I know this doesn't apply to non-Democrats like Ms. Sawant, but a curious aspect of the tactics employed by the progressive left in support of Gaza is that it is not transactional ("support a ceasefire or we won't vote for you") but rather punitive ("you have failed to support Gaza so we are not voting for you"). In the latter case, that theory suggests the Democrats losing next month will show that the pro-Gaza coalition is not to be messed with and the Democrats will need to appeal to them more to get them on side in four years. What happens in between, a price to pay for failing to support their priorities.

The truth is actually more cut and dry, and Sawant is kinda a good example. Most if not all the people who are the most outspoken about NOT voting Kamala because of Biden's Policy, were NEVER going to vote for her. There was literally nothing Kamala could do to earn their votes. Kamala could announce that once elected she will remove all funding to Israel and make a Binational state and they STILL would say "Little late for that". Its all optics to most people. Thankfully they represent only like 25% of the Actual Pro-Palestine Left, while most others are rational

I know this doesn't apply to non-Democrats like Ms. Sawant, but a curious aspect of the tactics employed by the progressive left in support of Gaza is that it is not transactional ("support a ceasefire or we won't vote for you") but rather punitive ("you have failed to support Gaza so we are not voting for you"). In the latter case, that theory suggests the Democrats losing next month will show that the pro-Gaza coalition is not to be messed with and the Democrats will need to appeal to them more to get them on side in four years. What happens in between, a price to pay for failing to support their priorities. From my experiences in these movements over the past seven/eight months or so I think it's a little more complex. The Abandon Harris (formerly Abandon Biden) campaign is more or less like you describe, and is at least trying to funnel people towards the Green Party as the alternative. On the other hand, though, there's the No Votes for Genocide campaign, which I'd argue is taking a more transactional perspective. The NVFG campaign statement starts out with "We will withhold our vote from Vice President Kamala Harris and all Congressional Democratic Party candidates on the ballot this November 5th unless there is an arms embargo and permanent ceasefire imposed on Israel", and ends with "Our demand is simple: our vote is earned by a restoration of the rule of law, the delivery of an arms embargo, and a permanent ceasefire." I'd say this is largely due to the NVFG campaign emerging out of a wing of the Uncommitted campaigns, which also organizing with the transactional argument in mind, whereas the Abandon Biden/Harris campaign, at least in my experience, stayed somewhat aloof from Uncommitted.