This is something that weighs heavily on my mind. I am as progressive as people come. Online surveys say that I am more of a Green Party supporter than a Democratic Party supporter. But I am not idealistic. Rather, I am pragmatic. I know that Hillary Clinton is not my ideal candidate, but she has a good chance at winning and Jill Stein none. I choose Clinton because the idea of getting some progressive ideas to become reality is better than getting NO progressive ideas to become reality. Think about it. Wouldn't it be better to have some than none at all?

Have you noticed that the majority of Stein voters are white? I am not saying that all are. Most are. And they seem very angry. They all claim that they are going to "vote their conscience" because Clinton is too hawkish, or Clinton is no better than Trump (really?), or whatever. In my mind as a person of color, these are people who would not lose much if Donald Trump were president. But if you are a person of color, LGBTQ, or otherwise different, you stand to lose a lot. Trump has promised that. If you are a person of color, you DO NOT have the luxury of "voting your conscience" because you know full well your vote affects you directly.

If you are still "voting your conscience", you may sleep better at night, but be aware that you are behaving unethically. Philosophers have written about the ethics of voting in the same way. Voting is actually not a personal act. It's a very public act because your vote affects the public at large. If you "vote your conscience" and vote for a candidate with no chance of winning or doing anything for you, you are basically telling people of color and LGBTQ people that you don't care about them. You are telling them that you care more about yourself than those who may be harmed by your action. "Voting your conscience" is one of the most selfish actions you can take right now.