Objection

You're arbitrarily focusing on something Biden doesn't control while intentionally ignoring the stuff he's very clearly and intentionally done to materially support Israel. That's obviously disingenuous. Suggesting that the problem is he just doesn't have the power to do anything differently is a lie.

That is approval of weapons sales, not sending them more money.

And that matters why? We shouldn't be giving them aid or selling them weapons?

In addition, Congress allocates funds to send to other countries and the President executes the orders he is given. Biden could’ve vetoed the aid bills I suppose

Biden literally bypassed congress to send more aid than what they had approved multiple times.

I hate the way liberals just shamelessly lie about this stuff, you don't even have the excuse of the election anymore.

But I've been repeatedly informed that the democrats are secretly pro-Palestine and were only pretending to support Israel to win over Zionist voters. Now that Biden has nothing to lose, why isn't he doing anything? Could it be that all those people were full of shit?

"Why should I break my head about the outside world? Let the outside world break it's own head!"

"He's right. As the good book says, if you spit in the air, it lands in your face."

"Nonsense! You can't close your eyes to what's happening in the world."

"...He's right."

"He's right, and he's right, they can't both be right."

"You know, you are also right."

That's completely upside down. Democracy means the people within the government structure are supposed to uphold the values of the broader population. If you think the people in the government structure should be the ones to set the values, then maybe democracy isn't for you.

The US pulling out of the UN would allow them to pass all sorts of cool stuff, like recognizing and admitting Palestine and calling for a ceasefire, recognizing the universal rights of children, and condemning the far-right, all of which the US used its veto power to stop against overwhelming support on the other side.

Alright, well "expecting them to do the bare minimum" isn't a winning strategy either. Expecting people to do things they've demonstrated they won't do doesn't make any sense.

And if neither party supports that reform, do we just keep voting Democrat until the end of time?

This mentality is what the Dems keep applying and it doesn't work. Trying to shame people into voting isn't an effective message. You can argue that it should be, but what matters is how things actually are and how a party can act most effectively based on that. It's either adapt or keep railing against reality and lose.

You know you're cooked when Bill Kristol is going around like, "Hey, shouldn't you be running a more progressive campaign to turn out more voters?"

Tammy Baldwin, Elissa Slotkin, and Jacky Rosen are all women who won senate races in states Kamala lost (WI, MI, NV). There's also Ruben Gallego, a Hispanic man who's winning in Arizona. So your "simplest explanation" is that these sexist, racist bigots were fine with voting for women (one of them a queer woman at that) and minorities for senate but not for president (for some reason) as opposed to the idea that Kamala Harris was just an unpopular candidate. That's not the simplest explanation, it's just the laziest.