetally your shut down code. And I’m going to ensure that everyone knows it.

                  • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    6
                    arrow-down
                    4
                    ·
                    6 months ago

                    I just don’t think your attempt to derail the primary thrust of my point is worth answering. I didn’t comment about who else might run or how well they would be doing.

                    You are trying to engage in a red-herring fallacy, and the royal “we” (since you used the royal “you”) are dutifully ignoring it.

                    There being or not being other viable candidates is irrelevant to Bidens chances at winning. Its a non-sequitur. If its important to you, you should come up with an answer to that question. I would be interested to hear what you come back with.

            • JimSamtanko@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              ROFL! She’s not even running. My god man… you people really need representation. You’re al over the place. How on earth can you expect to be taken seriously when you answer a question about who can beat Trump in the 2024 election….

              And your answer is someone that’s not even running?

              Get someone to speak for you if you want to be taken seriously.

              • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                The question:

                So what’s your solution? Who has a better shot at winning the election in November if they started campaigning today?

                I answered it. Now, you’re moving the goalposts and they have to be running? And you want me to take you seriously? Lol

                • JimSamtanko@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  You’re mistaken, I never once said “if they start campaigning today.”

                  And even if she started campaigning, she STILL doesn’t have a chance.

                  • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    6 months ago

                    Oh really:

                    Whitmer insists she has no interest in replacing Biden on the ticket this fall, but experts say the governor could be a top pick for Democrats should the president still decide — or be forced — to bow out of the race.

          • JimSamtanko@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            6 months ago

            Exactly this. Ask them every time. And none of them ever have an answer. They’re not here to support third party candidates- they’re here to sway votes away from Biden.

        • JimSamtanko@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          6 months ago

          And suggesting people vote third party when it is well known that not one of them have a remote chance to win, is purposefully trying to give the election to Trump.

    • StaySquared@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Apparently what the Libertarians elected as their candidate is good for the Democrats

      LOL it’s hilarious once you find out who and what.

    • NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Yeah, but if we do that, then in four years they won’t be able to say “trump” and get everyone on their knees

    • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Article mentions 5 other State Department employees have left over Biden’s support of a genocide while pretending it’s not a genocide.

      It’d be nice if we could have a presidency where no one from the State or Justice Departments quits in disgust during their term. The last time was what? The first Bush?

    • paysrenttobirds@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      6 months ago

      Who is this candidate? Pick one and start saying their name! Would Sanders take the nomination? Whoever it is, you’ll need their cooperation at least, so find your duck and get it in the row.

      I don’t mean to yell at you, it is frustrating and humiliating for the average citizen, and it’s going to get worse.

      Losing less is still better than losing more and if we’re too late we have to accept that and look beyond the vote to damage control in the coming years. Yes, asking each other to “hold your nose and vote” sucks, but we’ve got to pair it with the idea that protest and disobedience and local government action is going to be an important factor for years to come, no matter who is president.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        and if we’re too late

        That argument worked in 2016, it’s been 8 years of trump…

        If the party can’t find a single better candidate, than maybe there should be different people leading it?

        But pick any of the 49 senators that caucus with Dems (I’m not counting Manchin, he’d probably be just as hard to elect as Biden) and they’d all have a better shot.

        Hell, AOC would get every single Dem vote that can’t hold their nose for Biden. And while some “moderates” would campaign against her like they did Obama, as we saw back then increased turnout more than makes up for those conservatives who constantly claim compromise always means giving them exactly what they ask for Maybe less, but never more.

        The main voter block this election will be under 40, we can’t keep catering to boomers because our politicians are so old they can’t realize their grandkids are now the biggest demographic.

        We’ll always be little kids to an 82 year old.

        • Bookmeat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          Biden is part of the old boys club where all the monied interests hang out. If you think AOC will get their support you’re not thinking of the current USA. Politics in USA is owned by corporations and I haven’t seen her back corps, why would they back her?

          • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            If you think AOC will get their support

            Bernie showed us you don’t need them if voters support you…

            He ran a competitive race against Hillary and she had corporate donors and the full weight of the party. Hell, her campaign manager controlled DNC purse strings during the primary against Bernie.

            Biden might have needed a billion last election. And he’s projected to need 2 billion this year

            But that’s not how much it takes for a popular candidate to run a campaign, that’s how much it costs to convince Americans Biden is better than trump and they should hold their nose and vote Biden even tho he’s an 82 year old conservative genocide enthusiast who disagrees with most of his own party’s platform.

            You don’t need corporate donations to convince Dem voters to vote for someone they agree with.

            And the moderates tried to protest vote Republican against Obama for being “too progressive”. Do you remember how that worked out?

            Progressives are the future of the party, and this election most voters will be Millenials or younger.

            It’s cheaper if the people want what we’re selling

            • Bookmeat@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              I remember this, but Bernie failed to get his own party to support him as a candidate, is that not so?

              • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                Pick 2016 or 2020.

                But I’ve explained both already today, and I’m 90% sure it was in this comment chain…

                So pick one or look at my post history for both.

    • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      18
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      It’s not to late to ditch him for a candidate that represents the values of dem voters. And regardless of who it is, they probably have a better chance of stopping trump.

      I’ve been saying this for months. Years even. If you want Trump to lose, its not going to be with Biden.

      • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        6 months ago

        If you want Trump to lose, its not going to be with Biden.

        …again. Trump has already lost to Biden once in 2020. If anything Biden has a 100% track record of beating Trump in presidential elections. Trump has a 100% loss rate against Biden in Presidential elections.

        • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          6 months ago

          Biden wasn’t supporting a genocide of the Palestinian people in 2020.

          Things are different for incumbents than they are for challengers, especially those without a recent track record.

          In 2020, right now in terms of days till voting day, Biden had something like a 15 point lead on Trump.

          Biden barely won going into election day with a massive lead.

          Its 2024. Biden lags Trump by 3-6 points.

          Its over. Biden loses. He can’t make up that kind of polling deficit.

          • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            6 months ago

            Biden wasn’t supporting a genocide of the Palestinian people in 2020.

            Trump is also a supporter of Israel. Trump (and GOP lawmakers) actively criticized Biden for stopping delivery of weapons to Israel. So Trump comes out looking no better than Biden on Gaza.

            Things are different for incumbents than they are for challengers, especially those without a recent track record.

            Biden was in the Executive Branch for VP for 8 years and was in the US Senate for 36 years. Trump has 4 years as an twice impeached President.

            Its over. Biden loses. He can’t make up that kind of polling deficit.

            Thats funny, that’s what people said in Hilary’s favor, and then Trump won. So which is it?

            • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              Thats funny, that’s what people said in Hilary’s favor, and then Trump won. So which is it?

              You might consider that those were the same people who have been telling you to not worry about/ apologizing for Biden.

              The world isn’t a monolith. There were plenty of people, myself included, saying in 2016 that Trump had a far better shot than they were being led to believe.

              • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                You might consider that those were the same people who have been telling you to not worry about/ apologizing for Biden.

                No, they’re the same people saying the polls conclude Trump is a shoe in that you are citing yourself.

                • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Bro you don’t know who I’m citing. I’ve been doing ground up analysis on polling data for years. Biden showed a 12 point polling deficit to Trump in 2020, and hasn’t led (unweighted) in 15 months.

                  • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    6 months ago

                    So…you’re citing…yourself?

                    Biden showed a 12 point polling deficit to Trump in 2020, and hasn’t led (unweighted) in 15 months.

                    Didn’t you yourself point out that polling data analysis lead to the incorrect conclusion in 2016?