pjbogart wrote:Candidate A's policies are guaranteed to kill 100,000 people and he has a 50% chance of winning. Candidate B's policies are guaranteed to kill 50,000 people and he has a 50% chance of winning. Candidate C's policies will not kill anyone, hence he has a 0% chance of winning an election in the United States.
I don't think Stella is arguing for Candidate C.
I think Stella is arguing for changing the system so that a Candidate C stands a reasonable chance of getting elected.
Some would argue that voting for A or B only perpetuates such an obviously flawed system. I don't. But I do think that focusing too much on A vs. B is a distraction from the problems in both parties.
FWIW, I don't disagree with the topic of this thread; the GOP is totally off the rails. So much so that you don't really notice all the problems with the Obama administration (drones, indefinite detention, retaliation against whistleblowers.....)