You ignored or missed the main point of my comment. Do you think the entire world ends in 2027?
I admitted the country would be worse off between 2024-2028. But you entirely ignored the idea that we might get some concession from politicians if it’s clear to them they lost due to being pro-genocide.
Do you think that’s literally impossible? That even in a world where it’s abundantly clear that being pro-genocide lost them 2024, that they’d definitely stay pro-genocide in 2028?
It’s not clear what the better outcome is, unless you can only see 3 years out. If you’re able to look 5+ years out, then a Republican winning in 2024 could mean an anti-genocide Democrat president in 2028 that wouldn’t have won otherwise.
You really think “part of nature” is a good argument for if something is morally acceptable? You can’t think of anything that happens in the natural world that we choose not to do as civilized moral agents because it’d be wrong to do?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature