

Best case scenario with the honest man: he does nothing and I starve to death. Worst case scenario with the lying man: I starve to death anyway. May as well try changing things.
Sure, maybe I starve to death faster, but you give most people a choice between “100% chance you starve to death” and “99% chance you starve to death and 1% chance you don’t” and they will take the 1% chance.
At least the lying man admits there’s a fucking problem. “Everything is fine and nothing needs to change” was not a good strategy.
There’s dying, or a 1% chance of not dying. These are in fact not equal.
Which to someone starving to death is a lot better than someone saying “everything is fine, keep the status quo”.
Nope. I was spending time trying to argue with people to do the bare fucking minimum to stop this, and the Democrats did not help with their campaign of “lets change nothing because everything is fine.”
Not an American. I’ll be fine. I can just understand why someone who is desperate (which according to polls is over 50% of your population) could decide to vote for someone who says they want to fucking change things, instead of the people saying everything is fine and they will change nothing.