It isn’t going to matter: The genocide in Israel became simultaneously an issue large enough to decide an election and yet small enough to ignore as a political issue.
How ironic considering that the entire argument you continually put forward is that the genocide in Israel is simultaneously an issue large enough to decide an election, yet small enough to evade any responsibility for deciding an election.
Of course, I’m not sure what else should be expected from someone who plays apologist for Ukrainian genocide while pretending to decry Palestinian genocide.
Which swing states is this true for?
It isn’t going to matter: The genocide in Israel became simultaneously an issue large enough to decide an election and yet small enough to ignore as a political issue.
The argumentation swings both ways as needed.
How ironic considering that the entire argument you continually put forward is that the genocide in Israel is simultaneously an issue large enough to decide an election, yet small enough to evade any responsibility for deciding an election.
Of course, I’m not sure what else should be expected from someone who plays apologist for Ukrainian genocide while pretending to decry Palestinian genocide.
The issue was always large enough to impact the election by causing low turnout and abstention across the electorate.
The protest and third party voters, who turned out and did not abstain, were small enough not to decide the election.
This isn’t rocket surgery like hating waffles.