You’re just letting perfect be the enemy of good. And while unfortunately “good” is not really that good, the alternative is way too dangerous to risk it over moral principles. It’s sad, but as long as FPTP stays in place the only correct choice is to vote for the “least bad” of the main two.
the difference is that voting “whatever” is the same as not voting. by contrast, voting for a candidate is voting… for that candidate.
So the difference is for one you have to waste your time to achieve the same result?
it’s not the same result. in one scenario, the vote total doesn’t change. in the other, a candidate gets one more vote.
So you don’t care who wins but want to increase voter turnout?
of course i care who wins. i want my candidate to win. that’s why i vote for them.
And you already admitted it’s unlikely that’s going to happen.
I’d also like to become a millionaire, but that doesn’t mean spending all my money on slot machines makes sense.
it’s the right thing to do. ends don’t justify means.
You’re just letting perfect be the enemy of good. And while unfortunately “good” is not really that good, the alternative is way too dangerous to risk it over moral principles. It’s sad, but as long as FPTP stays in place the only correct choice is to vote for the “least bad” of the main two.
voting for bad people is bad. it’s not that I’m letting perfect be the enemy of the good. im letting good be the enemy of bad.