you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] 36 points 1 month ago (7 children)

Not really, because if people consistently choose the lesser evil. Like if 90% voted for lesser evils, then the other party would have to change things up, or there could be a new party that would have a chance of winning because they're competing for that 90% of people and no way would the evil party win.

But no, problems isn't choosing lesser evil, it's that significant people still choose evil

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [โ€“] 10 points 1 month ago

    The problem is that, despite people swearing they never had any other choice, there has always been many instances of good options that go unchosen while the population fights over voting for turbo-evil vs naturally-aspirated-evil.

    Here in Canada we have three main parties and people will do ANYTHING to justify why they cannot vote progressive and must vote for the centrist/conservative party because otherwise the conservative-conservatives might get power. Now we have a banker steam-rolling our people and our environment for free.

  • source
  • parent
  • [โ€“] 5 points 1 month ago

    Exactly. The lesser evil hasn't won enough because a bunch of peeps are just fucking evil and others don't care enough to vote for the less evil version because they aren't less evil enough.

    So instead we get constantly more evil variants instead of constantly getting better (less and less evil) for generations

    Fucking stupid original post

    We have a shitty 2 party system, keep voting lesser evil until we can fix it or don't be pissed when evil people win again and again.

  • source
  • parent
  • [โ€“] 3 points 1 month ago (4 children)

    Your assuming lesser evil stays the same. If they move lock step with the greater evil though then guess what?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [โ€“] 0 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    Then a new party will form. Again, if the votes are not split 50:50 and it's pretty much only on the lesser evil, then a good alternative party can easily grab the votes of the frustrated citizens without risking "splitting the vote and letting greater evil win"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [โ€“] 1 point 1 month ago (2 children)

    What are you talking about? This is not a hypothetical. That's what already happened. And a new party didn't form. Because we were kept being told to vote for the lesser of two evils.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [โ€“] 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

    Tell me one single election where the lesser evil part got more than 60% of votes? Let alone 90%

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [โ€“] 1 point 1 month ago

    Explain what makes you think the lesser evil would change anything when they're doing 90%, and don't claim the greater evil would simply disappear or change. The influences behind any of them that use money to push right do not care, and we have seen times and times again that the lesser evil has no intention of reducing that influence. Guess why.

  • source
  • parent