Well... They're Really Going To Do It

[thraashman]

Probably won't even vote this year. This is so giant douche vs turd sandwhich .

Hillary is not ideal, I won't deny that. But Hillary v Trump is like if you go to a restaurant to eat and your choices are a burnt hamburger on stale bread with soggy fries (Hillary) or feces crapped out by someone infested with Ebola on white bread (Trump). You could choose not to order, but in this case eventually someone will order for you and you'll be force fed. I'll suck it up and eat the burnt burger personally.

 

[Phynaz]

Just goes to show how great this country is. In America you can accomplish and become anything you want if you work for it.

You can even become President.


I know working hard is antithetical to a lot of people that post here so they won't understand why we are the best in the world.

 

[glenn1]

Probably won't even vote this year. This is so giant douche vs turd sandwhich .

I prefer this characterization.

 

[dullard]

The sheer quantity of lies he has produced is kind of awe inspiring. I mean every presidential candidate lies to a certain extent but his lies have been so huge and so frequent they seem to be on the verge of breaking the system.

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/FYFcT9sDSBs/hqdefault.jpg

According to the Simpson's, you become indestructible once you have too many diseases. I think the same thing applies to contradictions. If everything about you is a contradiction, then does that make you indestructible?

 

[SMOGZINN]

Replace he, with she. And the result is the same.

Sure Hillary lies, but she lies in the way we are used to politicians lying in. She covers up scandals, and tells the American people that she has simple solutions to incredible complex problems. But Trump is a whole different type of liar. Trump is the type of liar that when asked how we are going to feed the hungry he tells us that we are going to build a rocket and go to the moon to scoop up all the cheese. His lies are like the fishing stories where each time the story is told the fish just keeps getting bigger until the minnow becomes a whale.

 

[Knowing]

If everyone who said they didn't want to vote for a major party candidate voted for a third party candidate, the third party candidate would win.

By all means though, keep voting against your better judgement and maybe next election season we'll have a matchup that is even more farcical to argue about.

 

[JulesMaximus]

My dad couldn't stand trump thought he would never be nominated, of course now the die hard republican is back peddling. Trumps a good guy... Between him and hillary were all fucked.

I have a friend who is a die hard conservative (white, middle-aged, wealthy, gun owner) and he's actually stated that he will vote for Hillary just to keep Trump out of the White House.

 

[fskimospy]

If everyone who said they didn't want to vote for a major party candidate voted for a third party candidate, the third party candidate would win.

By all means though, keep voting against your better judgement and maybe next election season we'll have a matchup that is even more farcical to argue about.

1. That's probably not true.

2. Wouldn't that require them to all vote for the same third party candidate despite those people all harboring dramatically different political views? Why would they do that?

3. Even if that happened once it would go right back to being two parties again almost immediately. Our system is designed to only have two parties, it's the natural result of rational voting behavior in our system.

 

[Jhhnn]

I have a friend who is a die hard conservative (white, middle-aged, wealthy, gun owner) and he's actually stated that he will vote for Hillary just to keep Trump out of the White House.

Keeping fascists out of power is entirely rational, yes. Unless you are one.

 

[Humpy]

The better outcome for the long term is probably a disruptive win by Trump so that both parties might learn to offer higher quality candidates.

A win by Clinton will just ensure a continuance of the status quo.

 

[JSt0rm]

The conservative choice would be to go with Hillary. I can't even imagine giving trump control of the military with 0 experience.

 

[fskimospy]

The better outcome for the long term is probably a disruptive win by Trump so that both parties might learn to offer higher quality candidates.

A win by Clinton will just ensure a continuance of the status quo.

I have never understood this line of reasoning, that we should have something horrible happen so that in the future people might rethink things. People said that exact same thing about George W Bush, that he would be so bad it would cause huge changes. Guess what? He really was that bad and it didn't inspire those changes people hoped for.

 

[Knowing]

1. That's probably not true.

2. Wouldn't that require them to all vote for the same third party candidate despite those people all harboring dramatically different political views? Why would they do that?

3. Even if that happened once it would go right back to being two parties again almost immediately. Our system is designed to only have two parties, it's the natural result of rational voting behavior in our system.

1) I'm pretty sure it is true.
2) Yes, but I'd happily vote Green Party while sharing nearly nothing in common with their politics if I could be absolutely certain that neither Trump nor Hillary were in danger of being elected.
3) It very well might, but for an entire generation both major parties would be on notice. (If the schism didn't destroy one entirely)

 

[sontakke]

I added some numbers from primary elections. It has been claimed that Trump got record number of votes in the primary. As it turns out, Hillary has got more votes than him. Adding total votes casts in the primary, democratic tally is higher by at least a million votes.

Is the presidential election competitive because democratic voters don't show up in November? Otherwise, mathematically it would be impossible for a republican presidential candidate to win.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

I added some numbers from primary elections. It has been claimed that Trump got record number of votes in the primary. As it turns out, Hillary has got more votes than him. Adding total votes casts in the primary, democratic tally is higher by at least a million votes.

Is the presidential election competitive because democratic voters don't show up in November? Otherwise, mathematically it would be impossible for a republican presidential candidate to win.

Sound logic but remember every vote isn't equal the electoral college complicates things. Hillary currently isn't doing as well as was expected in battle ground states but Trump isn't doing as well as he should in solid Republican States. I predict there will be some surprises like Trump carries a few unexpected toss up states but loses one or two solid red states thus negating his gain(s).

 

[Humpy]

I have never understood this line of reasoning, that we should have something horrible happen so that in the future people might rethink things. People said that exact same thing about George W Bush, that he would be so bad it would cause huge changes. Guess what? He really was that bad and it didn't inspire those changes people hoped for.

I agree that it isn't ideal but, just like how a horrific plane crash is often the catalyst for safety improvements, disaster has shown to be one of the more effective ways to initiate action. :\

 

[fskimospy]

I agree that it isn't ideal but, just like how a horrific plane crash is often the catalyst for safety improvements, disaster has shown to be one of the more effective ways to initiate action. :\

What would be the action you are hoping for?

 

[Humpy]

What would be the action you are hoping for?

That's a good question. At first I was going to write something about the parties taking more control over who is chosen to be their candidate in hopes of getting the best of the best. Then I remembered that political parties are in the business of winning elections, not in looking out for the best interests of the country.

Then I thought that maybe with Trump the people would be more acutely aware of the consequences of their vote but then I just LOL'd at the absurdity of that idea.

So yeah... I'm going to go get lunch.

 

[bruceb]

I for one want Trump to get the nomination and win the White House ... The last thing we need is that thief, liar and treasonous, anti-gun Hillary in the White House ... Just look at how bad the budget has becomes.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Just goes to show how great this country is. In America you can accomplish and become anything you want if you work for it.

You can even become President.


I know working hard is antithetical to a lot of people that post here so they won't understand why we are the best in the world.

unless of course, you're born into wealth and then portray yourself as much more successful than you actually are and then attempt to be elected dicta... er president.

 

[fskimospy]

I for one want Trump to get the nomination and win the White House ... The last thing we need is that thief, liar and treasonous, anti-gun Hillary in the White House ... Just look at how bad the budget has becomes.

Thief: Trump is currently the defendant in numerous lawsuits over how he defrauded thousands of people in the Trump University scam.

Liar: Trump is widely known to be a pathological liar. He has the lowest percentage of true statements on politifact of any presidential candidate ever.

Treasonous: lolwut.

Anti-gun: Good!

Budget: The policies that Trump has put forth would, if enacted, create the largest budget deficits in US history by a large margin.

I always find it funny when people say 'I'm not voting for Hillary because she's X' and they somehow don't seem to realize that Trump is X^2.

 

[SMOGZINN]

2) Yes, but I'd happily vote Green Party while sharing nearly nothing in common with their politics if I could be absolutely certain that neither Trump nor Hillary were in danger of being elected.

But others would vote libertarian. In the end a Democrat or Republican would win because of their die-hard base would be enough to take it with everyone else split between 2-3 parties.

3) It very well might, but for an entire generation both major parties would be on notice. (If the schism didn't destroy one entirely)

Their solution would be to make it all but impossible for third parties to get on the ballot, then add a few more hoops people must jump through to actually get to vote, stuff like fewer voting locations, with fewer staff to help out, more stringent identification requirements, or fewer opportunities to vote absentee. Sounds familiar doesn't it?

Most people will not put much effort into going to vote if they are not really enthused with the candidates they are voting for, and that is the exact scenario you are talking about, people voting for a third party they don't really agree with just because they want to stick it to the primary parties. Every little bit more effort required will have dramatic results in stopping people from doing just that.

 

[SMOGZINN]

Just look at how bad the budget has becomes.

Trump has a solution for the budget! Declare bankruptcy just like he has done with his companies.

 

[bruceb]

He has a business sense of how to do things. Among other things our countries infrastructure (roads, bridges, tunnels, electric grid) are in dire need of major repair or improvement. He also wants to rebuild military strength which is a good thing. What needs to be fixed is the overspending on needless items and the excessive bureaucracy that the government currently has.

 

[ivwshane]

He has a business sense of how to do things. Among other things our countries infrastructure (roads, bridges, tunnels, electric grid) are in dire need of major repair or improvement. He also wants to rebuild military strength which is a good thing. What needs to be fixed is the overspending on needless items and the excessive bureaucracy that the government currently has.

I take it that you aren't familiar with how our government works and you are just as clueless as trump in that area? Hint: Congress controls the purse.