Even inside the Harris campaign, there was dissent about whether she needed to take a more aggressive stance for Gaza.
A Harris organizer who worked on youth turnout said that senior campaign officials gave them an order: When they sent out mass volunteer or fundraising emails and people replied by asking about Gaza, they were told to mark it as “no response.” The result? They seldom ended up engaging with voters on that issue.
“We also didn’t create a new category for Gaza responses out of fear that category would be leaked. Instead we were told to mark them as ‘no response,’” the organizer said, faulting top Harris campaign leaders for failing to address the issue. “The only ‘clowns’ out there are those who were in senior leadership and decided to abdicate on this issue, who silenced a Palestinian speaker at the DNC, and who told us to ignore it every time a voter asked us about Gaza.”
If she wasn’t pro genocide, then it should’ve been easy for her to speak out against genocide, right?
Again, how receptive was Harris? Clearly there was no choice when it came to genocide. If something as horrific as genocide is non-negotiable, what makes you think either political party cares to work for the people on any other heavily lobbied issue?