Re:Zelensky leaves White House after angry meeting
by Uvix on Friday February 28, 2025 @08:14PM
(#43214396)
If they're truly both evils, there's always the option to do a write-in vote for someone else. Futile? Sure. But hopefully headlines like "X won the election with 30% of the vote" would start to raise eyebrows in ways that "X won the election with 49% of the vote" doesn't.
Re:Zelensky leaves White House after angry meeting
by jachee on Friday February 28, 2025 @08:24PM
(#43214474)
Go back and read this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43212390
“voted for by >50%” is what I’m refuting. It’s literally, factually untrue.
Re:Zelensky leaves White House after angry meeting
by harshreality on Friday February 28, 2025 @10:12PM
(#43215352)
I didn't argue that Trump received ≥50% of votes cast.
GP's point was that far less than 50% cared enough to vote against Trump, which was their only real option if they didn't like him.
Many voters are voting for the lesser of two evils; they don't like either candidate. Non-voters are simply taking that to the next level: they can't decide between two evils strongly enough to value casting a vote.
Bikeshedding over the difference between active vs passive votes in a single-winner first-past-the-post election is fruitless.