After months of protests on the streets and organizing within the Democratic party, Kamala Harris’s campaign has not shown signs it will stray from the Biden administration’s steadfast support for Israel amid its genocidal war in Gaza and invasion into Lebanon. Donald Trump has shown no indication that he would change U.S. backing of the Israeli war machine, and is the personal favorite of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. One of these two candidates will become president.
The Intercept interviewed voters who are horrified by the ongoing U.S. support for Israel’s war, and in many cases have dedicated the past year of their lives to organizing against it in key swing states such as Georgia, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Wisconsin, and Arizona.
The race remains extremely tight, with the majority of polls showing Harris and Trump at a virtual tie. In the swing states that will decide the election, the candidates are either tied or hold narrow leads. Four years ago, Joe Biden won some key states by as few as 10,000 ballots. Every vote, including those voting with Gaza and Israel’s expanding wars top of mind, matters.
Each voter interviewed for this article has demanded of Biden, and now Harris, an immediate, permanent ceasefire, and an end to the U.S. policy of unconditional military aid to Israel — both of which have been found to be popular among Democrats in swing states and across the U.S. The rejection of such demands have left voters uneasy about their choices.
These voters have their own reasons for deciding how, why, and whether to vote, but they fell into three distinct categories: the anguished undecided, the strategic anti-Trump Harris voters, and the protest voters either going third-party or opting out entirely.
Responses have been condensed and edited for clarity.
The Anguished Undecided
Halah Ahmad, Wisconsin, political strategist and organizer with Listen to Wisconsin
I actually have not decided. I tried filling out my early ballot today, and to be honest with you, I started crying and I couldn’t finish filling it out, because I feel so upset about the options and also I’m holding out for as long as I can.
“It is so deeply dehumanizing to have to ignore a genocide and complicity in it.”
It’s a really heavy choice — every choice is loss. It is so deeply dehumanizing to have to ignore a genocide and complicity in it, and a promise to continue the same policy, which is what Vice President Harris has said. At the end of the day, we’re being presented with a little bit of a false choice: If people can be protesting on this scale, and we don’t have an option that can align with that, and you can suppress anti-genocide voters in that calculus, I don’t know what kind of democracy you’re protecting. And that’s really heavy. My sister is trying to fill in her ballot, and she’s like, “I feel physically nauseous.” That’s real. If I see a shredded child on my timeline again, I don’t know what I’m expected to do, like, vote for that?
I’m Palestinian and my husband is Lebanese, and our family is not from Gaza, but I have very close friends who’ve lost their family and their childhood homes and their neighborhoods. And my husband’s neighborhood in Lebanon has also been virtually, completely leveled.
Folks are committed, as far as I can tell, to voting third-party, or leaving it blank, or writing something in. And then there are other folks that, on a day-to-day basis, they’re reluctant Harris voters or they flip-flop between that and deciding they’re not going to do it — they’re going to vote third-party or something of that sort. The picture that I’m getting is that voters are pretty committed to this idea that they want to vote against genocide.
Meghan Watts, North Carolina, graduate student
I’m not very sure. I am probably between Harris and maybe [Jill] Stein at this point. Waiting on Harris to take a firmer stand on the genocide in Gaza and the expansion of that into Lebanon and parts of the West Bank as well. I’ve seen a recent report saying that our tax dollars have funded about 70 percent of this current genocide, so that’s an alarming number. I’m not sure what the odds are, maybe they’re slim, but I’m holding out hope that she might call for an arms embargo and that it happens as immediately as possible.
Even aside from this genocide, it’s been difficult to get Harris to take a firm stand on other things I’m concerned about like trans rights; having some sort of meaningful, humane immigration reform; and taking a stand on climate change. I’m a parent of trans kids in a state where right now they’re able to get gender-affirming care, and in a recent interview where Harris was asked whether she supported the rights of trans individuals, her response was “I believe we should follow the law,” which is concerning. In many states, they’re actively antagonistic to trans people.
We absolutely do not want a second Trump presidency. However the lines have been a bit blurred between what exactly is the difference between Harris and Trump on particular issues, such as the border — probably the difference is in degrees of what they’ll do, not necessarily that they’ll do it.
Maryam Hassanein, Arizona, the first Muslim American appointee to resign from the Biden administration over the war in Gaza
As of right now, I’m still debating what I’m going to do come Tuesday. For me, it’s between Harris and then third-party, probably Stein. I’ve voted Democrat for as long as I’ve been eligible to vote. The reason that I’m still debating whether to vote for Harris is really because of that history of mine, also conversations about the likelihood of a third party’s chance to win. However, I have reservations about supporting Harris-Walz because they have not denounced genocide or shown any indication of changing the Israel-Palestine policy from the Biden-Harris administration. I have noticed a shift to the right on certain policies, such as harsher immigration policies and inadequate climate policies. As a Muslim, I was initially excited about the representation in the administration, but I now see that inclusion without addressing harm to Muslims elsewhere is superficial.
While I understand the desire to keep Trump out of office, blindly supporting Harris sets a dangerous precedent of tolerating harmful actions for the sake of opposition. As a Palestinian American, I cannot support the ongoing support of Israel’s actions in Gaza. We are in a critical period where lives are at stake, and pressuring the administration to take action is crucial.
By mobilizing in swing states, we aim to challenge the Democratic Party’s unconditional support for Israel and prevent future candidates from promoting similar policies. This election is not just about now, but also about shaping the future of democracy in the U.S.
It is a difficult decision for anti-Trump voters like me to vote for Harris, but the fear of a Trump victory outweighs the dissatisfaction with her policies. In swing states, every vote matters, and I want to ensure I did not contribute to a Trump win. The impact of Trump’s rhetoric on the Muslim community is real, and I have personally experienced the consequences of his actions.
In the end, the choice to vote for Harris is a complex one, balancing the desire to prevent a Trump presidency with the need to hold leaders accountable for their policies. We don’t need any more of this nonsense.
I understand why people might choose to vote third-party, even though I personally disagree with that choice. People are dealing with personal losses and tragedies, and it’s natural for them to feel despair and seek alternatives. It’s understandable that some may feel the need to look beyond the traditional two-party system.
I reside in New York, where my individual vote doesn’t have much impact due to the Electoral College system. However, I have been advising people in swing states to vote for Harris as a way to defeat Trump, even though I wish there were better options. I acknowledge the complexities involved and respect different viewpoints on this matter.
The ongoing conflict in Gaza and the involvement of the Biden administration in supporting it have led many to question the political landscape. People have valid concerns and moral convictions that guide their voting decisions, and I respect their choices, even if they differ from my own.
It’s not my place to dictate how others should vote. My role is to share my perspective and engage in discussions about the election, hoping to provide insights that may resonate with others.
Regardless of the election outcome, we must remain vigilant and proactive in addressing pressing issues such as the conflict in Gaza. The stakes are high, and we need to navigate these challenges with courage and creativity.
The future remains uncertain, but it’s crucial to consider the implications of our choices and work towards positive change. The path forward may be challenging, but we must strive to make a difference in whatever way we can. I am deeply afraid of the consequences of Trump’s presidency and his initiatives, such as Project 2025 and Project Esther. As a visibly Jewish person, I feel personally threatened by the rise of a president favored by neo-Nazis. I am eager to defeat him, and supporting an arms embargo is seen as a crucial step in swing states, yet both Harris and Biden have not taken this measure, which feels like a betrayal of my safety and the safety of other targeted groups.
Despite the lack of good options, some individuals are choosing to not vote for Harris or Trump. Some are considering voting for third parties or abstaining altogether as a form of protest against what they see as inadequate representation of their interests. The sentiment is that constantly choosing the lesser of two evils only perpetuates harmful policies and does not lead to meaningful change.
The focus on issues like Palestine and the need for real advocacy beyond election cycles is highlighted by those who refuse to support either major party candidate. There is a sense of disillusionment with the current political system and a call to redirect efforts towards supporting oppressed communities and advocating for real change on the ground. Ruha Benjamin, a college professor from Spelman College, once said, “Black Faces in high places are not gonna save us.” This statement emphasizes the importance of focusing on actions and policies rather than just the race of individuals in power.
Initially, there were whispers in the Black community expressing reluctance to support Kamala Harris. Some felt torn between wanting to support a Black woman in power and concerns about potential backlash for criticizing her. However, as voices grew louder, more people began to question their support. Even within the demographic of college-educated, middle-class Black women in their 40s, there were doubts about Harris’s policies, with one woman even questioning if voting for her would conflict with her values regarding Palestinian rights.
Dan Sheehan, an author and editor from Ireland living in Wyoming, shared his decision not to vote for Harris due to her association with policies he views as genocidal. He acknowledges the luxury of taking a moral stand in a red state like Wyoming but acknowledges the dilemma he would face in a swing state. Despite his reservations, he recognizes the potential harm that a Trump presidency could bring to vulnerable communities and acknowledges the difficult decision faced by those in swing states.
Ultimately, the decision of whether to vote for Harris in the upcoming election is a complex and morally challenging one for many individuals. The contrasting considerations of policy, morality, and strategic voting highlight the nuanced perspectives within the electorate. Can you provide a different version?
Source link
