Would You Vote For The "Lessor of Two Evils" Candidate if

  • Thread starter Thread starter PLAL
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

PLAL

Guest
Would You Vote For The “Lessor of Two Evils” Candidate if …

Both Candidates were the same on all the issues except

Candidate A from one party is 100% Pro-Terrorism and

Candidate B from the other party is 40% Pro-Terrorism (60% Anti-Terrorism).
In this circumstance would you vote for the “lessor of two evils” candidate?

or What else would you do?
 
PLAL said:
Would You Vote For The “Lessor of Two Evils” Candidate if …

Both Candidates were the same on all the issues except

Candidate A from one party is 100% Pro-Terrorism and

Candidate B from the other party is 40% Pro-Terrorism (60% Anti-Terrorism).
In this circumstance would you vote for the “lessor of two evils” candidate?

or What else would you do?
Click to expand...
What’s “pro-terrorism”? Who would call themselves “pro-terrorism?”
 
I don’t understand your post, either.

However, if you are speaking of the upcoming elections … I will always vote for the lesser of 2 evils. I will always side for life … especially innocent life!
 
May I suggest another castitica:

Incumbant:
  • Prolife
  • Anti euthanasia
  • Pro Capitol Punishment
  • Pro War
  • Pro Torture
  • one wife, no allegations of infidelity
Challenger
  • Proaborotion
  • Proeuthanasia
  • Anti Capitol Punishment
  • Mostly Antiwar
  • left his legitamate wife for a sugar mama
  • Anti Torture
Who would you vote for and why and remember the rules: no NAMES
 
This is a substitute question for those who do not know what “terrorism” is in the year 2008. Let’s go back in time and hopefully make this question easier to understand and substitute the word “slavery” for “terrorism”. I hope this helps!
Would You Vote For The “Lessor of Two Evils” Candidate if …

Both Candidates were the same on all the issues except

Candidate A from one party is 100% Pro-Slavery and

Candidate B from the other party is 40% Pro-Slavery (60% Anti-Slavery).
In this circumstance would you vote for the “lessor of two evils” candidate?

or What else would you do?
 
Antegin said:
May I suggest another castitica:

Incumbant:
  • Prolife
  • Anti euthanasia
  • Pro Capitol Punishment
  • Pro War
  • Pro Torture
  • one wife, no allegations of infidelity
    Challenger
  • Proaborotion
  • Proeuthanasia
  • Anti Capitol Punishment
  • Mostly Antiwar
  • left his legitamate wife for a sugar mama
  • Anti Torture
    Who would you vote for and why and remember the rules: no NAMES
Click to expand...
Antegin,

I would rather you start another thread with your question. I really want to stick to my original question to keep it very simple. I think this is a question we all need to reflect on for some time.

Also, if you are describing one of the three candidates still left (no names) don’t forget one candidate is Pro-Infanticide and don’t forget about the candidates position of killing human embryo’s for the “sake of science”.

Thank You.

PLAL
 
PLAL said:
Would You Vote For The “Lessor of Two Evils” Candidate if …

Both Candidates were the same on all the issues except

Candidate A from one party is 100% Pro-Terrorism and

Candidate B from the other party is 40% Pro-Terrorism (60% Anti-Terrorism).
In this circumstance would you vote for the “lessor of two evils” candidate?

or What else would you do?
Click to expand...
My God… If we in America were to sink to the level where being Pro-Terrorism or Anti-Terrorism were actually legit political stands for those seeking public office, I suppose I would have to give up my citizenship. Perhaps find a monastery somewhere in the Alps and live the rest of my years in a monastic setting. Heck… I may do that anyway 😃
 
Why the Lessor of two evils"?

Just vote Libertarian:thumbsup:
 
Andruschak said:
Why the Lessor of two evils"?

Just vote Libertarian:thumbsup:
Click to expand...
I rather have my vote count for something. :rolleyes:

Besides, most of those people I have know, tended to be paranoid and saw conspiracy theories around every corned.

One, who I worked with, was always spouting off that everyone was out to get him. He finally quit by coming in at about 5 AM, taping an envelop to the director’s door with his resignation letter and security badge, and leaving.
 
Tietjen said:
My God… If we in America were to sink to the level where being Pro-Terrorism or Anti-Terrorism were actually legit political stands for those seeking public office, I suppose I would have to give up my citizenship. Perhaps find a monastery somewhere in the Alps and live the rest of my years in a monastic setting. Heck… I may do that anyway 😃
Click to expand...
Tietjen,

I want to keep the focus on Terrorism and then once everyone gives their opinion, then I want to follow up with added questions.

As to your comment above about Terrorism, here’s a couple of things to think about…

A. There was a time when American citizens would make the same statement you made above about “Slavery”, “Abortion” and “Infanticide”.

B. We do currently have a presidential candidate who is Pro-Infanticide (I will keep the candidates name nameless but he or she voted against the “Born Alive Infants Protection Act”).

So based on this, I don’t think having a Pro-Terrorism candidate in the future is out of the question.
 
PLAL said:
This is a substitute question for those who do not know what “terrorism” is in the year 2008. Let’s go back in time and hopefully make this question easier to understand and substitute the word “slavery” for “terrorism”. I hope this helps!
Would You Vote For The “Lessor of Two Evils” Candidate if …

Both Candidates were the same on all the issues except

Candidate A from one party is 100% Pro-Slavery and

Candidate B from the other party is 40% Pro-Slavery (60% Anti-Slavery).
In this circumstance would you vote for the “lessor of two evils” candidate?

or What else would you do?
Click to expand...
PLAL,

If there is perhaps a point that you will eventually be making with this thread, perhaps simply stating that point would be the best route to take. These “what if” scenerios are too “in your face” and unrealistic. No one (with any reasonable sense of morality) is going to state that they are “pro-slavery” nor will they say that they support “terrorism.” I suspect that eventually you plan on turning this line of questioning around to make a pro-life statement or appeal. While that is obvously a good intention, your method of “dumbing down” the path to that end is somewhat insulting…
PLAL said:
This is a substitute question for those who do not know what “terrorism” is in the year 2008. Let’s go back in time and hopefully make this question easier to understand and substitute the word “slavery” for “terrorism”. I hope this helps!
Click to expand...
Either way, I’ll leave you to your thread. Take care and God bless.
 
PLAL said:
Would You Vote For The “Lessor of Two Evils” Candidate if …

Both Candidates were the same on all the issues except

Candidate A from one party is 100% Pro-Slavery and

Candidate B from the other party is 40% Pro-Slavery (60% Anti-Slavery).
In this circumstance would you vote for the “lessor of two evils” candidate?

or What else would you do?
Click to expand...
I could not vote for the lesser of two evils when it comes to matters of intrinsic human rights. It would be better to abstain from voting given these are the only two possible choices. Otherwise if allowance is made for a write in candidate, that would be more acceptable.
If one looks at it from the angle of abortion for instance, one supports killing all unborn children, another supports killing them up to half way through gestation. Neither one is any the ‘lesser evil’. It is easy to say the latter is the lesser evil when your not the one whose life is in jeopardy. If one candidate supported killing all people and another candidate supported killing only people who have freckles. Who would you vote for?

Now, who would you vote for if you had freckles?
 
Antegin said:
May I suggest another castitica:

Incumbant:
  • Prolife
  • Anti euthanasia
  • Pro Capitol Punishment
  • Pro War
  • Pro Torture
  • one wife, no allegations of infidelity
Challenger
  • Proaborotion
  • Proeuthanasia
  • Anti Capitol Punishment
  • Mostly Antiwar
  • left his legitamate wife for a sugar mama
  • Anti Torture
Who would you vote for and why and remember the rules: no NAMES
Click to expand...
I’d vote for the first candidate, since I think that everyone at the Capitol needs to be punished. 😃
 
Antegin said:
May I suggest another castitica:

Incumbant:
  • Prolife
  • Anti euthanasia
  • Pro Capitol Punishment
  • Pro War
  • Pro Torture
  • one wife, no allegations of infidelity
Challenger
  • Proaborotion
  • Proeuthanasia
  • Anti Capitol Punishment
  • Mostly Antiwar
  • left his legitamate wife for a sugar mama
  • Anti Torture
Who would you vote for and why and remember the rules: no NAMES
Click to expand...
I, personally, would have to vote for the Incumbent in this case because I am totally against abortion and euthanasia. I’m also against war and torture but to me, those are secondary issues. After all, the 5 non-negotiable items in the Voters Guide For Serious Catholics are:
  • Abortion
  • Euthanasia
  • Embryonic Stem Cell Research
  • Human Cloning
  • Homosexual “Marriage”
 
I just wanted to add that I do not agree with Candidate A’s support of the death penalty and war but those are not non-negotiable issues.
 
PLAL said:
Would You Vote For The “Lessor of Two Evils” Candidate if …

Both Candidates were the same on all the issues except

Candidate A from one party is 100% Pro-Terrorism and

Candidate B from the other party is 40% Pro-Terrorism (60% Anti-Terrorism).
In this circumstance would you vote for the “lessor of two evils” candidate?

or What else would you do?
Click to expand...
I’d like to see the definition of Terrorism here.
 
I would vote for the candidate who would give the Republicans control over the White House and also a majority in Congress … that way there might be a chance of getting pro-life judges appointed to the Supreme Court and to the lesser Federal courts.
 
I have been eligible to vote since 1968, and there has never been a presidential election when the candidates have not represented greater or lesser degrees of evil. In every election either I have been holding my nose as I voted, or I discovered later that I should have been holding my nose. There has never been a truly righteous candidate. The only alternative to voting for the perceived lesser of two (or more) evils is not to vote at all.

The founders really missed out on something by not mandating a “none-of-the-above” option to the presidential ballot.

DaveBj
 
In Canada I’m told you can register to vote, then refuse your ballot. If you spoil your ballot it is merely discarded, but apparently if you register and then refuse to take your ballot, it has to be noted, and is tallied. Apparently some people do this as a protest vote, because, unlike spoiling, it is counted, and has a greater effect than just not showing up.

Or so I’m told. I need to find more info on this.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top