I’m reading this and can’t discern if you’re serious. On the one hand, the argument is insane and doesn’t address the actual calculus behind strategic voting. On the other hand, it reads exactly like what someone would say if they hadn’t thought about it other than deciding that voting is a moral evil a-priori and blurted out the first justification.
Who told you that? People who support those two parties? The corporations that fund those two parties? Maybe you’ve been played.
I’m reading this and can’t discern if you’re serious. On the one hand, the argument is insane and doesn’t address the actual calculus behind strategic voting. On the other hand, it reads exactly like what someone would say if they hadn’t thought about it other than deciding that voting is a moral evil a-priori and blurted out the first justification.
I feel the same way about what you wrote.
Where is the substance? Nothing you wrote actually addressed the issue, and your speculation was inaccurate as well. Meh.
You’re too stupid to understand how criticism works.