Anyone still undecided?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-09-2016, 11:37 AM
RE: Anyone still undecided?
(20-09-2016 03:34 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(19-09-2016 05:51 PM)TheGulegon Wrote:  I'd rather not vote for an imbecile, or a sheisty lady, so would it be better for me to throw my vote into a Johnson/Weld ticket, or just not vote?

Who do you think is going to pick better replacement Supreme Court Justices?

Clinton and Trump are the only two viable candidates. Any vote not for one of them, is directly or indirectly a vote for the other. Voting third party is both a vote both for your conscious, and a vote for the person you most want to keep out of that same office.

This is really only true in swing states (or at least somewhat close). It's not true at all for states with large populations, heavily decided, and winner-take-all-electoral-votes (such as CA).

"just an FYI: There are 2 kinds of people in the world -- those who divide everybody into 2 kinds of people & those who don't." Neil deGrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like MustangManda's post
21-09-2016, 11:39 AM
RE: Anyone still undecided?
(20-09-2016 09:59 PM)WillHopp Wrote:  
(20-09-2016 09:25 PM)CleverUsername Wrote:  A good point Shy

To quote the greatest band that ever was ... If you choose not to decide you still have made a choice.

I WILL CHOOSE FREEWILL!

I don't know about greatest band ever, but they have some incredible lyrics.

"just an FYI: There are 2 kinds of people in the world -- those who divide everybody into 2 kinds of people & those who don't." Neil deGrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like MustangManda's post
21-09-2016, 11:42 AM
RE: Anyone still undecided?
(21-09-2016 11:34 AM)MustangManda Wrote:  
(19-09-2016 10:02 PM)WillHopp Wrote:  I'd like to make a case for not voting for Johnson/Weld. If your concern is having someone who seems to be in touch with what we are going through as a country and someone who is prepared and will be prepared on Day 1, then you clearly can't vote for this ticket. The man had no idea what Aleppo was. But even if you give him a pass and just say it was a brain fart, though I have no idea how he could not know that, he then today said in an interview that he was grateful that no one got hurt in the New York/New Jersey bombings over the weekend. Seriously? 29 people went to the hospital. While I know he meant to say no one was killed and everyone looks to be recovering fully, the weed has fried his brain. He probably doesn't realize it yet, but he is lucky he didn't qualify for the debates because he would be made to look like the idiot he is. Also, Carl Bernstein reported Weld is considering dropping out because he is afraid their ticket might actually be the reason Trump could win. That they would serve as a catalyst to his campaign. While they have denied this, Bernstein doesn't report lightly and he took down Nixon for Zeus' sake. Far too many things wrong with this ticket.

I'm not voting for Johnson because I think he can win, I'm voting to show that I'm NOT supporting the election circus that produced Hillary and Trump. I agree, Johnson has problems, but I believe there are virtuous ideals within the Libertarian philosophy that I'd like to see become more mainstream, and the best way to show my support of them is to actually show up and vote. If I were in a swing state though, I might not feel comfortable (with Trump winning) enough to do this, but in CA, my vote will undoubtedly have ZERO effect on the winner of this election. I'm looking long-term.

(20-09-2016 12:55 AM)mrgr8avill Wrote:  I'm still undecided. With all the damage "Us v. Them" has done in the political arena of this country in the last 20-some years, we stand to get more divisive and less capable of compromise as we move ahead. We now talk about entire sessions of "lame duck" congresses, and it's growing more and more impossible to see the concept of patriotism over politics taking hold anytime soon. Trump getting elected may just be the thing necessary to burn our current concept of national politics down. From the ashes, we might learn to value compromise and maybe even get a third and fourth viable party that blends the current social ideals of one party with the fiscal ideals of another, such that one doesn't need to accept the socioreligious viewpoints of the Republicans to vie for fiscal conservatism, or accept the concept of Big Government to maintain social freedoms. Maybe Trump would condense the decades of pain necessary to affect real change and condense it into four short years of chaos and hell.

Then again, using dynamite to clean the carpets may not be the brightest idea. So, which is better - 4-8 more years of no real change going down the road of unsustainable debt and political infighting and the "K Street White House (which, by the way, I assign blame to both parties)," or four years of utter chaos followed by what will undoubtedly be a massive shift in the relationship between the American voter and national politics? Trump may be a catalyst of real change by the nature of how horrible he will be as president - offset by the possibility that the powderkeg might be so large that we do irreparable harm.

I readily agree that virtually nothing about Trump suggests that he will be a good or effective president, but the potential for change is tempting...

THIS, EXACTLY. I do hate Trump, passionately, but I can't help but hope that IF he wins, he could be so disastrous (just not nuclear-war-disastrous) that he inspires some fixes to our political climate, including the election process, corruption, and the increasing party divides (mostly caused by the growing "independent" voter base IMO, but media plays a large role as well).

Trump is a malignant narcissist and prone to being overly sensitive to perceived degradation. He will react in anger and be quite uncontrollable. Nothing good can come from this. Nothing.

[Image: dobie.png]Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like Dom's post
21-09-2016, 12:27 PM
RE: Anyone still undecided?
(20-09-2016 03:44 PM)Vosur Wrote:  
(20-09-2016 01:20 PM)WillHopp Wrote:  I interpreted his air quotes, which everyone here knows why he was using them, because he didn't really mean it.
As far as I can tell, you're the only one aside from me who has voiced his opinion on the matter in this thread. It's probably a good idea to refrain from speaking for everyone in a situation like that and to be content with only speaking for yourself.
Then perhaps is time someone else chimed in about it. What was said frankly isn't important, it's what was communicated that is important. Nonverbal communication is usually far more powerful than verbal. Take, for example, a person who says "Nothing is wrong!" with an angry expression. The anger is "louder" than the statement and it tells you something indeed is wrong even though the words say otherwise. So claiming Sanders said those words might be technically correct, but it makes no real point because it isn't what he communicated.

So what did those air quotes mean? Put it in context. He was replying to Clinton's statement that he is not qualified to be President. So the air quotes on the word "qualified" was to indicate using the identical term that Clinton used. He then listed a few actions and decisions that he didn't like that Clinton made - THAT is what he communicated. Within context, it's also obvious that Sanders wouldn't normally have been saying she isn't qualified at all (another reason for the air quotes) except it was a defensive response to her claim that he isn't qualified. It was a political reply, not a heart-felt opinion about Clinton's qualifications. THAT was also communicated. No, this is not opinion the same as it's not opinion that the angry "Nothing is wrong!" means something is wrong.

I am not accountable to any God. I am accountable to myself - and not because I think I am God as some theists would try to assert - but because, no matter what actions I take, thoughts I think, or words I utter, I have to be able to live with myself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Impulse's post
21-09-2016, 01:34 PM
RE: Anyone still undecided?
(20-09-2016 03:34 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(19-09-2016 05:51 PM)TheGulegon Wrote:  I'd rather not vote for an imbecile, or a sheisty lady, so would it be better for me to throw my vote into a Johnson/Weld ticket, or just not vote?

Who do you think is going to pick better replacement Supreme Court Justices?

Clinton and Trump are the only two viable candidates. Any vote not for one of them, is directly or indirectly a vote for the other. Voting third party is both a vote both for your conscious, and a vote for the person you most want to keep out of that same office.

Meh. The question was hypothetical. I'm from Arkansas; we vote for Clintons. It's what we do, main. Tongue Though Trump was winning in my current state of Missouri (misery) last time I looked. Facepalm

Just feels like if all we ever do is vote for the lesser of 2 evils, all we'll ever get in the White House will be evil. Undecided

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like TheGulegon's post
21-09-2016, 01:55 PM
RE: Anyone still undecided?
Clinton won't "win" the election... Drumpf will lose it. Confused

I'm a creationist... I believe that man created God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-09-2016, 02:12 PM
RE: Anyone still undecided?
(21-09-2016 01:55 PM)SYZ Wrote:  Clinton won't "win" the election... Drumpf will lose it. Confused

And in four years we will get to go through this all again.


But as if to knock me down, reality came around
And without so much as a mere touch, cut me into little pieces

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Momsurroundedbyboys's post
21-09-2016, 03:52 PM
RE: Anyone still undecided?
(21-09-2016 01:34 PM)TheGulegon Wrote:  
(20-09-2016 03:34 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Who do you think is going to pick better replacement Supreme Court Justices?

Clinton and Trump are the only two viable candidates. Any vote not for one of them, is directly or indirectly a vote for the other. Voting third party is both a vote both for your conscious, and a vote for the person you most want to keep out of that same office.

Meh. The question was hypothetical. I'm from Arkansas; we vote for Clintons. It's what we do, main. Tongue Though Trump was winning in my current state of Missouri (misery) last time I looked. Facepalm

Just feels like if all we ever do is vote for the lesser of 2 evils, all we'll ever get in the White House will be evil. Undecided

How can 'evil' be measured?

Don't let those gnomes and their illusions get you down. They're just gnomes and illusions.

--Jake the Dog, Adventure Time

Alouette, je te plumerai.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Old Man Marsh's post
21-09-2016, 04:45 PM
RE: Anyone still undecided?
By their stench ye shall know them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olf_(unit)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Fireball's post
21-09-2016, 05:05 PM
RE: Anyone still undecided?
(21-09-2016 11:42 AM)Dom Wrote:  
(21-09-2016 11:34 AM)MustangManda Wrote:  I'm not voting for Johnson because I think he can win, I'm voting to show that I'm NOT supporting the election circus that produced Hillary and Trump. I agree, Johnson has problems, but I believe there are virtuous ideals within the Libertarian philosophy that I'd like to see become more mainstream, and the best way to show my support of them is to actually show up and vote. If I were in a swing state though, I might not feel comfortable (with Trump winning) enough to do this, but in CA, my vote will undoubtedly have ZERO effect on the winner of this election. I'm looking long-term.


THIS, EXACTLY. I do hate Trump, passionately, but I can't help but hope that IF he wins, he could be so disastrous (just not nuclear-war-disastrous) that he inspires some fixes to our political climate, including the election process, corruption, and the increasing party divides (mostly caused by the growing "independent" voter base IMO, but media plays a large role as well).

Trump is a malignant narcissist and prone to being overly sensitive to perceived degradation. He will react in anger and be quite uncontrollable. Nothing good can come from this. Nothing.

Really personality wise he could easily pass as Kim Jong's twin.Both are warmongering egomaniacs. Ignorant of how most of the world works.Obsessed with there tiny parts . Coasted most of there life on there parents success.say crazy things then back peddle from them. Both shift positions on a dime. And both blame foreigners for all countries problems.

[Image: giphy.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like OrdoSkeptica's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: