...of Israel's assualts on Gaza.
As far as his supporting Israel, I'd also guess we'd find many of his constituency, other than you, who also support his funding votes related to Israel, none of which triggered their president to wage war in Iran, or retaliate they way they have for the massacres and rapes in their country.
When you find someone who says, 'the genocide in Gaza was in any way those pesky republicans way to deliberately divert and divide the Democratic Party,' you can tell them that I also disagree with that premise.
The attacks on the Biden administration for Israel's military response to the attacks were specious and completely off-base, give that the administration neither supported what Israel did or were responsible for their attacks on Gaza.
Indeed, as I wrote, VP Harris was actively engaged and tasked with brokering a ceasefire in '24, but was accused of some untenable association with the demagoguery against the Biden presidency that supposed the election was about the president who had stepped down, or the VP candidate they imagined was the problem and not the maniac that just went to war with Iran.
Not a word from those people today about enabling Trump into office with their opposition. Maybe someone can bother to hold them accountable for what ultimately happened with Trump and his buddy Bibi.
Whatever the 'Biden-Harris' policy toward Israel, it didn't result in a war with Iran, and it wasn't responsible for the military response of Israel after their people were massacred and raped. In fact, it was the Biden administration, led by VP Harris which worked to mitigate the response.
Anyone who's setting the Democratic party up to debate and focus on Israel, instead of the U.S., is doing exactly what people looking to deliberately divide the party at voting time used to dissuade voters from supporting our nominee, Kamala Harris.
Anyone supposing we'd be in the same position with Israel under a Harris presidency as we experienced under Biden or Trump isn't dealing with those facts in a responsible or factual manner, and the result of that demagoguery will be (deliberately) more of the same division and rejection of a perfectly responsible party; rejection of a coalition of Democrats who may well disagree at times; to the ultimate benefit of a republican party that is demonstratably hostile to the aims that critics purport to support.
How about starting with the supposition that NO American president has been able to formulate a policy that solves the conflict between Israel and it's Arab neighbors, not just Biden's?
How about acknowledging that, from Chuck Schumer, to Biden, to Harris, there is a chasm between them and any republican in any election; elections being the thing this posit is ostensibly concerned with, and that it's time and effort wasted directing Dem supporters to bear down on something that can be debated and resolved among Democrats in a majority?
It's not only deliberately divisive, to the point of threatening the actual Democratic leader more then the republican one, it's specious and deliberately distracting (for many who really don't have the Dem party's future at heart: see: last election) to the actual concerns and needs facing Americans today.
Again, what responsibility do those 'Gaza' advocates bashing Biden and Harris assume for splintering people away from the party right before we voted last time over disagreements best solved in a Democratic majority, and clearly at devastating risk under the presidency they helped enable into power with their campaigning against Democrats instead of republicans?
Some of those same critics are now engaged in trying to take down our Democratic leaders (both of them!) over this speciousness. How's that supposed to work out, advocating against your own party leaders as a strategy to gain support of voters?
It's ludicrous and self-defeating; not to mention, false.
= new reply since forum marked as read