Yes, but in context that was the only alternative at the time. Right?

Tearing down Biden benefitted Trump.

Biden’s term ended with the US overseeing a brutal war in Gaza and a historic cost of living crisis.

Yes, I too remember the US invading Palestine to kidnap their leader. I too remember Biden saying they should turn Gaza into a giant casino and beach resort. I definitely remember Biden threatening to invade denmark if sweden won't give him a medal.

Why do you think any criticism of Biden is an endorsement of Trump?

Well, you see, if there are two candidates, and you say "don't vote for that one" it's a defacto endorsement of the other.

Here's the thing though - US voters went into an election with a binary winner-takes-all choice for the head of their executive branch in a country where the executive branch wields an immense amount of power. Some chose to not take part because neither candidate appealed to them. Many made that choice due to a candidate's foreign policy positions. It is very reasonable to assume that those are votes that would have not gone to the more conservative/regressive side.

Result: popular vote went to the regressives. And since foreign policy issues could very well have been a cause in this (i.e. people basing their choice to not vote on a candidate's impacts on foreign populations), the end result is kind of ironic... The death and misery that will result from funding changes in things like PEPFAR, USAID, US funding contributions to various UN programs, refugee programs, etc. will far surpass anything happening in Gaza. Nevermind the incredible economic impacts (and very real resulting human consequences) of tariffs on people in so-called "shithole countries" - like me.

And that's not even mentioning the totally foreseeable domestic consequences that US voters are now seeing.

So tell me again how choosing not to vote in the US presidential election was a morally sound choice?

yeah i can see you went to speculation real fast.

And he certainly wouldn't have done anything to help home prices. If he felt Iran was close to a bomb, he certainly would have bombed Tehran. Him or Kamala. Hell, Kamala's signature kitchen table policy was a bone-headed plan to offer a large tax credit to first-time home buyers. Except that would have done nothing except bid property prices even higher.

None of these are "objectively true facts." This is speculation.

Maybe Kamala's house buying plan would have driven up prices a bit. But unless it somehow drove up the costs of all houses by the amount of "free" money, then it still would have been effective for its purpose; getting a house for a first time buyer. You don't need the same type of help when switching houses.

The only true fact you have is about Israel.

Liberals piss me off more because I feel like they should know better. They certainly act like they do.