If you HAD to Vote for One...

[amalik]

There should be a 3rd option in the poll. 'Allow goldfish to die for the sake of saving humanity.'

 

[1engineer]

Holy crap it's almost nine out of ten for Trump!

While some of the posts have been good so far, many of you need to face a few simple facts:

1. Realistically only Trump or Clinton will be President next January. No amount of wishing or talking or posting will change that.

2. Voting for a 3rd party might be noble but it's just a wasted vote. You might as well stay home.

3. You got two choices and that's it gentlemen. Choose wisely.

 

[JB.]

I would use every bit of the time I had until scheduled goldfish execution to do research.

Ha, who am I kidding. Given that a single vote has zero chance of affecting the election, I'd flip a coin so as to get back to sipping Pina Coladas on the beach with Goldy as soon as possible.

Edit: The coin likes Clinton

 

[wadle5]

Please, enlighten us with details...

I will go into details when you respond to my initial questions that I proposed to you that you seemed to ignore and then just started banter with Thai.
There is a series and order of questions, but you seem to just cherry pick. You and ndecent become difficult to have a debate/discussion with when you just walk away and try changing the subject every time you are stumped.

This is a Trump OR Hillary and thread and somehow they have managed to bring Sanders into this conversation. Sorry folks, but if you don't like your Democratic nominee don't blame us because your process is ridiculous. Also find it more amusing/terrifying that Canadians are pro-Sanders as well. Can't even vote and when given an option of A or B, you choose C? Please enlighten us with details how that works??

 

[wadle5]

Trump's rampant misogyny is justified because the Affordable Care Act is an attack against women and his racism is validated because Elizabeth Warren might have Native American ancestry.

Just go with it, dude.

See when you run several different "thoughts" together it doesn't make a sound argument, just makes you look confused. I was nowhere involved with the Elizabeth Warren Native American shennaigans. . . . .but keep grasping at those straws sir.

:help:

 

[ndcent]

See when you run several different "thoughts" together it doesn't make a sound argument, just makes you look confused. I was nowhere involved with the Elizabeth Warren Native American shennaigans. . . . .but keep grasping at those straws sir.

:help:

I don't blame you for distancing yourself for the asinine Warren narrative, didn't mean to imply that you were responsible for that absurd thought, you're the angry "ACA attacks women" guy.

 

[-JD-]

I will go into details when you respond to my initial questions that I proposed to you that you seemed to ignore and then just started banter with Thai.
There is a series and order of questions, but you seem to just cherry pick. You and ndecent become difficult to have a debate/discussion with when you just walk away and try changing the subject every time you are stumped.

Went back. Couldn't find it. Why don't you just tell me what your question was?
Since you seem to insist it is answered before you will speak on other issues.

 

[jahdai42]

I'd rather chew glass and seawater that vote for either

 

[jwkilgore]

At least Gary Johnson could face them in a general election.

^^^ This.

2. Voting for a 3rd party might be noble but it's just a wasted vote. You might as well stay home.

Not true. Staying home means you have removed yourself from the process, and therefore politicians will ignore your opinions. Voting third party says two things to politicians: 1) you went to the trouble of voting, so you are engaged in the process, and 2) you didn't vote for the "other guy", so you could potentially be persuaded to vote for "our guy" if we had a better candidate.

I fully agree that Gary Johnson has little to no chance of winning in November. But I'd rather he were my president than either of the other two, and if enough people vote for him it may snap the major parties out of their non-stop partisan bickering. :flipoff:


Back on topic, if I were forced to pick one, I still don't know. I've taken a few of those "I side with" type quizzes. In spite of being a life-long moderate/conservative, surprisingly, I agree with Clinton on many more issues than Trump. Plus the idea of Trump negotiating international treaties and trade deals scares the piss out of me.

But one of my biggest personal hot-button issues puts me directly at odds with Clinton, and there are several court cases on that issue working their way toward the supreme court. If Clinton gets the next pick it will set that issue back decades.

I honestly think I would have to get blind drunk first before making a last-second decision then immediately puking my guts out. :beer: :redbrick:

 

[1engineer]

^^^ This.

Not true. Staying home means you have removed yourself from the process, and therefore politicians will ignore your opinions. Voting third party says two things to politicians: 1) you went to the trouble of voting, so you are engaged in the process, and 2) you didn't vote for the "other guy", so you could potentially be persuaded to vote for "our guy" if we had a better candidate.

I fully agree that Gary Johnson has little to no chance of winning in November. But I'd rather he were my president than either of the other two, and if enough people vote for him it may snap the major parties out of their non-stop partisan bickering. :flipoff:


Back on topic, if I were forced to pick one, I still don't know. I've taken a few of those "I side with" type quizzes. In spite of being a life-long moderate/conservative, surprisingly, I agree with Clinton on many more issues than Trump. Plus the idea of Trump negotiating international treaties and trade deals scares the piss out of me.

But one of my biggest personal hot-button issues puts me directly at odds with Clinton, and there are several court cases on that issue working their way toward the supreme court. If Clinton gets the next pick it will set that issue back decades.

I honestly think I would have to get blind drunk first before making a last-second decision then immediately puking my guts out. :beer: :redbrick:

I was talking realistically instead of idealistic. You vote for a 3rd party who has no chance of winning you might as well have not voted because your vote did not go towards one of the two who could win.

 

[Crazysnowbdr]

If Hillary has her way we will no longer be able to 4 wheel anywhere in the US. Don't end up like NY vote Trump 2016 haha

 

[T5RUNNER]

Couldn't have said it better jwkilgore. These are the most hated candidates ever, and both parties will be doing some soul searching after this election. The most coveted voters are always independents who lean your way but did not vote for you. Any third party who gets even double digit percentage would have a massive effect on the establishment.

Those who say voting for a third party is the same as not voting, or that not voting for one is the same as voting for the other can not do basic math.

 

[bigbillyt]

I used to enjoy politics

Our political system has finally gone completely into the crapper. I am so tired of the left vs. right nonsense. They are all corrupt and no longer represent the American people in even the most fundamental way. Now, no sane person will go near running for higher office.

I am primarily a liberal, in that I believe in liberal social principles and the importance of a strong government that creates and enforces laws to help create and maintain a fair and just society. However, I am also in favor of individual freedom, as long as it doesn't cause harm to others. I am a strong supporter of the second amendment, and yet I also believe in implementing thorough background checks and limiting access to large capacity magazines. My point is that I, like I think many people, am not one hundred percent on one side or the other on every issue.

I am not happy with our current president either, but not for the reasons most people subscribe to. I think the biggest failure of the current administration is not ever finding a way to substantially punish anybody for the near collapse of our economy. Let's face it, there was collusion between multiple specific individuals at the ratings agencies involved and the bond traders and brokerages that created and dealt in fraudulent investments. The inability of the current administration to bring charges and prosecute any specific individuals is absolutely criminal in and of itself.

My point is, that as much as I see another Clinton presidency as a continuation of the status quo, which is pretty awful, I'll take four years of that over the potential horrors of a trump presidency. I fear that four years of trump could run our country into the ground in ways that most people can't even fathom. He could substantially damage relations between our country and most, if not all, of our allies. Worse yet, he appears poised, and likely, to escalate racial, ethnic and religious tensions to the point of near civil war. Also, don't kid yourselves, there are still plenty of people out there, some of them high level politicians and military strategists, who believe it is possible to "win" in a limited nuclear arms exchange scenario. Trump strikes me as one who might be led to subscribe to this type of theory. In his zeal to make sure he is being as politically incorrect as possible he might just be the one to bring about total global destruction. I know, most people think this is extreme thinking and highly unlikely, but I would argue that just twenty years ago a great deal of what has transpired in politics and world events would have been considered pretty far fetched.

Anyway, selfish though it may be, I have to go with Hillary. I would just like to live, is that so wrong?

 

[ThorInc]

Our political system has finally gone completely into the crapper. I am so tired of the left vs. right nonsense. They are all corrupt and no longer represent the American people in even the most fundamental way. Now, no sane person will go near running for higher office.

I am primarily a liberal, in that I believe in liberal social principles and the importance of a strong government that creates and enforces laws to help create and maintain a fair and just society. However, I am also in favor of individual freedom, as long as it doesn't cause harm to others. I am a strong supporter of the second amendment, and yet I also believe in implementing thorough background checks and limiting access to large capacity magazines. My point is that I, like I think many people, am not one hundred percent on one side or the other on every issue.

I am not happy with our current president either, but not for the reasons most people subscribe to. I think the biggest failure of the current administration is not ever finding a way to substantially punish anybody for the near collapse of our economy. Let's face it, there was collusion between multiple specific individuals at the ratings agencies involved and the bond traders and brokerages that created and dealt in fraudulent investments. The inability of the current administration to bring charges and prosecute any specific individuals is absolutely criminal in and of itself.

My point is, that as much as I see another Clinton presidency as a continuation of the status quo, which is pretty awful, I'll take four years of that over the potential horrors of a trump presidency. I fear that four years of trump could run our country into the ground in ways that most people can't even fathom. He could substantially damage relations between our country and most, if not all, of our allies. Worse yet, he appears poised, and likely, to escalate racial, ethnic and religious tensions to the point of near civil war. Also, don't kid yourselves, there are still plenty of people out there, some of them high level politicians and military strategists, who believe it is possible to "win" in a limited nuclear arms exchange scenario. Trump strikes me as one who might be led to subscribe to this type of theory. In his zeal to make sure he is being as politically incorrect as possible he might just be the one to bring about total global destruction. I know, most people think this is extreme thinking and highly unlikely, but I would argue that just twenty years ago a great deal of what has transpired in politics and world events would have been considered pretty far fetched.

Anyway, selfish though it may be, I have to go with Hillary. I would just like to live, is that so wrong?

I will address the "near collapse of our(your) economy", criminals don't lock up other criminals remember greed is good. I also agree that the right vs left is a distraction to keep the simple off balance.......so WE (the collective miss the forest.

 

[1engineer]

Couldn't have said it better jwkilgore. These are the most hated candidates ever, and both parties will be doing some soul searching after this election. The most coveted voters are always independents who lean your way but did not vote for you. Any third party who gets even double digit percentage would have a massive effect on the establishment.

Those who say voting for a third party is the same as not voting, or that not voting for one is the same as voting for the other can not do basic math.

Pretty sure my math skills are passable lol. See, you are letting emotion and all that crap get in the way of logic. Sure independents are the most coveted voters. By who? By those two candidates! How can you say a vote for someone who has no chance of winning is not a wasted vote? Moral victory yes. Logical no. I don't like either candidate but I know that unless I vote for one of them then my vote goes for naught. Like voting for Pedro.

 

[1engineer]

Our political system has finally gone completely into the crapper. I am so tired of the left vs. right nonsense. They are all corrupt and no longer represent the American people in even the most fundamental way. Now, no sane person will go near running for higher office.

I am primarily a liberal, in that I believe in liberal social principles and the importance of a strong government that creates and enforces laws to help create and maintain a fair and just society. However, I am also in favor of individual freedom, as long as it doesn't cause harm to others. I am a strong supporter of the second amendment, and yet I also believe in implementing thorough background checks and limiting access to large capacity magazines. My point is that I, like I think many people, am not one hundred percent on one side or the other on every issue.

I am not happy with our current president either, but not for the reasons most people subscribe to. I think the biggest failure of the current administration is not ever finding a way to substantially punish anybody for the near collapse of our economy. Let's face it, there was collusion between multiple specific individuals at the ratings agencies involved and the bond traders and brokerages that created and dealt in fraudulent investments. The inability of the current administration to bring charges and prosecute any specific individuals is absolutely criminal in and of itself.

My point is, that as much as I see another Clinton presidency as a continuation of the status quo, which is pretty awful, I'll take four years of that over the potential horrors of a trump presidency. I fear that four years of trump could run our country into the ground in ways that most people can't even fathom. He could substantially damage relations between our country and most, if not all, of our allies. Worse yet, he appears poised, and likely, to escalate racial, ethnic and religious tensions to the point of near civil war. Also, don't kid yourselves, there are still plenty of people out there, some of them high level politicians and military strategists, who believe it is possible to "win" in a limited nuclear arms exchange scenario. Trump strikes me as one who might be led to subscribe to this type of theory. In his zeal to make sure he is being as politically incorrect as possible he might just be the one to bring about total global destruction. I know, most people think this is extreme thinking and highly unlikely, but I would argue that just twenty years ago a great deal of what has transpired in politics and world events would have been considered pretty far fetched.

Anyway, selfish though it may be, I have to go with Hillary. I would just like to live, is that so wrong?

That is all well and good but you don't need to justify yourself and you won't change any minds. You could have just voted in the poll lol.

 

[T5RUNNER]

Pretty sure my math skills are passable lol. See, you are letting emotion and all that crap get in the way of logic. Sure independents are the most coveted voters. By who? By those two candidates! How can you say a vote for someone who has no chance of winning is not a wasted vote? Moral victory yes. Logical no. I don't like either candidate but I know that unless I vote for one of them then my vote goes for naught. Like voting for Pedro.

Sorry but no, voting for a losing candidate is in no way equal to not voting. Hand in your engineer decoder ring.

The last several posts contained quite a bit of logic on how voting for a third party can shape policy for the major parties and even change elections (see Ross Perot). No one expects a third party to win, but I do expect them to get a much higher percentage of the vote than usual. It is a small condolence that I will also be able to live with myself.

 

[1engineer]

Sorry but no, voting for a losing candidate is in no way equal to not voting. Hand in your engineer decoder ring.

The last several posts contained quite a bit of logic on how voting for a third party can shape policy for the major parties and even change elections (see Ross Perot). No one expects a third party to win, but I do expect them to get a much higher percentage of the vote than usual. It is a small condolence that I will also be able to live with myself.

It's not about policy changes.

It's not about living with yourself.

It's about winning the election. Simple logic.

If I vote for Clinton then I cancel a vote for Trump.
If I vote for Trump then I cancel a vote for Clinton
If I vote for Pedro... I throw away my chance to vote for a possible victor.

You are making too big a deal over this. Trump or Clinton. Pick one because one is going to be Potus.

 

[bigbillyt]

That is all well and good but you don't need to justify yourself and you won't change any minds. You could have just voted in the poll lol.

So, what you are saying, speaking for everyone else who might come across this thread, is that there is absolutely no point in engaging in any sort of basic, civil political discourse? And, that there is no point in providing a background for remarks that are relevant to the topic at hand? I am pretty sure this is the exact mindset that trump is counting on. In the interest of survival, I would highly recommend at least trying to keep an open mind. Believe me, I have tried to give trump a chance, as I too am tired of political correctness run amok, and we desperately need to shake things up. But death therapy is highly overrated as far as I am concerned.

 

[Jernik]

It's not about policy changes.

It's not about living with yourself.

It's about winning the election. Simple logic.

If I vote for Clinton then I cancel a vote for Trump.
If I vote for Trump then I cancel a vote for Clinton
If I vote for Pedro... I throw away my chance to vote for a possible victor.

You are making too big a deal over this. Trump or Clinton. Pick one because one is going to be Potus.

Most things I agree with you on, but this one I don't. The idea of voting, IMO, is not to side with a possible victor between two candidates who have the best chance of winning.

A vote is a choice, and possibly the only voice many have that can be heard by our current government. One should vote NOT to try siding with a winning team (bandwagon fan?), but rather to select the individual you feel best deserves that vote. If that is a 3rd party candidate, then so be it.

If enough disgusted voters go that route, it would get noticed. And may even make a 3rd party viable (eventually). If 30% vote for the Independent candidate, and Trump or Hillary win with say, 36% (leaving 34% for the runner up), would all those Independent votes be wasted, or would they have an impact?

What's that old saying about doing the same thing over and over while expecting different results? The D's and R's would LOVE for everyone to buy into the "wasted vote" line of thought - it helps keep their current shell game intact.