I want to address the "lesser of two evils" argument, because I think it obscures an important truth here.

Hillary Clinton does not fit my definition of "evil." Evil, as I understand it, involves maliciously inflicting pain or being willfully negligent of the harm you are doing. I have not seen anything, any evidence or sign, that Hillary Clinton has done, or will do, either of those things either in her professional or personal life, except to the extent that we are all human and sometimes do bad things. But there is no pattern of bad behavior, no evidence of commitment to bad behavior, and the bad behavior we're talking about is not more, in frequency or intensity, than that of a normal human being.

This choice cannot be for the lesser of two evils, because Hillary Clinton is not evil.

Donald Trump, on the other hand, is. There is copious evidence of his willful negligence, and he has acted openly in ways which are maliciously hurtful. As a presidential candidate, he is unique in my lifetime; uniquely unfit to be president, uniquely dangerous if elected. He demonstrates the danger of calling your opponents dangerous, or fascist, because when an actual dangerous fascist like Trump comes along, people may be desensitized to the language.

But I'm sure I don't need to tell you that, I'm only mentioning it so we can be clear that the choice here is not to vote for the lesser of two evils, but rather, to support an ordinary - and by all accounts hardworking, responsive, and passionate -- politician rather than an ignorant, unstable fascist. It is the choice between ordinary and evil, not between two evils.

One of these two people will be the next president of the United States, barring a sudden death. If you vote in a swing state like Virginia, your vote will help determine which of these two options it is. The question, then, isn't whether you SHOULD vote for Clinton in a swing state - you obviously should - but whether you CAN vote her - whether morally and ethically you can make this choice. Can you vote for her and still be voting your conscience?

First, I want to point out that your choice of president says nothing about whom you vote for downballot. You can help defeat Trump while also giving support for a party other than the Democrats. In fact, actually winning a race - congressional, local, whatever - will be of far more value to the Greens or Libertarians than your vote for President. So this choice for president says very little about your overall support for the Democratic party platform, and does not mean that other parties you support will be harmed.

Can you vote for Hillary Clinton? The case for voting for her starts with this: she has had experience and success in positions of government leadership. We do not have to think that success was total to note that if we look historically at the records of senators and secretaries of state, nothing sticks out as being particularly or unusually disastrous, malicious, or negligent. To the extent that she has made mistakes with bad consequences, those consequences have been larger simply because her position was more powerful, not because the magnitude of her mistakes was greater.

Second, she has demonstrated a temperament consistent with responsible leadership. She remains calm under tremendous pressure. She seeks advice from experts and makes decisions based on that advice. She takes the time to work hard to master details. She understands the gravity of the responsibility she has been charged with and she demonstrates that understanding by acting carefully and constructively in her dealings with other people. Contrary to the portrait her enemies have tried to paint of her over the years, she is not especially dishonest. In fact, different organizations that pay attention to this stuff have said that she is more honest than any other candidate. When she made promises as a senatorial candidate, she tried to make those promises a reality as a senator. Over the years, she may have given different opinions, but the question is if, whether elected, she will make her best effort to make good on the promises she has made in this election, and the evidence is that she will.

Third, some of the specific policies she advocates will help people live fuller, happier lives and reduce income inequality. She favors repealing Citizens United, free public tuition for families making less than $125,000 a year, raising the minimum wage to $12-15, and increasing regulation on banks. While none of these seem like a total solution to me, they represent progress towards that solution. They will make things better.

Fourth, where I absolutely cannot and do not agree with her and think her policies will make things worse -- I'm thinking primarily of foreign policy, but also fracking etc., I have to admit that her approach and ideas are not outside the mainstream. Most people believe that violence is a solution to some of the problems of the world. So does Hillary Clinton. I do not. But her advocacy of violence is measured, not total. Many thoughtful, intelligent people have similar views, even if I do not. Many people believe that there must be a balance between finding new unrenewable sources of energy and transitioning to renewable energy. I do not. I think we need to leave it in the ground. But again, this disagreement, regardless of the consequences, does not mean Clinton is evil even though I think these policies will cause harm. I have no reason to believe that she advocates these policies out of malice or negligence; she simply has a different opinion and point of view than I do, and her views are widely shared.

We all have many principles we would like to uphold, many values we would like to embody through our actions. The choices we make are a balancing act because these values and principles are not always commensurable. Sometimes we sacrifice long term goals for short term success, sometimes we do the opposite. And often we make a compromise in order to preserve some of what is best from each approach. In this case, I think that means voting for Hillary Clinton in Virginia, because she will do some good and Donald Trump would be a disaster. She is not the lesser of two evils. She is the greater of two candidates, and you can still support third parties while voting for her. A compromise is available.

Dang that was long.