Tim Walz makes direct appeal to conflicted Muslim voters

Not Democratic voters. What would please Republican psychopaths is irrelevant to the political positions of a Democratic candidate.

All Sunnis and all Shiites hate each other? Even unto death?

Well then they must be truely barbaric and therefore deserving of the decades of avarice inspired wrath meted out upon them by successive US governments and their proxy settler colony.

Not all of them all the time. Hamas are a bunch of radical Sunnis, who like Iran for example. However Al Qaeda and the Taliban really do hate Iran. Iran even told the US were to bomb Taliban positions, which was a big reason why the US could invade Afghanistan as easily as they did. Both Iran and the Taliban also fight the Islamic State.

The entire region is really complex and yes some Sunnis are going to cheer Iran being bombed, like the Saudis for example, others will not.

That she's not president right now is the benefit. She can say whatever she wants and skeptical people have no way of testing her sincerity. The problem with your examples are that they're entirely content free wishes for a better world. Those statements don't imply she might do something to try to enact this ideal world where the heartbreaking thing doesn't happen or that she would even consider doing anything to incentivize Netanyahu to make a deal.

The key to my proposed ambiguity is that there is an explicit acknowledgement that Netanyahu's far right government might be not only an obstacle to peace, but an obstacle that she might confront. Current statements are just the same things Biden is already saying.

She uses passive language when talking about the devastation in Gaza but direct language when talking about october 7. Even her 'concerned' language avoids even the implication that part of the suffering in Gaza is a direct result in Israel's extreme response and reckless bombing campaigns, let alone any indication that the ceasefire talks are stalling because Israel refuses to make any commitments to lasting peace.

Hell, even the US has said that they have had no intention of diplomacy with Hamas, affirming Israel's desire to eliminate them completely. It doesn't take a genius to see why there's been no ceasefire deal when the US and Israel both have publicly stated their intention to eliminate their negotiation partner.

No, Harris doesn't earn credit for sending thoughts and prayers like it's some unavoidable weather disaster.

It worked for LBJ, however.

So a candidate that openly supports Israel expects people to take her on faith that she will support those her party has supported killing.

AIPAC is "only" responsible for around $20 million in fundraising this cycle, I think it's more that she needs the support of her actual elected party members who are pro-israel

Then they made their choice. They chose the lobbyists.

You can talk about money equals votes all you want, but right now there's very direct evidence that her position is losing votes. No speculation on the power of ad campaigns or which wedge might be effective. There's an issue that's already losing votes and already being targeted by conservative money. And this whole premise of "do nothing, they'll come home" is based on everyone being able to recognize she's better for Palestinians except the Zionists. Because if they're not the lone idiots in this whole game, they already have reason to want her to lose. And the only reason they wouldn't already be putting all those resources against her is if THEY don't believe their money can win the election for Trump.

And even past all that, arguing "Democrats gotta do what the lobbyists want even if the party doesn't agree" is a position that itself is going to lose even more votes. It's feckless neoliberalism and "don't bother, the system is beyond the voters" all tied together with a nice little bow, presented as if that was supposed to motivate voters to knuckle-down and engage with a system you're claiming doesn't care about them and is incapable of acting in their interest. Because there's still going to be a weapons lobby and a Zionist lobby post election, and under this philosophy she's going to be beholden to them indefinitely because there's always going to be a next election for her or the party.

Protesting is becoming more criminalized under this admin. We just witnessed state violence against college students and protesters are getting hit with Rico charges. I wouldn't say they are more safe protesting under either admin.

"The American citizens should feel safe enough to ignore the issue because they are not impacted by it".

They can maybe singlehandedly win some House races. $14M is a lot of money there. You'll notice however that Ilhan Omar is still in Congress despite their opposition and Bernie Sanders, who's much more influential, has nothing at all to worry about. They accomplish a lot more by targeting a couple of already weakened reps and others getting scared than they ever could if they actually had to directly confront them. Their money isn't endless and is kind of an irrelevant amount when talking about the scale of a presidential race.

The fact that so many people refuse to recognize the chilling effect and implicit threat of AIPAC in the context of the election vis a vis “what you say about supporting Israel” continues to baffle me.

Oh, we're not. We see that the centrist wing of the party is fucking delighted to support genocide in exchange for AIPAC shoveling money at centrist challengers to progressive incumbents.

This is genocide, not just healthcare policy or something