A Progressive Case for Kamala Harris
From a progressive perspective, no candidate has earned my vote. From a strategic perspective, Kamala Harris is the correct choice. Most importantly, my vote is being cast not in resignation but with hope for a better future.
The Candidates
Here’s why none have earned the progressive vote:
1. Harris: On several issues, Harris falls short for progressives. On climate, she supports fracking. On immigration, she has adopted Republican framing on a number of issues. On trans issues, she has waffled as to whether people should be able to get gender-affirming care. Most devastatingly, she hasn’t signaled any break with Biden’s sponsorship of Israel’s murderous ethnic cleansing against the Palestinians or the strengthening of ties with the UAE despite their sponsorship of the Rapid Support Forces racist extermination campaign in Sudan.
2. Trump: On every issue, Trump falls short for progressives. He will not be better on Palestine or Sudan. His contempt for Palestinians was on full display when he used Palestinian as a slur while debating Biden. And on climate (he thinks it isn’t real), immigration (his campaign is based around racist fear-mongering), and LGBTQ issues (he plans to pass a series a discriminatory laws essentially outlawing being transgender), he will be infinitely worse. Not to mention the assault he intends to launch on women’s rights and social services like the Affordable Care Act.
3. Third Parties: Some third-party candidates might be appealing because they have rightfully condemned Israel’s campaign against the Palestinians. However, they have failed to offer a viable plan away from our electoral system which creates a two-party duopoly. Without systemic change, such as the adoption of ranked-choice voting, they will be forever relegated to spoiler votes. Jill Stein as the most prominent third-party candidate fails progressives because she is unwilling to condemn Putin’s violence against Ukrainians and China’s deadly persecution of the Uyghur people.
The Situation
For issues like climate and LGTBQ rights where Harris’s position is significantly better than Trump’s, you can persuasively point out the gap between the two. For other issues, like Sudan and Palestine, the situations are already so horrific, that even though Trump will be worse, it’s hard to argue persuasively for Harris from a progressive stance. Given the candidates will either keep the status quo or make it worse, in effect, the rights of Palestinians and other vital issues are simply not on the ballot in any meaningful, direct way.
You might want to punish Harris as a result. Or it could be that she has crossed a red line that you cannot countenance. I understand this impulse. But I would argue, since none of the candidates are worthy, that it is best to shift your focus away from them entirely and to the people that are suffering at home and abroad. Don’t ask, “Which candidate deserves my vote?” Ask, “How can I create a better future with my vote?” Or, put a different way, “Which candidate will create a better environment for progressives to succeed over the long-term?
The Path Forward
The answer to this question is Kamala Harris for at least four key reasons:
1. Democracy: Trump wants to overturn democracy and, thanks to Project 2025, he has a detailed plan to do so. The fight for democracy under a Trump presidency would almost certainly take center-stage and make it that much harder to fight for other causes.
2. Education: Republicans want to gut funding for public education. They don’t want to teach about the importance of diversity. They want to make our schools and colleges harder to access for low-income students. They want to make higher education harder for all of us to access because educated people tend to be more liberal.
3. The Courts: Under the first Trump presidency, Republicans were extremely successful at packing the courts. Under a second Trump presidency, they would cement their stranglehold. Changing laws to support progressive causes would basically become impossible. For example, with the Supreme Court’s Repeal of the Chevron Doctrine, it has become significantly more difficult to enforce new and existing laws that protect the environment and the health of Americans.
4. Unions: Biden is, arguably, the most pro-union president since FDR. It is reasonable to assume that Kamala will continue many of his policies. Unions can serve as a vital source of progressive power. For example, “more than half of organized labor in the US is part of a union that has called for a permanent ceasefire in Gaza.”
The Future
The journalist Karen Attiah writes that America’s inaction with respect to Jamal Khashoggi, the journalist brutally murdered by Saudi Arabia, “explains America’s and its allies’ indifference to crushing the lives of ordinary people.” The slaughter of innocents in Palestine and Sudan are, sadly, par for the course when it comes to US foreign policy. But I hope that these deaths can be the start of a turning point.
American’s increasing awareness of the suffering Israel inflicts on Palestinians, combined with the knowledge that justifiable outrage over this could cost Harris the election, creates space for a vital new narrative. We must make people aware that not only is US foreign policy disastrous because of the murder it enables abroad, but because its indifference threatens the United States itself. And not only over Palestine. Our foreign policy helped destabilize Central America creating the current crisis in migration. Fear-mongering over people fleeing the violence caused by this destabilization is an essential part of Trump’s campaign. Suffering does not respect borders. For the reasons outlined in the section above, a Harris presidency creates the best conditions for building bases of power and spreading this message.
So, I will vote for Kamala Harris. Not because she or the Democrats deserve it. I don’t think they do. I will vote for Harris for all the innocents, present and future, at home and abroad, who deserve lives of dignity and freedom. I hope you will join me.
