I do not think there are any good choices in this election.

I could write 10,000 words on this subject, but instead I will limit myself to Winston Churchill’s “single sheet of paper” standard. Its brevity, I pray, will be indicative of clear thinking. Indeed, obfuscation is usually easier to hide in a wall of words.

Neither Kamala Harris nor Donald Trump, in my view, ought to be anywhere near the Oval Office. Yes, of course, one of those two will, when the votes are counted, become the next president of these United States. But I don’t see it as my duty, as a citizen, to give my affirmation to this choice on any grounds. I see such reasoning — be it based on policy preferences, or tactical stratagems, or philosophical arguments — to be unconvincing.

It’s true that Donald Trump would, on balance, advance a few more of my policy preferences, especially on restricting illegal immigration, than would Kamala Harris. But my preference for Trump’s policy agenda, such as it is, is not a slam dunk. Neither candidate has professed any interest whatsoever in taming the enormous and ever-growing national debt. Both candidates promise bigger government, more spending, and an always advancing and always more powerful executive. There’s no reason to believe, based on the evidence of his first term, that Trump could get Congress to pass the much-needed reforms into law that are necessary to put our country on a firmer footing. I don’t even believe that he’d try.

And while a Harris administration would undoubtedly find new and improved ways to get itself into all kinds of mischief, with divided government and Republican control of the Senate (which is quite likely), the country can survive a Harris presidency. I see very little chance that Kamala Harris, of all people, could bully or lead the Congress into packing the Supreme Court or advancing a full-throated progressive agenda. Harris presents a real danger to the republic. But that danger is mitigated by an accurate assessment of her political talents, which are lacking.

On foreign policy, Harris may be weak and untested, but Trump is erratic and intemperate. I am unconvinced that either option is markedly superior to the other, and while I am more inclined to support a potential Trump administration’s handling of the crisis in the Middle East, I think it’s more likely that I would support a Harris administration’s policy on Ukraine. And no, neither candidate gives me any sort of confidence that Communist Chinese aggression in the Taiwan Strait will be met with a cool head and an iron resolve.

Kamala Harris is, of course, no conservative. Her progressive ideology and philosophy must be opposed at every turn. But I also do not view a second Trump term as at all likely to persuade average, not-particularly-political Americans of the merits of conservatism, ordered liberty, limited government, and the rule of law. Already, under the influence of Donald Trump, we are seeing conservative principles and ideas — from a pro-life worldview to free markets and free trade to a confident pro-American engagement overseas — be progressively replaced by solipsism and contingent, short-sighted thinking masquerading as a coherent philosophy.

Finally, there is my oath. When I raised my right hand and became a commissioned officer in the United States Marines, I gave my word that I would “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic,” bearing “true faith and allegiance to the same.”

I make no accusation whatsoever against my colleagues or any American who may disagree with me here. I will not castigate the honor or good faith of any citizen in this matter. I can only say that, according to my lights and my conscience, I see Donald Trump’s attempt to steal the 2020 election by unilaterally rewriting the 1876 Electoral Count Act and the Twelfth Amendment to the Constitution as an assault on our constitutional order. Trump’s actions four years ago, shambolic and in some ways ridiculous as they might have been, were those of a would-be tyrant. If Trump had lost the election, left office gracefully, and run again this time around, I would have considered voting for him to stop a continuation of the Biden-Harris era, contingent of course on the reservations stated above. But after his mendacious lunge for power in 2020, after Trump’s lunatic post-election musings that the Constitution be suspended, an affirmative vote for Trump would, in my view, violate my oath. I decline to do that.

Regardless, however, I feel confident that our country will survive and, yes, thrive no matter which party wins this election and no matter which of these two candidates ends up sitting in Lincoln’s chair. That’s not to say that our country will not suffer from the outcome of this election. Poor choices almost always lead to suffering. Americans are not, just now, sending our nation’s best to Washington. But our country is more than the presidency. America is more, and much greater, than our federal government. Whoever wins this election will have my prayers, but not my vote.