They may have preferred the outcome where she won but that was never going to happen no matter how you voted. The possibility that your vote was the difference between Trump and Harris, on the other hand, was within the realm of possibility.
We need ranked choice voting. But at the moment we don’t have it.
It would have been amazing if you had an option of a third outcome, but the reality is you didn’t. Life is full of situations where you have to pick between things that are both distasteful. But the trolley problem illustrates that opting out to avoid it is not an option at much as you try to convince yourself that it is.
If you look at the dictionary definition, it means pretty much exactly the opposite of what you said. Also, the D party is not highly aligned with the definition of liberal, so you’re also wrong about it meaning always voting blue.
You could have voted for your next door neighbor too and told yourself you were voting against genocide, but you’d be wrong then too.
You didn’t support the third party’s chances of winning because there was no way that was going to ever happen in this election. Elections aren’t about voting for candidates as much as they are voting for outcomes.
The word liberal is not the insult you think it is.
So as they are being killed, they can think “well, zarkanian didn’t vote for the choice that might have improved my chances of not being killed, but at least it was a principled wrong choice”
Why on earth do you think Trump is going to result in the slaughter of fewer of those people?
The only two possible outcomes were
genocide
genocide plus fascism and other bad shit
By voting third party, you supported the latter.
Sure, killing the two party system is the long term solution, but this particular election was not the time.
Then why do you claim that liberal means blindly voting D no matter what? Your statements don’t seem consistent.