Article in WAPO this morning on ethics of voting for a person you hate less than the other person. I disagree with the moralist's conclusion, but some might find it interesting.
The guy claims to be a "moral philosopher." Is the $10 he was paid for his article a sizable portion of his yearly income? He takes the position that you should vote for the cunt if you hate Trump but avoids the opposite side of the equation.
What I find appalling is that ANYONE regardless of who is on the other side or what other choices you have, could vote for that cunt.
people vote for whats familiar and authoritative even in the light of her not being human. human psychology is a fucked up thing. people can ignore every detestable act anyone shows right up until she gets elected. then they will defend her like they did this pos for 8 yrs telling you youre crazy for calling a spade a spade. the bad is never what we want to imagine. so we ignore it and pretend all is ok. or they just point the finger somewhere else. it doesnt help to have all the media on your side either for confirmation bias. it reaffirms everything they want to believe.
