Hacker News Reader

Comment by artursapek | Hacker News Reader

I'm seeing a lot of people deciding who to vote for by deciding which candidate they dislike less - not which they like more. Is that normal in US presidential elections? This is the first one I've followed.

View on HN

Sadly yes; it's unusual for an election to have a majority of people voting for rather than against someone for president, but it does sometimes happen.

It hasn't always been this way.. Reagan, JFK, FDR and several others had some overwhelming popularity at their time. Today, I feel that another Eisenhower or Truman would be better for the country, but would be very happy to see another Reagan or JFK take office. Even Bill Clinton was pretty likable, even if I disagree with many of his political points of view.

In the end, I've been voting Libertarian and/or "not the incumbent" for a few years now, and wish more people would do so.

I recently discussed this topic with some U.S. citizens in their sixties. It is their impression, and mine as well, that this is the worst election in our lifetimes in that way. Of course there are always some people that vote according to which candidate they dislike less, but this election does seem to be an extreme case.

How are those two different things? Seriously. I like Hillary more AND I dislike her less. How are those even two separate concepts?

The implication is that they "like" neither. Technically, disliking one less means you like them more, but the wording is meant to convey the distaste in the available choices, as opposed to being excited for the new term.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com