"Basic logic" in a philosophical sense, sure. But it seems removed from reality.
Frankly, I don't think this is about Biden or Trump. It's about the US. But either way, there's a difference between the person who is doing it, and the person who explicitly says they would also be doing it, and doing it more.
Maybe the US is already at maximum capacity for what it can do for Israel. Then there's no difference between Trump and Biden.
Maybe under Trump, more money and resources would be diverted to Israel (e.g. stopping all support for Ukraine). Then it'd be worse under Trump.
I think that the position of "Maybe Trump wouldn't do genocide even though he said he would and also said he'd do a better job of Palestine" exists only in some absurd fantasy. Realistically, you have a choice between "The same amount of genocide" and "The same OR MORE amount of genocide".
If you're okay with the same or more genocide just to spite the same amount of genocide, then that's your prerogative. It seems silly to me though to be a single issue voter and be okay with the one who wants to make your single issue worse.
If my single issue was abortion rights, I'd choose the one who wants to restrict abortion access rather than help win the election for the one who wants to outright ban abortion. I would lament the lack of an option that better represents what I want, but I'd choose a step forward over a step back. Or even not taking a step over a step back.
"Basic logic" in a philosophical sense, sure. But it seems removed from reality.
Frankly, I don't think this is about Biden or Trump. It's about the US. But either way, there's a difference between the person who is doing it, and the person who explicitly says they would also be doing it, and doing it more.
Maybe the US is already at maximum capacity for what it can do for Israel. Then there's no difference between Trump and Biden.
Maybe under Trump, more money and resources would be diverted to Israel (e.g. stopping all support for Ukraine). Then it'd be worse under Trump.
I think that the position of "Maybe Trump wouldn't do genocide even though he said he would and also said he'd do a better job of Palestine" exists only in some absurd fantasy. Realistically, you have a choice between "The same amount of genocide" and "The same OR MORE amount of genocide".
If you're okay with the same or more genocide just to spite the same amount of genocide, then that's your prerogative. It seems silly to me though to be a single issue voter and be okay with the one who wants to make your single issue worse.
If my single issue was abortion rights, I'd choose the one who wants to restrict abortion access rather than help win the election for the one who wants to outright ban abortion. I would lament the lack of an option that better represents what I want, but I'd choose a step forward over a step back. Or even not taking a step over a step back.