Jump to content

If American - which presidential candidate will you vote for? (Sept. Edition)


JayGatsby
 Share

If American - which presidential candidate will you vote for?  

230 members have voted

  1. 1. If American - which presidential candidate will you vote for?

    • Hillary Clinton
    • Donald Trump
    • Gary Johnson
    • Jill Stein


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 208
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Seriously, can someone explain to me this write in stuff? Cause I never understood that crap. Life is about choices. When you get to an intersection you can go ahead, left, or right. You can't start driving through buildings because you feel like it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seriously, can someone explain to me this write in stuff? Cause I never understood that crap. Life is about choices. When you get to an intersection you can go ahead, left, or right. You can't start driving through buildings because you feel like it.

 

Options.

 

http://www.againstcronycapitalism.org/wp-content/uploads/central-planning--565x422.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's cute, but I was being serious. Was there ever a president that won a write in? A candidate that won a state a write in? I know the answers to these. My question was more about the mentality behind it. Is there some purpose or just some juvenile tantrum in the candy isle?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's cute, but I was being serious. Was there ever a president that won a write in? A candidate that won a state a write in? I know the answers to these. My question was more about the mentality behind it. Is there some purpose or just some juvenile tantrum in the candy isle?

I think it's basically a vote of "no confidence", with the idea is that enough people do it it gets noticed. Some people have said they're going to stay home this year, but the risk there is that politicians just assume you're not interested. LC said write-in Bernie Sanders, which this election cycle seems like a protest vote against the bias at the DNC ("I may be a democrat, but I'm not going to follow you blindly"). In some states it looks like you can't technically write in a candidate. In that case I guess a Bernie supporter who who wanted to show their dissatisfaction with the process would choose between Johnson, Stein or a smaller party as a protest. The slippery slope of your argument is that at some point the question becomes why vote for anyone who can't win? If you're a Republican in California why even bother to show up?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.againstcronycapitalism.org/wp-content/uploads/central-planning--565x422.jpg

 

There's actually a relatively active subreddit dedicated to these sorts of paths:

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/DesirePath/

 

I find it strangely compelling.  It makes me think that, when building anything new, they shouldn't bother paving for a year. Then, they should just pave anywhere there's a path.

 

(And, to add a political element to the post, you don't actually see that many paths like this in the real world.  I guess that means that rkbabang thinks centrally planning mostly works....  :) )

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.againstcronycapitalism.org/wp-content/uploads/central-planning--565x422.jpg

 

There's actually a relatively active subreddit dedicated to these sorts of paths:

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/DesirePath/

 

I find it strangely compelling.  It makes me think that, when building anything new, they shouldn't bother paving for a year. Then, they should just pave anywhere there's a path.

 

(And, to add a political element to the post, you don't actually see that many paths like this in the real world.  I guess that means that rkbabang thinks centrally planning mostly works....  :) )

 

 

I think for the most part the pavement you see is put where the paths already were.  So nothing was really planned.  When planners try to change what people already want to do, like in the photo, it doesn't work.  Even in a new development it is fairly safe to just pave the shortest route between two points, it doesn't take much planning genius.

 

As far as write ins go.  Three of the four candidates on this above poll have 50 state + DC ballot access this year, where Stein is not on the ballot in 6 states.  It is possible that people in those 6 states could write her in.  Also it is theoretically possible that 3 days before the election, it is found out that Hillary goes into a coma, Trump is charged with tax evasion, Johnson is accused of being a child molester and Stein is hit by a bus.  It would be too late to get anyone else on ballot, so there would be a bunch of people running last minute write in campaigns.

 

EDIT:  I probably should have said:  Hillary drops dead from the heat on a 70 degree day, Trump is killed when a wall falls on him, Johnson is poisoned after eating at an unregulated restaurant, and Stein gets brain cancer from her WIFI router.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find it strangely compelling.  It makes me think that, when building anything new, they shouldn't bother paving for a year. Then, they should just pave anywhere there's a path.

 

(And, to add a political element to the post, you don't actually see that many paths like this in the real world.  I guess that means that rkbabang thinks centrally planning mostly works....  :) )

 

Or that most people just follow the paths our dear leaders provide without considering better alternatives  ;)

 

I do like the idea of not paving for a while then paving over the existing path though.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Just came out and trending. This is a major scandal exposing his connections with criminals and enemies. No wonder he doesn't release his tax returns that would clearly shows payouts."

 

"Just came out and trending. This is a major scandal exposing her connections with criminals and enemies. No wonder she doesn't release her e-mails that would clearly shows payouts."

 

Do you get it now? Don't you realize that both candidates are bad? What else is it going to take?

 

Cardboard

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Just came out and trending. This is a major scandal exposing his connections with criminals and enemies. No wonder he doesn't release his tax returns that would clearly shows payouts."

 

"Just came out and trending. This is a major scandal exposing her connections with criminals and enemies. No wonder she doesn't release her e-mails that would clearly shows payouts."

 

Do you get it now? Don't you realize that both candidates are bad? What else is it going to take?

 

Cardboard

 

You are absolutely correct. As I have said before, I would have gladly voted for Rubio, Kasich ,Bush against Clinton. I hate this dynastic appeal , her sense of entitlement and a complete disregard for the rules that all of us have to play by. That's why my vote will be a split one because anytime one party takes over, the end result is bad (Obamacare,Iraq war).

 

I simply despise Trump.  Clinton is your run of the mill corrupt politician that I can size up  but Trump is a dangerous wildcard with an inflated ego and is gullible with a thin skin. I am afraid he will drag us into a nuclear war. He is extremely cynical and plays to people's worst fears to get what he wants. This extreme narcissism would not be good for our country. Imagine the damage it can do to our society if the mainstream politicians embrace this strategy of division and hate against each other.

 

I have no problems voting against Hillary in the next election, just not this time.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, I think that you are getting it. However, such argument is bogus:

 

"I am afraid he will drag us into a nuclear war."

 

What is it to say that Clinton is less dangerous? When she gets provoked on almost anything see her reaction. Check her face.

 

And when Bengazi happened, she would not even answer the phone at night. What if the Russians launch a surprise attack?

 

Then you have Johnson who is so much on pot that he does not even know what is Aleppo. And these are the top 3 candidates... What is a primary for?

 

Cardboard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, I think that you are getting it. However, such argument is bogus:

 

"I am afraid he will drag us into a nuclear war."

 

What is it to say that Clinton is less dangerous? When she gets provoked on almost anything see her reaction. Check her face.

 

And when Bengazi happened, she would not even answer the phone at night. What if the Russians launch a surprise attack?

 

Then you have Johnson who is so much on pot that he does not even know what is Aleppo. And these are the top 3 candidates... What is a primary for?

 

Cardboard

 

I happen to think Clinton is more likely to provoke Russia or China into nuclear war than Trump is, but they are clearly both dangerous.  As is Obama.  He is trying to provoke a psychopath into starting a nuclear war right now as we speak.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/north-korea/u-s-bombers-send-china-russia-north-korea-message-n647616

 

EDIT: Maybe this guy has a point and Trump is more dangerous now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, I think that you are getting it. However, such argument is bogus:

 

"I am afraid he will drag us into a nuclear war."

 

What is it to say that Clinton is less dangerous? When she gets provoked on almost anything see her reaction. Check her face.

 

And when Bengazi happened, she would not even answer the phone at night. What if the Russians launch a surprise attack?

 

Then you have Johnson who is so much on pot that he does not even know what is Aleppo. And these are the top 3 candidates... What is a primary for?

 

Cardboard

 

"I am afraid he will drag us into a nuclear war."

 

Trump doesn't know how to de-escalate a conflict, no matter the urgency or the sensitivity of the matter. He gets into a rage and then nothing can stop him. Look how he had mocked a disabled reporter , family of a gold star soldier, McCain ,Ryan.He handles criticism by issuing threats,escalation and vendetta. Imagine the power he will have when he is the President. I don't think a 70 yr old can change.

 

Hate to defend Hillary but she is a known commodity. No matter what you guys think, nothing has come out of Benghazi.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's cute, but I was being serious. Was there ever a president that won a write in? A candidate that won a state a write in? I know the answers to these. My question was more about the mentality behind it. Is there some purpose or just some juvenile tantrum in the candy isle?

 

I remember Lisa Murkowski losing the primary but went on become a senator by contesting as a "write in" candidate. To me that is a successful challenge to the established practice of primaries, which may not be the best practice (mainly a "too left" or "too right" candidate winning the primary and quickly becoming unacceptable for a general electorate).

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-elections-murkowski-idUSTRE6AG51C20101118

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's cute, but I was being serious. Was there ever a president that won a write in? A candidate that won a state a write in? I know the answers to these. My question was more about the mentality behind it. Is there some purpose or just some juvenile tantrum in the candy isle?

 

I remember Lisa Murkowski losing the primary but went on become a senator by contesting as a "write in" candidate. To me that is a successful challenge to the established practice of primaries, which may not be the best practice (mainly a "too left" or "too right" candidate winning the primary and quickly becoming unacceptable for a general electorate).

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-elections-murkowski-idUSTRE6AG51C20101118

 

Viable strategy when the state's population is 50 people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seriously, can someone explain to me this write in stuff? Cause I never understood that crap. Life is about choices. When you get to an intersection you can go ahead, left, or right. You can't start driving through buildings because you feel like it.

 

I could go on a long rant about individual rights, the political process, not compromising in life, being able to sleep at night, etc. but I'll just say this:

 

I don't endorse shitty companies, products, or people. If I'm putting my name behind something, it's something I think works. So I have the right to drive through all your damn buildings, and I will do so with a smile on my face.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seriously, can someone explain to me this write in stuff? Cause I never understood that crap. Life is about choices. When you get to an intersection you can go ahead, left, or right. You can't start driving through buildings because you feel like it.

 

I could go on a long rant about individual rights, the political process, not compromising in life, being able to sleep at night, etc. but I'll just say this:

 

I don't endorse shitty companies, products, or people. If I'm putting my name behind something, it's something I think works. So I have the right to drive through all your damn buildings, and I will do so with a smile on my face.

So it's basically the tantrum in the cereal isle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I am afraid he will drag us into a nuclear war."

 

Trump doesn't know how to de-escalate a conflict, no matter the urgency or the sensitivity of the matter. He gets into a rage and then nothing can stop him. Look how he had mocked a disabled reporter , family of a gold star soldier, McCain ,Ryan.He handles criticism by issuing threats,escalation and vendetta. Imagine the power he will have when he is the President. I don't think a 70 yr old can change.

 

Hate to defend Hillary but she is a known commodity. No matter what you guys think, nothing has come out of Benghazi.

I'm not sure why Benghazi gets as much discussion as it does, but the real issue with Hillary and Libya that bothers me was the actual overthrow of Gaddafi. It was her influence that swung the pendulum toward bombing Libya, against the recommendation of the Sec of Defense: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/28/us/politics/hillary-clinton-libya.html . What came out of that decision was a failed state that strengthened ISIS and worsened the refugee crisis: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/libya-david-cameron-isis-islamic-state-ultimately-responsible-for-leading-to-collapse-and-rise-of-a7251331.html

 

She may have meant well, but it's her poor judgment that bothers me more than anything. Her rhetoric on Russia sounds straight out of the Cuban missile crisis: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/sep/1/clinton-us-will-treat-cyberattacks-just-any-other-/ . The scariest part there is she regularly blames Russia for hacks when no public evidence exists that the Russian government is behind them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seriously, can someone explain to me this write in stuff? Cause I never understood that crap. Life is about choices. When you get to an intersection you can go ahead, left, or right. You can't start driving through buildings because you feel like it.

 

I could go on a long rant about individual rights, the political process, not compromising in life, being able to sleep at night, etc. but I'll just say this:

 

I don't endorse shitty companies, products, or people. If I'm putting my name behind something, it's something I think works. So I have the right to drive through all your damn buildings, and I will do so with a smile on my face.

So it's basically the tantrum in the cereal isle

 

Actually no. I think most reasonable people can understand my argument. But I will do the favor of breaking it down for you as it seems you've only gotten as far as Frosted Flakes:

 

I don't endorse shitty companies, products, or people. If I'm putting my name behind something, it's something I think works.

This is my vote, and it represents my choice for who I wish to lead me politically. There is a saying that goes something like, 'if you don't vote, you don't get to complain'. Well that can be further expanded, into something like, 'why are you complaining? you voted for him!'.

 

So I have the right to drive through all your damn buildings, and I will do so with a smile on my face.

 

Here in the great State of New York, I have the ability to write-in a candidate. In New York, and in the United States, citizens are generally encouraged to exercise their rights and abilities, particularly in the field of politics. This is how many individual freedoms have been won, especially for oppressed groups. The very existence of these freedoms is what allows the social and political landscape to evolve. To dismiss it by calling it "crap" is to dismiss one of the most important principles of this country. It's lazy, short-sighted, and spits in the face of history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share




×
×
  • Create New...