PDA

View Full Version : You are voting Trump



AZ Jim
10-01-2016, 04:11 PM
I am voting Clinton. One of us will win, one lose. I don't want to change your mind, mine won't change. Go forward in peace.

16305

Cthulhu
10-01-2016, 04:19 PM
I am voting Clinton. One of us will win, one lose. I don't want to change your mind, mine won't change. Go forward in peace.

16305

http://www.kappit.com/img/pics/201603_1054_eedib.jpg

Mister D
10-01-2016, 04:25 PM
lol

Green Arrow
10-01-2016, 04:32 PM
I'm not voting for Trump or Clinton.

Peter1469
10-01-2016, 04:34 PM
Vote third party or vote for trash.

Your choice.

FindersKeepers
10-01-2016, 04:34 PM
I am voting Clinton. One of us will win, one lose. I don't want to change your mind, mine won't change. Go forward in peace.




Seriously -- you're right.

That's all we can do.

It's a shame that in the greatest nation in the world, the presidency is coming down to these two candidates.

Green Arrow
10-01-2016, 04:37 PM
Seriously -- you're right.

That's all we can do.

It's a shame that in the greatest nation in the world, the presidency is coming down to these two candidates.

It isn't.

Mister D
10-01-2016, 04:38 PM
I'll be voting for Trump. There is little to endear him except that all the right people hate his guts. I find that very attractive in a candidate. Hillary is a status quo neoliberal and I'd never consider Johnson or Stein.

Cthulhu
10-01-2016, 04:45 PM
I'll be voting for Trump. There is little to endear him except that all the right people hate his guts. I find that very attractive in a candidate. Hillary is a status quo neoliberal and I'd never consider Johnson or Stein.

I get why you'd dislike Stein, but why Johnson? I agree that the hatred of Trump is a boon to him, even if he of himself is not a person you'd like. I am still on the fence about Johnson. But he is a far cry better than the main to choices the people have.

Mister D
10-01-2016, 04:51 PM
I get why you'd dislike Stein, but why Johnson? I agree that the hatred of Trump is a boon to him, even if he of himself is not a person you'd like. I am still on the fence about Johnson. But he is a far cry better than the main to choices the people have.

The ideology of libertarians like Johnson epitomizes what I dislike most about liberalism: radical individualism and free market capitalism. he appears to champion both.

Mister D
10-01-2016, 04:55 PM
There was a time (before mine) when at least some libertarians (e.g. Rothbard, Murray) understood that collective identities (especially race) and community matter. I haven't gotten that impression from contemporary libertarians.

Cthulhu
10-01-2016, 04:58 PM
The ideology of libertarians like Johnson epitomizes what I dislike most about liberalism: radical individualism and free market capitalism. he appears to champion both.

I think the main problem is perception. Most percieve libertarians as anarchists. While there is certainly an amount of overlap, there is a difference. I think anarchy works with moral anarchists, limited to possibly a few thousand people.

We live in the world where that sort of radical individualism is becoming more and more necessary because malevolent parties are manipulating the group abstractions to very dangerous ends. At times these radical individualists can be quite ridiculous. However group think put to immoral purposes is infinitely more harmful and has filled graveyards both ancient and modern, and continues to do so.

America's problem is that we are an extreme people, off balance. You need to balance group abstractions with individuality for the best results.

A constitutional republic with libertarian ideals, practiced by a moral and virtuous people is the best form of government aside from righteous kings - in my opinion.

Cthulhu
10-01-2016, 05:01 PM
There was a time (before mine) when at least some libertarians (e.g. Rothbard, Murray) understood that collective identities (especially race) and community matter. I haven't gotten that impression from contemporary libertarians.

Well, had I waited about a minute...

Ah well. Agreed.

I subscribe to the libertarian way of things, but like you said, community matters, groups matter (regardless of their nature as mental abstactions) because they affect people who are real.

Peter1469
10-01-2016, 05:07 PM
I'll be voting for Trump. There is little to endear him except that all the right people hate his guts. I find that very attractive in a candidate. Hillary is a status quo neoliberal and I'd never consider Johnson or Stein.I plan to vote for Johnson, but if the Fans get too obnoxious I may vote Trump just to poke them in their collective eye. :wink:

Mister D
10-01-2016, 05:15 PM
Well, had I waited about a minute...

Ah well. Agreed.

I subscribe to the libertarian way of things, but like you said, community matters, groups matter (regardless of their nature as mental abstactions) because they affect people who are real.

The individual too is an abstraction. All men have a sociohistorical context that largely defines who they are. That's no determinism on my part. Identity is fluid and subject to change but it is formed through social interaction and belonging. We're born into a web of social relations that we simply do not choose. This autonomous man liberated from involuntary attachments and commitments is a figment of the liberal imagination. That man rides a unicorn to work.

Mister D
10-01-2016, 05:15 PM
I plan to vote for Johnson, but if the Fans get too obnoxious I may vote Trump just to poke them in their collective eye. :wink:

What do the polls in VA indicate at this time?

Chris
10-01-2016, 05:16 PM
I am voting Clinton. One of us will win, one lose. I don't want to change your mind, mine won't change. Go forward in peace....



False dichotomy. Peace, out.

Cthulhu
10-01-2016, 05:18 PM
The individual too is an abstraction. All men have a sociohistorical context that largely defines who they are. That's no determinism on my part. Identity is fluid and subject to change but it is formed through social interaction and belonging. We're born into a web of social relations that we simply do not choose. This autonomous man liberated from involuntary attachments and commitments is a figment of the liberal imagination. That man rides a unicorn to work.
By real I mean you can poke it with a stick.

I can poke you with a stick, but I can't poke a group with a stick, only one real person at a time.

Fear profits a man nothing.

Mister D
10-01-2016, 05:18 PM
I think the main problem is perception. Most percieve libertarians as anarchists. While there is certainly an amount of overlap, there is a difference. I think anarchy works with moral anarchists, limited to possibly a few thousand people.

We live in the world where that sort of radical individualism is becoming more and more necessary because malevolent parties are manipulating the group abstractions to very dangerous ends. At times these radical individualists can be quite ridiculous. However group think put to immoral purposes is infinitely more harmful and has filled graveyards both ancient and modern, and continues to do so.

America's problem is that we are an extreme people, off balance. You need to balance group abstractions with individuality for the best results.

A constitutional republic with libertarian ideals, practiced by a moral and virtuous people is the best form of government aside from righteous kings - in my opinion.

I think that individualism is at the root of the problem. Imagine what white people could do in this country if they could only perceive a common interest like everyone else?

That said, I also think there is merit in the bold.

Mister D
10-01-2016, 05:22 PM
By real I mean you can poke it with a stick.

I can poke you with a stick, but I can't poke a group with a stick, only one real person at a time.

Fear profits a man nothing.

I understand. That's called nominalism. Yet another instance of Christianity influencing the way moderns think about the world. I'm just saying that the pokee, if I may, is not a blank slate free to choose who and what he is. There is an anthropology at work in the West that is built on truly mistaken premises.

Chris
10-01-2016, 05:23 PM
There was a time (before mine) when at least some libertarians (e.g. Rothbard, Murray) understood that collective identities (especially race) and community matter. I haven't gotten that impression from contemporary libertarians.

The libertarians I know and those I read adhere to classical liberal views of individual as actor in society. Hoppe is contemporary and does. Foundations of libertarianism like the non-aggression principle are social principle in nature. Austrian economics, often associated with libertarianism, is all about exchange and trade creating the social order we call the market.

Who do you have in mind that's extremely individualistic?

Ransom
10-01-2016, 05:24 PM
I plan to vote for Johnson, but if the Fans get too obnoxious I may vote Trump just to poke them in their collective eye. :wink:
There's no may to it, you'll do you duty. Nobody else but Trump has a chance to beat her, you won't vote Johnson. You'll vote Trump.

Cthulhu
10-01-2016, 05:27 PM
I think that individualism is at the root of the problem. Imagine what white people could do in this country if they could only perceive a common interest like everyone else?

That said, I also think there is merit in the bold.

Both trains of thought are two edged swords. But I entirely agree on the needs for social cooperation.


I understand. That's called nominalism. Yet another instance of Christianity influencing the way moderns think about the world. I'm just saying that the pokee, if I may, is not a blank slate free to choose who and what he is. There is an anthropology at work in the West that is built on truly mistaken premises.

I didn't know today I was a nominalist.

You see, I'm not terribly well read, I just try not be in imbecile. There are enough of those already.

Fear profits a man nothing.

Mister D
10-01-2016, 05:33 PM
The libertarians I know and those I read adhere to classical liberal views of individual as actor in society. Hoppe is contemporary and does. Foundations of libertarianism like the non-aggression principle are social principle in nature. Austrian economics, often associated with libertarianism, is all about exchange and trade creating the social order we call the market.

Who do you have in mind that's extremely individualistic?

The individual as actor in society theoretically pursues his own self-interest does he not? Individualism and universalism are at the core of liberal and market ideology. That the market is being proposed (or rather forced) as a global social order is exactly what I object to. Life is more than bean counting, exchange and trade.

Crepitus
10-01-2016, 05:37 PM
I plan to vote for Johnson, but if the Fans get too obnoxious I may vote Trump just to poke them in their collective eye. :wink:
Oh there's a good reason.:rollseyes:

Mister D
10-01-2016, 05:39 PM
Both trains of thought are two edged swords. But I entirely agree on the needs for social cooperation.



I didn't know today I was a nominalist.

You see, I'm not terribly well read, I just try not be in imbecile. There are enough of those already.

Fear profits a man nothing.

The issues at the core of nominalism go back to ancient Greece but it's real influence today comes from the debates among Medieval theologians.

Crepitus
10-01-2016, 05:40 PM
I've been planning on writing in "None Of The Above", but several of my friends have been making impassioned speeches about who gets to pick the next few supreme court justices and that is beginning to prey on my mind.







edited for spelling

Peter1469
10-01-2016, 05:40 PM
What do the polls in VA indicate at this time? Toss up. Goes back and forth.

Chris
10-01-2016, 05:41 PM
The individual as actor in society theoretically pursues his own self-interest does he not? Individualism and universalism are at the core of liberal and market ideology. That the market is being proposed (or rather forced) as a global social order is exactly what I object to. Life is more than bean counting, exchange and trade.

Right, but self-interest is pursued by providing others what they value. Adam Smith's invisible hand at work. Life is about value. Thus the market of exchange and trade which can exist between known neighbors or unknown strangers. It's both individual and collective especially when people get together in a club, a coop, a firm.

I should perhaps clarify that on the libertarian/Austrian view the individual as actor is simply the unit of analysis, the view itself is not psychological but sociological. The individual isn't analysed in terms of his desires or reasoning, it's just assumed he acts to attain value, and acts with others to attain it.

Cthulhu
10-01-2016, 05:46 PM
The individual as actor in society theoretically pursues his own self-interest does he not? Individualism and universalism are at the core of liberal and market ideology. That the market is being proposed (or rather forced) as a global social order is exactly what I object to. Life is more than bean counting, exchange and trade.

I think self interest is healthy. However when it turns toxic it becomes greed. Greed may enhance a thing, but it always comes at cost of one's humanity. While the beans must be counted, obviously, there needs to be a higher form of currency in the shape of family, reputation of accomplishments, honor, status, and most importantly moral character. Some argue that the credit bureaus do that - but it is always linked to the almighty dollar, not morality.

Americans need to change their focus of what they find valuable. Money is a tool for a destination, not the destination itself. It is a pleasant servant when properly applied, but a tyrannical master.

Peter1469
10-01-2016, 05:49 PM
There's no may to it, you'll do you duty. Nobody else but Trump has a chance to beat her, you won't vote Johnson. You'll vote Trump.That is not my current plan. If the Fans piss me off enough- we shall see.

Mister D
10-01-2016, 05:59 PM
Right, but self-interest is pursued by providing others what they value. Adam Smith's invisible hand at work. Life is about value. Thus the market of exchange and trade which can exist between known neighbors or unknown strangers. It's both individual and collective especially when people get together in a club, a coop, a firm.

I should perhaps clarify that on the libertarian/Austrian view the individual as actor is simply the unit of analysis, the view itself is not psychological but sociological. The individual isn't analysed in terms of his desires or reasoning, it's just assumed he acts to attain value, and acts with others to attain it.

But he still has his own interest at heart. Theoretically he is acting on that self-interest. Frankly, how someone can perceive that as a guarantee of social good is perplexing. It's counter-intuitive.

What do you mean when you say life is about value? Economic value? It's precisely the commodification of virtually everything (including human beings) that I find so repugnant. Everything is reduced to a product to be bought and sold. What can't be so reduced simply isn't real or has no value. When traditions, customs or institutions impede the smooth functioning of the proposed market order they must go because they're primitive and barbaric (19th and early 20th Century pretexts for annihilating traditional non-white cultures)) or racist, the product of religious extremism or the product of xenophobia (contemporary pretexts for annihilating traditional non-white cultures as well as our own).

Green Arrow
10-01-2016, 06:02 PM
I've been planning on writing in "None Of The Above", but several of my friends have been making impassioned speeches about who gets to pick the next few supreme court justices and that is beginning to prey on my mind.







edited for spelling

Your vote won't change the outcome, but voting Clinton or Trump will sanction their candidacies.

Mister D
10-01-2016, 06:04 PM
I think self interest is healthy. However when it turns toxic it becomes greed. Greed may enhance a thing, but it always comes at cost of one's humanity. While the beans must be counted, obviously, there needs to be a higher form of currency in the shape of family, reputation of accomplishments, honor, status, and most importantly moral character. Some argue that the credit bureaus do that - but it is always linked to the almighty dollar, not morality.

Americans need to change their focus of what they find valuable. Money is a tool for a destination, not the destination itself. It is a pleasant servant when properly applied, but a tyrannical master.

To an extent, sure. Self-interest is definitely healthy. I agree with that. A man with no self-interest is either a monk or devoid of ambition.

Well said. You made a remark earlier about not sounding like an idiot. IMO, you're one of the more interesting members we have.

Crepitus
10-01-2016, 06:04 PM
Your vote won't change the outcome, but voting Clinton or Trump will sanction their candidacies.
True enough. Here in Kansas I already know who is gonna take the stare.

Mister D
10-01-2016, 06:05 PM
Toss up. Goes back and forth.

That's curious. I figured Trump would do well there.

AZ Jim
10-01-2016, 06:06 PM
Toss up. Goes back and forth.Clinton up 6.8 on RCP

Peter1469
10-01-2016, 06:09 PM
That's curious. I figured Trump would do well there.


Northern VA is liberals and government workers. They cling to the status quo.

Mister D
10-01-2016, 06:11 PM
Northern VA is liberals and government workers. They cling to the status quo.

yeah, I've read about that demographic transformation.

Peter1469
10-01-2016, 06:11 PM
Clinton up 6.8 on RCP

+3 sport



RCP Poll Average (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html)
47.5 (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html)
44.4 (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html)
Clinton +3. (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html)

Peter1469
10-01-2016, 06:13 PM
yeah, I've read about that demographic transformation.

Maryland libs raised taxes to support their socialist utopia, and then the rich Maryland libs said to hell with that and moved here. That is how Virginia went from Red to Purple.

FindersKeepers
10-01-2016, 06:18 PM
It isn't.

It is.

Yes, yes, yes, I know there are third-party candidates. But, they're not in the running for the win.

Only two candidates are.

The others are so far behind. They will never win.

Newpublius
10-01-2016, 06:24 PM
I am voting Clinton. One of us will win, one lose. I don't want to change your mind, mine won't change. Go forward in peace.

16305

And that's exactly what will happen Wednesday morning. I don't know about you but I'll start contemplating turkey day and the holidays thereafter.

Bethere
10-01-2016, 07:24 PM
Vote third party or vote for trash.

Your choice.

Name 10 libertarians you have voted for in your lifetime.

Bethere
10-01-2016, 07:30 PM
That is not my current plan. If the Fans piss me off enough- we shall see.

You'll vote a straight party ticket.

Peter1469
10-01-2016, 07:50 PM
You'll vote a straight party ticket.

3rd party. Why do you care? Statist.

Bethere
10-01-2016, 08:01 PM
3rd party. Why do you care? Statist.

Name 10 third party candidates you have ever voted for.

Peter1469
10-01-2016, 08:23 PM
Name 10 third party candidates you have ever voted for.


Well, I left the GOP in 2006 because they were spending like drunken statists. So every election local, state and federal since then here in my district in VA. We actually have a small but committed group of Americans here.

I will spend the next few hours getting the names for you. LOL. Not.

Green Arrow
10-01-2016, 08:34 PM
It is.

Yes, yes, yes, I know there are third-party candidates. But, they're not in the running for the win.

Only two candidates are.

The others are so far behind. They will never win.

That's because people are foolish enough to hate the two major party candidates but still support them in the end.

Break the cycle. Show some independence. Don't run off the cliff with the others.

JDubya
10-01-2016, 08:58 PM
Vote third party or vote for trash.

Your choice.

Correction: Vote third party throw your vote in the trash.

Peter1469
10-01-2016, 09:04 PM
Correction: Vote third party throw your vote in the trash.

That concept is why we are in the position that we are at in the US.

Wake up.

Safety
10-01-2016, 09:56 PM
I think that individualism is at the root of the problem. Imagine what white people could do in this country if they could only perceive a common interest like everyone else?

That said, I also think there is merit in the bold.

Ok, you've piqued my interest, I'm listening....

JDubya
10-01-2016, 10:49 PM
That concept is why we are in the position that we are at in the US.

Wake up.

If a third party ever comes along that offers an actual, plausible alternative to the two major parties, the voters will embrace them and they'll have better than a snowball's chance in hell of getting more than a tiny handful of votes.

But so far, there hasn't. Nobody is interested because most of them have been kooks.

Tahuyaman
10-01-2016, 11:32 PM
I am voting Clinton....

No kidding? I would never have guessed that one.

Hal Jordan
10-02-2016, 01:55 AM
I am voting Clinton. One of us will win, one lose. I don't want to change your mind, mine won't change. Go forward in peace.

16305

I'm not voting for evil, so I refuse to vote for either of your options. Try again.

Hal Jordan
10-02-2016, 01:59 AM
Seriously -- you're right.

That's all we can do.

It's a shame that in the greatest nation in the world, the presidency is coming down to these two candidates.

Except for the fact that it doesn't come down to those two candidates.

I question the morality of anyone that would be willing to vote for Clinton or Trump. Only evil could justify voting for evil.

Hal Jordan
10-02-2016, 02:03 AM
I've been planning on writing in "None Of The Above", but several of my friends have been making impassioned speeches about who gets to pick the next few supreme court justices and that is beginning to prey on my mind.







edited for spelling

So you're voting for Trump because his actual picks will be far more liberal that Hillary's?

Hal Jordan
10-02-2016, 02:07 AM
Correction: Vote third party throw your vote in the trash.

Correction: Don't vote third party. Vote for absolute shit and throw your vote in the trash. Both Trump and Clinton are absolute shit.

Hal Jordan
10-02-2016, 02:10 AM
If a third party ever comes along that offers an actual, plausible alternative to the two major parties, the voters will embrace them and they'll have better than a snowball's chance in hell of getting more than a tiny handful of votes.

But so far, there hasn't. Nobody is interested because most of them have been kooks.

Show me where the two major parties are putting forth anything plausible. Oh, you can't, because they aren't. Enjoy your slavery.

Tahuyaman
10-02-2016, 03:05 AM
Vote third party or vote for trash.

Your choice.

I have been in the Gary Johnson camp for a while, but he's been showing signs of being an unacceptable choice too. I'm now leaning to voting for every position on the ballot other than POTUS.

Hal Jordan
10-02-2016, 03:36 AM
I've been planning on writing in "None Of The Above", but several of my friends have been making impassioned speeches about who gets to pick the next few supreme court justices and that is beginning to prey on my mind.







edited for spelling

So you're voting Trump, since his actual nominees will be more liberal than Clinton's?

Hal Jordan
10-02-2016, 03:37 AM
Correction: Vote third party throw your vote in the trash.

Correction: Vote Republican or Democrat and throw your vote in the trash.

FindersKeepers
10-02-2016, 05:04 AM
Except for the fact that it doesn't come down to those two candidates.

I question the morality of anyone that would be willing to vote for Clinton or Trump. Only evil could justify voting for evil.


Hal, you know it's coming down to those two candidates. The third party candidates have not been able to rise high enough to garner sufficient votes to win. That is not the American voter's fault. That's the fault of the candidates' campaigns.

To pretend that any third party candidate has a shot (in this election) is just wrong.

In any election, you have the ones leading the pack and the ones lagging behind. The polls are telling us what's happening, Hal. I promise you -- a third party candidate will NOT win.

It's just wishful thinking.

And, I don't blame you for badly wanting another candidate in the running, but no third party candidate is rising to that level. Truly, it's not happening.

FindersKeepers
10-02-2016, 05:16 AM
That's because people are foolish enough to hate the two major party candidates but still support them in the end.

Break the cycle. Show some independence. Don't run off the cliff with the others.



That's not really how it works, GA.

There are things we wish for -- and then there's reality. Hillary and Trump are reality. Our third-party candidates exist in a world of magical thinking.

Just as I could vote for one of the third-party candidates, I could also write in the name of my horse on the ballot -- and "take a stand" as some say. But the truth is, GA, my horse has just as much chance of winning as Stein does.

That throws me back to the land of reality where I have to base my decision on choices that are most likely to happen. Most likely based on the sentiment of the rest of the American voters.

It's like when my kids were little and we'd talk about the dreams they had for their lives. My eldest wanted to be a Supreme Court Justice, my middle son wanted to be a fireman and my youngest daughter wanted to be a horse. None of them aspired to those careers but as my daughter got older, we finally had the talk about how she probably wasn't going to be a horse. Instead, I bought her a horse and took her to Pony Club. She learned hunter-under-saddle and is an accomplished rider today. But, she never became a horse. She went into law enforcement.

Sometimes, it's important to differentiate between what's real and what's a fantasy.

I love your enthusiasm and fierce independence. Truly, I do. What you want, however, just isn't going to happen.

Peter1469
10-02-2016, 06:28 AM
That's not really how it works, GA.

There are things we wish for -- and then there's reality. Hillary and Trump are reality. Our third-party candidates exist in a world of magical thinking.

Just as I could vote for one of the third-party candidates, I could also write in the name of my horse on the ballot -- and "take a stand" as some say. But the truth is, GA, my horse has just as much chance of winning as Stein does.

That throws me back to the land of reality where I have to base my decision on choices that are most likely to happen. Most likely based on the sentiment of the rest of the American voters.

It's like when my kids were little and we'd talk about the dreams they had for their lives. My eldest wanted to be a Supreme Court Justice, my middle son wanted to be a fireman and my youngest daughter wanted to be a horse. None of them aspired to those careers but as my daughter got older, we finally had the talk about how she probably wasn't going to be a horse. Instead, I bought her a horse and took her to Pony Club. She learned hunter-under-saddle and is an accomplished rider today. But, she never became a horse. She went into law enforcement.

Sometimes, it's important to differentiate between what's real and what's a fantasy.

I love your enthusiasm and fierce independence. Truly, I do. What you want, however, just isn't going to happen.


That is exactly what the Establishment wants people to believe.

I don't.

FindersKeepers
10-02-2016, 06:31 AM
That is exactly what the Establishment wants people to believe.

I don't.



I believe we can change it -- I just don't believe we can do so this time around. Not in the position we're in at present.

Peter1469
10-02-2016, 06:37 AM
I believe we can change it -- I just don't believe we can do so this time around. Not in the position we're in at present.


I agree that change takes time. But letting the puppet masters pull your strings is not change. It is what they want.

FindersKeepers
10-02-2016, 06:45 AM
I agree that change takes time. But letting the puppet masters pull your strings is not change. It is what they want.

You make a good point, but in the current election, while we have no good leading candidate, electing Hillary could be catastrophic. I think she'll win, but I want my vote cast against her in a meaningful way.

If every third-party voter cast a vote for Trump, we might be able to keep Hillary out of the Oval Office. Granted, we'd elect a doofus, but perhaps one that could slow down globalism enough for us to figure out a way to retain at least a modicum of our nation's integrity.

For me -- keeping Hillary out is tantamount. Neither Johnson nor Stein are mainstream enough to garner the votes needed to bump Hillary. And, Stein could easily be worse than Trump. Gary Johnson simply doesn't have the name recognition to pull it off at this late date.

I'm just being realistic. At some point -- we have to face the reality of where the candidates stand in the polls.

Peter1469
10-02-2016, 06:56 AM
You make a good point, but in the current election, while we have no good leading candidate, electing Hillary could be catastrophic. I think she'll win, but I want my vote cast against her in a meaningful way.

If every third-party voter cast a vote for Trump, we might be able to keep Hillary out of the Oval Office. Granted, we'd elect a doofus, but perhaps one that could slow down globalism enough for us to figure out a way to retain at least a modicum of our nation's integrity.

For me -- keeping Hillary out is tantamount. Neither Johnson nor Stein are mainstream enough to garner the votes needed to bump Hillary. And, Stein could easily be worse than Trump. Gary Johnson simply doesn't have the name recognition to pull it off at this late date.

I'm just being realistic. At some point -- we have to face the reality of where the candidates stand in the polls.

I am comforted with the knowledge that I am prepared if our elite destroy the economy. I am not in the position where I must support evil in order to survive.

Green Arrow
10-02-2016, 09:06 AM
You make a good point, but in the current election, while we have no good leading candidate, electing Hillary could be catastrophic. I think she'll win, but I want my vote cast against her in a meaningful way.

If every third-party voter cast a vote for Trump, we might be able to keep Hillary out of the Oval Office. Granted, we'd elect a doofus, but perhaps one that could slow down globalism enough for us to figure out a way to retain at least a modicum of our nation's integrity.

For me -- keeping Hillary out is tantamount. Neither Johnson nor Stein are mainstream enough to garner the votes needed to bump Hillary. And, Stein could easily be worse than Trump. Gary Johnson simply doesn't have the name recognition to pull it off at this late date.

I'm just being realistic. At some point -- we have to face the reality of where the candidates stand in the polls.

If every voter that hated Trump and Clinton voted third party, we wouldn't have to suffer Clinton or Trump as president.

That is reality.

Mac-7
10-02-2016, 10:02 AM
If every voter that hated Trump and Clinton voted third party, we wouldn't have to suffer Clinton or Trump as president.

That is reality.

That's an impossible dream

What we are going to get if libertarians have their way is a one-party dictatorship like the old Soviet Union run by the Clinton's

Crepitus
10-02-2016, 10:32 AM
So you're voting for Trump because his actual picks will be far more liberal that Hillary's?

I suspect that if trump wins he will lose interest pretty quickly and those choices will be made by someone other than him.

Chris
10-02-2016, 11:41 AM
That's an impossible dream

What we are going to get if libertarians have their way is a one-party dictatorship like the old Soviet Union run by the Clinton's


https://i.snag.gy/e3jwFW.jpg

Chris
10-02-2016, 11:42 AM
I suspect that if trump wins he will lose interest pretty quickly and those choices will be made by someone other than him.

Isn't that what we have now, Presidents issuing general dictates and Congress passing general laws and both leaving it to bureaucrats to work out the details?

Crepitus
10-02-2016, 11:45 AM
Isn't that what we have now, Presidents issuing general dictates and Congress passing general laws and both leaving it to bureaucrats to work out the details?

To a certain extent yes, I'm talking about taking it to extremes though.

Chris
10-02-2016, 04:08 PM
To a certain extent yes, I'm talking about taking it to extremes though.

It could, we could become even more of a bureaucratic state. The problem with that though is it leads to away from rule of law and toward rule of man, little local dictators interpreting the law their own way like Kim Davis.

Hayek, The Road to Serfdom, predicted the opposite, the frustration of the people with the government getting things done leading to election of a charismatic leader who fixes everything, an allusion to the authoritarian populist Trump, btw.

Hal Jordan
10-03-2016, 01:56 AM
Hal, you know it's coming down to those two candidates. The third party candidates have not been able to rise high enough to garner sufficient votes to win. That is not the American voter's fault. That's the fault of the candidates' campaigns.

To pretend that any third party candidate has a shot (in this election) is just wrong.

In any election, you have the ones leading the pack and the ones lagging behind. The polls are telling us what's happening, Hal. I promise you -- a third party candidate will NOT win.

It's just wishful thinking.

And, I don't blame you for badly wanting another candidate in the running, but no third party candidate is rising to that level. Truly, it's not happening.

Either way, the third parties are the only hope. Evil versus evil can no longer stand.

Hal Jordan
10-03-2016, 02:00 AM
I believe we can change it -- I just don't believe we can do so this time around. Not in the position we're in at present.

If not now, when?

Hal Jordan
10-03-2016, 02:02 AM
You make a good point, but in the current election, while we have no good leading candidate, electing Hillary could be catastrophic. I think she'll win, but I want my vote cast against her in a meaningful way.

If every third-party voter cast a vote for Trump, we might be able to keep Hillary out of the Oval Office. Granted, we'd elect a doofus, but perhaps one that could slow down globalism enough for us to figure out a way to retain at least a modicum of our nation's integrity.

For me -- keeping Hillary out is tantamount. Neither Johnson nor Stein are mainstream enough to garner the votes needed to bump Hillary. And, Stein could easily be worse than Trump. Gary Johnson simply doesn't have the name recognition to pull it off at this late date.

I'm just being realistic. At some point -- we have to face the reality of where the candidates stand in the polls.

Realistic is voting in the more liberal candidate?

Hal Jordan
10-03-2016, 02:04 AM
That's an impossible dream

What we are going to get if libertarians have their way is a one-party dictatorship like the old Soviet Union run by the Clinton's

This nation was an impossible dream too.

FindersKeepers
10-03-2016, 04:50 AM
Either way, the third parties are the only hope. Evil versus evil can no longer stand.


I can't follow you down the "evil" road, Hal. Not literally. Our two major candidates are just humans, after all. Both are flawed, as are all humans and both have a few (very few) good points. You will find folks who call the third-party candidates "evil" as well. That doesn't make it true.

I only say we're voting for the lesser of "two evils" in a very figurative sense.

Our nation is bigger and stronger than any candidate.

FindersKeepers
10-03-2016, 04:50 AM
If not now, when?

When the citizens, collectively, decide they want change.

Not now.

Peter1469
10-03-2016, 04:51 AM
Too late. The citizens have realized that they can vote themselves the contents of the public treasury.

PolWatch
10-03-2016, 05:30 AM
The third party candidates won't win...that's a given. However, votes for third party candidates are a way to tell the two major parties that we are fed up. Trump is the repub reaction to party dissatisfaction just as Sanders was the dem side of dissatisfaction. Have we ever seen an election when so many of the normally docile party members have said 'I've had it with your garbage'?

We now have 2 poor choices for president and I'm not willing to vote for either. Sanders succeeded in getting some of his views into the dem platform and Trump has completely disrupted the repub party. Its not politics as usual. We may actually see government by the people (and not party) in the future. Its a nice idea.

Mac-7
10-03-2016, 05:45 AM
I plan to vote for Johnson, but if the Fans get too obnoxious I may vote Trump just to poke them in their collective eye. :wink:

Since you have a survival plan for after America falls you can afford to vote for johnson/Hillary

but I grew up in a family of patriots who stll love this country and mere personal self interest is not enough for me.

I want whats best for the country as well as myself

Subdermal
10-03-2016, 10:02 AM
http://www.kappit.com/img/pics/201603_1054_eedib.jpg

Thread Winner.

Hal Jordan
10-04-2016, 12:07 AM
I can't follow you down the "evil" road, Hal. Not literally. Our two major candidates are just humans, after all. Both are flawed, as are all humans and both have a few (very few) good points. You will find folks who call the third-party candidates "evil" as well. That doesn't make it true.

I only say we're voting for the lesser of "two evils" in a very figurative sense.

Our nation is bigger and stronger than any candidate.

I'm not saying they're pure evil. Even Hitler wasn't 100% evil. However, in terms of direction for the country, both are evil.

Hal Jordan
10-04-2016, 12:10 AM
When the citizens, collectively, decide they want change.

Not now.

The citizens can't come together as a whole. Even during the Revolutionary War, there was dissension among the citizenry.

Also, how can the citizenry rally around a third party without support? They can't, and everything is stacked against them, thanks to the media and the myth of the wasted vote that the major parties push.

FindersKeepers
10-04-2016, 03:14 AM
The citizens can't come together as a whole. Even during the Revolutionary War, there was dissension among the citizenry.

And that will always happen as we all continue to have different ideas about what is best for us. But, we've come together enough to develop a two-party system that most voters (not most citizens) take part in. Democratic elections will naturally morph into a two-party system once voters figure out that like-party candidates are harmed by a split of the vote.


Also, how can the citizenry rally around a third party without support? They can't, and everything is stacked against them, thanks to the media and the myth of the wasted vote that the major parties push.

As nice as it would be to have someone or something to blame our election system on -- the truth is that we have exactly what we deserve.

It's true that the media doesn't care about third-party candidates but why should they? The media is simply in it for themselves.

We can't really force the media to cover third-party candidates. As a candidate grows in popularity (or oddness), the media begins to jump on board. But, not until then.

All of it really comes down to the candidates. Do they have the ability to garner the support they need to stay in the headlines? Trump played the media like a fiddle. Hillary's name was already so big she didn't have to do too much.

I don't see a way to change that process and so I will vote my conscience, which is what I advise every voter to do. I will vote in the manner I think is most likely to keep Hillary out.

Boris The Animal
10-04-2016, 05:54 AM
+3 sport



RCP Poll Average (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html)
47.5 (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html)
44.4 (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html)
Clinton +3. (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html)



Statistical dead heat and well within the margin of error. I think this one is going to go to the Senate.

Truth Detector
10-04-2016, 06:19 AM
I am voting Clinton. One of us will win, one lose. I don't want to change your mind, mine won't change. Go forward in peace.

16305

Is that why we are bombarded with whiney tirades about Trump daily? :biglaugh:

You lefties are going to be kicking and screaming after Trump wins....I wonder if many will finally leave the country as they promised last time Bush won?

Truth Detector
10-04-2016, 06:24 AM
That is not my current plan. If the Fans piss me off enough- we shall see.

I was never FOR Trump; he reminded me too much of the petulant arrogance of Obama. We already have one emperor without clothes. That said, I was going to sit this out and vote local. BUT, the more shrill the media and Hitlery became, and leftists here, the more I changed my mind. I am all in for a Trump Presidency, if for nothing else than it will drive the political class insane and that can only be GOOD!

;)

Truth Detector
10-04-2016, 06:28 AM
That concept is why we are in the position that we are at in the US.

Wake up.

Third party candidates and charismatic personalities will do nothing to change the status quo.

Truth Detector
10-04-2016, 06:33 AM
Except for the fact that it doesn't come down to those two candidates.

I question the morality of anyone that would be willing to vote for Clinton or Trump. Only evil could justify voting for evil.

WTF does morality have to do with the REALITY that you are going to get Trump or Clinton? You think it is a question of morality???? :laugh:

Truth Detector
10-04-2016, 06:34 AM
Correction: Don't vote third party. Vote for absolute $#@! and throw your vote in the trash. Both Trump and Clinton are absolute $#@!.

....and one of them WILL be your next President. You could move to Mexico or Canada. ;)

Truth Detector
10-04-2016, 06:36 AM
If every voter that hated Trump and Clinton voted third party, we wouldn't have to suffer Clinton or Trump as president.

That is reality.

The two candidates for third parties are morons and whackos. I have to laugh when people proclaim they aren't choosing trash then vote for lunatics.

Truth Detector
10-04-2016, 06:37 AM
Either way, the third parties are the only hope. Evil versus evil can no longer stand.

Wrong; Jill Stein and Gary Johnson are loony whackos. Evil? That's an extremist position and strawman.

Truth Detector
10-04-2016, 06:38 AM
Realistic is voting in the more liberal candidate?

If you don't think Jill Stein is a loony liberal, hell she is nearly Marxist in her political positions, then you really need to get a mental checkup.

Truth Detector
10-04-2016, 06:41 AM
Too late. The citizens have realized that they can vote themselves the contents of the public treasury.

....which is why we need to insist on term limits and replacing the current abomination of a tax code with the Fair Tax. That and eliminating all government subsidies will get us back to where we need to be.

Truth Detector
10-04-2016, 06:45 AM
The third party candidates won't win...that's a given. However, votes for third party candidates are a way to tell the two major parties that we are fed up. Trump is the repub reaction to party dissatisfaction just as Sanders was the dem side of dissatisfaction. Have we ever seen an election when so many of the normally docile party members have said 'I've had it with your garbage'?

We now have 2 poor choices for president and I'm not willing to vote for either. Sanders succeeded in getting some of his views into the dem platform and Trump has completely disrupted the repub party. Its not politics as usual. We may actually see government by the people (and not party) in the future. Its a nice idea.

The tiny percentages that third party candidates receive do NOTHING to sway the two major parties. The most ever received was by Ross Perot with 18.6% of the vote. Nothing changed.

I am amused by the claims that we all have two POOR choices.....because the pundits say so. But to many, these are the BEST choices as noted by them winning the majority of their party's nomination.

Truth Detector
10-04-2016, 06:46 AM
I'm not saying they're pure evil. Even Hitler wasn't 100% evil. However, in terms of direction for the country, both are evil.

Hitler most certainly was PURE evil and defines the term. Wow, just wow.

Truth Detector
10-04-2016, 06:47 AM
Statistical dead heat and well within the margin of error. I think this one is going to go to the Senate.

If Trump takes Florida and Ohio; the election is over for Hillary.

Mac-7
10-04-2016, 06:55 AM
The tiny percentages that third party candidates receive do NOTHING to sway the two major parties. The most ever received was by Ross Perot with 18.6% of the vote. Nothing changed.

I am amused by the claims that we all have two POOR choices.....because the pundits say so. But to many, these are the BEST choices as noted by them winning the majority of their party's nomination.

Libs will say anything to obscure the fact that they really dont care who the next president is as long as they can say it isnt their fault.

Not having to make the difficult choice is the most important thing to them

Ransom
10-04-2016, 09:37 AM
That is not my current plan. If the Fans piss me off enough- we shall see.

This is bigger than you, Peter. Your plan and who pisses you off is irrelevant.

Peter1469
10-04-2016, 04:09 PM
This is bigger than you, Peter. Your plan and who pisses you off is irrelevant.

oh