Sam Smith - Donald Trump is probably the most dangerous presidential candidate with a chance of winning that we have ever had. Therefore we have made the argument that voting for Clinton is not the lesser of two evils but a vote against an unprecedented evil.
But, as been pointed out to us, there are a number of states where a vote for Green Jill Stein would not be dangerous. Here, for example, are nine states where Clinton has a safe lead of ten or more points: California, Colorado, Delaware, Massachusetts, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Vermont and Washington. Also Maine's First District.
3 comments:
This would be tempting, but what about the danger that millions of votes could be altered or erased electronically?
These Democratic scare tactics are so very, very tired. And the notion that "work begins after the election" isn't valid in an oligarchy. The time to think about safe voting is when the candidate is being chosen. It might have helped to ask a few timely questions like "How many voters will this candidate drive away?" and "Will the electorate support our party if they think we're complete assholes?"
States where it's safe to vote for Jill Stein: all of them.
I think a Hillary presidency should easily be considered to be an "unprecedented evil"...secrecy, graft, more money and weapons to repressive regimes, greater possibilities of wars, Bill still dicking bimbos...not exactly a rosy picture.
Post a Comment