I quoted the article. The median age in gaza is estimated to be 18. Half of the population was not even born the last time there was an election. Consider hamas lost 3 of 5, it was neither a plurality. It's not about how liberals or conservatives lie, what was written is a lie.
A plurality of gazans did not vote for Hamas because half of them were not even yet born. They had no vote.
Unless I made a terrible copy/paste error, I 100% quoted the guardian article that we are discussing. In other words, "did you read the article?"
To your other point: The goal post is the statement (I'm paraphrasing here): "It was not a majority of Gazans that voted for Hamas, but instead a plurality". My rebuttal is that for sure half of the country did not vote for Hamas because the last election is before the median age of the country (half the country was not even born yet).
Could you explain how I shifted goal posts?
I think you might be assuming that we "know" without elections that the majority of the current population is "radicalized". The evidence of pluralities and majorities is given through elections, we don't have evidence for the current population. Maybe that is what you perceive as shifting the goal posts?
If you're going off of something other than elections as evidence for support of hamas at a plurality level of current Gazans - please share the data you are using to be "terrifi[ed] of .. what would be elected" (quoting you @nobodyandpround with slight paraphrase to make the grammar work). The population is roughly 2M people, it's difficult to get to any answer other than "we don't know" without a full blown and free election.
A plurality of gazans did not vote for Hamas because half of them were not even yet born. They had no vote.