Readers respond to an article by our interns disagreeing with The Nation’s endorsement of Kamala Harris for president.
I write in response to “Kamala Harris Does Not Deserve The Nation’s Endorsement” [TheNation.com, October 25] by The Nation’s interns. I am probably about the same age as them, and I passionately disagree. The root of our conflict seems to be this: They view voting in a vacuum, as an expression of their personal ethics. It is not.
Someone will be elected, and a person of conscience should choose. Either Kamala Harris or Donald Trump will stand below the Capitol Dome on January 20. And these folks—progressives(!)—seem to not see the difference. Or they just don’t care. They pay lip service: “We know that a second Trump presidency would be a disaster, but we believe that we cannot vote our way out of this genocide.” That is effectively support for Trump. We think he would be terrible but aren’t willing to vote against him, they say.
This is the kind of Trump supporter that really drives me up the wazoo. The kind who knows he would be worse. Worse for women, worse for people of color, worse for LGBTQ people, and worse for protesters. Millions who would be harmed by a Trump administration. Friends and neighbors.
I know that the interns believe that Harris is bad. They are deeply, profoundly saddened by the war in Gaza. As am I. But the least among us, living right next to you, are relying on you. The women and children of Gaza need protecting. But so do the women and children of America.
Mark Kliesenoberlin, ohThe writer is a student at Oberlin College.
As a Palestinian American and a Nation reader since I was in my 20s, I’ve never been prouder of this publication. The inspirational editorial that it just published by its interns is the best I’ve read anywhere on the subject.
It sickens me that my own tax dollars are being spent by Kamala Harris and Joe Biden to bomb babies and murder mothers in Palestine. Sponsoring Israeli state terror, genocide, and ethnic cleansing is appropriate for a war criminal but not a candidate for the presidency of the United States.
Harris’s reckless, stubborn, and irresponsible decision to turn her back on her base and to the millions of “Uncommitted” voters, all of whom could be her supporters, is outrageous and short-sighted. She has proven that her moral and political judgment and her leadership are all horribly defective and disgraced herself in the eyes of history.
Harris will have no one but herself to blame if she loses.
Tom J. Wrightoakland, caThe writer is a union representative, political activist, and commentator.
The interns’ position, while thoroughly understandable, as it is based on complete empathy for the thousands of victims in Israel’s unwarranted and immoral aggression in a grave overreaction to the Hamas attack last October 7, nonetheless shows a fatal naïveté. It fails to even mention, let alone take into account in its moral calculus, the brutal attack by Hamas that provoked the Israeli response. It’s obvious that the interns don’t know what the word “genocide” means and are prone to hyperbole. War crimes is far more accurate, for which Israel has been justifiably charged by the World Court, with far more charges to come. I firmly believe that Israel should face the full consequences for any and all war crimes they have committed, as should Hamas.
In the coming election, the fate of our democracy and fundamental civil rights are on the ballot. The conservative architects of Project 2025 are scheming to institutionalize Donald Trump’s authoritarian vision across all levels of government if he should win.
We’ve already seen events that fill us with both dread and cautious optimism—throughout it all, The Nation has been a bulwark against misinformation and an advocate for bold, principled perspectives. Our dedicated writers have sat down with Kamala Harris and Bernie Sanders for interviews, unpacked the shallow right-wing populist appeals of J.D. Vance, and debated the pathway for a Democratic victory in November.
Stories like these and the one you just read are vital at this critical juncture in our country’s history. Now more than ever, we need clear-eyed and deeply reported independent journalism to make sense of the headlines and sort fact from fiction. Donate today and join our 160-year legacy of speaking truth to power and uplifting the voices of grassroots advocates.
Throughout 2024 and what is likely the defining election of our lifetimes, we need your support to continue publishing the insightful journalism you rely on.
Thank you,
The Editors of The Nation
By refusing to endorse Ms. Harris, the interns are playing directly into the hands of Donald Trump. In solely blaming President Biden and Vice President Harris for all the death and destruction in Gaza and in the surrounding region, they completely exclude Trump, as well as ignore his future role should he become president—which, as he himself said in plain English, is to give Netanyahu the “green light” to “finish the job.” What do you think that means? Real genocide, maybe?
I am entirely in favor of stopping all further arms sales of any sort to Israel, and, if need be, all further aid, shifting US monetary assistance to Gaza for humanitarian purposes. In the past several years, in my role as a member of our denominations’ investment board, I—and we—have voted on and approved a policy that forbids our investment broker to invest any of the roughly $10 million in our investment fund in any Israeli company that serves its military or promotes further illegal settlements in the West Bank.
The interns clearly have no idea about diplomacy. Their position glaringly shows the natural ignorance of inexperience.
Thomas J. Porterminnetonka, mnThe writer is a psychologist and a minister.
I am writing to express my gratitude to the Nation interns for their bold stand and evocative appeal to reject Kamala Harris on her genocidal record. I share their sentiment, and will cast my vote for Jill Stein.
David Gurarieshaker heights, ohThe writer is a professor at Case Western Reserve University.
Though The Nation’s interns deny their naïveté, in America, politics are zero-sum, either/or. Not supporting one candidate helps the other. As such, Americans—certainly those interested in progress—must view politics through the lens of better and worse, holding fast to the creed that progress through politics comes slowly from the combined efforts and—yes—votes of interested parties.
Had earlier progressives withheld their support of Abraham Lincoln over his views on Native Americans, abolition might have taken decades longer. Had earlier progressives withheld their votes from Franklin Delano Roosevelt over internment, America’s most significant expansion of social services would never have happened. Nearly 50 million Americans have healthcare because progressives did not withhold their support of Barack Obama over his unwillingness to support same-sex marriage. These men had grave moral failings and made decisions that caused real harm—failings that history rightly condemns. But progress relied on even the most progress-minded among us to choose better over worse.
The election before us is no different, except that what is at stake is nothing less than our very democracy, with it the progress already made and the ability to make progress still needed. Nor, tangentially, is it clear how helping Donald Trump—a man who used “Palestinian” as an insult—would help ease the suffering Gaza.
Get unlimited access: $9.50 for six months.
Once again, politics calls on interested parties to choose progress over perfection, recognizing that withholding support from the better candidate only empowers the worse. Past progressives avoided the petulant instinct to demand ideological purity at the expense of achievable progress. If today’s progressives can’t do the same, we will lose everything we’ve fought for.
Itai Grofmandurham, ncThe writer is a student at the Duke University School of Law.
I agree with these younger journalists. But as an old guy, I come down on the side of making or trying to make the most realistic decision.
With Harris, if elected, we can organize and put tremendous pain on her. I regret to have to say that, but we have very many hard-headed Democrats who do not think well. In my 50-some years in politics, I have learned that many Dems usually too often do not learn and can only be taught the hard way.
With Trump, if elected, you can make a deal with him. And by the time goodbyes are said and we all leave the room, he will be breaking the deal and laughing that we are such suckers.
With Stein, if elected, we might be in a better place. But realistically, that is not going to happen.
If you live in the swing states of Wisconsin, Nevada, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Michigan, Arizona, or Georgia and have not yet voted, vote for Harris and give democracy a chance.
If you live in a deep red or a deep blue state, vote for Stein and help the Green Party build power.
Having done thousands of doors as a candidate, I have concluded that nearly all Americans want to use “Oh, so you are a Republican” or “Oh, so you are a Democrat” to help them make their decision. They are just too busy, and many don’t have very much grounding of politics. Thus they conclude that Dr. Stein or other Greens cannot yet make it in our political system. Thus they go with what Mom and Dad went for one party or the other.
We in America are in a mess. Trump may attempt coup #2 regardless of what happens on November 5. We must try to save our democracy (as bad as it is), and that can only be done with a Harris victory. And then through nationwide organizing, put pressure and pain on the winners to force changes in the rotten political system that has pushed us to this cliff.
Buzz Davistucson, azThe writer is a member Veterans for Peace in Tucson.
Our ReadersOur readers often submit letters to the editor that are worth publishing, in print and/or online.