[Persevero]

“neither candidate is worthy of my vote.”

See, that is what I meant about perfection, which others on this board have called a “straw man.” It is not a straw man, it is a real philosophy which keeps people from voting for anyone because no one is perfect enough.

I respect your right to vote or not as you see fit, of course. I’m just discussing the issue.

-The perfect is the enemy of the good.- This phrase was tossed around at my church for quite a while as we sought a new pastor for years and years. No one was quite “good” enough. Therefore we had no pastor at all.

[algernonpj]

“neither candidate is worthy of my vote.”

See, that is what I meant about perfection, which others on this board have called a “straw man.” It is not a straw man, it is a real philosophy which keeps people from voting for anyone because no one is perfect enough.

I respect your right to vote or not as you see fit, of course. I’m just discussing the issue.

-The perfect is the enemy of the good.- This phrase was tossed around at my church for quite a while as we sought a new pastor for years and years. No one was quite “good” enough. Therefore we had no pastor at all.

You define all candidates as flawed. This is true. We all have flaws as a result of human nature.

That being said you have tagged all flaws as 'evil'. I, and I suspect KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle, only tag those flaws which are totally unacceptable in a candidate as 'evil'.

Some candidates flaws rise to the level of not being acceptable or worthy of a vote, i.e. a deal breaker. Hence Refusing to vote for "the lesser of two evils" =/= "seeking perfect candidate."