I'd love to know what rates -- approximate is fine -- count as "confiscatory" to you.  I would certainly grant that confiscatory taxation is theoretically possible, but I wouldn't describe any of the tax plans I've seen as being that.

Or maybe an easier way to ask it would be: what is it about, say, Warren's tax plans that makes them confiscatory?  The mere fact that the rates are higher?  Or is it the steeper progressiveness ("progressiveness" in the technical tax rate sense, not the political sense, of course)?  In other words, is it the slope of the curve, or is it where the curve sits in absolute terms, or some combination of both?

I never look for a nominee whom I agree with on everthing: that will never exist.  When the alternative is Trump, even if I had voted Republican all my life I would vote for any of the current Democratic candidates.  Once you get to the general election, you're expressing a relative preference between two outcomes.  If A is better than B, then vote for A.  The question of whether A is better or worse than some theoretical option Q that isn't on the ballot shouldn't affect that decision, I would think.