Yes, because you were all voting for politicians who were complicit in that genocide. Then the election happened, and the quasi-ceasefire (really, relocation of hostilities to the West Bank, until they almost inevitably resume in Gaza again) happened. And you’re all still clinging to the “it was a spoiler designed to cost Dems the election” and yet you’re still completely failing to ask the absolutely fundamental question of why the Democrat politicians would rather give up an election than give up being complicit in genocide.

The sheer fact that you write “genocide” in the “I’m an idiot” up-and-down caps, by the way. It meets the legal definition of genocide. It means the intent of laws authored against genocide. It meets the structural characteristics of past genocides. You have to be a truly sick person to trivialize it like that. It’s really striking how much trivializing the genocide like that goes hand-in-hand with blaming its critics for the Democrat’s loss - it’s always the same people doing both. Are we not living in the same planet, where genocide is literally the worst crime imaginable, besides causing the extinction of the entire human race or all life of Earth? Does a politician’s complicity in genocide not completely discredit everything they say or do as a facade to gain power and wealth? Does it not reveal an absolute deception that’s fundamental to our entire social system? Be honest, have you even thought about those questions?