Discussion about this post

User's avatar
TrackerNeil's avatar

I can understand where you are coming from, even though I take a different view. To me, voting is not a moral act, but a strategic one. I vote for the candidate most likely to get the nation where I think it should go. So my votes are not love letters but chess moves. I will sacrifice this or that piece if necessary to get to checkmate, because the priority is pinning the king and winning the board.

So I'll vote for Kamala Harris--indeed, I already have--and should she make it into the White House, I will push her administration for better gender policy.

(Admittedly. Trump being an egotistical, incurious, avaricious, unqualified lout made my decision even easier, but that's another matter.)

Expand full comment
PhDBiologistMom's avatar

“And all signs suggest that a Harris administration would just be more of the same.” Like her choice of running mate? Minnesota may be the one state that rivals California on the gender insanity front.

Should she win, our best hope is for gridlock (a Republican-controlled Senate). Not for the first time am I grateful for the checks and balances in our system, such as they still are.

Expand full comment
160 more comments...

No posts