Republicans Should Do The Patriotic Thing And Vote Democrat For President

[Mark III]

excerpt
"There are some who suggest (https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2015/12/09/understanding-why-trumps-latest-outrage-is-different/) that the more Trump and Cruz say outrageous things that stand little chance of practical implementation, the more likely you GOP brethren will punish them during the primaries. However, in reality, this isn’t likely to happen. As it turns out, primary voters tend to prefer (http://www.jstor.org/stable/40263411) more ideologically extreme candidates.
So, where does this leave you Republicans?
It’s simple: you need only act upon the patriotism you so often claim. If you really love America as you say you do, you must put the country first, and sacrifice the interests of the party – at least for the present election cycle.
You must vote for Hillary Clinton – or Bernie Sanders, if he prevails in the primary.
It’s your patriotic duty, the republican thing to do."

http://theconversation.com/dear-republicans-do-your-patriotic-duty-52078

[Mark III]

This may seem like a joke and I admit that on the face of it it seems like a humorous presumption, but the seed of a serious discussion is there. Six weeks before the first voting the two GOP leaders are a reality tv celebrity know nothing, and an extremist who is roundly disliked among his own professional colleagues.


Neither Trump or Cruz is close to being acceptable as the next president. If one of them was to be the nominee, why wouldn't conscientious Republicans switch and vote Democrat, or even Green or Libertarian? The time could come when this choice will have to be made.

[Chris]

Wow, and Dems should vote Rep.

[The Xl]

Lol at the nerve of dems to suggest that when they basically have two people running, one is a criminal and the other is a socialist.

[Green Arrow]

I think it would be far more patriotic to follow the advice of George Washington:

"The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty...The common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it."

[birddog]

Extreme liberal thinking is a lie and just plain wrong! I am a proud Veteran, Patriot, and successful family man, and I am proud to be a Republican. The Constitution is to be preserved.

[Green Arrow]

Extreme liberal thinking is a lie and just plain wrong! I am a proud Veteran, Patriot, and successful family man, and I am proud to be a Republican. The Constitution is to be preserved.

Republicans have been just as responsible as Democrats for eroding the constitution.

"The common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it."
- George Washington

[Dr. Who]

Not voting at all is far more credible than voting for a brand that no longer delivers the goods. Otherwise, you are just voting for more of what you don't like. That makes no sense whatsoever. The idea of voting is a responsibility, not to be undertaken lightly. If you view the country like a child that must be taken care of with due care and responsibility, you would not choose to leave that child in the care of a known child abuser or alternatively, someone who prioritizes their own needs over anyone else's. The first would directly damage the child and the second would damage the child through utter neglect.

[Common Sense]

I'd like to see Rubio get the nomination. Seems to be the sane one in the bunch. He'd also have a better chance at beating Clinton.

[pjohns]

"There are some who suggest (https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2015/12/09/understanding-why-trumps-latest-outrage-is-different/) that the more Trump and Cruz say outrageous things that stand little chance of practical implementation, the more likely you GOP brethren will punish them during the primaries. However, in reality, this isn’t likely to happen. As it turns out, primary voters tend to prefer (http://www.jstor.org/stable/40263411) more ideologically extreme candidates.

As regarding Donald Trump, he does, indeed, fit the general description made of him.

But Ted Cruz?

It is probably predictable that an academic (most of whom are leftists) would consider Ted Cruz "ideologically extreme."

But why do you consider him to be "ideologically extreme"?

And what has he said, exactly, that is "outrageous"?

(By the way, I would vote for even Donald Trump--whom I consider mean-spirited, and a bit of a bully--over Hillary Clinton, who is a congenital liar, a possible convict-to-be, and, most damning of all, a part of the Professional Political Class.)

[AeonPax]

`
`
Break the republicrat habit; Vote Independent - Third party.

[Crepitus]

Extreme liberal thinking is a lie and just plain wrong! I am a proud Veteran, Patriot, and successful family man, and I am proud to be a Republican. The Constitution is to be preserved.

A resounding endorsement from Wile E Coyote, Suuuuper Geeeenius.13742

[pjohns]

`
`
Break the republicrat habit; Vote Independent - Third party.

If you do, you are certain to lose.

Or are you simply playing a Long Game?

[AeonPax]

If you do, you are certain to lose. Or are you simply playing a Long Game?
`
There is a deep well of resentment amongst voters, aimed at an unresponsive and impotent Congress which the duoply runs. Trump is an excellent example of people just being fed up with the GOP status quo. On the left, there are liberal/progressives who see the Democratic party, as selling out to the necons....like Obama and Clinton. Look how well the Democrats have marginalized Bernie Sanders.

There is discontent on both sides of the Republicrat coin. Yeah...it may take long but on the other hand, who knows?

[Beevee]

Lol at the nerve of dems to suggest that when they basically have two people running, one is a criminal and the other is a socialist.

That's strange, since it's been the conservative mantra in reverse as long as I have been a member of this forum.

[gamewell45]

Not voting at all is far more credible than voting for a brand that no longer delivers the goods. Otherwise, you are just voting for more of what you don't like. That makes no sense whatsoever. The idea of voting is a responsibility, not to be undertaken lightly. If you view the country like a child that must be taken care of with due care and responsibility, you would not choose to leave that child in the care of a known child abuser or alternatively, someone who prioritizes their own needs over anyone else's. The first would directly damage the child and the second would damage the child through utter neglect.

Better to write-in your name then not vote at all; that way you can legitimately complain about how bad things are since you participated in the process.

[Dr. Who]

Better to write-in your name then not vote at all; that way you can legitimately complain about how bad things are since you participated in the process.
By participating in a process that doesn't allow a NOTA vote, you may be choosing between the lesser of two evils. How is that advancing anything, but rather perpetuating a process that disregards the needs of the people in favor of the dictates of the elite. They own and fund both sides, so however you vote, you are getting more of the same.

[pjohns]

`
On the left, there are liberal/progressives who see the Democratic party, as selling out to the necons....like Obama and Clinton. Look how well the Democrats have marginalized Bernie Sanders.

Uh, since when is the Democratic Party in the hands of neoconservatives?

[pjohns]

By participating in a process that doesn't allow a NOTA vote, you may be choosing between the lesser of two evils.

If the "process" did allow for a none-of-the-above vote; and if that actually (somehow) won; how would that work, anyway?

Would we simply have no president?

[zelmo1234]

Let's take a look at what Democrats see as patriotic. A vote for the honorable Hillary Clinton.

The Women that likely paid someone to murder the only person who could convict her in the White Water Scandal, trying to make it look like a suicide. That seems like a person of High moral Standard.

The Women that helped to Hide her Husbands Rape of several Women, and now is covering up his flights to a small tropical Island with friends, where he likely is having sex with 13 to 15 year old Girls. I think that is the kind of person we can trust don't you.

The Women that set up the structure by which their so call charity funnels 85% of the donations, right in to their own pockets. The women that used this charity, and speaking fees nearly 4 times more than average to sell influence and outcomes of decisions while Sec of State. Sounds like the best President money can buy.

The Women that refused to refund donations to there so called Charity, from countries and leaders that Support Terrorism and the killing of US citizens. Because someone who would put the rights of terrorist over that of the citizens is the Women for me.

The Women that called of the rescue of a US ambassador, allowed classified information to be hacked from her private account which lead to that murder, then blamed a video and jailed an innocent US citizens for it. Now that is the decision making that makers her a great leader.

Not to mention that she lies about her Safety in the job, Her Emails, Sexuality, nearly everything in her life is a lie.

NO patriotism is not voting for someone that our funding fathers would have wanted to hang for high treason. And just goes to show what a threat the modern day Democrats are to the freedom and success of the USA

[Mark III]

`
There is a deep well of resentment amongst voters, aimed at an unresponsive and impotent Congress which the duoply runs. Trump is an excellent example of people just being fed up with the GOP status quo. On the left, there are liberal/progressives who see the Democratic party, as selling out to the necons....like Obama and Clinton. Look how well the Democrats have marginalized Bernie Sanders.

There is discontent on both sides of the Republicrat coin. Yeah...it may take long but on the other hand, who knows?

We have had third parties throughout American history. They never win (they actually almost always do very poorly) because the U.S. is a two party country. Of course , that could change.

[AeonPax]

Uh, since when is the Democratic Party in the hands of neoconservatives?
`
For now, that's my opinion and I used the term figuratively.

[Mac-7]

Not voting at all is far more credible than voting for a brand that no longer delivers the goods. Otherwise, you are just voting for more of what you don't like. That makes no sense whatsoever. The idea of voting is a responsibility, not to be undertaken lightly. If you view the country like a child that must be taken care of with due care and responsibility, you would not choose to leave that child in the care of a known child abuser or alternatively, someone who prioritizes their own needs over anyone else's. The first would directly damage the child and the second would damage the child through utter neglect.

Not voting at all is the avice I would expect centrists and leftwingers to promote because only republicans are unhappy enough to stay home in large numbers.

And that hands the election to the democrsts.

which is what big government lrfties and centrists prefer.

and yes i know that the beautiful people here in the center claim they want smaller government.

abd maybe a few really do.

but the final result of hating republicans makes the third way types pawns of the democrats and big government.

[gamewell45]

By participating in a process that doesn't allow a NOTA vote, you may be choosing between the lesser of two evils. How is that advancing anything, but rather perpetuating a process that disregards the needs of the people in favor of the dictates of the elite. They own and fund both sides, so however you vote, you are getting more of the same.

I understand and respect your position; I normally write-in my name for various positions because while I know virtually nothing about running the state/federal government, at least I'm honest and that's more then most of them are (I believe most politicians are crooks). I cannot live with the "lesser of two evils" since there is no difference in my mind; it's like saying either you're pregnant or you're not pregnant, there is no in-between.

Moreover I feel those who complain about how bad the government is and who don't vote in elections, have no moral grounds to be complaining since they do not participate in the process. Those with whom I may disagree with on their viewpoint I can still respect if they at least get off their collective butts and go out and vote regardless on how they vote; those who don't, I cannot take them seriously. Just my thoughts.

[Cigar]

Not voting at all is far more credible than voting for a brand that no longer delivers the goods. Otherwise, you are just voting for more of what you don't like. That makes no sense whatsoever. The idea of voting is a responsibility, not to be undertaken lightly. If you view the country like a child that must be taken care of with due care and responsibility, you would not choose to leave that child in the care of a known child abuser or alternatively, someone who prioritizes their own needs over anyone else's. The first would directly damage the child and the second would damage the child through utter neglect.

We have something like 140,000,000 people over the age of 35 in this country, most of which are probably natural born citizens and eligible to be elected President and yet it isn't just possible that it will happen, but we are ACTIVELY pushing for, returning a family to power who is 1 of 2 that have already ran this country for 20 of the last 28 years.

This is what oligarchies does.

Is this seriously as creative as America (and the Democratic and Republican Party) can get at this point?

This is giving it our best?

Out of 100 MILLION PLUS eligible people, we can't find ONE person qualified to be elected President in 2016 that isn't named Bush or Clinton?

Does anyone here really think Donald J Trump won't make America the Worlds Laughing Stock of the Universe?

Really???

Trust me, if I had a choice other than Hillary ... I'd take it. But Trump, Cruz, Rubio or Bush isn't a choice I can take.

Go Bernie :grin:

[Adelaide]

This is kind of ridiculous. Clinton and Sanders don't hold many positions that jive with the Republican POV.

[Cigar]

This is kind of ridiculous. Clinton and Sanders don't hold many positions that jive with the Republican POV.

I think we're all going to just have to hold our nose and give it a Big Yank :grin:

[Dr. Who]

If the "process" did allow for a none-of-the-above vote; and if that actually (somehow) won; how would that work, anyway?

Would we simply have no president?
NOTA could not win, as it would be a candidate and it's highly unlikely that everyone would vote NOTA anyway.

[Dr. Who]

I understand and respect your position; I normally write-in my name for various positions because while I know virtually nothing about running the state/federal government, at least I'm honest and that's more then most of them are (I believe most politicians are crooks). I cannot live with the "lesser of two evils" since there is no difference in my mind; it's like saying either you're pregnant or you're not pregnant, there is no in-between.

Moreover I feel those who complain about how bad the government is and who don't vote in elections, have no moral grounds to be complaining since they do not participate in the process. Those with whom I may disagree with on their viewpoint I can still respect if they at least get off their collective butts and go out and vote regardless on how they vote; those who don't, I cannot take them seriously. Just my thoughts.
Depending upon where you live, there may be no option to write in your name, because some areas use electronic voting machines.

[Green Arrow]

If you do, you are certain to lose.

Or are you simply playing a Long Game?

Better to lose an election than lose my morals and values.

[birddog]

Republicans have been just as responsible as Democrats for eroding the constitution.

"The common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it."
- George Washington

Not true! Both parties contribute, but the dims have done more to destroy aspects of the constitution.

[birddog]

I'd like to see Rubio get the nomination. Seems to be the sane one in the bunch. He'd also have a better chance at beating Clinton.

That's what the establishment RNC wants everyone to believe.

[Green Arrow]

Not true! Both parties contribute...

That's what I said.

Thanks for agreeing.

[birddog]

That's what I said.

Thanks for agreeing.

In the total context of my post, I do agree.

By the way, who's the old boy in your avatar, an old president perhaps?

[Green Arrow]

In the total context of my post, I do agree.

By the way, who's the old boy in your avatar, an old president perhaps?

Not quite. Eugene V. Debs, Socialist Party candidate for President in 1900, 1904, 1908, and 1912.

[donttread]

This may seem like a joke and I admit that on the face of it it seems like a humorous presumption, but the seed of a serious discussion is there. Six weeks before the first voting the two GOP leaders are a reality tv celebrity know nothing, and an extremist who is roundly disliked among his own professional colleagues.


Neither Trump or Cruz is close to being acceptable as the next president. If one of them was to be the nominee, why wouldn't conscientious Republicans switch and vote Democrat, or even Green or Libertarian? The time could come when this choice will have to be made.

None of them are truely "acceptable"

[Professor Peabody]

When did it become patriotic to vote for a liar and a criminal?