If they're not remotely equal, then one must be better.

I disagree. Two things can be very different from each other, but still rank similarly when judged against various standards.

Given that the only feasible outcomes are either a Trump presidency or a Clinton presidency, you should be doing what is necessary to ensure whichever you think is better.

I disagree that they are the only feasible outcomes. They aren't the only candidates, and I won't be bullied into accepting your candidate as the only option.

Anyone who can take the risk of a Trump presidency is incredibly privileged.

It hurts when you continue to call me that, apparently as a way to weaken my position, even though I told you it wasn't true. I just happen to feel differently on the matter than you do. I don't think Trump will strip my rights and send me to a slave camp just because I'm trans. A Trump presidency might mean more laws like HB1, and it might mean a strong effort to repeal marriage equality. I whole-heartedly disagree with those ideas, and I will do everything I can to fight them, but they simply are not the only issues to consider when selecting a candidate, and I think it is harmful to the national conversation when you suggest that they are.