LogFAQs > #979214200

I reject the notion that "Biden enables Israel" and "Trump wins the election" are the only two options. I've seen no convincing evidence whatsoever that getting Biden to pivot on Gaza is going to hurt his election chances. This is a claim that has to substantiated before any hypothetical of a Trump reelection can be used as an argument. Especially when it's used to stop people from protesting against atrocities.

Fact of the matter is: polls show that Biden's handling of Gaza so far is met with disapproval of his own base and independents. He's selling weapons to a country that half of his own voters believe is currently committing genocide! If anything it's his current stance that is turning away voters, not the protest.

The administration CAN come with a harsher condemnation of Israel's action, it CAN stop vetoing UN resolutions and it CAN place conditions on further arms sales and financial aid. Not doing so is a choice, not some inescapable natural law. In fact the tone HAS changed in the last 2 weeks: both Biden and Harris have now publicly called for a ceasefire (albeit a temporary one), and now even submitted a draft UN resolution. The argument that Biden can not, will not, change his stance under any circumstance is bogus.

Not only is upholding international human rights is the morally right thing to do(!), it may actually win back protest voters as well. Instead, we have people like Pelosi accusing ceasefire-protesters of being Putin plants. We see Dems insisting that genocide is inevitable and pointless to prevent, branding protestors as undercover Trumpers, or even threatening them with deportations if they don't fall in line. If the assertion is that protesting the Gaza war is hurting Biden's election chances, I'm very curious to know how the hell this sort of rhetoric is convincing voters who already feel disenfranchised over this issue.