trailhead

What effect did the “lesser of two evils” framing have on the past few elections?

The more I hear it, the less I like it. It’s an unnecessary rationalization with self-righteous undertones. 

I wish there were more candidates that aligned more closely with what I’d like to see in the world, sure. But there are a couple candidates. Pick one. Or don’t. 

I suspect that a lot of people didn’t vote at all because they couldn’t vote for an “evil” choice and I can understand it: I held that view for a while. Maybe there’s a sort of personal political divestment happening under the surface.

Believer, husband, dad, optimist // Possibilities into opportunities // Design & strategy // Expert dabbler // tylerhilker.com

writing at: https://paragraph.xyz/@thearcadia || curating vibes over at /football || bringing football onchain at /thefalsenine

I can see the savior angle in the past couple, yeah. 

You help me see that what I’m talking about isn’t even the dominant narrative, and it normally happens later in the election cycle when candidates have been established and any sense of purity is removed. I think it’s more of an undercurrent and in more personal interactions, where people are trying to justify a decision.

i think that the dominant narrative i saw in most circles last election was not the lesser of two evils choice. but one of voting for a saviour who could save america from the pure evil the other party and candidate represented.

of course twitter is only a small sample size for the entire country and i could be wrong.