Was the message/mission of those interrupting her material in why she said “I’m speaking”? I would assume she was holding an official press conference or something, and it was her turn to speak and it was not being honored.
If my assumption is wrong, I’m happy to revise my opinion of it.
If my assumption is right, it’s just people with hurt feelings who couldn’t wait their turn to speak (as this assumption requires that it was harris’ turn to speak.)
Describing people begging for a genocide to stop as just having hurt feelings and being impatient is a wild approach.
Protests aren’t supposed to be silent. That’s the entire point and the only way to get anything done. If Harris was already campaigning on a ceasefire they would have nothing to protest about and she wouldn’t be interrupted. These are constituents making their voices heard.
It’s a protest at a press conference. When protesting its beneficial to take your message to the press and politicians. I’m not claiming it was their turn to speak because the entire point of a protest is taking a stand and making your voice heard even if it isn’t convenient.
Historically effective protest movements weren’t convenient for politicians.
I’m sorry, I had no idea this concept could be so alien to anybody.
As I said earlier in the thread that you didn’t read or didnt understand, “The politically adept way to answer protesters with a substantial base of support that you don’t want to alienate is to say, ‘I hear you.’”
If she wants their votes she needs policy and actions that will win those votes.
Was the message/mission of those interrupting her material in why she said “I’m speaking”? I would assume she was holding an official press conference or something, and it was her turn to speak and it was not being honored.
If my assumption is wrong, I’m happy to revise my opinion of it.
If my assumption is right, it’s just people with hurt feelings who couldn’t wait their turn to speak (as this assumption requires that it was harris’ turn to speak.)
Describing people begging for a genocide to stop as just having hurt feelings and being impatient is a wild approach.
Protests aren’t supposed to be silent. That’s the entire point and the only way to get anything done. If Harris was already campaigning on a ceasefire they would have nothing to protest about and she wouldn’t be interrupted. These are constituents making their voices heard.
Were they protesting or at a press conference? That’s my point.
If she was addressing an active protest, then they had every right to keep speaking, and as I said, I revise my opinion.
So, which was it?
Edit I’m specifically not addressing the context they are protesting, I’m focusing on the setting this phrase was said by her.
Separately, becayse this is Lemmy and people don’t seem able to separate concerns:
Her stance on Israel and Palestine is no good, and what’s happening in Palestine is genocide.
Protests are not effective if they can be ignored. THE ENTIRE POINT IS THAT IT ISN’T THEIR TURN TO SPEAK.
Edit: The politically adept way to answer protesters with a substantial base of support that you don’t want to alienate is to say, “I hear you.”
Agree!
A press conference is not a protest! It’s specifically the time for an official to make a statement.
So, which was it? Who’s turn was it? That’s all I’m asking.
Was harris at a protest or was someone interrupting a press conference?
Edit if Harris was trying to talk over a protest, then I fully support the notion that this statement by her is trash! I said that from the beginning.
It’s a protest at a press conference. When protesting its beneficial to take your message to the press and politicians. I’m not claiming it was their turn to speak because the entire point of a protest is taking a stand and making your voice heard even if it isn’t convenient.
Historically effective protest movements weren’t convenient for politicians.
I’m sorry, I had no idea this concept could be so alien to anybody.
So to get this straight.
She was speaking, interrupted, took back her turn, and that’s what you’re upset about?
Would you rather go back to Biden who just sits there while other people talk over him?
As I said earlier in the thread that you didn’t read or didnt understand, “The politically adept way to answer protesters with a substantial base of support that you don’t want to alienate is to say, ‘I hear you.’”
If she wants their votes she needs policy and actions that will win those votes.
I concede that is a good way to look at it and I did not originally interpret that as your intent. Apologies.