Question for people that voted for Trump in the primaries

[retrospooty]

I'm registered as republican but I don't vote along party lines. I voted for Obama twice (I would have voted for McCain but then he went batshit insane and choose a complete moron as his running mate) and I also voted for GWB the first time although in hindsight Al Gore probably would have been a much better president. I'm voting for Hillary because Trump is such a bad choice for the country. I also don't want a conservative choosing the next Supreme Court Justice.
Hillary has the temperament and experience to lead this country. Trump is completely unfit to lead.

You are registered R and voted for Obama 2x, and are voting for Hilary... See that is the issue with the reps... They keep putting up candidates that 1/2 the reps wont vote for. A very large part of today's republican party is far FAR removed from the old style republican values of small govt., a low tax business friendly environment, govt out of people lives and above all personal responsibility. Today's republican party has been taken over by religious nutjobs that want to tell women how to live, they want to tell consenting adults who they can and cannot marry, they are afraid of science and want our schools to teach dis-proven religious dogma and they clearly blame immigrants for all of their problems on a scale not seen since Germany in the 1930's.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

You are registered R and voted for Obama 2x, and are voting for Hilary... See that is the issue with the reps... They keep putting up candidates that 1/2 the reps wont vote for. A very large part of today's republican party is far FAR removed from the old style republican values of small govt., a low tax business friendly environment, govt out of people lives and above all personal responsibility. Today's republican party has been taken over by religious nutjobs that want to tell women how to live, they want to tell consenting adults who they can and cannot marry, they are afraid of science and want our schools to teach dis-proven religious dogma and they clearly blame immigrants for all of their problems on a scale not seen since Germany in the 1930's.

This is very, very true. I have never voted R for President. Honestly I've always wanted to however for my entire voting life the Republicans keep missing one important element and always have one part of the formula missing. Every, single, time since Bush Sr.

 

[RY62]

I'm sorry she's quantitatively better than Trump. You can disagree with every single one of her policies, but compared to Trump how can't you not see that she's way more qualified and an adult in the room compared to a 16 year old buffoon that says the dumbest shit.

How can you compare encouraging nuclear proliferation, cutting ties with our allies, insulting war vets (and then saying you have their backs), being manipulated by russia to an email server or benghazi.

I dont want to wake up for the next 4 years of my life wondering what dumb shit the president is going to say or if we're going to go into a nuclear war. give me a fucking email scandal every day for the next 8 years over that shit.

You get no argument from me on any of these points.
Better still doesn't mean worthy. We can set the standards. If the candidate isn't worthy, don't vote for them. A better smelling turd is still just a turd.

 

[fskimospy]

You get no argument from me on any of these points.
Better still doesn't mean worthy. We can set the standards. If the candidate isn't worthy, don't vote for them. A better smelling turd is still just a turd.

I don't disagree in a philosophical sense but in a practical sense it doesn't seem to hold up.

We know with relative certainty that either Clinton or Trump will be president. Assuming you believe your vote matters at all (a big assumption!) and that Trump is far worse, any voting action you take other than voting for Clinton makes a Trump presidency more likely. Doesn't that mean a Clinton vote is the logical choice considering the choice is binary?

 

[TeeJay1952]

It is difficult to vote for people who don't think that government can solve problems to be in charge of our government.

 

[RY62]

I don't disagree in a philosophical sense but in a practical sense it doesn't seem to hold up.

We know with relative certainty that either Clinton or Trump will be president. Assuming you believe your vote matters at all (a big assumption!) and that Trump is far worse, any voting action you take other than voting for Clinton makes a Trump presidency more likely. Doesn't that mean a Clinton vote is the logical choice considering the choice is binary?

Again, no arguments. This logic is what keeps the system in place. It will never change as long as we keep accepting the better turd. Sure, it will suck for a while. Growing pains always do. But we need to act like Americans and stand up to the damn challenge. Only we, all together, can fix this and stop the madness. Stop rewarding these losers. If it goes nuclear for a while, so be it.

 

[Sunburn74]

You get no argument from me on any of these points.
Better still doesn't mean worthy. We can set the standards. If the candidate isn't worthy, don't vote for them. A better smelling turd is still just a turd.

Such extreme nihilism. What standards for example did George W Bush, Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, Reagan, Ford, etc meet that Hillary Clinton doesn't meet?

 

[1sikbITCH]

This is exactly what I'm talking about. The one and most important way that they are comparable is that both have proven themselves to be unworthy of our trust.
Neither is worthy of a vote.

Neither should get our vote. But, we'll convince ourselves that our turd smells better than their turd so it must be good for us. Keep cheering for your team it's what you've been programmed to do.

White people are the only Americans blessed with "making a choice".
African Americans, Arab Americans, and Latino Americans vote for Hilary to save their lives. Life with a turd or terror, death, or deportation with Trump. No choice at all.

 

[fskimospy]

Again, no arguments. This logic is what keeps the system in place. It will never change as long as we keep accepting the better turd. Sure, it will suck for a while. Growing pains always do. But we need to act like Americans and stand up to the damn challenge. Only we, all together, can fix this and stop the madness. Stop rewarding these losers. If it goes nuclear for a while, so be it.

I find that often people who say 'blow it up and start over' have not considered the consequences of blowing it up.

How about advocating for instant runoff voting, which would immediately solve this problem without giving a mentally unstable racist access to nuclear weapons?

 

[RY62]

Such extreme nihilism. What standards for example did George W Bush, Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, Reagan, Ford, etc meet that Hillary Clinton doesn't meet?

I won't try to debate which past presidents were or were not worthy of their office. We didn't have access to the amount of information we have today. The past can be our guide but we can take control of our futures.

 

[RY62]

I find that often people who say 'blow it up and start over' have not considered the consequences of blowing it up.

How about advocating for instant runoff voting, which would immediately solve this problem without giving a mentally unstable racist access to nuclear weapons?

I'm all in for any discussions to fix this. I love to hear ideas but I'd love more seeing those ideas become a movement. Anything to break the power stranglehold and make our government start to work for us. Let it start here. We'll choose our next leader. To hell with the parties and their media control. Viva la revolución!

 

[fskimospy]

I'm all in for any discussions to fix this. I love to hear ideas but I'd love more seeing those ideas become a movement. Anything to break the power stranglehold and make our government start to work for us. Let it start here. We'll choose our next leader. To hell with the parties and their media control. Viva la revolución!

Seriously I strongly suggest you look into instant runoff voting. It's something that can be implemented at the state level through referendum in a lot of states if you're looking for a way to make change. I genuinely believe that's the answer to a two party system. It's easy to go the route of 'blow it up' but that sort of thing has real and severe consequences for people who never asked for it.

 

[glenn1]

Seriously I strongly suggest you look into instant runoff voting. It's something that can be implemented at the state level through referendum in a lot of states if you're looking for a way to make change. I genuinely believe that's the answer to a two party system. It's easy to go the route of 'blow it up' but that sort of thing has real and severe consequences for people who never asked for it.

I doubt you'll find much objection to that. However I'd want the system to accommodate the equivalent of a "not acceptable" vote, even being forced to list Clinton and Trump as my 3rd or 4th choices isn't an option. Hell I would like to do away with the whole political party nomination system altogether.

 

[RY62]

Seriously I strongly suggest you look into instant runoff voting. It's something that can be implemented at the state level through referendum in a lot of states if you're looking for a way to make change. I genuinely believe that's the answer to a two party system. It's easy to go the route of 'blow it up' but that sort of thing has real and severe consequences for people who never asked for it.

Thanks. I will take a look at instant runoff. Blowing it up sucks but I'm almost convinced this extreme shake up may be what's needed.

For too long we've elected leaders we really don't trust just because they might not be quite as bad as the other guy. We then try to split the executive, judicial and legislative powers so they can't screw us too bad.

Give me, just once, an average decent person who cares more about what's right than power or party.

 

[bozack]

This is the false equivalency that drives me crazy. Hilary may be a flawed candidate, but she would make a good president. She and Trump are not even on the same level to be comparable. She has spent her life trying to make the country better, even though she had some issues.

"good president" is a joke right? she has already established that she is a life long "public servant", someone who has gotten exceptionally wealthy at the expense of taxpayers, a woman who has no regard for ethics, morals, or even common decency....yet the good thing for her is that her adversary in this race is an especially easy target for sensationalist journalism because he is a typical braggart with far too much of a degree of self importance.

If you love excessive government spending on programs that do little to nothing to improve the working climate in this country, if you feel that the national debt is just a number that doesn't really matter anyway, if you truly believe the "wealthy" upper middle class paying 90% of their income would make all the difference and that they truly are out to help the working middle class, and if you figure that political dynasties are just fine then sure Hillary would be great.

But as others mentioned above there are many who are tired of jobs being off-shored, open trade agreements where the Washington elite benefit, and the do nothing perception of politicians, who are willing to vote for anyone but another insider.

This may be the first year I don't vote in a general election for president as there is no way I could vote for Hillary

Trump seems about toast unless the numbers for Hillary are low and his supporters come out in force for a major upset

 

[retrospooty]

White people are the only Americans blessed with "making a choice".
African Americans, Arab Americans, and Latino Americans vote for Hilary to save their lives. Life with a turd or terror, death, or deportation with Trump. No choice at all.

Don't forget gays and women too.

 

[sandorski]

"good president" is a joke right? she has already established that she is a life long "public servant", someone who has gotten exceptionally wealthy at the expense of taxpayers, a woman who has no regard for ethics, morals, or even common decency....yet the good thing for her is that her adversary in this race is an especially easy target for sensationalist journalism because he is a typical braggart with far too much of a degree of self importance.

If you love excessive government spending on programs that do little to nothing to improve the working climate in this country, if you feel that the national debt is just a number that doesn't really matter anyway, if you truly believe the "wealthy" upper middle class paying 90% of their income would make all the difference and that they truly are out to help the working middle class, and if you figure that political dynasties are just fine then sure Hillary would be great.

But as others mentioned above there are many who are tired of jobs being off-shored, open trade agreements where the Washington elite benefit, and the do nothing perception of politicians, who are willing to vote for anyone but another insider.

This may be the first year I don't vote in a general election for president as there is no way I could vote for Hillary

Trump seems about toast unless the numbers for Hillary are low and his supporters come out in force for a major upset

How did she get wealthy at the expense of Tax Payers?

 

[Jaskalas]

How did she get wealthy at the expense of Tax Payers?

She was already wealthy from her time as a Senator but...
Clinton Foundation donations in exchange for State Department favors.

More specifically, Clinton being paid by Putin for a large supply of Uranium.

 

[fskimospy]

She was already wealthy from her time as a Senator but...
Clinton Foundation donations in exchange for State Department favors.

More specifically, Clinton being paid by Putin for a large supply of Uranium.

You've been duped if you believe that. It's not what the article says.

 

[brycejones]

She was already wealthy from her time as a Senator but...
Clinton Foundation donations in exchange for State Department favors.

More specifically, Clinton being paid by Putin for a large supply of Uranium.

LOL, sometimes you sound sane....

other times like this one, not so much.

 

[MovingTarget]

You get no argument from me on any of these points.
Better still doesn't mean worthy. We can set the standards. If the candidate isn't worthy, don't vote for them. A better smelling turd is still just a turd.

You still haven't explained why Hillary isn't deserving of your vote other than vaguely referencing things that "everybody knows". Keep in mind that the GOP has been mudslinging against her since the early 90s. It isn't enough anymore to claim this background noise as a reason for her to be unworthy of a vote. Please explicitly state these reasons/objections.

 

[Blackjack200]

I won't try to debate which past presidents were or were not worthy of their office. We didn't have access to the amount of information we have today. The past can be our guide but we can take control of our futures.

Bullshit. I knew the policy positions of the major party candidates before I was old enough to vote, and long before the internet. The "information" people have access to today is a lot of innuendo and unsubstantiated crap. The kind of crap you use to justify your criticism of Clinton. When someone calls you on it, you refuse to even provide arguments. You're what's wrong with the system. Voters like you.

I'm all in for any discussions to fix this. I love to hear ideas but I'd love more seeing those ideas become a movement. Anything to break the power stranglehold and make our government start to work for us. Let it start here. We'll choose our next leader. To hell with the parties and their media control. Viva la revolución!

Fix what? The problems with government are complex and difficult to solve, and "blowing it all up" is the easy, cowardly way out.

Seriously I strongly suggest you look into instant runoff voting. It's something that can be implemented at the state level through referendum in a lot of states if you're looking for a way to make change. I genuinely believe that's the answer to a two party system. It's easy to go the route of 'blow it up' but that sort of thing has real and severe consequences for people who never asked for it.

Don't we sort of have that already with the primaries? If we had runoff elections, who do you think would have been elected rather than Clinton? I think it just gets you to the same result.

My understanding is that a parliamentary system is the way to avoid two parties, but the downside is that it guarantees that the deplorables will have 20%-25% representation.

 

[Blackjack200]

You still haven't explained why Hillary isn't deserving of your vote other than vaguely referencing things that "everybody knows". Keep in mind that the GOP has been mudslinging against her since the early 90s. It isn't enough anymore to claim this background noise as a reason for her to be unworthy of a vote. Please explicitly state these reasons/objections.

Exactly. Clinton will be an excellent president. I think she will be better than Obama.

http://www.salon.com/2016/10/06/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-popularity/

 

[fskimospy]

Bullshit. I knew the policy positions of the major party candidates before I was old enough to vote, and long before the internet. The "information" people have access to today is a lot of innuendo and unsubstantiated crap. The kind of crap you use to justify your criticism of Clinton. When someone calls you on it, you refuse to even provide arguments. You're what's wrong with the system. Voters like you.



Fix what? The problems with government are complex and difficult to solve, and "blowing it all up" is the easy, cowardly way out.



Don't we sort of have that already with the primaries? If we had runoff elections, who do you think would have been elected rather than Clinton? I think it just gets you to the same result.

My understanding is that a parliamentary system is the way to avoid two parties, but the downside is that it guarantees that the deplorables will have 20%-25% representation.

Instant runoff is a lot different than primaries. What it basically does is allow people to vote for their true preference without ensuring the election of their opponent. It's a way to avoid two parties without a parliamentary system.

 

[lopri]

Here is a window into Trump's psych. I usually do not bother with Maureen Dowd's columns (I think she has her own mental issues) but in this case she is following the campaign in close proximity and this one is mostly a factual account.

Donald Goes to the Dogs