The Fallacy of Voting for the "Lesser of two Evils"

The following is a blog written in October 2012 by Jon Rappoport, a former candidate for the 29^th Congressional District in California and Pulitzer Prize nominee. His observations are even more succinct four years later.

For decades, disaffected Americans have been trudging to the polls and voting for the lesser of two evils. That’s how they register their preference for a presidential candidate.

Choices based on that dubious strategy seem to work for the short-term (at best). But in the long run, the law of diminishing returns sets in.

Term after presidential term, the lesser of two evils lowers the quality of life for everyone and keeps nudging the decline of the American Republic. The hole to dig out of becomes deeper, and successive presidents—each one the lesser of two evils—are less capable and willing to do the necessary digging.

That’s the story of leadership in America.

But prompted by new and more desperate created crises, citizens resort to the “lesser” strategy every four years, believing they must.

“I’m not that enthusiastic about either man, but I have to choose one. I have to go with the lesser of two evils because this country is in real trouble.”

Where does it stop? “Look, this time, I’m picking the lesser of two evils because the national crisis is so terrible. But next time, I promise I’ll do something else.” Really? What else will you do? Hope the sun comes out?

The voter who is chronically addicted to the lesser of two evils is like a man in debt who borrows to pay it off. Each time he borrows, the debt gets bigger. He says, “I know this is crazy, but what else can I do? Borrowing from Peter to pay Paul is the lesser of two evils. If I don’t do it, I’m sunk. I promise I’ll straighten this mess out—but not right now. I have a payment coming due. I have to borrow again.”

And just like the federal debt, which keeps swelling, the election of one lesser after another as the president keeps expanding the national misery. Finally, the idea that voters can step outside the two-party system to find a real president who actually believes in the Constitution seems like a pipe dream because all the prior lessers have screwed things up so badly, have sold so out badly, have trampled on the Constitution so crazily…the shell-shocked public accepts these lessers as the status quo.

At that point, people say, “Stop all this nonsense about a third-party candidate. Get real. We have to choose from the two candidates in front of us. That’s what life and elections are all about. Be an adult. Make your decision. Go for the lesser of two evils.”

A national poll might prove quite interesting. Ask people, “In the presidential election, are you voting for the lesser of two evils? Are you voting for the candidate who is “less bad” than the other guy?”

Better yet, let’s have a candidate who says, up front, “Hi, I’m Gil Fulbright, the lesser of two evils, and I’m running for president. Let’s not kid each other. You know, I know, and everybody knows that my opponent and I are both morons and sell-outs. We got where we are by lying and stealing. What else did you expect? We’re both puppets for larger forces. But at least I’m willing to admit it. And I believe, in my heart, that I’m the lesser of two evils. What do you say? Cut me a break. I really want to live in the White House and be the commander-in-chief. And my wife? Don’t get me started on what she wants.”

So the next time a “smarter, wiser” friend, who “really knows how the world works,” tells you you’ve got to choose the lesser of two evils, realize who’s smart and who the idiot is.

This fake political ad for Gil Fulbright is an example of what you get from voting for the lesser of two evils. Copy and paste address below in Google search.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQTqB5jZ4Lc


Politicians won't change if they know we'll vote for them anyway. Good candidates seldom receive the support they need to become viable. The problem of bad choices are thereby perpetuated, and the nation's political process continues to deteriorate until the day when our choices will be an Adolf Hitler or a Joseph Stalin.

Misunderstanding Trump

       He's number 1.....He's number 1.....He's number 1

          Poor, poor misunderstood Donald Trump. Here he is trying to steer the country back onto the right path after what he calls the failure of the Obama presidency, and everyone is instead distracted by his perceived verbal gaffs. It’s hampering his shot at the White House where he says he’ll ‘Make America Great Again’. Incidentally, that motto was plagiarized from Ronald Reagan who used “Let’s Make America Great Again” in the 1980s. Trump says he came up with the phrase on his own and that it has nothing to do with Reagan’s. But does anyone pay attention to his making America great…again? No. All people want to do is misquote him or knowingly misrepresent what he implied. He speaks his mind off-the-cuff-like, and then the media puts its own spin on it to make him look like a first-class jerk. That’s because what was recorded and what we heard was simply a misunderstanding of what he said. In other words, it’s our fault, not his.

        For example:

In a Sept. 2015 Rolling Stone interview, Trump is quoted saying about rival GOP candidate Carly Fiorina: "Look at that face! Would anyone vote for that? Can you imagine that, the face of our next president?" He claims he wasn’t talking about her looks, “I'm talking about persona," he corrected everyone. And we can believe him. When he uses the word ‘face’ twice, it’s simply our not realizing he meant a theatrical mask.

 At the Republican debate in August 2015, after moderator Megyn Kelly asked him about the sexist comments he’s made, such as calling some women "fat pigs, dogs, slobs, and disgusting animals," Trump retaliated later by saying she had "blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her, wherever…" He claims he meant her nose. Obviously. “Wherever…” always means nose. He even added the caveat "Only a deviant would think anything else" while also tossing in that Megyn was a “bimbo”. He wouldn’t stoop to saying anything sexist that might refer to her menstruation cycle, or compare woman to dogs, pigs, slobs…or bimbos. We can believe him because it was clearly a misunderstanding of where ‘wherever’ was located.

 Earlier this year, Trump retweeted — and then deleted — a tweet that said, "If Hillary Clinton can’t satisfy her husband what makes her think she can satisfy America?” He said it was a staffer’s fault. It wasn’t him that tweeted it, even though it was just like his other comments. “Satisfy” wasn’t referencing anything sexual, it was simply misunderstood.

Trump says he loves bimbos...er, broads...that is, babes...you know, sex objects.

Trump consistently insults, belittles, and stereotypes women, having disparaged Sarah Jessica Parker, Katy Perry, Rosie O'Donnell, Cher, Bette Midler, Angelina Jolie, even Ivana when he was still married to her. He is quoted as saying women are essentially aesthetically-pleasing objects, that sexual assault in the military is totally expected, that women need to rely on sex appeal, and that women fawn over him because he’s rich and powerful. But those don’t really reveal his thinking on women. People are just misunderstanding the context of his comments.

The draft dodger and the POW

 Even people he has no quarrel with, like Senator John McCain, are Trump targets. “He’s not a war hero.” Trump snarled in an interview last July in Iowa with Republican pollster Frank Luntz. When called out several times on TV for it, Trump claimed he didn’t say it, then tried to backpedal by saying that he said McCain “WAS a war hero, but nobody wants to play that part” [of the interview]. He thinks the recording will exonerate him, where he clearly says McCain “wasn’t a war hero…Okay, he’s a war hero because he was captured. I like people who weren’t captured, okay?” When he mocks a former prisoner of war, claiming he wasn’t a war hero because his aircraft was shot down over Hanoi and McCain could not avoid being caught by North Vietnamese forces because he broke both arms and one leg in the ensuing crash…that that actually counts as him saying McCain IS a war hero. His perspective was simply misunderstood.

Mexicans are drug runners, criminals and rapists, breast feeders are horrible people, free trade is terrible (except when he does it), the Chinese can be beaten only by him, it’s just stupid people who care about him previously filing for bankruptcy, that his pregnant wife Melania had become “a monster” (which he said was a positive statement about her), and that he got a draft deferment during the Vietnam War because he had a bone spur in his foot. When politely asked which foot, he stammered and then said “You’ll look it up in the records, it’s in the records.” He just couldn't remember, even with a 50/50 chance of getting it right.

Yes, Jesus loves lying, self-centered, sexist, thrice-married, white billionaires

 As The Daily Show’s Jon Stewart once asked about Trump “What the f*%k is wrong with him?” It’s a question that's being asked every day; because that’s at least the frequency the current GOP front runner makes a bombastic statement. The downside is he gets away with it. His supporters love the comments. They eat it up and demand more…and their numbers are growing. He is never held accountable for saying some of the most pig-headed, narrow-minded, and politically-damaging things as he runs for the highest office in the land. He’s just misunderstood. How clear does he have to say things, about bimbos and others, to be understood?

However, there IS one bimbo who is squarely in Trump’s corner… 

Of course...makes total sense!

If we end up with a President Trump, get ready for the rest of the world to wonder “Are the Americans just completely insane?” Below is already how the world sees candidate Trump, and it’s only going to get worse.