If I was on the left and leaning to not voting because of gripes with Harris on one single issue... I'd certainly rather be dealing with holding accountable the Harris administration over a Trump administration over the next 4 years.

That's leaving aside the fact that it's always easier to break something than maintain or build upon it.

I'd certainly trade one issue where there may be a constant on (there isn't) for wins on a range of other important issues, as well.

All due respect, you didn't answer the question.

Pyrrhic victories are meaningless. In the end, who actually followed through with change?

Obama himself, the first black President, sympathized with you that change never seems to come quickly enough. Partly because people like Trump are so damaging and disruptive to progress. In their absence, we'd be far more free to advance more quickly. Alas, that's just dreaming.

So in the end, it was those liberals in Congress who passed the monumental change. And without question, MLK had more allies among them than he did the Confederate successors in the KKK, obviously.

In the end, some change is better than no change is better than regression through entropy.

Yet for all of MLK's grievances, who ultimately provided the pathway to lawful change in Congress in 1964?

I hear this a lot but:

• I'd argue that driving up the support for Harris in the popular vote is critical. If Trump wins Electorally, it's still rhetorically important to stifle the notion of a mandate by not letting him get 50%.

• Blue states have fallen in the past or can shift purple if the line isn't held.

That said, I'm glad you're not in a swing state at least.

Reminder that it was Biden who just recently issued a forceful formal apology to the indigenous people of America. GOP didn't it. Trump mocked it by having a rally on their sacred grounds no less.

I'm glad you're willing to throw that all away, but you're also throwing it away for my family, too... So thanks, I guess...?

And for what? To get Trump elected? You do understand mathematically you're supporting Trump's chances, correct?

Let's also not forget that if Harris is complicit in genocide in Gaza, then you're not voting for Harris means you condone and are complicit on Russia's genocide in Ukraine.

Edit: Bernie Sanders says the choice is clear; to vote for Harris despite Gaza.

What's funny is their action here means they're condoning genocide in Ukraine.

He's an anti-immigration latino immigrant who at least claims doesn't support the Confederacy.

Respectfully, what you wrote doesn't change the binary choice at play:

Trump or Harris will become President no matter what you do.

You could at least help my daughter, my mother, my sister by ensuring the one who supports women's rights gets elected? Who supports LGBTQ+? Who supports climate change initiatives? That's even pretending Harris is equally bad on Gaza or that things couldn't obviously get worse for Palestinians.

Either Trump will win, or Harris will win. Choose one to help.

Clearly, obviously, Harris stands a better chance of helping Palestinians than does Trump.

They're one of those, "Nice guy... Little on the dumb side" kind of people.

They truly have no foresight and no capacity to see in the rear-view mirror. They've fallen prey to the manosphere youtube / twitter / social media fake news and have been told that any outside news is nonsense. They truly live in an alternate universe where Trump kicks ass and Democrats are the bad guys.

Legit, he completely fell hook, line, and sinker for the "Democrats were the Slavers, so that means they're bad today" thing.

I talk to this Trump supporter from time to time and ask why he doesn't trust all these groups but singularly trusts a conman like Trump. Nothing substantive. It just boils down to blind religious faith. A cult.

America: "Can you hold until after this election? You'll have your answer then."