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.
The only thing wrong about voting your conscience is 1- At this point in time a 3rd party candidate isn't going to win as president & 2 - it can backfire & cause your least desirable candidate to win . I guess if you really don't have a preference between the 2 major party candidates # 2 wouldn't matter to you .
I thought Bush 41 was doing a reasonable job but I voted my conscience [ right or wrong ] & voted for Ross Perot . Enough people did the same & gave the presidency to Bill Clinton . I know a lot of people think Bill is the best thing since sliced bread but I'm not one of them & would much rather have had Bush 41 again .
Then that is how you should have voted. Odd that you would argue that you thought he was doing a reasonable job and now wish you have voted for him but didn't.
I voted for Stein and if I had it all to do over again, I would again. In 2012 I wrote in Vermin Supreme and if I had it all over to do again, I would again.
My choice at the time was Perot & I didn't think far enough ahead to realize that voting for him would give the election to Clinton . I've wised up some since then & now vote against my least desirable candidate that has a chance of winning instead of for a more desirable candidate that doesn't have a chance of winning . I don't think that anyone really thought that someone besides Clinton or Trump would win .
My choice at the time was Perot & I didn't think far enough ahead to realize that voting for him would give the election to Clinton . I've wised up some since then & now vote against my least desirable candidate that has a chance of winning instead of for a more desirable candidate that doesn't have a chance of winning . I don't think that anyone really thought that someone besides Clinton or Trump would win .
People are getting sick and tired of voting against someone as opposed to for someone. If you want to win, present better candidates.
i didn't have an opinion of her and could care less.......but listening to her reasons of a recount I could see she is lying and her reasons are B.S.
She said she is doing this to make sure the system is not corrupt and that no outside interference took place (hackers and Russia), she has ZERO evidence for this witch hunt. Then she said she isn't doing this to help Hillary Clinton...another B.S. from her.
She ONLY picks 3 states that Trump won that gave him the victory.....she didn't pick Nevada, Minnesota and N.H. which Hillary won that was close.....and Nevada has many illegals and that is "outside" influence.
She worries about "outside" influence" but she never mentions illegals voting in our system and never mentions California and the huge gap Hillary won. Aren't illegals "outside" influence also?
if she wants to really audit our voting system from "outside" influence she has to min. take 15 states, red and blue states to do an audit and if the people that are voting are legal U.S. CITIZEN and hire a non-partisan task force to do this audit and this will take months even more than a year if she was really serious about this.
but that is not what she is doing....and this is just a scheme to take millions of dollars for her party and be on the news.
i didn't have an opinion of her and could care less.......but listening to her reasons of a recount I could see she is lying and her reasons are B.S.
She said she is doing this to make sure the system is not corrupt and that no outside interference took place (hackers and Russia), she has ZERO evidence for this witch hunt. Then she said she isn't doing this to help Hillary Clinton...another B.S. from her.
It isn't helping Hillary in any way. Not is there any way it can. The rest is just more repetitive claims that have already been covered.
I've covered this. She knows that is where the money is at. Who is going to donate to recount New York? No one.
Or she is smarter than everyone. What if we recount Pennsylvania and we find an extremely low fraud rate?
Damn, there goes the argument for more restrictions on voting rights, eh?
If you think there is a massive amount of illegal votes cast, why would you not support her? If we discover a large number of fraudulent votes, the argument for I.D.s grows stronger.
Where is the problem here?
Who is "we"?
Stein in the instigator.
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.
