GOP prized informant against Hunter Biden now charged with lying under oath

[mandrill]

It's not exactly an ad hominem when one uses a fact like posting volumes to make a point. Some here will certainly commend you for your tenacity.

Earp, I post about a number of different topics, including posting nudes.

I'm not the guy posting over and over and over and over about how there's no need for actual evidence that Joe Biden committed a crime because "doncha-thinky-thinky-thinky-thinky?" .

You got into the same shtick when you spent page after page complaining that Trump's judicial loss in the E. Jean Carroll trial "wasn't really a loss because it was a civil trial, not a criminal trial". It's repetitive, silly and pointless.

You post only in the politics section and only very strained "defences" of an extremely dubious current crop of GOP personalities - most of whom have been disbarred, jailed or found civilly liable for large amounts of money.

How many times have you written essentially the same post in this thread over and over and over again?

 

[Valcazar]

You keep arguing like you don't think being known as Genocide Joe is bad for his reelection.

Of course it is bad for his re-election.
Why do you think people who don't want him elected are pushing it?

What I am arguing with is you overstating what effects we are actually seeing.

That 13% uncommitted after a major campaign to get people to use it as a protest vote isn't very impressive given the historical trend of uncommitted scoring in that range when there is a non-competitive race.
So don't read too much into it.

I get that you want Biden to lose now and you want to prove that it is the "Genocide Joe" thing that is going to make him lose.
But that doesn't mean you should over-read what you're actually seeing in the results.

Why do you refuse to acknowledge that Biden's support of genocide could kill his reelection?

I've acknowledged it from the beginning.
I've just kept telling you to not over-read your personal preferences as what will actually happen.

A majority of Democrats prefer a presidential candidate who does not back U.S. military aid for Israel, according to a new Reuters/Ipsos poll that showed Democratic President Joe Biden tied with Donald Trump ahead of the November presidential election.
The three-day poll, which closed on Wednesday, showed 56% of respondents who identified themselves as Democrats said they were less likely to support a candidate who backs military assistance for Israel, compared to 40% who said they would be more likely to support such a candidate.

Which, if true, may be a good sign for Biden, since Trump is far more supportive of military aid to Israel.
It's just very hard to read what that actually means in the electorate, given who is actually running.

 

[Valcazar]

I don't know where Fox News' audience numbers are currently. It's a rather small segment of the population.

I'm pretty sure all cable news audience numbers are a small segment of the population.

 

[Valcazar]

The one thing you don't hear much about now is the bipartisan talks between Trump, Schumer and Pelosi five years ago. If you recall, Schumer and Pelosi walked out because they claimed they were offended by the way the President discussed the problem.

Don't remember that, actually.
I'm sure there were many negotiations, though, so can you narrow down which ones? (I presume immigration since that is the subject we were talking about?)
Was it immigration? If so I can probably find the 2019 stories on it.

 

[Frankfooter]

Of course it is bad for his re-election.
Why do you think people who don't want him elected are pushing it?

What I am arguing with is you overstating what effects we are actually seeing.

That 13% uncommitted after a major campaign to get people to use it as a protest vote isn't very impressive given the historical trend of uncommitted scoring in that range when there is a non-competitive race.
So don't read too much into it.

I get that you want Biden to lose now and you want to prove that it is the "Genocide Joe" thing that is going to make him lose.
But that doesn't mean you should over-read what you're actually seeing in the results.



I've acknowledged it from the beginning.
I've just kept telling you to not over-read your personal preferences as what will actually happen.



Which, if true, may be a good sign for Biden, since Trump is far more supportive of military aid to Israel.
It's just very hard to read what that actually means in the electorate, given who is actually running.

You're still misreading the numbers based on your own bias.
Sure, I'm also biased but I acknowledge my bias and see the numbers which you try to discount based on your own views.

Approval ratings are today have Biden at 39% approval and he only needs to lose a few swing states like Michigan to lose the election.
If 13% of dem voters stay home, as those 13% in Michigan suggest, he'll lose. If he loses even 5% of dem voters, he's done.

In contrast, Mr. Biden is winning only 83 percent of his 2020 voters, with 10 percent saying they now back Mr. Trump.

CNN won't blame Israel or say the word 'Israel' in this headline, but even they are worried.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/28/politics/biden-michigan-vulnerabilities-israel-gaza/index.html

Israel could lose Biden the election

Democrats are badly split on Gaza

www.telegraph.co.uk

 

[Valcazar]

You're still misreading the numbers based on your own bias.
Sure, I'm also biased but I acknowledge my bias and see the numbers which you try to discount based on your own views.

I am discounting them because you keep making statements that are at odds with what the numbers are actually saying.

Approval ratings are today have Biden at 39% approval and he only needs to lose a few swing states like Michigan to lose the election.

Yes.
Everyone agrees.

If 13% of dem voters stay home, as those 13% in Michigan suggest, he'll lose.

That isn't what is suggested by that 13% in Michigan.
This is my point.

If he loses even 5% of dem voters, he's done.

Absolutely, and that's a more defensibly argument from the 13% in Michigan, but actually making any prediction of a real number based on the Michigan number is foolish.

In contrast, Mr. Biden is winning only 83 percent of his 2020 voters, with 10 percent saying they now back Mr. Trump.

And then you do things like selectively pull this quote out instead of looking at the whole thing.

There's a lot to point to that is bad for Biden here, like the continuing loss of non-college educated voters who aren't white.
The slip in the gender split as well. Both of those don't seem to track the Gaza situation but are serious weaknesses Biden needs to be worried about.

But you also have to look at the rest of the reporting:


An un-enthusiastic vote is still a vote.
That "dissatisfied, but not upset" number is a huge deal, of course, because it is hard to say which way they vote, if at all.

This is also a key factor:

Among the 19 percent of voters who said they disapproved of both likely nominees — an unusually large cohort in 2024 that pollsters and political strategists sometimes call “double haters” — Mr. Biden actually led Mr. Trump, 45 percent to 33 percent.

The candidate who had won such “double haters” was victorious in the elections in both 2016 and 2020.

And, of course, most explicitly relevant to the point you are making about the Israel/Palestine situation.

As the Israel-Hamas conflict rages in its fifth month, 40 percent of voters said they sympathized more with Israel compared to 24 percent who said they sympathized more with the Palestinians. Mr. Trump was winning 70 percent of those who backed Israel primarily; Mr. Biden was winning 68 percent of those who sided with the Palestinians, even as he has faced demonstrations and a protest vote over his pro-Israel stance.

Like your other two links point out, this is a real issue for Biden.
That doesn't mean you need to misrepresent things to try and make it seem important.

 

[dirtydaveiii]

got to be embarrasing to be GOP

 

[Frankfooter]

Like your other two links point out, this is a real issue for Biden.
That doesn't mean you need to misrepresent things to try and make it seem important.

First, how did you post the full chart, I couldn't post it with the numbers and image.
I don't think I'm misrepresenting things, valcazar.

The 13% in Michigan was an intentional movement, you'd have to prove that it wasn't out of the norm.
The 6% 'angry' in the chart posted from the poll is what I'm talking about.
Lose 6% of your vote and rump wins.

These protests are following the Bidens everywhere now.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1764013906433875981

 

[Valcazar]

First, how did you post the full chart, I couldn't post it with the numbers and image.

I took a screen shot.

I don't think I'm misrepresenting things, valcazar.

The 13% in Michigan was an intentional movement, you'd have to prove that it wasn't out of the norm.

Locals say it is the norm when there isn't a contested race and the last time the Democrats had an incumbent was Obama and Uncommitted got just under 11%.
Pretending that 13% is the number of Democrats ready to not vote Biden is misunderstanding what is happening.
Especially since at least one faction of the "uncommitted" (Listen to Michigan, I think it is called?) has said specifically that you shouldn't consider their uncommitted here a pledge to not support Biden.
It's a shot at him to get him to listen to them.

The 6% 'angry' in the chart posted from the poll is what I'm talking about.
Lose 6% of your vote and rump wins.

What's the angry for Trump in that same chart?
What were those numbers in 2020?

These protests are following the Bidens everywhere now.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1764013906433875981

Again, this is a real issue.
I'm not denying that.
I'm asking you to think about how you are reading the numbers.

 

[Frankfooter]

I took a screen shot.



Locals say it is the norm when there isn't a contested race and the last time the Democrats had an incumbent was Obama and Uncommitted got just under 11%.
Pretending that 13% is the number of Democrats ready to not vote Biden is misunderstanding what is happening.
Especially since at least one faction of the "uncommitted" (Listen to Michigan, I think it is called?) has said specifically that you shouldn't consider their uncommitted here a pledge to not support Biden.
It's a shot at him to get him to listen to them.



What's the angry for Trump in that same chart?
What were those numbers in 2020?



Again, this is a real issue.
I'm not denying that.
I'm asking you to think about how you are reading the numbers.

Michigan is one of the highest Muslim proportion states, I agree.
The 13% isn't likely national but youth and Muslim anger over Israel is likely larger than you admit. Losing 5% of dem votes would lose him the election.

After today's SC ruling on Colorado its pretty clear they will make sure his trials don't stop him from running.

Which means that the US is in for a totally messed up election between trump, a wanna be dictator who is clearly going senile quickly and Biden, who has turned the world against the US and alienated a large part of democrats. Its a crap shoot now, either could win but neither are good.

America in 2024: Blind, blundering Colossus on a downward slide

If the Biden-Trump rerun wasn't embarrassing enough, U.S. support for Israel has alienated the entire world

www.salon.com

 

[Valcazar]

Losing 5% of dem votes would lose him the election.

I never said otherwise.
Losing even less than that in the right place would cost him the election because of the stupidity of the electoral college system.

After today's SC ruling on Colorado its pretty clear they will make sure his trials don't stop him from running.

We already knew that.

Which means that the US is in for a totally messed up election between trump, a wanna be dictator who is clearly going senile quickly and Biden, who has turned the world against the US and alienated a large part of democrats. Its a crap shoot now, either could win but neither are good.

You've made your Butler-esque desire that the Democrats lose "because both are bad" quite clear.

Again - Biden is in trouble and the Gaza situation is a major issue.
I just want you to stop over-interpreting the numbers just to satisfy your narrative.

 

[Frankfooter]

You've made your Butler-esque desire that the Democrats lose "because both are bad" quite clear.
Again - Biden is in trouble and the Gaza situation is a major issue.
I just want you to stop over-interpreting the numbers just to satisfy your narrative.

Butler is an accelerationist, he wants to tear everything down so that a utopian state run by boogaloo boys will institute free health care or something along those lines.

I understand how fragile democracy is which is why I am so pissed at Biden for messing it up. The dems should lose so they can purge the Israeli influence from the party and return it to something more supportable.

It still seems you are backing voting for genocide as being 'practical'. That's also supporting the decline of democracy.

There are no winning solutions right now, really, they are all bad.

 

[Valcazar]

Butler is an accelerationist, he wants to tear everything down so that a utopian state run by boogaloo boys will institute free health care or something along those lines.

Yes.
But you have adopted his strategy of "damn both their houses, but especially this one because I don't like them now so even though the goals I think are important would be better served with them in power, it is important that they lose".

I understand how fragile democracy is which is why I am so pissed at Biden for messing it up. The dems should lose so they can purge the Israeli influence from the party and return it to something more supportable.

Exactly.
Your feelings are hurt, so you want to impose collective punishment on everyone so that "those people learn their lesson".

It still seems you are backing voting for genocide as being 'practical'. That's also supporting the decline of democracy.

There are no winning solutions right now, really, they are all bad.

Yes.
And you are choosing a worse solution and actively encouraging it.
You are now actively rooting for Biden and the Democrats to lose.
Which means even any advance on the Gaza situation is insufficient for you now - they have to lose to "learn their lesson".

Sound familiar?

 

[Frankfooter]

Yes.
But you have adopted his strategy of "damn both their houses, but especially this one because I don't like them now so even though the goals I think are important would be better served with them in power, it is important that they lose".

No, I haven't adopted his strategy at all.
I would much prefer that rump be removed from the candidacy through his legal issues and coup attempt.
I would also prefer Biden step down and that protests dog him until he does so.

Its not a 'burn down the system' stance, nor a damn both their houses stance. Its a damn both candidates stance. Get them out and renew democracy.

Exactly.
Your feelings are hurt, so you want to impose collective punishment on everyone so that "those people learn their lesson".

Sorry, but this is a disgusting post.
To assume that my position is not about honouring 'never again' and taking a stand against genocide and its all about 'hurt feelings' is just disgusting.
To claim that I want to impose 'collective punishment' on 'everyone' is also disgusting. There are 2.2 million people living through a genocide, 1.1 million are sick, 100,000 dead, injured or buried in rubble, another 500,000 close to starvation. You intentionally dehumanized them and excluded the suffering of Palestinians as not 'everyone', which infers you think they don't count as humans.
The 'those people learn their lesson' comment is just as bad, it infers that its about racism and 'those people' instead of about human rights, equality and decency.
It reads like you are actively supporting the genocide and mad that most people are against genocide.

Yes.
And you are choosing a worse solution and actively encouraging it.
You are now actively rooting for Biden and the Democrats to lose.
Which means even any advance on the Gaza situation is insufficient for you now - they have to lose to "learn their lesson".

Sound familiar?

I'd argue that you are the one arguing for the end of democracy.

Your arguments are now no different than Mitch's rump support. Like Mitch, you've declared that being a war criminal charged with genocide at the ICJ doesn't matter, that your choice of leader should also be above the law. Supporting genocide is the worst possible crime against humanity, yet you think its not enough lose your support. This reads as you support genocide and don't think its a bad thing that your leader is genocidal as long as it keeps the guy you don't like out of power. You don't care that 80% of your choice party supports a ceasefire, your leader is allowed do whatever he wants as long as the other guy stays out of office.

Your view that trump is the worse solution is your view, its not a universally proven truth.
The US survived 4 years of rump, he's now totally senile and likely would have another 4 years with maybe another tax cut for the rich. Regardless, you belittle the idea that people can have moral limits, that there are things they won't support and that they are therefore 'wrong'.

You want your leader elected regardless of what he's done because you are afraid of the other leader.

Sound familiar?

 

[Valcazar]

No, I haven't adopted his strategy at all.
I would much prefer that rump be removed from the candidacy through his legal issues and coup attempt.
I would also prefer Biden step down and that protests dog him until he does so.

Its not a 'burn down the system' stance, nor a damn both their houses stance. Its a damn both candidates stance. Get them out and renew democracy.

It's the same strategy, even if for a different end.

Sorry, but this is a disgusting post.
To assume that my position is not about honouring 'never again' and taking a stand against genocide and its all about 'hurt feelings' is just disgusting.

And yet it is accurate.
Since voting Biden out doesn't stop the Israel/Palestine situation in any meaningful way (and in all probability makes it worse given Trump's position on the issue), this is about your feelings on the matter.
Even more so since you don't vote in the US and so are therefore only expressing your personal distaste in the issue.

To claim that I want to impose 'collective punishment' on 'everyone' is also disgusting.

And yet it is accurate.
You have said that Biden must lose to purge the Jewish influence from the Democrats.
That means a Republican government.
Which means you are saying everyone in the US who will suffer under that situation should be punished collectively for Biden's sin.

There are 2.2 million people living through a genocide, 1.1 million are sick, 100,000 dead, injured or buried in rubble, another 500,000 close to starvation. You intentionally dehumanized them and excluded the suffering of Palestinians as not 'everyone', which infers you think they don't count as humans.
The 'those people learn their lesson' comment is just as bad, it infers that its about racism and 'those people' instead of about human rights, equality and decency.
It reads like you are actively supporting the genocide and mad that most people are against genocide.

I am not mad that most people are against genocide.
I think it is a good thing.
Taking action that will make the genocide worse isn't really helpful, though, is it?
And taking action to punish other people because they aren't sufficiently against genocide for you is also what it is.
You can decide that is appropriate punishment. But don't deny that is what you are doing.

I'd argue that you are the one arguing for the end of democracy.

That would be silly, but you can do what you want.

Your arguments are now no different than Mitch's rump support. Like Mitch, you've declared that being a war criminal charged with genocide at the ICJ doesn't matter, that your choice of leader should also be above the law.

I have said no such thing.
Have I argued that Biden shouldn't be prosecuted for war crimes if he is found to be guilty of them?
I have never argued that any American president should be above being charged with war crimes.

Supporting genocide is the worst possible crime against humanity, yet you think its not enough lose your support. This reads as you support genocide and don't think its a bad thing that your leader is genocidal as long as it keeps the guy you don't like out of power. You don't care that 80% of your choice party supports a ceasefire, your leader is allowed do whatever he wants as long as the other guy stays out of office.

This isn't what I am arguing and you know it.
Even you aren't this naïve about politics.

Your view that trump is the worse solution is your view, its not a universally proven truth.
The US survived 4 years of rump, he's now totally senile and likely would have another 4 years with maybe another tax cut for the rich. Regardless, you belittle the idea that people can have moral limits, that there are things they won't support and that they are therefore 'wrong'.

Yes, I am well aware that in order to justify your position, you have had to convince yourself that Trump wouldn't be worse for the Palestinians.
And that he wasn't so bad before.
And that he is too feeble and ineffectual and senile to really do anything bad now.

Lying to yourself about that is necessary in order to make your position that Biden must be punished, regardless of what happens in Gaza, palatable.
I don't expect you to change your mind on this.

You want your leader elected regardless of what he's done because you are afraid of the other leader.

Sound familiar?

Yes.
Weighing between insufficient pressure on Israel and giving Israel a free reign would be enough to support Biden.
Add in all the other shit Trump brings with him and it is an easy moral choice.

 

[toguy5252]

It's the same strategy, even if for a different end.



And yet it is accurate.
Since voting Biden out doesn't stop the Israel/Palestine situation in any meaningful way (and in all probability makes it worse given Trump's position on the issue), this is about your feelings on the matter.
Even more so since you don't vote in the US and so are therefore only expressing your personal distaste in the issue.



And yet it is accurate.
You have said that Biden must lose to purge the Jewish influence from the Democrats.
That means a Republican government.
Which means you are saying everyone in the US who will suffer under that situation should be punished collectively for Biden's sin.



I am not mad that most people are against genocide.
I think it is a good thing.
Taking action that will make the genocide worse isn't really helpful, though, is it?
And taking action to punish other people because they aren't sufficiently against genocide for you is also what it is.
You can decide that is appropriate punishment. But don't deny that is what you are doing.



That would be silly, but you can do what you want.



I have said no such thing.
Have I argued that Biden shouldn't be prosecuted for war crimes if he is found to be guilty of them?
I have never argued that any American president should be above being charged with war crimes.



This isn't what I am arguing and you know it.
Even you aren't this naïve about politics.



Yes, I am well aware that in order to justify your position, you have had to convince yourself that Trump wouldn't be worse for the Palestinians.
And that he wasn't so bad before.
And that he is too feeble and ineffectual and senile to really do anything bad now.

Lying to yourself about that is necessary in order to make your position that Biden must be punished, regardless of what happens in Gaza, palatable.
I don't expect you to change your mind on this.



Yes.
Weighing between insufficient pressure on Israel and giving Israel a free reign would be enough to support Biden.
Add in all the other shit Trump brings with him and it is an easy moral choice.

How does every thread turn into an anti- Israel screed, is there no way for the mods to keep threads from being hijacked.

 

[Valcazar]

How does every thread turn into an anti- Israel screed, is there no way for the mods to keep threads from being hijacked.

None, apparently.

 

[Frankfooter]

It's the same strategy, even if for a different end.

No, its not.
Your view is that its the same based on your views of what you think rump will do.
If other people have different views of what rump might do than they are using a different strategy based on those different views.

And yet it is accurate.
Since voting Biden out doesn't stop the Israel/Palestine situation in any meaningful way (and in all probability makes it worse given Trump's position on the issue), this is about your feelings on the matter.
Even more so since you don't vote in the US and so are therefore only expressing your personal distaste in the issue.

The genocide will end before Nov, likely before April.
Voting in rump will not restart it, if Israel becomes troublesome to support he'll throw them under the bus.
He likes racist despots but not if the knives come out for them, as they will for Netanyahu once this stops.

And yet it is accurate.
You have said that Biden must lose to purge the Jewish influence from the Democrats.
That means a Republican government.
Which means you are saying everyone in the US who will suffer under that situation should be punished collectively for Biden's sin.

Are you saying everyone in the US suffered under 4 years of rump rule already and that suffering was so much worse than genocide?

I am not mad that most people are against genocide.
I think it is a good thing.
Taking action that will make the genocide worse isn't really helpful, though, is it?
And taking action to punish other people because they aren't sufficiently against genocide for you is also what it is.
You can decide that is appropriate punishment. But don't deny that is what you are doing.

Again, if the genocide continues until November everyone in Gaza will be dead. It will stop soon.

I have said no such thing.
Have I argued that Biden shouldn't be prosecuted for war crimes if he is found to be guilty of them?
I have never argued that any American president should be above being charged with war crimes.

You have argued that voters need to be 'practical' and that supporting genocide is a price you are willing to pay to keep the guy you hate out of office. That's the same moral stance as mitch and his support of rump. Doesn't matter if he breaks the law, as long as he wins. Like mitch, you will use the argument that he hasn't been found guilty in court yet so is innocent. Your morals are the same as mitch now.

This isn't what I am arguing and you know it.
Even you aren't this naïve about politics.

It is what you are arguing.
You are arguing that its ok that Biden commits some genocide because in your feelings you think rump would commit more.

Yes, I am well aware that in order to justify your position, you have had to convince yourself that Trump wouldn't be worse for the Palestinians.
And that he wasn't so bad before.
And that he is too feeble and ineffectual and senile to really do anything bad now.

Just as in order to justify your position you have to convince yourself that rump would commit even more genocide, if that's possible, or convince yourself that what rump will do to the US is worse than genocide.

Lying to yourself about that is necessary in order to make your position that Biden must be punished, regardless of what happens in Gaza, palatable.
I don't expect you to change your mind on this.

I don't have to lie to myself about anything. I just have to have moral limits like Never Again. I wouldn't vote for rump because he's a corrupt racist and I won't vote for Trudeau because he's backed genocide here.

Yes.
Weighing between insufficient pressure on Israel and giving Israel a free reign would be enough to support Biden.
Add in all the other shit Trump brings with him and it is an easy moral choice.

That's a rather dishonest characterization. Biden has gone further than 'insufficient pressure', he's blocked 4 UNSC resolutions and implemented emergency funding to send billions in bombs for Gaza while refusing to do the same for people in need in the US. Whatever he says publicly his actions have been to actively enable the genocide and to actively block all attempts to stop it.

 

[Frankfooter]

How does every thread turn into an anti- Israel screed, is there no way for the mods to keep threads from being hijacked.

Its still the biggest news story going on, with massive global protests and daily shocking news along with people actively supporting what will go on trial at the ICJ as genocide.

Deal with it.

 

[Valcazar]

No, its not.
Your view is that its the same based on your views of what you think rump will do.
If other people have different views of what rump might do than they are using a different strategy based on those different views.

Sure.
Your view of Trump is wrong and delusional.
But it is the same strategy.
"Trump would be better or really not that bad, because the important thing is that the Democrat loses."

The genocide will end before Nov, likely before April.

How, exactly, do you see that happening?
Are you saying there will be a cease fire or something under Biden's watch?
A ceasefire which you will then punish him for by making sure Trump wins?

Voting in rump will not restart it, if Israel becomes troublesome to support he'll throw them under the bus.
He likes racist despots but not if the knives come out for them, as they will for Netanyahu once this stops.

What on earth are you basing this on?
And are you saying that Biden will restart it?

Are you saying everyone in the US suffered under 4 years of rump rule already and that suffering was so much worse than genocide?

No.
I'm saying that round two of Trump would be much worse than round 1.
And since you just said above that the genocide would be over before April, then your argument for putting Trump into power appears to be "Biden did a bad thing, therefore Americans must suffer" since it isn't even like you are arguing that Trump would stop the Genocide that Biden won't.

Again, if the genocide continues until November everyone in Gaza will be dead. It will stop soon.

If the Israeli's are dead set on committing genocide and Biden is supporting them, then it won't stop until everyone is dead.
That's the point of supporting genocide, isn't it?

You have argued that voters need to be 'practical' and that supporting genocide is a price you are willing to pay to keep the guy you hate out of office. That's the same moral stance as mitch and his support of rump. Doesn't matter if he breaks the law, as long as he wins. Like mitch, you will use the argument that he hasn't been found guilty in court yet so is innocent. Your morals are the same as mitch now.

It's cute when you try to be clever.
Try and keep up.
Given a choice between two bad options, you take the less bad option.
You have yet to provide a single reason getting rid of Joe helps the Palestinians other than you feel it punishes the bad behavior you want punished.
Except that it rewards people who want to do more of that bad behavior, so it isn't even like you're going to get a clear message out of it.

It is what you are arguing.
You are arguing that its ok that Biden commits some genocide because in your feelings you think rump would commit more.

No.
I am arguing that since Trump will be worse for the Palestinians, there is nothing to be gained by trying to get him to win in order to "punish Biden".
That isn't arguing it is "ok for Biden to commit Genocide" that is arguing that "this course of action doesn't get me what I want".
You yourself have said in this very post that the US election will have NO EFFECT on the genocide, since the Israeli operation will stop before then.

Just as in order to justify your position you have to convince yourself that rump would commit even more genocide, if that's possible, or convince yourself that what rump will do to the US is worse than genocide.

I don't have to convince myself of either of those things.
I have to convince myself that Trump would be worse for the Palestinians.
This is not difficult to do.
I have to convince myself that Trump would be worse for the Americans.
This is not difficult to do.
I have to convince myself that Trump would be worse for the World.
This is not difficult to do.

There isn't even a moral trade off here where Trump wins one category.

I don't have to lie to myself about anything. I just have to have moral limits like Never Again. I wouldn't vote for rump because he's a corrupt racist and I won't vote for Trudeau because he's backed genocide here.

Ahh.
The "I wouldn't vote for them so I am morally clean" delusion.

Well, I know I won't break you of that, but luckily you don't vote in US elections.

That's a rather dishonest characterization. Biden has gone further than 'insufficient pressure', he's blocked 4 UNSC resolutions and implemented emergency funding to send billions in bombs for Gaza while refusing to do the same for people in need in the US. Whatever he says publicly his actions have been to actively enable the genocide and to actively block all attempts to stop it.

He's been quite bad on the issue, I agree.
Very weak and ineffectual, even given his very limited ability to affect the issue.
I want more from him.

But, as you said, none of it matters because Israel will stop anyway, according to you.