Thanks, Pi.

I have found the contrapositive argument for the "lesser evil" idea to have more bite (stated as carefully and clearly as I can, but read/think it slow):

If one does *not* vote for the LO2E (in one's own honest individual judgment), then one is, in essence/reality, *increasing* the chance that the greater evil wins.

Remember, no individual judgment on future human behavior is demonstrably/automatically true. We can all be mistaken. What we seek is a *collective* wisdom (a real thing; I wish I had archived the studies that showed it) as opposed to so called "mind viruses", i.e. collective madness or the madness of crowds, which is also obviously a possibility!

Incidentally (imo), this is also why a Constitutional Republic should always naturally have only 2 main parties. Otherwise, the opposition party (the one not in democratic control of the Federal gov't. at any given point in time) has little chance of changing the situation, and the People have little chance of "spanking" their overlords. I use a 40/30/30 split as example. See, 60% of the Peeps want change, but divide their protest vote among more than 1 opposition party, leading to continued rule by the powers-that-be, who can now claim a mandate (that's a 10% win margin).

What do you think?