1: It is rarely true, even within a limited area. For example, Biden's record with women is troubling, both personally and politically. But it is not remotely as bad, and certainly not recently as bad, as Trump's attitude and policies w/regard to personal choice.

2: Even if within a limited parameter it is true - let us say that we can genuinely PROVE that Biden's approach to, say, social care, is no better than Trump's, there will always be sufficient other areas where he IS clearly more progressive that the localized argument is weak.

3: Most importantly, such a 'The Democratic/Labour candidate is no better than the Republican/Tory candidate' argument is getting in the way of the more honest, and materially provable argument, which is the one so rarely elucidated and the proximate inspiration for this thread.

The REAL reason for persistently not voting for, criticising, + even voting/campaigning against centrist candidates from supposedly left-leaning parties, is that such candidates can never radically change the status quo, since their whole ideology is based on accommodating it.

So left-wingers in the Labour Party or the Democratic Party should not waste time attempting to argue that 4 more years of Trump is somehow better than 4 years of Biden. It is an absurd and easily-refuted argument.

What they should be doing is making the long-term case. Is 4, or 8 years, of a status-quo-accepting candidate, followed inevitably by many years of right-wing candidates, a price we can afford to pay, in the face of climate and social collapse?

In other words - yes, Biden is better than Trump. But if the DNC/Labour Party could FINALLY be convinced that genuinely left candidates are the ONLY way they can guarantee full turn-out, then 4 more years of Trump doesn't have to be compared with 4+years of Biden.