You're right, we should have voted for an even more conservative narcissistic lunatic instead. ‍

@admin The facepalm emoji still adds the female symbol...

@JeffMurray at least you know what you're getting.

@Tejas That's about the dumbest argument I've ever heard.

"Hey, would rather eat a bowl of cat shit sprinkled with broken glass, or some random low-quality fast food items?"

"Umm, I think I'll take the fast food."

"Are you sure? It could end up being something you don't like. At least with the cat shit you know what you're getting."

If your reasoning skills are really that poor I'd love to talk to you about an exciting investment opportunity I just came across.

@JeffMurray I'm not making that argument at all. I don't do the "choose the lesser of two evils" thing. Apparently you do. That mindset is the reason we can't have any real progressive change. Just keep the staus quo and play the game. Voting at all when both options are bad is and will be the problem.

@Tejas You're the one that said "At least you know what you're getting" not me. If refraining from voting did anything you'd have a point, but it doesn't. Candidates only need one more vote to win, which means 1 to nothing is just as good as 75 million / + 1. Since they will vote for themselves, and they probably want everyone to be apathetic and refrain from voting anyway, all you're doing by sitting home is hurting the candidate that most closely aligns with your beliefs (i.e. the candidate you would have voted for if you voted "lesser of two evils" as you say). So your method literally is getting you the worst possibly outcome. I used to be more idealistic like you, but I realized I was just hurting myself demanding my idea of perfection.

@JeffMurray i disagree. If more people would stay at home come time to vote. The party would have to change or risk dieing. Which it probably should.

@Tejas I assume you're only taking about the Democratic party. The problem is, you're then setting up the Republican party for a significantly large number of cycles of complete sweeps where they own all three branches of government and can do immeasurable harm to the democracy (if it even survives).

@JeffMurray so your saying not much will change, gotcha

@Tejas Of course not. I know you're young, but haven't you been paying attention? Two party system set up so that it will always remain a two party system. You literally have to vote for the lesser of two evils or let the more evil one win while you sit on the sidelines.

@JeffMurray i guess age drains passion for change out of you. Too bad

@Tejas Passion for change is good... up until the point it makes you do something against your own best interests. This is why you should vote your conscience/ideals in the primary and vote practically in the general.