"I support this war so much that I'm going to ignore the position of the vast majority of my constituents and party members even though it endangers our chances of re-election in the Fall" is also a take.
@seb321 @evan I said people who think like that have a bad take. I did not criticize them. I'm focused on the ideas and outcomes, not on criticizing people.
If I were to say the people who care about reproductive rights shouldn't avoid voting for Biden just because he has failed to get those rights passed into law, would that be criticizing people, or would that be addressing an illogical assessment?
I rather disagree with the idea that Biden "CLEARLY is doing his best to limit the violence"; he is doing a little, but he could do a lot more.
It's likely that the reason he isn't doing a lot more is that he's afraid of losing votes on the pro-Likud side if he does.
He might therefore do more to limit the violence if he had evidence that he should be afraid of losing votes on the anti-genocide side if he doesn't.
It's not like the choice is between two fixed and static positions, Biden-as-given and Trump-as-given. If Biden believes that genocide opponents will stay home if he keeps fully funding the genocide, there's a greater chance he'll stop doing that. His need for votes can change his behavior.
There's a whole issue about whether the anti-genocide people are actually bluffing of course, and whether they'd actually risk a Trump presidency by staying home if he doesn't do more for Palestine. And I think it's frankly best if he can't assume it's just a bluff.