If the US political system produced two very not good candidates for President, either of who will advance objectionable agendas or a corrupt status quo while in office, why is it considered a moral duty to pick one?
Every four years in most memories, we have been presented with false choices, essentially a continuation of a bought and paid for status quo led by one of two different teams, both politically and economically very similar, but optically opposed.
Voting condones and endorses the process and subsequently, the actions elected ‘representatives’ do and say in the names of the voting enablers. Both the R and D parties are systemic threats to our future, preserving power and the economy with Potemkin bailouts funded by Federal Reserve fiat printing to buy up treasury bonds to paper over unsustainable federal and corporate debt as each additional dollar created from nothingness diminishes the value of those already in circulation. This inflation Ponzi, supported by both parties, is confiscating the wealth of our poorest to enrich our 1% as those at the top finance what's left of our political system.
There’s probably never been a US presidential election where both likely nominees are more incompetent / despised etc... by more people, other than 2016. A Gallup poll conducted in May 2020 found that while 31 percent of Americans identify as Democrats and 25 percent identify as Republican, a whopping 40 percent of the country identified their political position as Independent.
The election is already over and most lost. We will spend more on war. The top military brass want to keep fighting wars so that all of the companies making the hardware etc... stay happy. In the mid-1990s nearly 50% of three- and four-star generals went on to work as consultants or executives for the arms industry. In 2006, at the height of the Iraq War, that number swelled to over 80% of retirees. The current hierarchy is just waiting to cash in.
More taxpayer money for zombie corporations. More for lobbyist's interests and to the rich who fund their court jesters.
Our political system is corrupt to the core. Thank mainstream media, a part of corporate America, for the optics of only two sides planning to vote for the least worse without considering other choices on the ballot. The ability to make an informed choice has been severely diminished as most referenced information comes from an overtly biased and censoring 'news' industry paid for with corporate cash from the healthcare conglomerates among others, and censorship by Google, Facebook, Twitter etc... to maintain the monopolies.
The D and Rs are two factions of the same 'Party of Money'. Supporting the lesser of only two evils, a logical fallacy called 'false dilemma', is still supporting evil, in this case a preferred enemy of most voter's perceived enemies. The lesser of two evils tactic has not worked out very well in reality for most citizens, while establishment politicians and monopolies are strengthened as chances for free markets and political change get flushed year after year, over and over again.
Even if voting helps defeat Trump, the message for the D elites will be that they can betray peasant concerns as long as they offer someone marginally better than the R alternative, and then vice versa next time.
If Trump wins, it won’t be the fault of Bernie Sanders supporters voting their conscience. The fault will lye with elites forcing a tarnished and worn establishment puppet down the throats of the electorate too stupid to know how they are being played for fools.
We shouldn’t be coerced to compromise moral principles and merely vote against someone. Political elites are blackmailing voters by claiming, “if you don’t vote for our chosen one, it’s your fault if XYZ wins.” Maybe it may be the Democratic Party's fault for ignoring and marginalizing the far left and minorities, who they claim to have represented for generations to little effect.
The party elites shouldn’t be exonerated for second-rate judgment by convincing supporters to violate their moral principles. Voting for the lesser of two evils is not like choosing to switch a runaway train to another track so it kills one person instead of five if you do nothing. In this hypothetical, there are only two plausible choices, just like national elections. If you aren’t fooled by propaganda, you’ll see the real lesser of two evils choice here is voting for the lesser of two evils versus refusing to vote for the lesser of the two.
When faced with two repulsive candidates for office, we can abstain from voting, vote for a third party candidate or write someone in until actual change occurs.
Voting for the lesser of two evils compromises moral values, condones our Oligarch's shoddy treatment of millions of consumers and sabotages needed structural change, virtually guaranteeing the Party elites will do it again and again. If enough refuse to vote as indoctrinated, a write-in or third party choice will win at some point. But the electorate could certainly send a very clear message that many will no longer tolerate being ignored, marginalized or shamed into terrible, crooked choices.