You have diverted the question to “maximizing happiness for all humans”. This is substituting the original bounded problem (“which of these finite candidates do I support in 2020 and why”) with something much less bounded.
Thank you for the advice, I will take it into consideration.
> You have diverted the question to “maximizing happiness for all humans”. This is substituting the original bounded problem (“which of these finite candidates do I support in 2020 and why”) with something much less bounded.
I'm not quite sure I understand this part, I was answering your question:
> Is your political goal mostly to shake up the status quo?
I answered with what I see as my political goal.
To my way of thinking, your characterization of my sincere answer to your question as a "diversion" to be yet another example of what I see as a problematic characteristic of early 21st century Western culture: blind, unthinking allegiance to an ideology, with little interest in or concern for nuance or differing opinions. When I encounter this, it feels like authoritarianism to me. I may be wrong about this, I may be right. Do you know the answers to such questions? I make no presumption to know such things, I merely do my best at estimating them under the current conditions of the time.
Consider staying with the matter at hand.
You have diverted the question to “maximizing happiness for all humans”. This is substituting the original bounded problem (“which of these finite candidates do I support in 2020 and why”) with something much less bounded.
Signing off.