Sorry if it wasn't clear, my argument is less "we shouldn't even try the better solutions, because people might object" and more "we shouldn't fight against oth

Sorry if it wasn't clear, my argument is less "we shouldn't even try the better solutions, because people might object" and more "we shouldn't fight against other solutions in favor of a hypothetical that we are miles and miles away from being able to try." I have seen protestors who draw a line in the sand at "free good housing for everyone" (sometimes piling on even more things like "abolish capitalism" for even less feasibility) and fight against any solution short of that. And the only people who would win, politically, from that are the right-wingers who want to deploy cops against the homeless and push them out of town and out of sight. Enough people start to lose patience with the lack of action that they vote with the assholes since nobody else is trying anything. It's not all the way there, but look at the last mayoral election in Los Angeles: two candidates who were both fairly pro-police and pro-shelter and pro-encampment-clearing, despite the efforts of the more radical protestors. If those efforts were to get blocked by protests from the left, I think people would only swing further right on that issue, since both of the final candidates were already far more active on the issue in their platform than in previous elections.