Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No one is deciding for me. It's sad you can not decide for yourself.
I guess I am just not making myself very clear...
Say for example there are three people in the room. You and two others, deciding on which of two movies to see. You HATE both movies so you won't decide either way. Hence, the other two decide for you. Understand?
This is just the way it works, no matter whether you or I like it or not.
And as it relates to our choice between Hillary or Trump, you WILL watch the movie chosen for you whether you like it or not.
This is what I mean about letting others choose for you, but again..., as you wish of course. It is a free country.
Also, BTW, if your inclination were ultimately to vote for Trump rather than Hillary, you do America the favor of not voting, because America is better off if Hillary becomes POTUS rather than Trump all considered IMO.
Location: Sitting on a bar stool. Guinness in hand.
4,428 posts, read 6,515,823 times
Reputation: 1721
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe
Hence you will let those who can vote for either to decide for you. That's ultimately my point.
As you wish of course...
What third party is strong enough to win The presidential race at this point?
The only thing I or anyone who doesn't like either of the candidates can do at this point, is to make sure my representatives and senators put The appropriate pressure on whoever wins the presidency. That is how my voice is going to be heard at this point. Not by voting for the lesser of two evils. And not voting for splintered third parties.
The only thing I or anyone who doesn't like either of the candidates can do at this point, is to make sure my representatives and senators put The appropriate pressure on whoever wins the presidency. That is how my voice is going to be heard at this point. Not by voting for the lesser of two evils. And not voting for splintered third parties.
That was one of the more politically sophisticated comments that I've read from one of the disaffected. But there is one other thing you might consider. If there is a alternative party on the ballot voting for them isn't always a lost cause because in most states there is a threshold of votes above which insures that that they can be on the ballot in the next election cycle without having to collect an onerous number of petition signatures.
Say for example there are three people in the room. You and two others, deciding on which of two movies to see. You HATE both movies so you won't decide either way. Hence, the other two decide for you. Understand?
This is just the way it works, no matter whether you or I like it or not.
And as it relates to our choice between Hillary or Trump, you WILL watch the movie chosen for you whether you like it or not.
This is what I mean about letting others choose for you, but again..., as you wish of course. It is a free country.
Also, BTW, if your inclination were ultimately to vote for Trump rather than Hillary, you do America the favor of not voting, because America is better off if Hillary becomes POTUS rather than Trump all considered IMO.
Your idea is that we are presented with crap, so we must, therefore, choose crap. Someone put it another way on another thread:
Do I vote to be stabbed in the back or do I vote to be stabbed in the front?
Why would I vote for either of those?
My vote is "I choose not to be stabbed."
The people who keep claiming that "you're wasting your vote" if you don't vote for a stabbing, are saying: "This is all we have. We have to be stabbed, so at least we get to decide if it's in the front or the back. If you don't choose one of those, you let other people decide if you're going to be stabbed in the front or the back." That's what you're saying.
The people who choose otherwise are not saying, "Please pick which way I'll be stabbed", they are saying, "I choose not to be stabbed." And when enough people say, "I will not be stabbed" is when the protest is heard. As long as people continue to give up, give in, and give away their right to say, "I choose not to be stabbed", the stabbings will never stop.
Say for example there are three people in the room. You and two others, deciding on which of two movies to see. You HATE both movies so you won't decide either way. Hence, the other two decide for you. Understand?
No, I can decide to go bowling.
Quote:
This is just the way it works, no matter whether you or I like it or not.
And as it relates to our choice between Hillary or Trump, you WILL watch the movie chosen for you whether you like it or not.
I wouldn't waste my money going to a movie I have no desire to see, nor will I waste my vote on a candidate I can not support.
Quote:
This is what I mean about letting others choose for you, but again..., as you wish of course. It is a free country.
Also, BTW, if your inclination were ultimately to vote for Trump rather than Hillary, you do America the favor of not voting, because America is better off if Hillary becomes POTUS rather than Trump all considered IMO.
I'm not voting for Trump but he concerns me less than Hillary. If Trump decides on war at least we will once again have a voice to protest that. When a (D) decides to go to war, unfortunately that voice is largely non existent.
For those of you unhappy with the current standard options available ("candidates come in red or blue ONLY!"), you probably are perfectly aware that it's nearly impossible for a third party candidate to have a chance in *this* election cycle, but in order to create that possibility in the future, here's how to start getting that voice heard *without* unwittingly risking the worse-of-two-evils candidate being let into office because you didn't vote for the other one:
If you live in one of the swing states, you should probably vote for one of the two GOP/Dem candidates, using the lesser-of-two-evils approach, if you must. However, try to spread the message of your true choice (again this is for those preferring third party candidates) of your true party/candidates of choice to others who aren't in swing states.
Now, if you DO live in a solid red or blue state where your vote will have little sway anyway (especially if it's a populous one, like CA/TX/GA/NY/WA/etc), then you're in a great position to communicate your dissatisfaction with the current 2 parties by voting third party. If they're not on the ballot, write them in.
The ascent up Mount Everest begins with a single step.
I keep reading these comments about how people will not vote for either Hillary or Trump given certain circumstances, and I wonder how it is they don't realize they are simply abdicating the election for our next POTUS to those who WILL vote for Hillary or Trump. Not sure how people can logically conclude to waste their vote on other than either of those two, but maybe somebody knows something I don't?
Did you ever wonder why no one (pollsters) asks if you would never vote for Cruz or Sanders?
Your idea is that we are presented with crap, so we must, therefore, choose crap. Someone put it another way on another thread:
Do I vote to be stabbed in the back or do I vote to be stabbed in the front?
Why would I vote for either of those?
My vote is "I choose not to be stabbed."
The people who keep claiming that "you're wasting your vote" if you don't vote for a stabbing, are saying: "This is all we have. We have to be stabbed, so at least we get to decide if it's in the front or the back. If you don't choose one of those, you let other people decide if you're going to be stabbed in the front or the back." That's what you're saying.
The people who choose otherwise are not saying, "Please pick which way I'll be stabbed", they are saying, "I choose not to be stabbed." And when enough people say, "I will not be stabbed" is when the protest is heard. As long as people continue to give up, give in, and give away their right to say, "I choose not to be stabbed", the stabbings will never stop.
Here again is what you don't seem to understand, or maybe it is me, but let's look at this again with your analogy...
If you consider the winner of the race for POTUS as getting stabbed either in the back or in the front, then needless to say we ARE all going to get stabbed one way or another, right? Can we agree that we will have a new POTUS and he/she will either be Hillary or Trump for all practical purposes?
If we can agree on the above, we can understand one another and move on. Otherwise, you can't understand my point.
If we agree that the end result is either Hillary and/or Trump, the following options are all we have to consider;
A) We vote for the candidate that represents what most resonates with our view of what policies are best for America, which person will best guide America.
B) We vote for someone else or we don't vote at all, the "protest vote."
If A, end of discussion and as it should be.
If B, even if you think both Hillary and Trump are absolute pieces of sheet, we are all going to end up with one of them as POTUS regardless. THIS IS WHERE YOUR ANALOGY LOGIC FALTERS; we don't get to choose NOT to get stabbed. We ARE ALL GOING TO GET STABBED whether you like it or not, right???
I think the "getting stabbed" analogy is more than a little over-the-top or at least very typical political nonsense, but for purposes of this point I'm trying to make, it works as good as any. For any clear thinking person who understands what the ultimate result of this election is going to be, given those two choices, you either help decide on the choice, or you leave it to others to make that choice for you -- whether we like it or not. This is the truth of the matter.
I would also add that surely one is less "evil" than the other. There are simply too many political factors for any thinking person to consider them exactly equal. That too is nonsense, but of course out of frustration that neither is satisfactory, it may feel better to THINK we can somehow divorce ourselves from the final decision, the process in general. Not so. Feel better or not, that feeling is also misguided, because even the "protest vote" favors Hillary or Trump one way or another unless you really could care less which one becomes POTUS.
If that's you, if you could care less whether it is Hillary or Trump that becomes the next POTUS, then no doubt you can't understand what I am explaining here beginning with word one, because that too is ridiculous in my opinion. The two represent very different futures for America. I mean what can you otherwise be thinking, to suggest they are EXACTLY as good or as bad? I really don't know...
Finally, if you actually know better, and you might be more inclined to vote for Trump rather than Hillary if you do vote, then by all means, I encourage you not to vote or cast that protest vote. By doing so we will both feel better...
I think a protest vote is quite sensible and honorable if one truly does not have faith in either candidate. There are people who truly think the county will suffer under either option, so in that case voting third party of write in is the only way to register their displeasure. If enough people do that it definitely sends a message to whomever wins that they have some work to do if they really want to govern the entire nation. It also sets the political wheels in motion to try to capture those voters next go around.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What happens if you don't vote for Clinton or Trump?
