Except that it won't actually be the best choice for them. Not financially, not medically, and not in the long term due to the alienation of our allies and the diminishing of America's reputation in the world.

But you don't know that. You don't know what's actually the best choice for them, because you don't know how they prioritize things like the personal effect of the federal government on their financial or medical situation (which is going to be rather modest) or far more abstract things like alienating allies or diminishing our reputation, relative to other things like dramatically limiting new unlawful border entrants or reversing broad cultural trends towards "wokeness" or all the things that a Harris Administration doesn't do that now get done.

People have different priorities. For example, there are people who feel so passionate about abortion that they will base their vote almost entirely on whether a candidate will protect a woman's right to choose even though it will not directly affect their personal interest at all. There are also people who feel so passionate about abortion that they will base their vote almost entirely on whether a candidate will bar what they feel is murder even though it will not directly affect them at all, either. Almost by definition, those people can't be "wrong." They can't not be making the best choice for them, because they get to choose what's important to them. Those are value questions, not empiric questions that can be correct or incorrect.