GOP candidates pledge to vote for the man they call a liar, con man and fraud — his name is #NeverTr - Polidicks

[url]https://www.yahoo.com/politics/gop-candidates-pledge-to-vote-for-the-man-they-051713182.html[/url] Video in source. [quote] As Donald Trump has notched win after win in the GOP primaries and caucuses, conservative and Republican Party elites have begun to panic. [B]They have created new million-dollar [URL="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/28/us/politics/donald-trump-republican-party.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=1"]coalitions to take down[/URL] the New York businessman, rallied around the hashtag #NeverTrump and cheered past nominee [URL="https://www.yahoo.com/politics/mitt-romney-tells-donald-trump-voters-theyre-162616616.html"]Mitt Romney’s speech[/URL] on Thursday morning tearing down the real estate mogul. [/B] But asked at the end of Thursday night’s debate whether they’d vote for Trump if he was the Republican nominee, every candidate reluctantly said yes. Although not without making it really, really, really clear they didn’t want to. [/quote] [quote] Finally, moderator Chris Wallace turned the question to Trump. “[B]Can you definitively say tonight that you’ll definitely support the Republican nominee for president, even if it’s not you?[/B]” he asked. [B]“Even if it’s not me?” Trump said innocently, eliciting laughter from the audience[/B]. He couldn’t resist answering the question without lobbing one last insult at his opponents. “I’m going to give them some credit too, even though they don’t deserve it,” said Trump. “But the answer is: Yes, I will.”[/quote] This is why I hate the #BernieOrBust movement. They would, [URL="http://www.cbsnews.com/news/bernie-sanders-on-why-he-wont-run-as-in-independent/"]against the express wishes of their leader Sanders[/URL], refuse to vote for Hilliary Clinton in protest for Sander's loss to her. Meanwhile, the Republicans are more than capable of mobilizing their own party to ensure a right-wing President. Clinton may be a shape-shifting hypocritical nominee, but she's still a liberal shape-shifting hypocritical nominee. A conservative shape-shifting hypocrite will do far worse to this country than a liberal. To draw an analogy, MSNBC — whilst sharing a relatively similar degree of bias to Fox News is still better than Fox because despite their tendency to favor a slant in their coverage, still yields arguably better journalistic integrity than Fox News. Also Marco Rubio is such a sleazy slimeball by saying: "I will vote for Trump because one of the Democratic candidates is a socialist, and if you want America to be a socialist-country, then move to a socialist-country" America can be whatever its voters evolve and advance our nation to become. It is akin to saying "If you want America to be a military-first nation, then move to a [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Songun"]military-first country[/URL]."

Starpluck, I would vote for Bernie because of his policies that he has stuck to for his entire life. For the past deeds he has done in fighting segregation and fighting for civil rights of black americans. But he is not my leader who tells me who to vote for. Hillary? A woman who interned for Barry Goldwater, bought out by Wall Street who her family helped empower. Who, as a perfect example of what a politician is, supported same sex marriage the moment a majority of the country supported it just a few years ago? Who switched her entire platform to mirror Sanders to appeal to voters? A warhawk like any other Republicans and would be ready to send our men and women off to die just to get more money from the military complex in this country? I could never with a good conscience vote for her or any of the damned Republicans unless I wanted to press the start over button for this country by voting Trump. Where do you lean, Starpluck?

If Bernie does not get the nomination it's not like my vote is limited to either Hillary or the Republican nominee. I can still choose to vote for whomever I want to, though the chances of that person actually getting the position are slim to none. I don't believe in forcing myself to choose the candidate that I dislike the least between two people.

[QUOTE=Vitalogy;49865687]If Bernie does not get the nomination it's not like my vote is limited to either Hillary or the Republican nominee. I can still choose to vote for whomever I want to, though the chances of that person actually getting the position are slim to none. [B]I don't believe in forcing myself to choose the candidate that I dislike the least between two people[/B].[/QUOTE] That's what everyone said in 2000. We got George W. Bush for 8 years. Bush beat Gore by a mere 537 votes in Florida. Ralph Nader received 97,421 votes in Florida. If only [B]0.6%[/B] of Ralph Nader's voters in Florida flocked to Gore, we wouldn't have the catastrophe known as George W. Bush. No Iraq War, and no regression of American society, socially and culturally. We would have a technocrat, one of the founders of modern day internet and a prominent climate change activist as our president. In the battle between -50% progress (Trump) and -10% progress (Clinton), we must do whatever it takes to mitigate the damage to our nation.

[QUOTE=Starpluck;49865611]This is why I hate the #BernieOrBust movement. They would, [URL="http://www.cbsnews.com/news/bernie-sanders-on-why-he-wont-run-as-in-independent/"]against the express wishes of their leader Sanders[/URL], refuse to vote for Hilliary Clinton in protest for Sander's loss to her. [/QUOTE] I can't bring myself to endorse someone who refuses to own up to committing a crime that, if I did it, would have landed me 10+ years in prison. She may be a lesser evil, but as far as I'm concerned Sanders has shown that you can be a viable candidate without being an 'evil' at all, and that makes it a lot harder to support her just on the basis that she's not Trump.

I'm starting to like Kasich more and more and am confused why he's not picking up traction

[QUOTE=Starpluck;49865734]That's what everyone said in 2000. We got George W. Bush for 8 years. Bush beat Gore by a mere 537 votes in Florida. Ralph Nader received 97,421 votes in Florida. If only [B]0.6%[/B] of Ralph Nader's voters in Florida flocked to Gore, we wouldn't have the catastrophe known as George W. Bush. No Iraq War, and no regression of American society, socially and culturally. We would have a technocrat, one of the founders of modern day internet and a prominent climate change activist as our president. In the battle between -50% progress (Trump) and -10% progress (Clinton), we must do whatever it takes to mitigate the damage to our nation.[/QUOTE] Still voting third party because I vote on principle, not pragmatism.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;49865760]Still voting third party because I vote on principle, not pragmatism.[/QUOTE] That sucks.

[QUOTE=Glitchman;49865758]I'm starting to like Kasich more and more and am confused why he's not picking up traction[/QUOTE] He's a scumbag just as much as any of them, he pushed a third party off the ballot in the last Ohio governor election despite them having the required signatures to be on the ballot.

Go ahead, vote third party, fracture the voting base so instead of it being a close vote between 2 candidates it becomes a landslide between 3.

[QUOTE=LtKyle2;49865639]Starpluck, I would vote for Bernie because of his policies that he has stuck to for his entire life. For the past deeds he has done in fighting segregation and fighting for civil rights of black americans. But he is not my leader who tells me who to vote for. Hillary? A woman who interned for Barry Goldwater, bought out by Wall Street who her family helped empower. Who, as a perfect example of what a politician is, supported same sex marriage the moment a majority of the country supported it just a few years ago? Who switched her entire platform to mirror Sanders to appeal to voters? A warhawk like any other Republicans and would be ready to send our men and women off to die just to get more money from the military complex in this country? I could never with a good conscience vote for her or any of the damned Republicans unless I wanted to press the start over button for this country by voting Trump. Where do you lean, Starpluck?[/QUOTE] Obama was bought by Wall Street, Goldman Sachs; you name it. But no one likes to acknowledge this little secret; we cover it up in order to invoke more onslaughts against Clinton. [url]http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/apr/22/barack-obama/obama-campaign-financed-large-donors-too/[/url] [quote]"In the 2008 campaign, you got a lot of money, [B]about $1 million from employees of Goldman Sachs[/B]," Harwood said. "[B]Your former White House counsel Greg Craig is apparently going to represent Goldman Sachs[/B]. In light of this case, do either of those things embarrass you?"[/quote] I have highlighted concerning donors in red below, in regards to Barack Obama's 2008 presidential campaign. What is so shocking is that Obama's 2nd largest donor (and by a small margin when compared to 1st place) was Goldman Sachs — the same organization who Clinton's detractors have utilized in their attacks to Clinton. But no one brings this up while criticizing Clinton's record with Goldman Sachs. [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/0bZgQrs.png[/IMG] We like to ignore how Obama's top advisers and senior appointed positions comes from Wall Street lobbyists, but we for some reason, do not give the same treatment to Hilliary Rodham Clinton. [URL="http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/may/01/obama-tom-wheeler-fcc"]Obama to appoint cable industry lobbyist Tom Wheeler as FCC head[/URL] In fact recently (Jan 2016), Bernie Sanders has led the action to block Obama's most recent nominee, an appointment to the head of the FDA. Why? [URL="http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/267020-sanders-places-hold-on-obamas-fda-nominee"]Obama's nominee is another lobbyist, for Big Pharma[/URL]. [quote]"Dr. [Robert] Califf’s extensive ties to the pharmaceutical industry give me no reason to believe that he would make the FDA work for ordinary Americans, [B]rather than just the CEOs of pharmaceutical companies,” Sanders[/B], who is running for the Democratic presidential nomination, said Tuesday. [/quote] [URL="https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/03/obama-nominates-former-sopa-lobbyist-help-lead-tpp-negotiations"]Obama Nominates Former SOPA Lobbyist to Help Lead TPP Negotiations[/URL] And here's a list of [URL="http://www.businessinsider.com/meet-the-lobbyists-inside-the-obamas-administration"]20 lobbyists that infest Obama's administration[/URL]. In the year that followed, Obama appointed more than 40 former lobbyists to senior positions, including three Cabinet secretaries and the Director of Central Intelligence.

I don't agree with any of Obama's nominations for those roles, and I don't doubt he was funded by the same groups. If it wasn't for the fact he was black he would've never won the white house without the voter turnout he had, he probably wouldn't have won the nomination too. If it wasn't for his skin Hillary would've been the one sitting in the white house and god knows where we would be now. Doesn't mean we should encourage or perpetuate that sort of politics just because of "for progress!"

[QUOTE=Starpluck;49865794]Obama was bought by Wall Street, Goldman Sachs; you name it. But no one likes to acknowledge this little secret; we cover it up in order to invoke more onslaughts against Clinton. [/QUOTE] Probably because the alternatives to Obama weren't any better. Wall Street collusion becomes much more significant when there's a candidate who [I]doesn't[/I] represent political cronyism. It's easy to say 'every politician does this, vote for the lesser evil' until you actually have a candidate on the table who [I]doesn't[/I] do it and the potential is there to break the cycle.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;49865760]Still voting third party because I vote on principle, not pragmatism.[/QUOTE] I will admit, in 2012 I did not vote for Barack Obama out of my disappointment for his passive policies. I voted Green Party; Jill Stein. In hindsight, it was a foolish, risky and a potentially catastrophic endeavor when compared to the potential devastation Mitt Romney can unleash upon the United States. But I will no longer let petty sub-principles detract from my utmost principle — ensuring that America succeeds.

[QUOTE=Glitchman;49865758]I'm starting to like Kasich more and more and am confused why he's not picking up traction[/QUOTE] Because look into him some and you shall find his claims of success are greatly exaggerated The only thing he has going for him is Ohio might give him a win

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;49865760]Still voting third party because I vote on principle, not pragmatism.[/QUOTE] A bit sad that people would put their pride over the well-being.

[QUOTE=Dark RaveN;49865850]A bit sad that people would put their pride over the well-being.[/QUOTE] If people voted on pride or principle Jill Stein would be in the white house. But since everybody gobbles up MSNBC and CNN they only know the Democrats and the Republicans and don't know that they can vote for someone else.

[QUOTE=Starpluck;49865817]I will admit, in 2012 I did not vote for Barack Obama out of my disappointment for his passive policies. I voted Green Party; Jill Stein. In hindsight, it was a foolish, risky and a potentially catastrophic endeavor when compared to the potential devastation Mitt Romney can unleash upon the United States. But I will no longer let petty sub-principles detract from my utmost principle — ensuring that America succeeds.[/QUOTE] This describes my voting history perfectly. Voted McCain in 2008 but didn't vote in 2012 out if frustration with both candidates. I disagree with Clinton on most issues but I genuinely believe she will do less damage to this country than any GOP candidate.

[QUOTE=Sableye;49865821]Because look into him some and you shall find his claims of success are greatly exaggerated The only thing he has going for him is Ohio might give him a win[/QUOTE] We aren't going to give him our vote, I'm fairly sure. Very few Republicans I've talked to here give a rats ass about him.

[QUOTE=Jrose14;49865933]We aren't going to give him our vote, I'm fairly sure. Very few Republicans I've talked to here give a rats ass about him.[/QUOTE] Who is we and where is here?

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;49865984]Who is we and where is here?[/QUOTE] I assume Ohio, from context.

[QUOTE=Dark RaveN;49865850]A bit sad that people would put their pride over the well-being.[/QUOTE] It's not pride, it's knowing I have voted with a clear concious on the candidate I want most, not what the majority want most.

I will say this again. Voting for people based on the likelihood of them winning defeats the purpose of voting.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;49866071]It's not pride, it's knowing I have voted with a clear concious on the candidate I want most.[/QUOTE] So voting on emotion.

Either your state agrees with your vote and your vote doesn't matter or your state disagrees with your vote and your vote doesn't matter, vote for whoever leaves you with talking points for future political arguments.

[QUOTE=Starpluck;49865734]That's what everyone said in 2000. We got George W. Bush for 8 years.[/QUOTE] Except that Bush LOST the general election versus Al Gore. That election was NOT an example of apathetic voters causing a bad candidate winning, it was a prime example of the failure of the electoral college. [editline]4th March 2016[/editline] It's like you try with every part of your being to demand people see the world the way you do, even so far as to stretch the truth of the matter.

[QUOTE=ForgottenKane;49866741]Except that Bush LOST the general election versus Al Gore. That election was NOT an example of apathetic voters causing a bad candidate winning, it was a prime example of the failure of the electoral college. [editline]4th March 2016[/editline] It's like you try with every part of your being to demand people see the world the way you do, even so far as to stretch the truth of the matter.[/QUOTE] Oddly not that different from Hillary Clinton.

[QUOTE=Starpluck;49865794]Obama was bought by Wall Street, Goldman Sachs; you name it. But no one likes to acknowledge this little secret; we cover it up in order to invoke more onslaughts against Clinton. [URL]http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/apr/22/barack-obama/obama-campaign-financed-large-donors-too/[/URL] I have highlighted concerning donors in red below, in regards to Barack Obama's 2008 presidential campaign. What is so shocking is that Obama's 2nd largest donor (and by a small margin when compared to 1st place) was Goldman Sachs — the same organization who Clinton's detractors have utilized in their attacks to Clinton. But no one brings this up while criticizing Clinton's record with Goldman Sachs. [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/0bZgQrs.png[/IMG] We like to ignore how Obama's top advisers and senior appointed positions comes from Wall Street lobbyists, but we for some reason, do not give the same treatment to Hilliary Rodham Clinton. [URL="http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/may/01/obama-tom-wheeler-fcc"]Obama to appoint cable industry lobbyist Tom Wheeler as FCC head[/URL] In fact recently (Jan 2016), Bernie Sanders has led the action to block Obama's most recent nominee, an appointment to the head of the FDA. Why? [URL="http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/267020-sanders-places-hold-on-obamas-fda-nominee"]Obama's nominee is another lobbyist, for Big Pharma[/URL]. [URL="https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/03/obama-nominates-former-sopa-lobbyist-help-lead-tpp-negotiations"]Obama Nominates Former SOPA Lobbyist to Help Lead TPP Negotiations[/URL] And here's a list of [URL="http://www.businessinsider.com/meet-the-lobbyists-inside-the-obamas-administration"]20 lobbyists that infest Obama's administration[/URL]. In the year that followed, Obama appointed more than 40 former lobbyists to senior positions, including three Cabinet secretaries and the Director of Central Intelligence.[/QUOTE] Nobody who's serious has ever ignored this though. Obama has always been a center-right corporate sellout from the get-go. It's been extraordinarily transparent and his legislative record confirms it.

[QUOTE=ForgottenKane;49866741]Except that Bush LOST the general election versus Al Gore. That election was NOT an example of apathetic voters causing a bad candidate winning, it was a prime example of the failure of the electoral college. [editline]4th March 2016[/editline] It's like you try with every part of your being to demand people see the world the way you do, even so far as to stretch the truth of the matter.[/QUOTE] Read what I said. If Gore won Florida, we wouldn't have Bush. It's a basic fact recognized by anyone who observed the 2000 presidential elections. If Gore won Florida, the Electoral College would have awarded the appropriate electorate votes from Florida to Al Gore. This would have been enough electoral votes for Gore to win the presidential election.

I'm not voting for Hillary if she wins the nomination because I don't believe that being "liberal" makes her a lesser of two evils in any way. I think she has the potential to fuck this country just as bad as Trump. Given her record I don't expect her to stuck by a single word she's said, she'll turn and sell us all in an instant.