• BBC: Sanders says he will vote for Clinton
    101 replies, posted
[QUOTE=cody8295;50591978]Again, for the 20th time, I'm voting based on the actions of the candidates before they started positioning for the oval office[/QUOTE] I imagine you'll be voting for Jill Stein or something then?
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;50592022]I imagine you'll be voting for Jill Stein or something then?[/QUOTE] I'm not in the business of giving my vote to somebody who I know will not win.
[QUOTE=cody8295;50591978]Again, for the 20th time, I'm voting based on the actions of the candidates before they started positioning for the oval office[/QUOTE] So you're in favor of Trump's idea 20 years ago that Social Security should be privatized, and not with his current idea that it needs to be protected? So similar to Sanders. Privatization is truly the wave of future Progressives like Trump!
[QUOTE=cody8295;50592045]I'm not in the business of giving my vote to somebody who I know will not win.[/QUOTE] This is gold coming from a former/current Sanders supporter
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50592324]This is gold coming from a former/current Sanders supporter[/QUOTE] I still sense a tone of irony in your posts with that avatar you got. Seriously johnson never has had a chance, whereas bernie could likely win as a third party in this shitshow.
[QUOTE=cody8295;50592378]I still sense a tone of irony in your posts with that avatar you got. Seriously johnson never has had a chance, whereas bernie could likely win as a third party in this shitshow.[/QUOTE] No he couldn't. At best he might pick up Vermont and one other small state. That's it.
[QUOTE=1nfiniteseed;50592443]No he couldn't. At best he might pick up Vermont and one other small state. That's it.[/QUOTE] Normally I would accept that 3rd parties don't win, as is generally the case. However, sanders name is now almost household in America. Trump and Shillary have outstandingly high unfavorable rates and i think Sanders would pull votes from the both of em
[QUOTE=cody8295;50592455]Normally I would accept that 3rd parties don't win, as is generally the case. However, sanders name is now almost household in America. Trump and Shillary have outstandingly high unfavorable rates and i think Sanders would pull votes from the both of em[/QUOTE] If there's one thing you're right on, it's that he'd pull votes away from Clinton, which'd mean a Trump presidency. Sanders doesn't want a Trump presidency. Therefore, Sanders won't run third party. [editline]a[/editline] Furthermore, he'd have to win more than 50% of all electoral votes, else the choice will go to the house, who will either choose Clinton or a moderate Republican. Maybe Trump if he manages to unite the party.
-nope- Voting for a third party canidate in the general election makes no sense. Its not a philosophy thing its just mathmatically working against your own interests.
[QUOTE=DVH;50592474]If there's one thing you're right on, it's that he'd pull votes away from Clinton, which'd mean a Trump presidency. Sanders doesn't want a Trump presidency. Therefore, Sanders won't run third party. [editline]a[/editline] Furthermore, he'd have to win more than 50% of all electoral votes, else the choice will go to the house, who will either choose Clinton or a moderate Republican. Maybe Trump if he manages to unite the party.[/QUOTE] Thanks for the brief recap of the past 100 pages dealing with American Politics on fp
[QUOTE=Trebgarta;50592676]Vote Jill Stein. Let her rise to 10-15 percent, get her national coverage. Endure Trump for 4 years and you might have the first Green president of the history of the United States. Cody, voting for Jill is the same as voting for Trump, if winning is your matter. Then why not vote for Jill? She shares so much with Bernie.[/QUOTE] It's not the same, it might take a vote away from Clinton but that's not my only goal in voting.
[QUOTE=cody8295;50592378]I still sense a tone of irony in your posts with that avatar you got. Seriously johnson never has had a chance, whereas bernie could likely win as a third party in this shitshow.[/QUOTE] Goal isn't to win the presidency (though that would be nice). The goal is to drum up support and attention to the party to gain supporters for future elections. [editline]25th June 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Mattk50;50592542]-nope- Voting for a third party canidate in the general election makes no sense. Its not a philosophy thing its just mathmatically working against your own interests.[/QUOTE] It's in my interest to vote for who I believe in most, not who's "most likely to win".
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50594931]It's in my interest to vote for who I believe in most, not who's "most likely to win".[/QUOTE] In a general election, the first past the post voting system means by voting for a third party your views will be less likely to be represented at all. This isn't some dumb platitude this is just how the math works out, with 3 candidates, your vote takes one vote from whoever is most similar to you and splits the votes, causing you to be less represented even if you and your 2nd choice combined had a majority, suddenly you're two minorities.
[QUOTE=DVH;50592474]If there's one thing you're right on, it's that he'd pull votes away from Clinton, which'd mean a Trump presidency. Sanders doesn't want a Trump presidency. Therefore, Sanders won't run third party. [editline]a[/editline] Furthermore, he'd have to win more than 50% of all electoral votes, else the choice will go to the house, who will either choose Clinton or a moderate Republican. Maybe Trump if he manages to unite the party.[/QUOTE] Any damage Clinton or Romney/Kasich/whoever you're thinking of would cause would be entirely reparable. If it has to go to the House, they're not going to cause any damage we can't fix later. At the moment, I'm figuring Trump only polls as high as he does because Republicans aren't hip to third parties yet. Pretty soon, they'll all start feeling the Johnson (or just get mad and vote Clinton, either way), and we can write Trump and the GOP off. Don't take that as a prophecy, however.
[QUOTE=Mattk50;50595285]In a general election, the first past the post voting system means by voting for a third party your views will be less likely to be represented at all. This isn't some dumb platitude this is just how the math works out, with 3 candidates, your vote takes one vote from whoever is most similar to you and splits the votes, causing you to be less represented even if you and your 2nd choice combined had a majority, suddenly you're two minorities.[/QUOTE] My vote isn't taking away from anyone as I never intended it to give to Trump or Clinton to begin with. The moment Gary Johnson announced his presidential run, I was on board with him. No, he mathematically cannot win. But I'll vote for a loser with a clean conscious than I will a winner as the 'lesser devil'.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50585364]"Term originated from 4chan" "It's a legit word used in politics" :v: [editline]24th June 2016[/editline] You still didn't answer my question by the way[/QUOTE] Pretty sure the word cuck predates the internet, and chan boards in specific.
[QUOTE=Pops;50596144]Pretty sure the word cuck predates the internet, and chan boards in specific.[/QUOTE] It does, but the political usage of the term comes from chan boards
[QUOTE=Pops;50596144]Pretty sure the word cuck predates the internet, and chan boards in specific.[/QUOTE] The article he presented literally says in it that it originated from 4chan with the meaning he's using.
[QUOTE=cody8295;50592455]Normally I would accept that 3rd parties don't win, as is generally the case. However, sanders name is now almost household in America. Trump and Shillary have outstandingly high unfavorable rates and i think Sanders would pull votes from the both of em[/QUOTE] Sanders would lose if he went third party, there's no alternate universe where sanders would be able to snag enough votes to win as third party. If sanders was to break on his promise, and his word, and go third party he'd only split the vote and give trump more of a chance. Since he ran democrat, he doesn't want that to happen. He knows he lost, and rather them thinking he has some chance in hell of winning, he's voting for the democratic nominee instead. If you supported sanders, it wouldn't be smart to vote for someone who is his polar opposite. I thought about it long ago and after thinking I knew it'd be the worst idea ever.
[QUOTE=Rocko's;50598167]Sanders would lose if he went third party, there's no alternate universe where sanders would be able to snag enough votes to win as third party. If sanders was to break on his promise, and his word, and go third party he'd only split the vote and give trump more of a chance. Since he ran democrat, he doesn't want that to happen. He knows he lost, and rather them thinking he has some chance in hell of winning, he's voting for the democratic nominee instead. If you supported sanders, it wouldn't be smart to vote for someone who is his polar opposite. I thought about it long ago and after thinking I knew it'd be the worst idea ever.[/QUOTE] How many times will people echo this nonsense? Ive admitted many times that 3rd parties dont win. However, in the circumstances of 2 nominees being hated by both parties. And the independent voters making up almost half of registered voters. I wouldnt mind a trump presidency considering clinton is now a real national security risk
[QUOTE=cody8295;50598204]How many times will people echo this nonsense? Ive admitted many times that 3rd parties dont win. However, in the circumstances of 2 nominees being hated by both parties. And the independent voters making up almost half of registered voters. I wouldnt mind a trump presidency considering clinton is now a real national security risk[/QUOTE] You're operating under the assumption that these "independent voters " would all vote for Bernie Sanders correct?
[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;50598210]You're operating under the assumption that these "independent voters " would all vote for Bernie Sanders correct?[/QUOTE] No? I'm not operating on assumptions, I'm operating on the fact that most dems and most republicans dont want clinton or trump. And many people from all over the spectrum find Bernie to at least be honest, in my experience at least
[QUOTE=cody8295;50598204]How many times will people echo this nonsense? Ive admitted many times that 3rd parties dont win. However, in the circumstances of 2 nominees being hated by both parties. And the independent voters making up almost half of registered voters. I wouldnt mind a trump presidency considering clinton is now a real national security risk[/QUOTE] I'll echo the nonsense till I understand how someone who supports sanders and his platforms can jump to someone who is the polar opposite of sanders. Were you voting for sanders because he was the thing at the time, or were you truly behind his platform and his ideas. If you were behind his ideas, voting trump is a bad idea. You could vote Johnson or stein, or not vote at all. Giving a vote to trump is something sanders would not want his supporters doing as trump doesn't represent a single thing he's behind.
[QUOTE=Rocko's;50598214]I'll echo the nonsense till I understand how someone who supports sanders and his platforms can jump to someone who is the polar opposite of trump. Were you voting for sanders because he was the thing at the time, or were you truly behind his platform and his ideas. If you were behind his ideas, voting trump is a bad idea. You could vote Johnson or stein, or not vote at all. Giving a vote to trump is something sanders would not want his supporters doing as trump doesn't represent a single thing he's behind.[/QUOTE] Bernie or bust movement isnt about getting behind him because he was popular at the time. Its about getting behind him because hes the only one that represents most of my values. Clinton might come in at around 30 or 40 percent of what i loved about bernie. And thats not enough for my vote. Stein or johnson would have my vote if they had enough support to win, they dont. I'm voting for trump because i dont believe he will pass as many bad bills as clinton, and he sure as fuck wont be "paying back" countries like saudi arabia and isreal. I really honestly think that trump isnt as able to be as disastrous as clinton will be
[QUOTE=cody8295;50598213]No? I'm not operating on assumptions, I'm operating on the fact that most dems and most republicans dont want clinton or trump. And many people from all over the spectrum find Bernie to at least be honest, in my experience at least[/QUOTE] Most dems don't want Clinton when she won a majority vote over Bernie Sanders in the primaries? Please rationalize this to me.
[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;50598243]Most dems don't want Clinton when she won a majority vote over Bernie Sanders in the primaries? Please rationalize this to me.[/QUOTE] Did we already forget that many millions of dems couldnt even vote in the primaries? Did you not know that? The primary was rigged and if you still dont see that then you probably never will
[QUOTE=cody8295;50598274]Did we already forget that many millions of dems couldnt even vote in the primaries? Did you not know that? The primary was rigged and if you still dont see that then you probably never will[/QUOTE] I don't even care if you're right or wrong - what is up with your terrible attitude across these threads? Just explain your stance and get over it - no reason to start talking about everyone else like they're sheeple. It's what makes conversations like these terrible to be involved in and it's why everyone treats you very harshly.
[QUOTE=Rocko's;50598214]I'll echo the nonsense till I understand how someone who supports sanders and his platforms can jump to someone who is the polar opposite of sanders. Were you voting for sanders because he was the thing at the time, or were you truly behind his platform and his ideas. If you were behind his ideas, voting trump is a bad idea. You could vote Johnson or stein, or not vote at all. Giving a vote to trump is something sanders would not want his supporters doing as trump doesn't represent a single thing he's behind.[/QUOTE] Cody doesn't give a shit about policy or beliefs. He only wants to back a winner and nothing further.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50598390]Cody doesn't give a shit about policy or beliefs. He only wants to back a winner and nothing further.[/QUOTE] That sweet, sweet legal weed will help him ride out the ruin a trump presidency would bring us, too! Assuming trump doesn't flip-flop like usual about his stance on that, of course. And assuming Cody has the free money to spend after Trump tanks the economy and puts us in a recession. But it's okay, guys! We're [I]way [/I]better off than if $hillary got in!!!
[QUOTE=wauterboi;50598376]I don't even care if you're right or wrong - what is up with your terrible attitude across these threads? Just explain your stance and get over it - no reason to start talking about everyone else like they're sheeple. It's what makes conversations like these terrible to be involved in and it's why everyone treats you very harshly.[/QUOTE] Except I haven't called anybody a sheep, that's the argument everybody else is using against me. I've explained my stance many many times, and it's not good enough for some reason. The reason some of you treat me harshly is because you've let candidates talking points take control of your decisions. I don't care that trump is an awful person, I really couldn't care less what he says, because I don't think he's competent enough to go through with much. I'm not basing my decisions off of promises and empty threats. I'm making my decision a different way than you, and that's fine, except you denounce it as illogical. Prove to me that clinton will be better than trump, you can't. I can't prove anything either, then by my own intuition and decision making I decided trump is less evil. But I guess I don't care about policy and I'm just voting my emotions or out of spite for Hillary, right? That's the only argument you guys have, and it's very ineffective at getting anything meaningful across, other than that you can't understand my decisions, which I could care less about.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.