2aHawaii
General Topics => Political Discussion => Topic started by: eyeeatingfish on March 01, 2016, 05:36:05 AM
-
As it seems more and more likely that Trump will win the republican nomination to then face either Clinton or Sanders I find myself unsure of how I will vote.
Do I vote for Trump anyway as a way of keeping democrats away from the presidency or am I going to vote for a third party.
Maybe people avoiding Trump will be the start of the rise of power of the 3rd party success?
So if Trump wins, who are you considering as an alternative to voting for Trump? Vote Libertarian?
-
I would vote Libertarian given a reasonable choice and a reasonable chance that candidate would win, but unfortunately the least of the three evils would be Trump. I'd have to vote for him because I think Sanders and Clinton are far worse choices.
-
I had a very spirited debate with my son about this last night.
I think his college professors are warping his views on a lot of subjects including 2A rights.... But that's beside the point.
Anyway I told him that I really don't care for Trump but I dislike everybody else more. sigh :'(
-
The 3rd party would be Bloomberg. Talk about terrible choices, ugh...
-
I will be voting for the R nomination as the lesser of evils.
-
Absolutely, he'd be the lesser of two evils and while voting for him would be a gamble at least it wouldn't be a guaranteed losing bet.
-
Same as above
Stay at home = vote for the "other side" (dark side)
-
I will be voting for the R nomination as the lesser of evils.
It IS a lot more clear than with McCain or Romney.
-
If Sanders gets elected, I wonder if it will end up pushing people right the next election. Sort of like how a mistake teaches us all a lesson?
I am seriously considering voting third party if Trump wins.
Saying that Trump is the lesser of two evils is kind of relative. It is like the crazy homeless guy on a street corner rambling about things. I might agree with his positions on the topics but in the end he is still a crazy person you wouldn't want to run the country.
-
I don't think Bernie will get the D nomination.
A vote for 3rd party = a win for Hillary.
Do you want the crazy that you didn't vote for or the crazy that you did?
-
I don't think Bernie will get the D nomination.
A vote for 3rd party = a win for Hillary.
Do you want the crazy that you didn't vote for or the crazy that you did?
I still reserve optimism that Hillary will lose to Bernie.
The only reason that a vote for a third party means a democratic win is that people keep thinking that way. It is a self perpetuating myth, it is only true for the fact that people keep saying it.
If people stopped saying it, then you could see a rise of a third party.
-
I don't think Bernie will get the D nomination.
But, but, Bernie got the endorsement of the Communist Party - USA!
That has to count for a lot for a lot for the true believers!
-
The only reason that a vote for a third party means a democratic win is that people keep thinking that way. It is a self perpetuating myth, it is only true for the fact that people keep saying it.
If people stopped saying it, then you could see a rise of a third party.
A-fucking-MEN!!!!
-
Trump! Not because he's the lesser of two evils, but because he's the best republican candidate on the stage. Here's why:
1. Business - We need someone that understands how the economy works. Senators do not. Few politicians do.
2. He's not a politician - how happy have any of you been with the republican establishment? People are supporting outsiders because they hate what's been going on. You don't get something new by electing yet another politician
3. Not PC - Everyone says they like the straight talk, but in my experience, when you give it to them they don't like it. If you want someone's measured talk, then elect another politician. They are great at telling you what you want to hear. Just don't be a hypocrite about it.
4. Executive experience - Governors have it, senators do not. Business leaders have it as well. Trump oversees a business network larger than many countries. He is much more qualified to lead our economy than anyone else on the stage.
I get very concerned when I hear conservatives talk about a third party as if it's a reality, or as some have said - give the country a leftist and see how they like it (implying they'll turn conservative by the next election). Really? I remember that being said 8 years ago when Obama got elected. 8 years later, we're saying it again when we're facing, in my opinion, an even more dangerous/liberal person for the dem nominee?
No - now is not the time to try and lay out some long-term strategy to try and build this third party, conservative movement and take short-term losses for long-term gains. Not this election. There is far too much at stake to even talk like that. If you're even thinking about not-voting, voting for a Dem, or voting third party just to "make a point", I hope someone is able to slap some sense into you between now and election day.
I understand the concerns about Trump. I have my own concerns, but they aren't that different than the concerns about each of the candidates. He wasn't my first choice, but he will win the nomination and he will be facing Hillary in the general. Get used to it.
-
If Sanders gets elected, I wonder if it will end up pushing people right the next election. Sort of like how a mistake teaches us all a lesson?
I am seriously considering voting third party if Trump wins.
Saying that Trump is the lesser of two evils is kind of relative. It is like the crazy homeless guy on a street corner rambling about things. I might agree with his positions on the topics but in the end he is still a crazy person you wouldn't want to run the country.
The typical cycle is to swap between the two parties. You don't often have 12+ years with the same party in the White House.
-
Trump! Not because he's the lesser of two evils, but because he's the best republican candidate on the stage. Here's why:
1. Business - We need someone that understands how the economy works. Senators do not. Few politicians do.
2. He's not a politician - how happy have any of you been with the republican establishment? People are supporting outsiders because they hate what's been going on. You don't get something new by electing yet another politician
3. Not PC - Everyone says they like the straight talk, but in my experience, when you give it to them they don't like it. If you want someone's measured talk, then elect another politician. They are great at telling you what you want to hear. Just don't be a hypocrite about it.
4. Executive experience - Governors have it, senators do not. Business leaders have it as well. Trump oversees a business network larger than many countries. He is much more qualified to lead our economy than anyone else on the stage.
I get very concerned when I hear conservatives talk about a third party as if it's a reality, or as some have said - give the country a leftist and see how they like it (implying they'll turn conservative by the next election). Really? I remember that being said 8 years ago when Obama got elected. 8 years later, we're saying it again when we're facing, in my opinion, an even more dangerous/liberal person for the dem nominee?
No - now is not the time to try and lay out some long-term strategy to try and build this third party, conservative movement and take short-term losses for long-term gains. Not this election. There is far too much at stake to even talk like that. If you're even thinking about not-voting, voting for a Dem, or voting third party just to "make a point", I hope someone is able to slap some sense into you between now and election day.
I understand the concerns about Trump. I have my own concerns, but they aren't that different than the concerns about each of the candidates. He wasn't my first choice, but he will win the nomination and he will be facing Hillary in the general. Get used to it.
Trump does have the most economic experience out of any of the remaining candidates, I will give you that.
But Trump is a salesman, they also are great at telling you what you want to hear. Frankly I don't know if I can trust him. For all I know he is a democrat in republican's clothing. He has been caught lying or changing his position on a lot of things already. I am not sure I can trust that he won't start a war with his mouth.
Thats why I preferred Carson. He was an outsider but an honest one but there is very little chance he can come back on top so I am not holding my breath.
I agree that the strategy should not be to chance a democrat as a lesson, that was just sort of a passing comment.
It is possible that Trump doesn't win the nomination though so maybe I can keep my fingers crossed on that.
-
I'll be voting for Trump.
Not because I think he's any kind "savior" of the GOP or conservatism, but because I think he represents a better choice than those put forth by the "donor class".
The GOP is about to collapse under the weight of its own neo conservative duplicity. I and many others are tired of having them piss down our backs and telling us it's raining.
He may not be perfect, but at least he's running as his own man, not a political puppet.
-
I'll be voting for Trump.
Not because I think he's any kind "savior" of the GOP or conservatism, but because I think he represents a better choice than those put forth by the "donor class".
The GOP is about to collapse under the weight of its own neo conservative duplicity. I and many others are tired of having them piss down our backs and telling us it's raining.
He may not be perfect, but at least he's running as his own man, not a political puppet.
Well said edster!
Ken Langone explained very well this morning on Cavuto's show what I've been thinking for quite awhile.
http://www.foxbusiness.com/features/2016/03/02/home-depots-langone-sounds-off-on-2016-race.html (http://www.foxbusiness.com/features/2016/03/02/home-depots-langone-sounds-off-on-2016-race.html)
-
Well said edster!
Ken Langone explained very well this morning on Cavuto's show what I've been thinking for quite awhile.
http://www.foxbusiness.com/features/2016/03/02/home-depots-langone-sounds-off-on-2016-race.html (http://www.foxbusiness.com/features/2016/03/02/home-depots-langone-sounds-off-on-2016-race.html)
He's right, and the GOP would do well to listen.
If they had fought half as hard to keep Obama within Constitutional bounds as they are to keep Trump from being nominated, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
It's become obvious that their main concern is to keep the gravy train rolling, not what's best for the country or its citizens.
-
I want to add that I think it is important that Trump needs to win or lose by the choice of voters through the political process. I don't want to see some back door technical loophole used to disqualify Trump. That could rip the party apart if soo many found that their vote ended up meaning nothing. They should
I hope Trump doesn't get the nomination but if he does then the republican party needs to honor the decision brought about by the democratic process.
I must say that I would like to see a competition between Hillary and Donald for the sake of entertainment and seeing who would come out on top, but I don't actually want that to be the outcome.
-
I want to add that I think it is important that Trump needs to win or lose by the choice of voters through the political process. I don't want to see some back door technical loophole used to disqualify Trump. That could rip the party apart if soo many found that their vote ended up meaning nothing. They should
I hope Trump doesn't get the nomination but if he does then the republican party needs to honor the decision brought about by the democratic process.
I must say that I would like to see a competition between Hillary and Donald for the sake of entertainment and seeing who would come out on top, but I don't actually want that to be the outcome.
Very much on point.
The GOP is on thin ice with its constituency and it won't take much to cause an implosion.
Things like votes for Trump being switched to Rubio due to a "glitch" in some Texas precincts are only adding to the fire. The voters aren't going to tolerate it anymore.
-
Very much on point.
The GOP is on thin ice with its constituency and it won't take much to cause an implosion.
Things like votes for Trump being switched to Rubio due to a "glitch" in some Texas precincts are only adding to the fire. The voters aren't going to tolerate it anymore.
Democrats are in a similar position with their superdelegates system worth 15 percent of the vote. That means Sanders could beat Hillary by 14 percent of the votes and still lose by super delegates voting for Hillary.
-
If the Donald is nominated I'll vote for him against the corrupt one, assuming she is not indicted and barred from holding any position that might handle classified information prior to her trial which will probably be in 2017.
Right now my support is for Cruz. Whoever wins has to be quick and hardnose and not hold back on her, which is why Kasich, Bush and Carson is/were too reserved or low energy. They have to remember she's not a woman but a venomous snake.
-
If the Donald is nominated I'll vote for him against the corrupt one, assuming she is not indicted and barred from holding any position that might handle classified information prior to her trial which will probably be in 2017.
Right now my support is for Cruz. Whoever wins has to be quick and hardnose and not hold back on her, which is why Kasich, Bush and Carson is/were too reserved or low energy. They have to remember she's not a woman but a venomous snake.
I was going for Carson but now considering Kasich.
There is a load of dirt on Clinton and the arguments will be easy to make. I don't think we need some loudmouth just to win. I would personally prefer someone with a cleaner record, someone who can attack Clinton for her lies and not have a closet of skeletons they have to hide themselves. If it is Trump vs Clinton then we will just have two candidates with loads of dirt to be thrown.
Just my take.
-
I was going for Carson but now considering Kasich.
There is a load of dirt on Clinton and the arguments will be easy to make. I don't think we need some loudmouth just to win. I would personally prefer someone with a cleaner record, someone who can attack Clinton for her lies and not have a closet of skeletons they have to hide themselves. If it is Trump vs Clinton then we will just have two candidates with loads of dirt to be thrown.
Just my take.
I too was initially impressed with Kasich. But then I remembered; he's a party hack. Just as beholden to the people that paid his way as all the others.
That, to me, is the critical difference. Take Trump out of the equation and the entire field is owned by what we now call the "donor class".
Yes, Trump was, and for that matter still is part of that "class". That's why they are so upset by him. He knows what makes them tick, what their agendas are, how they plan to bring them to fruition.
As far as his record, the mans life has been a matter of public record for over 30 years, warts and all. Especially the warts. I find it difficult to believe that there is anything earth shattering that we don't already know about him.
Attacking Hillary for her lies is pointless. Those that will vote for her already know she's a liar, and they don't care. That she's a democrat and, allegedly, in possession of a vagina is all they care about.
If we want anything to change in politics in this country we're going to have to get away from the status quo that has been screwing us for decades.
At this point in time I see Trump as the agent of that change. JMHO :shaka:
-
I too was initially impressed with Kasich. But then I remembered; he's a party hack. Just as beholden to the people that paid his way as all the others.
That, to me, is the critical difference. Take Trump out of the equation and the entire field is owned by what we now call the "donor class".
Yes, Trump was, and for that matter still is part of that "class". That's why they are so upset by him. He knows what makes them tick, what their agendas are, how they plan to bring them to fruition.
As far as his record, the mans life has been a matter of public record for over 30 years, warts and all. Especially the warts. I find it difficult to believe that there is anything earth shattering that we don't already know about him.
Attacking Hillary for her lies is pointless. Those that will vote for her already know she's a liar, and they don't care. That she's a democrat and, allegedly, in possession of a vagina is all they care about.
If we want anything to change in politics in this country we're going to have to get away from the status quo that has been screwing us for decades.
At this point in time I see Trump as the agent of that change. JMHO :shaka:
Trumps known history is enough to rake him over the coals. Clinton could likely sway a large number of female votes just by repeatedly pointing out Trump's disparaging comments about women.
What do you mean Kasich is a hack? He clearly served a successful term as governor and he is the only one who has experience as an executive official. He is a little more moderate and can attract more votes from the other side. He doesn't run his mouth like an idiot. I haven't seen any skeletons coming form his closet. The only thing I don't like is that he has been in politics the whole time, he is not an outsider.
I do think Trump could be an agent of change. Not because of his positions but just because of his style. He is a reality show in politics.
-
Trumps known history is enough to rake him over the coals. Clinton could likely sway a large number of female votes just by repeatedly pointing out Trump's disparaging comments about women.
What do you mean Kasich is a hack? He clearly served a successful term as governor and he is the only one who has experience as an executive official. He is a little more moderate and can attract more votes from the other side. He doesn't run his mouth like an idiot. I haven't seen any skeletons coming form his closet. The only thing I don't like is that he has been in politics the whole time, he is not an outsider.
I do think Trump could be an agent of change. Not because of his positions but just because of his style. He is a reality show in politics.
Trump would make a change. Maybe a little too right a change for many to stomach, that is why he has so much support. He does have executive experience, just not in politics.
Clinton has skeletons, people don't care and would vote for her, Trump has skeletons, people don't care and would vote for him. What matters is what direction people are wanting the country to go in. Clinton further left, Trump back to the right. (assuming he is genuine)
Like I said, I'm not really a Trump supporter, but having to make that choice, I'm willing to take that gamble.
Plus, I wouldn't worry too much if you think Trump would go too far right. There is enough rinos in congress to reign him in a little. I think right is where we need to be. It will bring balance back to the country.
-
Trump would make a change. Maybe a little too right a change for many to stomach, that is why he has so much support. He does have executive experience, just not in politics.
Clinton has skeletons, people don't care and would vote for her, Trump has skeletons, people don't care and would vote for him. What matters is what direction people are wanting the country to go in. Clinton further left, Trump back to the right. (assuming he is genuine)
Like I said, I'm not really a Trump supporter, but having to make that choice, I'm willing to take that gamble.
Plus, I wouldn't worry too much if you think Trump would go too far right. There is enough rinos in congress to reign him in a little. I think right is where we need to be. It will bring balance back to the country.
I still don't know whether I trust Trump to be a genuine republican or conservative.
I am not worried about him being too far right. I think he is going to start pulling left. He knows that if he gets the nomination he needs to pull in moderates and undecided voters.
He has to make up for the republican voters that will vote 3rd party if he gets the nomination.
-
I still don't know whether I trust Trump to be a genuine republican or conservative.
I am not worried about him being too far right. I think he is going to start pulling left. He knows that if he gets the nomination he needs to pull in moderates and undecided voters.
He has to make up for the republican voters that will vote 3rd party if he gets the nomination.
That is also a valid concern.
-
Trumps known history is enough to rake him over the coals. Clinton could likely sway a large number of female votes just by repeatedly pointing out Trump's disparaging comments about women.
What do you mean Kasich is a hack? He clearly served a successful term as governor and he is the only one who has experience as an executive official. He is a little more moderate and can attract more votes from the other side. He doesn't run his mouth like an idiot. I haven't seen any skeletons coming form his closet. The only thing I don't like is that he has been in politics the whole time, he is not an outsider.
I do think Trump could be an agent of change. Not because of his positions but just because of his style. He is a reality show in politics.
I said Kasich is a "party hack", meaning he will tow the GOP line for good or ill, because he will owe them his ass.
If you want more of the same that we've been getting from the GOP, he's your man.
-
I still don't know whether I trust Trump to be a genuine republican or conservative.
I am not worried about him being too far right. I think he is going to start pulling left. He knows that if he gets the nomination he needs to pull in moderates and undecided voters.
He has to make up for the republican voters that will vote 3rd party if he gets the nomination.
I'll go so far as to say I don't believe there are any "Genuine" conservatives left in the GOP, given the lightning speed that they show in capitulating to the left.
That being said, I agree that Trump will probably pull to the left, but people tend to forget that Reagan did the same thing. That was how he managed to be successful with a democratic congress. I'm not saying that Trump is the next Reagan, but I think he beats the alternatives hands down. He has experience putting together real world deals, at the highest levels of finance, working with people of opposing opinion and ideology and making it come out in his favor. I'm pretty sure he could do the same for the country.
As far as I'm concerned that beats both freshman senators and one governor that have no experience outside government.
If we're to survive as a nation, we need someone willing to grab the tiger by the tail and swing it.