Everyone has a limit for what they will vote for in a representative for government at any level. So when that limit is reached, it should be perfectly acceptable to state there is no viable candidate worth your vote.
If you disagree with the reasoning of someone else, please try to do so rationally and without ridicule, or appeals that "no vote for x is a vote for y". That is not an argument, but instead is basically a direct insult that the abstainer's bedrock principles are without value.
You lose absolutely nothing from your argument to refer to the opposing candidate by his or her actual name rather than some silly 6th grade pejorative play on their name. Doing otherwise shuts many ears. Referring to supporters of that candidate in similarly pejorative ways is even worse. We are all individuals, with life experiences and distilled values that inform our opinions. Disrespecting anyone else in response to their stated opinion by calling them a silly name, no matter how clever, is a slur on the very being of that person.
If you reach an impasse, just drop it. Agree to disagree, and move on.
Understand that anger loosens many a tongue from normally firm mooring, and try to forget who started what and who called whom whatever.
It's a new week. You can choose the default state of biting sarcasm, outright insults and encouraging anger with everyone opposed to your opinion; or you can choose to be more respectful, and while disappointed with your adversary on this topic, maintain a civility that is ennobling to all parties in itself.
Read the rest here...