The 2016 election has only two plausible results: Trump or Clinton.  There is no third party candidate that it going to win.

I’ve read a lot of folks who are saying, quite altruistically, that they will not vote simply for the lesser of two evils.

Now it appears that there’s really not a lot of “evil” associated with Clinton, certainly not in comparison with the levels of provable evil you get with The Donald.  That’s just a lot of stuff you think you know from forces that want you to think you know it.

But even so, you’re saying in effect you want to vote for the greater of two evils?

Some folks cite the common refrain of “my vote doesn’t matter, it’s not mathematically significant.”  It’s true, an individual vote is a very small piece of the pie, but there’s something funny that happens in mathematic when you multiply really small number by a really large number.  All of a sudden it’s get significant again.  Your individual likelihood of winning the lottery?  Zilch.  But people keep winning.


* By not voting at all, if the lesser of two evils wins, you’re good.  If the greater of two evils carries the day, by not voting against that outcome you in effect voted for it. This is not spin, just simple logic.