In election after election, we see the argument. We are told that somehow we are must choose that candidate with a “chance of winning” who happens to be the least evil.
tries to convince us that we are morally obligated to make such a choice :
“If our vote is part of a set of votes that will contribute to the defeat of the realistically electable “lesser evil,” therefore electing the “more evil” candidate, then we force society to pay a high price for our clean conscience. Sometimes, our concern for feeling morally impeccable should give way to a concern for what type of society we can help to create for the sake of all, including ourselves.”
Ms.must think that we can somehow distinguish the cleanest turd floating in the toilet. I say just flush it.
A vote for a candidate is a vote for a candidate. It is never a vote against another candidate.