That's fun fairy time, but it isn't reality. You need to research how game theory, and the availability (or lack) of true choice works.
You are literally at the precipice of "do I like the giant douche, or the turd sandwich". You cannot have anything else.
Edit in some cases (location dependant) chosing a third means you implicitly choose the distant other
I.e. if the third is closer to Biden than trump (even if very different, it's all about proximity), then you helped trump.
Another flavor: if your district is highly contested, and a trump win is close, a vote for anyone but Biden is a vote FOR trump. You are feeding the uncertainty of contest.
if game theory dictated human behavior, and if you are right about the options and outcomes, then no one would vote third party. so either you're wrong about the options and outcomes, or game theory doesn't dictate human behavior
In many countries, third parties are very viable. In this particular election, in the US, they are not.
Game theory happens to humans weather they acknowledge it or not. What you are experiencing is the illusion of choice in an outcome constrained system.
Agree. You WILL see Biden or trump as the next president. Depending on where you live, your may have helped that along. You may not like what your helped.
I am not wrong. You are in a constrained system. You have no extra choices. Believe what you like, live with what you do.
Edit you've not once suggested a meaningful rebuttal. You're position is without merit.
if all you can see is the winner of the presidency in 2024, you have a miopic view. there are many possible outcomes and many possible futures, and who wins the election in november is inconsequential to almost all of it.
Are you discussing post election? I've commented on this in this thread. Leftists and progressives have work to do, today, and beyond the election to build a viable candidate.
You are moving the goalposts by discussing the ever after, because nothing I've said to you means anything beyond the next vote. All m discussing is the next vote. Pretty shitty behavior to try to shift things like that.
All m discussing is the next vote. Pretty shitty behavior to try to shift things like that.
i think it's shitty to try to browbeat people into voting for immoral candidates. or to narrow the scope of the discussion to only one facet and ignore all the other outcomes and impacts.
I'm educating you on how reality works. You're effectively asking if you can invent a perpetual motion service, and I'm reciting the basic laws of thermodynamics