Can We Have a Roll Call?

It is possible to simultaneously assent to 1 and 2, as I do, (or say "1, or failing that, 2") although it is academic since I am not a US citizen or resident.

Agree w Con

I'm not sure it is.

Being the "lesser of two evils" doesn't bode well for a presidency that might be considered "good" or "great" since it means the person is "evil."

Either one of them might win and somehow prove to be wonderful presidents but based on what we know of them that seems unlikely.

if the lesser of the two evils is only a little bit evil, or whose evil nature is open to debate, and the greater of the two evils is a gigantic, colossal, no-two-ways-about-it mindfuck of a walking disaster, then the rational choice is clear. Like the common cold vs. polio.

I'm not making any judgments about the candidates (other then in registering my choice). Since I think both are too "evil" to support, it's immaterial to me which is more "evil"

My point is that it's difficult to reconcile #1 and #2 (or for that matter #3 and #4) as being a valid choice. It seems like you want to cover all the bases.

Too early to commit.

Fair enough

2) I support Clinton because she is the lesser of two evils

I'll go with #2, although I think she'll make an ok president also. I don't anticipate any disasters with her as POTUS, nor to I anticipate any big changes.

In my opinion it's Congress (The Legislative Branch) which needs to be fixed, way more than the Executive Branch. Congress is thoroughly owned by big-money providers who can get them re-elected, and that's a broken system. Congress is supposed to be driven by the electorate, not by the people who can fund their media campaigns (which influence the electorate). Don't get me going...

5
Cinco
Viisi
Cinq
Fünf
Because, as G W Bush once observed, "You are either with us, or you are against us."

In a Ven Diagram of Finn and edgar there is this small but significant overlap.

Support? None of the above. How my vote will go is already decided but I will leave that for another discussion.

Isn't that #5?

Probably...

(I refuse to commit)

Well, we could unpack that "lesser of two evils" a bit. The word 'evil' is this context merely means "unpleasant option". It does not necessarily imply that both choices are "evil" in the cartoonish Bible Belt/Hollywood-horror-movie horns/cloven hooves/pitchfork sense. Anyhow, for me Mrs Clinton would not particularly be an unpleasant option. I don't agree that she is a totally bad person. She sounds like one hell of an operator. If the choice is between her and the dangerous demagogue Trump, I'll take Mrs Clinton.

True to an extent. I would argue that "evil" means unacceptable.

So it sounds like you've opted for #1

You shouldn't call this a roll call, you're conducting a survey and you are inserting yourself in to every response. (At least that's what my husband told me I could say)

What kind of a drooling throwback troll would it take to suggest you would have to consult your husband for a response? Oh, nevermind...

Years ago I swore I would NEVER EVER vote for Hillary for anything... then along came Donald Trump and I'm looking around for a "Hillary 2016" sign for my front lawn!
So #2) I support Clinton because she is the lesser of two evils

Me too, but holding my breath on future news.