- Joined
- Sep 3, 2011
- Messages
- 34,817
- Reaction score
- 18,576
- Location
- Look to your right... I'm that guy.
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
"Picking the lesser of two evils" and "supporting the status quo" is more semantics for the same end result. The individual voter's motivation or rationalization is less important if the end result is the same regardless.Voting for one of the 'big two' for president is not supporting the status quo. It is picking the lesser of two evils. Which must be done to minimize damage while a third party
comes up into the system, first locally, state, then into the legislature. They can not just jump in and take the white house. That's crazy talk.
So once the election results are in, I will know you voted for whoever the winner is, based on throwing away a vote.
I agree that it would be better for a third-party to "work its way up", but at the same time if no one votes for third parties then they never get taken seriously, lack ballot access in many places, remain on the fringe, and so on. The "lesser evils" become a self-fulfilling prophecy.