This take is electoralism masquerading as materialist analysis: it tries to game out which President winning will be better for the left, with the logical conclusion that you should vote for Trump.

The reality is that the left is already powerless, As it was under Obama, Bush, Clinton, etc. The only thing that has changed is that left-wing ideas have become much more mainstream. This is a consistent trend regardless of which party is in power. Another consistent trend is that material conditions have gotten worse regardless.

The left quite literally has nothing to lose with a Biden administration that it hasn't already lost under Trump. But that doesn't matter for the socialist project either way, since our path to power remains largely outside electoral politics.

To further argue that you shouldn't vote for dems because they don't care about you and they will suffer consequences by the left not voting for them is just pure electoralism. It doesn't take seriously that the Dems quite literally do not care: their material success is not dependent on the left voting for them at all. They are making more money under Trump than ever before and they don't even have to do anything.

Far from making the choice between socialism and barbarism clear, Trump has in a counterintuitive fashion further mystified material relations by personifying the horrors of the system. I'm willing to bet a large part of the American public thinks things will get better if Trump is out of office.

A materialist analyses would reject electoralism because it recognises that power lies with the capitalist class, that liberal democracy is bourgeoisie dictatorship. Not because the Dems aren't nice to the left so we should not vote for them to teach them a lesson about consequences and expedite the collapse of capitalism. That still assumes that voting matters to the left, but only when you don't vote or vote third party.