I vote for leftist candidates on my local level and I vote for whichever option is more interested in preventing ecocide federally.
IMO there are certain special cases where one can accurately judge that voting in a local election will prevent or guarantee a specific event, e.g. voting in a politician who promises not to do a specific thing (but even then, no guarantees because politicians are lying scum...). The logic here is that the social network is small enough that you personally know or are not very far separated from all parties in the situation.
I would like it if the next generations have a world to inherit, and there is a tangible difference between the two major parties federally. I'll vote for the neoliberal that kills the planet slower, because the revolution isn't happening this election cycle, or likely for a long time.
My argument is that neither of these is possible through voting. There is no tangible difference between the two parties from an anti-capitalist perspective other than their marketing. And the neoliberals are united in all the ways that count.
I take direct action in my community
Excellent!
and I use my vote in hopes of not killing the planet for shareholder value.
Personally, I think the miniscule time spent voting would be better used for rest and enjoying your life.
In general, I'm willing to agree to disagree with comrades on the voting issue...but emphasis on disagree.