NoLifeGaming to Political [email protected] • 6 months agoSurely we can learn from this?lemmy.worldimagemessage-square165fedilinkarrow-up1614
arrow-up1614imageSurely we can learn from this?lemmy.worldNoLifeGaming to Political [email protected] • 6 months agomessage-square165fedilink
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish5•6 months agoThis statement implies popularity = good, universally. In the 1800s, slavery was popular. Hence, should a candidate have run on preserving slavery?
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish5•edit-26 months agoNo it doesn’t. A candidate needs a lot of qualities to be “good”. One of those qualities is the ability to be popular on election day. An unpopular candidate isn’t a good candidate. A popular candidate might be.
This statement implies popularity = good, universally.
In the 1800s, slavery was popular. Hence, should a candidate have run on preserving slavery?
No it doesn’t. A candidate needs a lot of qualities to be “good”. One of those qualities is the ability to be popular on election day. An unpopular candidate isn’t a good candidate. A popular candidate might be.