In recent months, as food insecurity has intensified and warnings of famine in parts of Gaza have grown, the tone of criticism in the American capital has shifted. Phrases that once cautiously spoke of the “unintended consequences of war” have given way to more explicit statements about deliberate obstacles to humanitarian aid. Although this transformation is not uniform or universal, it is transforming the language used to describe the crisis as much as it is changing the American political landscape. American public opinion, however, shows a different direction, slowly but steadily. Voter preferences are leaning towards a ceasefire and unrestricted access to humanitarian aid.