Imagine two groups of people, one is all Nazis and the other is 60% Nazis, 35% Nazi apologists, and 5% potentially decent people.

Would you hang out with the slightly less Nazi group? What do you think that would make you if you hung around with 60% Nazis and their apologists?

I know what my answer would be, and it would be to hang around neither group and instead plan how to see very real harm come to them as my enemies. I wouldn’t defend them for being less Nazi, because any amount of Nazi is indefensible.

Let me guess, your strategy for changing the voting system is to vote for a lesser evil in the broken system.

"My car broke down" "Well then, just drive it to the mechanic!" what a load of nonsense. A broken tool won't fix itself.

"Mathematics" my ass. I'm constantly in awe of the fact that most of the ways I disagree with you are that you are too attached to treating human social constructs as objectively real. The whole electoral system was created by humans and is maintained only through faith, if it proves incapable of functioning as is required by the actually real physical constraints of planet earth, then it will change. The gap between what must, necessarily happen, and what this social construct tells us is possible widens every day. One way or another, things the system claims are "impossible" are going to happen, and it can either adapt or it can go down in flames.

The idea that electoral strategy is purely dictated by "mathematics," that liberalism is somehow an objective, unchangeable facet of reality, is completely absurd.