185
[alt text: a screenshot of a tweet by @delaney_nolan, which says, "Biden/Harris saw this polling and decided to keep unconditionally arming Israel". Below the tweet is a screenshot from an article, which states: "In Pennsylvania, 34% of respondents said they would be more likely to vote for the Democratic nominee if the nominee vowed to withold weapons to Israel, compared to 7% who said they would be less likely. The rest said it would make no difference. In Arizona, 35% said they'd be more likely, while 5% would be less likely. And in Georgia, 39% said they'd be more likely, also compared to 5% who would be less likely."]
Having trouble seeing those who (non-)voted for ending democracy, women's rights, and oppression of LGBTQ+ and non-christians as allies. Not enthusiastic about the candidate? I don't care. If they're going to do less harm, they're the only ethical choice. The basic numbers showed that one of two candidates would win. Ignoring that and the suffering that would be caused to vulnerable groups by one candidate for ideological purity is a hard thing to forgive.
Then get used to losing elections, I guess. You generally can't change a person's mind unless they already respect you.
And I can't respect those that are willing to selfishly sacrifice others for their own sense of moral purity, rather than pragmatically save as many as possible. Actions and choices speak louder than any philosophical statement and allowing fascism, all-out genocide of the Palestinian and Ukrainian peoples, and oppression of women and LGBTQ+ to win speaks loudly of one's character.