nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnddaehgu3wwp6kyqpqljfe28dzrjqnzfuan2g6dmkczmtqhnnp2ptlvk2j9y82gkks4zzs3ry63h (nprofile…y63h)
The Democratic Party has added an extra dimension to the trolley problem: by opting for their (less harmful) path, you set them on a cycle where they come back around and run over (the fewer) new people again and again. Because they've decided it's what benefits them the most somehow, and they believe that their voters will tolerate it because it's the less harmful path.
So for some voters, refusing to vote for the Democratic candidate may have been their last ditch effort to force reform in a badly broken party, and to hopefully put an end to the situation where their only choices are genocide, or more genocide + a lot of other really bad stuff.
And a central concept of the trolley problem isn't logical but rather psychological, with a strong emotional component: some people simply cannot force themselves to suck it up and make the difficult choice when it results in serious harm. Explaining that they're wrong isn't going to change their behavior. But that behavior can be accounted for and accommodated if desired, eg by opposing genocide instead of providing material support for it.
I would have voted for Harris if my vote had the slightest chance of mattering, because Trump is terrifying. But the prospect of a Democratic Party that is not accountable to its voters is also terrifying, because they're the only chance we've got for necessary reform in the US political system. Without that reform, I simply don't see how the system can ultimately avoid collapse.