We've all heard the liberal argument "if there is a candidate only 99% as bad then you're morally obligated to vote for 99% Hitler." But when we extend that logic to a nearly identical scenario it suddenly sounds a lot less compelling.
We've all heard the liberal argument "if there is a candidate only 99% as bad then you're morally obligated to vote for 99% Hitler." But when we extend that logic to a nearly identical scenario it suddenly sounds a lot less compelling.
What policies would make someone 1% worse than Hitler? Advocates for smoking cigarettes on top of being hitler?
He's mean and orange and says cringe things on twitterRealistically, being healthier and more competent would have made Hitler worse I guess