Would they, though?

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/12/05/congress-ev-chargers-billions-00129996

A little older, but gives more of an overview. A lot of it is tied up in state reluctance to implement.

You have fun in the world where “Do you support Israel’s current offensive” is the same as “Do you support Israel” or “Do you support continued aid to Israel”

Do you… do you NOT know that 22% is less than 78%?

Or do you think that “Biden is doing just the right amount of help towards Israel” means… support for Palestine?

The 52-22 you cited was whether Israel’s conduct was too far, not whether they supported Israel or Israeli aid in the conflict - as the other charts clearly demonstrate. But uh, you have fun disproving yourself with your own source.

From your own source, man

He would have instantly been viewed favorably on this issue and likely wouldn’t have tanked his polling.

1. His polling didn’t tank in tandem with the Gaza genocide.

2. Most Americans are either in support or ambivalent towards Israel in this conflict.

3. Every poll I’ve seen asks the most important issue to voters, and it’s always the economy, with the Israel-Palestine conflict coming in near the bottom.

Israel is committing a genocide, to be clear. The moral thing is to, at minimum, stop supporting their genocide. But that’s not the same as saying that the Palestinian genocide is what brought Biden’s poll numbers down, or that it’s a silver bullet (or even an unambiguous net gain) electorally speaking.

People want their side to be all good and the opposition to be all bad.

I mean, the opposition is all bad in this case, but one’s own side is rarely all good. People more often engage in hagiography than analysis.