this post was submitted on 18 Jul 2025
-20 points (37.8% liked)
United States | News & Politics
8278 readers
657 users here now
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
What does this mean?
"They will twist your words. Make them untwistable"
"Watch your phrasing, Israel and the media will take anything out of context"
Are you sure you know who Bernie Sanders is
If you think any of this should be said to Zohran Mamdani:
Are you sure you know who Zohran mamdani is?
Really not sure what the point of your ire is here. And you’re kind of coming off like an ass.
AIPAC and the people they influence are notorious for twisting and misrepresenting rhetoric that’s even slightly critical of the Israeli government. It pays to be extremely deliberate and careful when speaking publicly on those topics. You and I may understand the nuance of Mamdani’s position, but (to be blunt) a lot of more stupid and/or less engaged voters on NYC won’t necessarily have the same reaction. You’ll probably deride me as a “centrist” for saying this, but to ignore the propagandistic influence that AIPAC exerts is essentially an unforced error. So, yes, it is a absolutely good and correct to call out Bibi’s genocidal campaign, but it is a way better idea to do that in a specific, careful, and nuanced fashion, in the interest of minimizing AIPAC’s ability to twist the words into a weapon against him.
This line very specifically implies that Zohran has crossed the line in the past and does not make the correct distinction.
No it doesn’t. It’s an acknowledgement that the Israeli government and zionists in general have a strong tendency to jump on and misrepresent even the most mildly critical statements, and to be careful in that context. Sanders is providing pragmatic, tactical political advice, nothing more. And that’s fine and appropriate. Stop trying to outrage farm against people who actually do support Palestinians and are meaningfully against genocide.
more means that he believes that Zohran currently does not make the distinction well enough.
I’m not going to litigate semantics of the English language with you.
In my estimation, you are reading far more nuance into that statement than is either implied or meant directly. I disagree with your evaluation, and I think you’re just trying to pointlessly stir up trouble where there’s not actually a problem.
No. Bernie Sanders said words. These words mean things. And Sanders knows exactly what he is doing.
You’re not going to convince me by being pithy and making inaccurate negative insinuations about one of the very few genuinely upstanding politicians that exist in this country.
When you are so infatuated with a politician that you refuse to acknowledge their faults.
Reminds me of a certain red cap folk.
The real question is why I even replied when I'm sure I know you're a disingenuous troll.
Based on the downvotes in this thread and the other one you posted, it seems no one like your opinion or feigned ignorance. But don't take to mean you're an underground hero, some takes really are just that bad.
So you don't know and are just trolling.