It is so strange, these days, listening to supporters of the duopoly argue. The dialogue always revolves around which one of their candidates is worse. It's never about how good that person would be for the job... quite the contrary: it's always about how BAD the other person is or was at the job.
It's like listening to gang members. There is no real logic to the argument. Some of them hang on to color or letter loyalty; they'll always vote for that person with the R beside their name... or written in the BLUE box. The other color or letter is automatically worse.
I feel like I'm watching some sort of psychiatric experiment...
Yeah... this goes beyond superstition and into the realm of psychosis.