For the reasons I mentioned previously, it’s not at all clear which outcome would be worse. So, your premise is flawed. Regardless, you haven’t explained how voting for the alleged lesser of two evils is strategic. What kind of message does it send to both the DNC and RNC that a candidate can actively support a genocide and still get reelected? What message does it send to the world for us to keep a president like Biden in office? What is the goal of that kind of strategy?
It means you don’t vote for what you “want”, it means you vote for the best possible outcome. Again, of which there are 2 and of which 1 is worse.
You cannot seriously be this dense.
For the reasons I mentioned previously, it’s not at all clear which outcome would be worse. So, your premise is flawed. Regardless, you haven’t explained how voting for the alleged lesser of two evils is strategic. What kind of message does it send to both the DNC and RNC that a candidate can actively support a genocide and still get reelected? What message does it send to the world for us to keep a president like Biden in office? What is the goal of that kind of strategy?