Pardon me for still allowing such a silly thing as an ideal to guide my actions in the face of the obvious pragmatic choice.
You are stating in no uncertain terms that you feel that Gary Johnson, through his ignorance of foreign policy, will therefore provide a better standpoint on complicated issues such as Syria by virtue of his lack of knowledge. You are literally arguing that ignorance of an issue is better than knowledge of an issue for handling an issue. You are advocating ignorance for its own sake. No, that's not true. You're arguing ignorance because you're so far up your own ass that the only thing you can see anymore is your own dudgeon, the only fight worth having is spite for spite's sake, the only position worth having is the minority one, a plague on both your houses, everyone is wrong except you because fuck the world. Take it from someone who's been there: bitterness is not moral authority, no matter how much you want it to be. So when you have these little discussions? You're basically saying "you're wrong because I hate you." Let's examine this statement:What does it say that my conscience voted for 'what is Aleppo?' over literally everything else?