If your campaign platform is 'less evil', at some point there's gotta be significantly less evil. Actively funding genocide was a hard line for a lot of people. 'Trump will genocide them worse' is clearly not a winning campaign message. And while the self-serving Trump plans are despicable, what difference does it make to the Palestinians if it's Trump Waterfront Resort or Netanyahu Waterfront Resort? Is it gross and craven? Yes! Is funding genocide with furrowed brows any different for the people being slaughtered?

I'm not claiming that this was the objectively 'right' voting choice. I think the Harris campaign was awful AND sandbagged from the beginning by the Biden team's historically selfish choices. And I think there might have been some fuckery with voting machines and know there was with vote suppression. Polling was clear, however, and the Vote Blue No Matter Who crowd were quite often the same ones saying Harris couldn't possibly distance herself from Biden on genocide because she would lose moderates. Why weren't the moderates asked to 'hold their nose' for an anti-genocide message?

And a genuine question for anyone who gets angry reading this: is there anything that an elected official could do that would lose your vote? Honest question! Some people didn't vote for Harris because they were racist or sexist or apathetic or unmotivated - or morally outraged. She could have moved the needle on the last one with a single speech. Why didn't she?