These aren't contractors. They're mercenaries.

Lol, sure man. Definitely no one ever makes an argument in an editorial. It's not possible as their opponent is not present, may not even read it, and frequently will not be allowed to publish a rebuttal to the same audience.

Arguments are about the audience, not the opponent. Making a straw man when your opponent is not present is the most common form of the fallacy. When they're there they might just say that's not what they're argument is.

Lol, what? Do you seriously think you cannot create a straw man argument in anything but direct debate? Sure Mr. Smartman.

Hint, logical fallacies are about the logic, not the debate.

Just because you feel like the straw men deserve it doesn't change that you're arguing with hypotheticals versions you've created instead of actual people.

You've literally defined the argument of an opposing group to look stupid so you can dunk on them. You're arguing with a straw man. This isn't even a critique of your rhetorical basis though, it's just normal Internet lameness.

It's a very American viewpoint to believe that sentiments just spring up organically with no influence from political leaders and their role in the whole process is to take opinion polls and only then decide what they believe.

Taking away the microphones of hate-mongers doesn't make hate cease to exist, but it pushes it back into the shadows and cuts off an avenue for it to breed. The US would be a less hateful and less fascist place if Donald Trump was in prison. Leaders can drive the conversation and mainstream fringe ideas. The Democratic establishment just chooses not to.

Yes, that's exactly what they're talking about and you're being extremely weird in making it a priority of discussion on something at best tangentially related.

It's just a straw man writ large because you're miffed at another online argument you had somewhere else.

New Zealand recently just punished three politicians harshly for doing the Haka. They were protesting a proposed law to strip special constitutional privileges for the Maori stemming from the original colonial treaties. Those old British colonizers were apparently too respectful to the rights of the indigenous people for modern conservatives.

Ro Khanna just voted against impeaching Donald Trump for dropping bombs on Iran for Israel.

Nuclear scientists, a.k.a. "civilians". They're bragging about a war crime.

Oh, he was saying things then too. He was one of the main spokespeople defending the genocide.

Biden is not a piece of shit

So someone who enables genocide is not, in your moral framework, a piece of shit. Full stop. Not even a "lesser evil" argument, just straight out not-evil.

Good that we've got that definitively stated.

State Department Spokesman. Not a policy maker, but he was definitely a significant person involved in providing cover for Israel's atrocities.

The question you're trying to dodge was "is Biden a piece of shit for enabling a genocide" not "is Trump worse".