You’re obviously just baiting, but for readers on, I’ll post this hyper simplified situation I commented already.
5 total voters.
2 for trump 1 for Biden 1 for Mickey and one abstains
Trump wins.
If the mickey and the abstain voters don’t want trump, their best action was to vote for Biden, as that would have achieved:
2 for trump
3 for Biden
0 for mickey.
Biden wins.
In competitive locations, votes are a scarce resource.
By not voting for Biden, you have helped trump, and not achieved your own voting goal all the while. You never voted for trump, but your actions aided his victory.
Just repeating it and sticking your head in the sand doesn’t make it so.
If you feel capable of refuting the point, lay out any example you can provide, that meets my original premise. Edit I provided a clear simple case to discuss the situation, which you haven’t been able to refute.
(Edit: For clarity), I acknowledge many places in the US are NOT competitive, thus the scarce vote concept is much less relevant. Location was always in my comments, so that is not a goalpost move.
There are 2 competitive candidates for president. One of them WILL be president.
How you get there is a mix of direct and indirect actions. You do not seem able to grasp or refute that indirect actions can have an influence on the frontrunners.
you’re inability to tell the truth plainly and without hyperbole or fallacy has resulted in you spreading election misinformation. all I’ve done here is try to keep the rhetoric honest
You’re obviously just baiting, but for readers on, I’ll post this hyper simplified situation I commented already.
5 total voters.
2 for trump 1 for Biden 1 for Mickey and one abstains
Trump wins.
If the mickey and the abstain voters don’t want trump, their best action was to vote for Biden, as that would have achieved:
2 for trump 3 for Biden 0 for mickey.
Biden wins.
In competitive locations, votes are a scarce resource.
By not voting for Biden, you have helped trump, and not achieved your own voting goal all the while. You never voted for trump, but your actions aided his victory.
only a vote for trump helps trump, no matter how long you make your favorite bedtime story
Just repeating it and sticking your head in the sand doesn’t make it so.
If you feel capable of refuting the point, lay out any example you can provide, that meets my original premise. Edit I provided a clear simple case to discuss the situation, which you haven’t been able to refute.
(Edit: For clarity), I acknowledge many places in the US are NOT competitive, thus the scarce vote concept is much less relevant. Location was always in my comments, so that is not a goalpost move.
Removed by mod
Ok Dr strange.
There are 2 competitive candidates for president. One of them WILL be president.
How you get there is a mix of direct and indirect actions. You do not seem able to grasp or refute that indirect actions can have an influence on the frontrunners.
That’s on you.
you’re inability to tell the truth plainly and without hyperbole or fallacy has resulted in you spreading election misinformation. all I’ve done here is try to keep the rhetoric honest
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
So not yet. No worries
Not sure what was deleted here cause mod notes don’t include the referenced comment.
Anyway, you haven’t done that, you’ve simply tried to make up lies by misquoting me, then intentionally not addressing the content of my comment.
how can I refuted a fiction, except by saying “you made that up”?
If you can’t meet a toy case, you aren’t ready to discuss the real world.
no more dismissal is needed: your stories are fictions.
Obviously. It’s obviously a toy case to illustrate a point. You think I’m actually stating there are only 5 people voting?
I think you haven’t told a true story yet.