I see your point.
The way that you've written it may imply the argument being whether it matters who one votes as no matter how much any of those is evil since they both are.
The way I see it is similar with the difference being that lesser evil is always preferable.
It is (in my experience) better to see parties as foes and better foe is always preferable.
(1/2)
And I'd like to ass that Democrats, while certainly less corrupt, had their share of scandals as well.
Simply put, the party isn't perfect.
Is it better? Certainly yes.
My initial problem was the way you "celebrated" it. The "black and white" comparison between good and bad.
(Although, it is tempting even for me, to be fair.)
But after all, it might be just a behavioral difference between us.
@The_Universality I'm not really celebrating "democrats win." I was specifically celebrating progressive candidates who won against big, dark money opposition without accepting corporate campaign financing. Troy Jackson, El-Sayed, and Talarico specifically.
@gardiner_bryant I see. Your first post was speaking "generally" so that's why I though you was celebrating the win of the entire party.
That's partly my bad as well.
@The_Universality currently, my country's party "system" is just an extension of corporate bullshit. It's a money laundering scheme that runs cover for national candidates. So I agree with you on that front.
But it's too cynical to say "the lesser of two evils" because less politically literate folks hear that and throw up their hands in disgust. It causes them to opt out and disengage, IMO. That's precisely how we end up with Trumpism.
@gardiner_bryant I see.
That I failed to consider and you are partly correct here.
But I use this way of thinking to "push" people to go vote. Since most want no or less evil.