Using “harm-reduction” to unite progressives against Trump

A general sentiment among Hillary supporters is that voting for a third-party presidential candidate, in defiance of the Democratic Party and its nominee, is socially irresponsible because it could lead to a Trump presidency. However, one must understand and accept that not all progressives will be voting for Hillary in a collective effort to stop Trump. Therefore, attempting to convince steadfast third-party supporters to back Hillary — especially if done in a patronizing way — may be of little avail in the end. Nevertheless, there’s still a way to make up for losing votes to a third-party candidate.

Here’s where harm reduction, a life-saving public health strategy, may come in handy.

An article published in the Paediatrics & Child Health journal describes harm reduction “as a strategy directed toward individuals or groups that aims to reduce the harms associated with certain behaviours.” For instance, “harm reduction accepts that a continuing level of drug use…in society is inevitable and defines objectives as reducing adverse consequences.” As such, people who inject drugs are respectfully given access to clean syringes and needles so as not to use contaminated equipment that would increase their chances of acquiring HIV or other infections. Now let’s put this into the context of voting behavior.

It’s inevitable that some progressives will be voting for a third-party presidential candidate in the November elections. So, in order to reduce potential harm — namely, Trump winning — Hillary supporters need to ensure that a vote from an undecided Republican goes to the left of Trump for every progressive vote gone to the left of Hillary. Call it the 2theLeft^2 strategy (inspired by Beyoncé’s song, “Irreplaceable”). At the very least this would help maintain a steady stock of votes for Hillary despite any outflow of progressive votes. Additionally, adopting this framework may relieve tension among progressives by refocusing efforts on garnering support from the conservative side.

Though third-party candidates appeal to me in the abstract, I’ll be supporting Hillary because I believe she has the strongest shot at defeating Trump at this point. Regardless, together we are stronger, especially when we can agree to disagree on our candidate of choice while agreeing on a common objective: defeating Trump.