The choice is demonstrably not binary. The very fact that many Americans are refusing to vote for genocide is what made the Democrats gesture towards a ceasefire in the first place. If you fall in line and promise Kamala your vote regardless of any action against the genocide, you are telling the Democrats to keep killing Palestinians because that issue is not important enough to sway you. If you make a racket, protest, and tell as many people as possible not to support the genocide, you are actually providing the Dems with a positive case to abandon support for 'Israel.'

This line of thinking is probably a bit questionable to you, because it's just not consistent with history (if you are familiar) where American imperialist policy continues despite domestic unrest. We'd like to think that our actions to hold politicians accountable are pushing them towards making the world better. But in reality, as long as capital is the driving force behind American Foreign Policy, any capitulations toward the working class are only temporary compromises to be taken away as soon as possible. Divesting away from participating in elections for bourgeois parties is the ideologically consistent move for communists, because participating in them grants legitimacy to a 'democratic' process that is more concerned with absorbing the energy that would go into effecting change, rather than being the vehicle for effecting change. The pressure we exert on the DNC to change course vis a vis 'Israel' is only going to cause, at most, a temporary shift in tactics, while maintaining the strategic focus on ethnic cleansing to secure a future for America's unsinkable aircraft carrier.

Do notice, however, that both analyses give us a very simple prescription: you are, under no circumstances, to vote for a candidate that is giving support to a genocide.