And after crunching the numbers, the organization sees warning signs in the form of soft support for Biden in the 2024 electorate.
HRC estimates that this year there will be 75 million “equality voters” — who vote based on support for LGBTQ rights — up from 62 million in 2020 and 52 million in 2016. But the group says one-third of them aren’t a lock for Biden. In the six key swing states, hundreds of thousands are “at risk of not voting,” and another group of hundreds of thousands of voters are what HRC refers to as “double doubters” who will likely defect to a third party, according to data HRC shared with NBC News.
I’m criticizing them not for who they vote for but who they endorse. That’s just to say that who you vote for doesnt need to match who you publicly endorse. Its possible to vote for the lesser of two evils and not to publicly support him.
That said, Jill Stein and Cornel West are also people that you can endorse and/or vote for. As well as “none” for one or both.
Pragmatically, they’re endorsing the lesser of two evils to encourage people to vote for the lesser of two evils. They think Biden being in office will be much better for LGBT people than Trump will be, to the point that it’s worth it to spend millions to encourage votes for Biden. Third parties are very unlikely to win, so it’s not worth it; they could spend millions on some other project to more directly help LGBT people.
If you think it’s OK to vote for the lesser of two evils, then I don’t see why you draw the line at endorsing the lesser of two evils.
The ethical thing to do is not to endorse someone who is funding a genocide, no matter how much he helps your marginalized group
But why not apply that logic to “The ethical thing is not to vote for someone who is funding a genocide, no matter how much he helps your marginalized group”?