Nobodyspecial: Don't Vote Obama -- If you want some crazy-ass far-right extremist running the U.S.

[ProSense]

52. Speaking

Oh sorry you're right

clearly my problem is I take the OP at it's word, assuming the words are supposed to denote the authors meaning rather then assigning whatever arbitrary meaning will make it sound better and be more defensible.
(do I need a sarcasm smiley here?)

Anyway, I am afraid you still fail at advertising 101.

Arguing that you should choose A because B is worse still sends the message that A isn't great. Just because one guy is horrible does not mean his opponent is awesome. They can both be bad and the OP not only doesn't show why one is awsome, it feeds into the assumption that both may suck.

Which means you fail logic too (excluded middle).

And yet you all seem to think this will convince anyone?

I am going to vote for Obama and even I am not convinced. So if you turn off your own side, what chance do you have?

...of "fail," if you took the OP at its word, you wouldn't be rejecting the premise that "crazy-ass far-right extremist" is bad for the U.S.

I mean, do you envision a situation in which "crazy-ass far-right extremist" might be the better choice?

"Arguing that you should choose A because B is worse still sends the message that A isn't great."

Flawed! If someone tells you to choose A (a straight path) because B (a cliff into the abyss) is worse, that doesn't mean "A isn't great." It means use your head.

You're free to argue that A is better than B, but it would be silly to claim that A is only better than B because B is the abyss.

By that logic, given a choice between life and death, life is only better because death is worse.

That is the gist of the negative frame, absolutism.