Reply #67: "Will you at least concede that there are better candidates out there?"

[BzaDem]

No. Why would someone concede to a falsity? Of course, if you broaden "candidate" to any person on the street, it loses all meaning.

Defined in a meaningful way (one who has a non-zero probability of being inaugurated), there are no better candidates.

The only person who is wrong in both a philosophical and practical sense is you. Philosophically, you shirk from fear (as if fear is a bad thing) when fear can actually be a very good thing. Practically, your strategy has led the country on the road to ruin before (see 2000) and will continue to do so whenever it is successful. Your strategy does nothing but enable the most corrupt, unjust system that could possibly be conceived. By abdicating your responsibility to select a candidate to govern (and instead selecting a "candidate" with a zero probability of governing), you are enabling others to make the decision for you -- and those others only serve to further solidify the corruption.