Support NeoGAF

[metalslimer]

I'm also just going to put this out there. In Louisiana, John Bel Edwards is the current governor. Now as someone who is much more liberal than JBE is it was kind of shame that it was the only choice we had. But I knew that he would be a net benefit to the state of Louisiana and the only chance of expanding Medicaid to help thousands of people. It's hard to not to get upset with people who put their pride ahead of the realistic options because if the left in Lousiana had threw up their hands at the pick they would screwed over thousands of people. And for those of you in non swing states I urge you to get out and vote as well. There is the possibility that dems could win the electoral college while losing the popular vote and the result of that would probably not be pretty.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

Bullshit. It's bullying, especially when you start labeling people as bigots just for not voting Hillary.

I didn't see that in the post you quoted.

 

[HylianTom]

Bullshit. It's bullying, especially when you start labeling people as bigots just for not voting Hillary.

I won't call it bigoted.

But if someone is shrugging their shoulders at the enabling of bigoted policy to withstand judicial review for the next 20 years, that's something that speaks for itself.

And if someone feels guilt for this reality being plainly laid before them.. again, that's on THEM.

 

[Ponn]

I didn't see that in the post you quoted.

In this thread, the poster was talking about whats going on in this thread.

I won't call it bigoted.

But if someone is shrugging their shoulders at the enabling of bigoted policy to withstand judicial review for the next 20 years, that's something that speaks for itself.

And if someone feels guilt for this reality being plainly laid before them.. again, that's on THEM.

You're going down a slippery slope of self-responsibility. You are taking a 'if you aren't with us you're against us' totalitarian approach. If you buy an iPhone are you for the labor shops that make your product? If you buy gas are you not supporting their pollution and big companies, did you eat at Chick-fil-a this week? How do you know someone is shrugging their shoulders at the decision they make? You think every Hillary supporter is not a racist or bigot? It's a broad brush stroke, but okay lets do this then...

People who eat at Chick-fil-A are anti-gay bigot supporters.

 

[jbug617]

I think a big issue no one really is talking about is the appointing Supreme Court Judges. The next President will have 3 judges to pick and this can become a big change to the country.

 

[TwoDurans]

I think a big issue no one really is talking about is the appointing Supreme Court Judges. The next President will have 3 judges to pick and this can become a big change to the country.

Which is why Trump is a nightmare scenario. Imagine Chief Justice David Duke...

 

[Ms.Galaxy]

Which is why Trump is a nightmare scenario. Imagine Chief Justice David Duke...

 

[Jonm1010]

In this thread, the poster was talking about whats going on in this thread.



You're going down a slippery slope of self-responsibility. You are taking a 'if you aren't with us you're against us' totalitarian approach. If you buy an iPhone are you for the labor shops that make your product? If you buy gas are you not supporting their pollution and big companies, did you eat at Chick-fil-a this week? How do you know someone is shrugging their shoulders at the decision they make? You think every Hillary supporter is not a racist or bigot? It's a broad brush stroke, but okay lets do this then...

People who eat at Chick-fil-A are anti-gay bigot supporters.

Our actions and inaction has ethical and moral consequences, not sure your point?

If you eat chic-fil-a(and I occasionally do) you are in fact contributing to the pocket books of an anti-gay company. You just are.

But the consequence of that pales in comparison to that of throwing a vote away in a potential swing state in an election with such direct consequences like stacking a supreme Court for possiblly a generation and giving a possible totalitarian figure a likely rubber stamp Congress and Supreme Court.

 

[Spyder_Monkey]

Bullshit. It's bullying, especially when you start labeling people as bigots just for not voting Hillary.

Helping a bigoted man win makes you bigoted.

 

[Kthulhu]

Bullshit. It's bullying, especially when you start labeling people as bigots just for not voting Hillary.

If you vote Trump, there is a good chance you are a bigot.

 

[Vicetrailia]

Some people really will vote for trump cause they don't like Hilary. They're either uninformed and therefore self destructive out of stupidity, or don't mind racism.

 

[Doc Holliday]

If you vote Trump, there is a good chance you are a bigot.

Or uninformed.

I'm Latino and I have an aunt who is thinking of voting for trump because he's tough....

Just kill me lol

 

[Michael F. Assbender]

How childish. We're standing on the precipice of an election that will decide how our Supreme Court is structured for the next several decades. If this country teeters right instead of left in November, I place the blame entirely on the shoulders of these Bernie-or-Bust clowns.

This is far too important a time for grandstanding and protest voting. Your guy didn't win. Boo-fucking-hoo. Write a letter to your congressperson. But don't abstain from voting or vote third party. You're allowing a tyrant to win by doing nothing to stop him.

Picture a person balancing on one foot on a high wire. Let's call this person "America." To his left is salvation and to his right is an endless supply of flaming shit. We need to push this guy left, but there are millions of people to his other side who can't fucking wait to push him right. Meanwhile, these diehard Bernie people are either standing around with their dicks in their hands or they're refusing to help by pushing from the front.

You aren't impressing anyone, and your refusal to help the sane people win this is only to the benefit of the assholes on the other side. Or at the very least, it helps nobody. But boy don't you feel good helping nobody while bigots and facists take over?

I don't know if this made any sense. I'm tired. It's been a long day and I'm going to bed. Goodnight world. Hopefully you're slightly less selfish and shitty in the morning.

 

[Bear Force One]

It was always a game for many of the Bernie Bros. This is the the boss fight they've been grinding for.

 

[foxuzamaki]

In this thread, the poster was talking about whats going on in this thread.



You're going down a slippery slope of self-responsibility. You are taking a 'if you aren't with us you're against us' totalitarian approach. If you buy an iPhone are you for the labor shops that make your product? If you buy gas are you not supporting their pollution and big companies, did you eat at Chick-fil-a this week? How do you know someone is shrugging their shoulders at the decision they make? You think every Hillary supporter is not a racist or bigot? It's a broad brush stroke, but okay lets do this then...

People who eat at Chick-fil-A are anti-gay bigot supporters.

We arent talking about fucking iphones here man, we're talking about me and basically my whole community wanting to feel safer for atleast 4 more years without losing our rights(again)

 

[Kthulhu]

Or uninformed.

I'm Latino and I have an aunt who is thinking of voting for trump because he's tough....

Just kill me lol

Maybe she hates Muslims?

 

[Cipherr]

I think a big issue no one really is talking about is the appointing Supreme Court Judges. The next President will have 3 judges to pick and this can become a big change to the country.

That's intentional. The conversation is ALWAYS steered away from concrete undeniably important things like Supreme Court appointments because its very difficult to justify the real and true damage that will be dealt to people if someone like Trump won.

The conversation is instead steered towards "Stop hurting my feelings!". Much much easier to hold dialogue about that than to find a way to justify the aforementioned (without just being honest that is).

 

[TarNaru33]

If you are liberal, or anything left of center-right, not voting or voting for a 3rd party is a vote for Trump, because that vote could have been used to vote against him by voting for Clinton. One more vote for Clinton, means you're increase her chance to win against Trump. If you're right wing and not voting for Trump, that means you're voting for Clinton and increasing her chances of winning by removing one vote that could have been used for Trump. That's the reality of the way things work in the United State's voting system.

I do not agree with this in the slightest. As it isn't true in any sense, you can't even say its technically what the person is doing. A vote for a party that isn't likely to win is just a vote for a party that isn't likely to win. The numbers simply isn't high enough for 3rd party to even matter, so no it is not even close to a technical vote for the other side, not to mention it balances out with others from Republican party not voting Trump because he is an idiot.

I hate this argument, because it do not really apply as the 3rd party vote isn't significant enough to say that. If and only if that 3rd party was certain to lose, but had a large base that didn't care about the results would I say you are technically right. Even if this was the case, I would not judge a person by trying to shift blame on them for one party losing because it couldn't get enough voters to go with their policies.

Simply put, the blame can only be put on the party itself for losing. Republican party going in the shit right now isn't because other more conscience Republicans won't vote Trump, it is because they allowed such a candidate to exist in the first place. Same with the Democrats. Let people stand by their principles and stop being so damn judgmental (not aimed at you but others ITT that likes to accuse others of not caring). Sometimes people see standing for their convictions to be incredibly important and it is as that is how change comes about, who are you to tell them what that conviction is worth? who are you to tell them the risks are too high? I am sure we all are aware of the risks when talking about U.S Presidency. There is a difference between full on voting for a regressive asshole and voting another candidate who you favor more over the popular candidate, even if it is just in protest.

I shall vote Hillary, but only because I rather some form of progressive policies in U.S than regressive ones. The risks are high and not just for Blacks and minorities (as many of you keep pointing out), but for poor and middle class whites, the country as a whole, and on the international stage. Anyone accusing people of being a bigot for voting Trump, fair game, but his election isn't only going to damage the status of minorities, but rights for majority of U.S citizens.

 

[cdyhybrid]

I do not agree with this in the slightest. As it isn't true in any sense, you can't even say its technically what the person is doing. A vote for a party that isn't likely to win is just a vote for a party that isn't likely to win. The numbers simply isn't high enough for 3rd party to even matter, so no it is not even close to a technical vote for the other side, not to mention it balances out with others from Republican party not voting Trump because he is an idiot.

I hate this argument, because it do not really apply as the 3rd party vote isn't significant enough to say that. If and only if that 3rd party was certain to lose, but had a large base that didn't care about the results would I say you are technically right. Even if this was the case, I would not judge a person by trying to shift blame on them for one party losing because it couldn't get enough voters to go with their policies.

Simply put, the blame can only be put on the party itself for losing. Republican party going in the shit right now isn't because other more conscience Republicans won't vote Trump, it is because they allowed such a candidate to exist in the first place. Same with the Democrats. Let people stand by their principles and stop being so damn judgmental (not aimed at you but others ITT that likes to accuse others of not caring). Sometimes people see standing for their convictions to be incredibly important and it is as that is how change comes about, who are you to tell them what that conviction is worth? who are you to tell them the risks are too high? I am sure we all are aware of the risks when talking about U.S Presidency. There is a difference between full on voting for a regressive asshole and voting another candidate who you favor more over the popular candidate, even if it is just in protest.

I shall vote Hillary, but only because I rather some form of progressive policies in U.S than regressive ones. The risks are high and not just for Blacks and minorities (as many of you keep pointing out), but for poor and middle class whites, the country as a whole, and on the international stage. Anyone accusing people of being a bigot for voting Trump, fair game, but his election isn't only going to damage the status of minorities, but rights for majority of U.S citizens.

No one is saying people throwing away their votes are going to be solely responsible for a party losing. They're just saying it isn't accomplishing anything, when that vote could go towards someone that COULD accomplish something.

 

[Jonm1010]

I do not agree with this in the slightest. As it isn't true in any sense, you can't even say its technically what the person is doing. A vote for a party that isn't likely to win is just a vote for a party that isn't likely to win. The numbers simply isn't high enough for 3rd party to even matter, so no it is not even close to a technical vote for the other side, not to mention it balances out with others from Republican party not voting Trump because he is an idiot.

I hate this argument, because it do not really apply as the 3rd party vote isn't significant enough to say that. If and only if that 3rd party was certain to lose, but had a large base that didn't care about the results would I say you are technically right. Even if this was the case, I would not judge a person by trying to shift blame on them for one party losing because it couldn't get enough voters to go with their policies.

Simply put, the blame can only be put on the party itself for losing. Republican party going in the shit right now isn't because other more conscience Republicans won't vote Trump, it is because they allowed such a candidate to exist in the first place. Same with the Democrats. Let people stand by their principles and stop being so damn judgmental (not aimed at you but others ITT that likes to accuse others of not caring). Sometimes people see standing for their convictions to be incredibly important and it is as that is how change comes about, who are you to tell them what that conviction is worth? who are you to tell them the risks are too high? I am sure we all are aware of the risks when talking about U.S Presidency. There is a difference between full on voting for a regressive asshole and voting another candidate who you favor more over the popular candidate, even if it is just in protest.

I shall vote Hillary, but only because I rather some form of progressive policies in U.S than regressive ones. The risks are high and not just for Blacks and minorities (as many of you keep pointing out), but for poor and middle class whites, the country as a whole, and on the international stage. Anyone accusing people of being a bigot for voting Trump, fair game, but his election isn't only going to damage the status of minorities, but rights for majority of U.S citizens.

Do all the rationalizing, downplaying, blame shifting, and mental gymnastics you want, a person is still ethically and morally culpable for their actions and inaction in a democracy. If you choose a third party that decision is subject to scrutiny like any other.

Democracy is fluid, symbiotic and an intertwined process. One that puts responsibility on institutions, infrastructure, groups and most importantly individuals.

You will never convince me that individuals have little or no culpability in the process. As you said yourself, the likelihood of a third party winning is practically zero. So a vote for a third party has opportunity costs. Which are subject to scrutiny. And if the individual choosing that action can't come up with a good justification or clear rationale then they have failed to convince not only others but themselves of the value of their decision. And when that decision, whether third party, Trump or abstain, has such strong arguments locked up for why it is a bad choice, a person needs to provide better then "well IDK" or "Well its not TECHNICALLY swinging an election" or rest on "Well I like X person that can't win."

 

[TarNaru33]

No one is saying people throwing away their votes are going to be solely responsible for a party losing. They're just saying it isn't accomplishing anything, when that vote could go towards someone that COULD accomplish something.

Yes, which doesn't matter as the vote is insignificant and even if it wasn't, it is still a legitimate choice that should be respected even if one disagree with it. It should not be equated to voting for the party in opposition to what they want.

I am not even talking about the people trying to actually talk and convince people to vote Hillary. I am talking about the people equating other's non-vote for Hillary as a vote for Trump and therefore they are bigoted or do not care at all about the stakes of the election.

 

[cdyhybrid]

Yes, which doesn't matter as the vote is insignificant and even if it wasn't, it is still a legitimate choice that should be respected even if one disagree with it. It should not be equated to voting for the party in opposition to what they want.

I am not even talking about the people trying to actually talk and convince people to vote Hillary. I am talking about the people equating other's non-vote for Hillary as a vote for Trump and therefore they are bigoted or do not care at all about the stakes of the election.

Some of us don't have the luxury of sitting an election out because the candidates don't perfectly match our desires - you can understand why people doing so can be a bit discouraging.

 

[TarNaru33]

Some of us don't have the luxury of sitting an election out because the candidates don't perfectly match our desires - you can understand why people doing so can be a bit discouraging.

It isn't a bit discouraging when you are trying to call those who won't line the way you want despite the costs a bigot, the same as those actually rallying behind Trump.


To the post above this guy, yes a person's actions have consequences and they should own up to it. Again, it isn't the same as voting the opposite party especially when the vote is insignificant which is why I wonder why you all are so angst about it. I am just calling out this part of the argument as it gets no where. Either argue good points without fear mongering and accusations or if you give up and lost patience, do not argue about it imo.

 

[Ms.Galaxy]

Yes, which doesn't matter as the vote is insignificant and even if it wasn't, it is still a legitimate choice that should be respected even if one disagree with it. It should not be equated to voting for the party in opposition to what they want.

I am not even talking about the people trying to actually talk and convince people to vote Hillary. I am talking about the people equating other's non-vote for Hillary as a vote for Trump and therefore they are bigoted or do not care at all about the stakes of the election.

Like I said, I'm not going to mince words today, I don't respect you if you choose to stay home and not vote, there's a legitimate threat of fascism looming that stands against the very thing this nation was founded on, and you have the power to ensure that millions of lives don't suffer both nationally and internationally. Voting is a right, but it should be a civil duty of all American citizens because it is just that important for the nation and the world itself. I do not have the luxury as some of you to sit at home and do nothing, because if I did, my life and those around me will greatly suffer. A vote is a vote, whether you use it or not, so think wisely. This is not a game, and for once, this election has much more dire consequences than previous ones.

Oh, and I don't care if this is fear mongering, because that's the reality. I know Trump's type, I saw the RNC, I read their platform. There are lives at risk under his presidency, mine including, and I'm tired of coddling people the past 6 months over this issue while I'm not even sleeping half the time and having nightmares over it.

 

[cdyhybrid]

It isn't a bit discouraging when you are trying to call those who won't line the way you want despite the costs a bigot, the same as those actually rallying behind Trump.

They might not be bigots, but they would be enabling them. Whether that's any better is up to you, I suppose.

It is a bit amusing that people are taking their ball and going home over the suggestion that they might not be backing up their claims of being progressives, rather than actually voting like a progressive would.

 

[King Tubby]

Some of us don't have the luxury of sitting an election out because the candidates don't perfectly match our desires - you can understand why people doing so can be a bit discouraging.

It's a little more dramatic than not being perfect, these people think Clinton and the Democrat establishment unfairly manipulated or outright rigged the primaries to disenfranchise them and appoint Hillary as the nominee against the will of the people.

 

[Jonm1010]

Yes, which doesn't matter as the vote is insignificant and even if it wasn't, it is still a legitimate choice that should be respected even if one disagree with it. It should not be equated to voting for the party in opposition to what they want.

I am not even talking about the people trying to actually talk and convince people to vote Hillary. I am talking about the people equating other's non-vote for Hillary as a vote for Trump and therefore they are bigoted or do not care at all about the stakes of the election.

Why should it automatically be respected?

It will be judged like any other vote would. Like you would a Trump voter or a Clinton voter.

I will say it is not fair to call an abstainer a bigot. That is a personal judgement that requires more then a person's vote to determine. Aiding a bigot? I think that is fair game because the connection is able to be clearly shown.

But I think it is 100% accurate to assert they do not care about the stakes in this election. Or at least not enough to drive them to positive action. Which is IMO the same as not really caring.

 

[BotoxAgent]

It's a little more dramatic than not being perfect, these people think Clinton and the Democrat establishment unfairly manipulated or outright rigged the primaries to disenfranchise them and appoint Hillary as the nominee against the will of the people.

Except Bernie lost because more people voted for Hillary--and these people can't handle the L

 

[King Tubby]

Except Bernie lost because more people voted for Hillary--and these people can't handle the L

...but they would argue that he lost because of things ranging from media manipulation to voter suppression to outright electoral fraud. They might be wrong or loony, but that's real outrage and in their minds a justification to sabotage Hillary.

 

[BlackClouds]

I guess I'm just most depressed that I see people on the right say the same stuff as people on the far left about the democratic party right now. Strange bedfellows. Nauseating bedfellows. :\

I've been hearing this since the lead up to the 2010 mid-terms. I am glad that more people can see it now.

 

[Jonm1010]

It's a little more dramatic than not being perfect, these people think Clinton and the Democrat establishment unfairly manipulated or outright rigged the primaries to disenfranchise them and appoint Hillary as the nominee against the will of the people.

And what does a protest vote accomplish if that is the case?

That allegation is a reason to start a grass roots movement like so many other successful movements in the past. It's not really a good reason to issue a protest vote as your rallying flag. Which will do nothing in the name of righting that assumed wrong. Its literally lose/lose.

If it works and Trump wins you are left with a country that will regress in all the areas Bernie was championing and no guarantee the DNC will take the lesson you want them to take.

If it doesn't Hillary wins and your protest becomes a forgotten part of history in no time and hurts a cause that was built around a protest vote.

 

[Mr. Blonde]

Which is why Trump is a nightmare scenario. Imagine Chief Justice David Duke...

I don't seem to remember that particular unqualified felon being on Trump's shortlist that he released in May.

 

[Ms.Galaxy]

...but they would argue that he lost because of things ranging from media manipulation to voter suppression to outright electoral fraud. They might be wrong or loony, but that's real outrage and in their minds a justification to sabotage Hillary.

I could easily blame Bernie for setting that fire on people, but I need to ask where is this recent conspiracy bullshit trend is coming from as of late. Both the alt-right and, hmm, let's call these people the alt-left, all have these weird conspiracies that have been time and time again looked at and proven wrong, but they just won't listen to the facts.

 

[cdyhybrid]

I don't seem to remember that particular unqualified felon being on Trump's shortlist that he released in March.

You say that like it's supposed to mean something.

 

[BotoxAgent]

...but they would argue that he lost because of things ranging from media manipulation to voter suppression to outright electoral fraud. They might be wrong or loony, but that's real outrage and in their minds a justification to sabotage Hillary.

Yeah the fraud of millions of Americans voting for Hillary instead. Their entitlement and persecution complex is definitely real, complaining about voter fraud when Bernie benefitted from undemocratic caucuses and peddled the idea of overturning super delegates against the will of the people....wanting to change the rules in the middle of a primary to benefit them while not understanding the primary process.

 

[soundscream]

"I'm not racist......I just vote for racist."

Is all I hear when someone says they are voting Trump, but claim they aren't racist. But I'm a minority who actually has a genuine reason to fear the rise of Trump and his ilk, so maybe I'm biased.

Its funny for as much shit black people get in this country we might be the only ones able to save it from trump. If blacks voted around the latino averages for Republicans states like Ohio, Pennsylvania and Michigan would probably go red.

 

[Mr. Blonde]

You say that like it's supposed to mean something.

Do you think a President Trump would nominate someone other than a conservative Federal district/COA or State Supreme Court Judge to the SCOTUS?

 

[EatinOlives]

"I'm not racist......I just vote for racist."

Is all I hear when someone says they are voting Trump, but claim they aren't racist. But I'm a minority who actually has a genuine reason to fear the rise of Trump and his ilk, so maybe I'm biased.

Its funny for as much shit black people get in this country we might be the only ones able to save it from trump. If blacks voted around the latino averages for Republicans states like Ohio, Pennsylvania and Michigan would probably go red.

People are more worried about being called racist than actually doing racist things, like vote for someone who is very obviously a racist and going through mental gymnastics to pretend like they're not really voting for those policies so therefore they don't have to defend their decision.

Where those are going wrong is that they can't just create this fantasy idea of who Trump is, picking and choosing the shit they like about him while pretending everything else about him doesn't exit. If you support the candidate you support what he stands for, not what you want him to stand for.

 

[cdyhybrid]

Do you think a President Trump would nominate someone other than a conservative Federal district/COA or State Supreme Court Judge to the SCOTUS?

Why shouldn't I?

If you set aside the appeal to angry, scared, white racists, his whole campaign is based on 1) doing stuff that typical politicians would not, and 2) misinformation.

Why should I believe he'll do something relatively reasonable in the end?

 

[Staccat0]

Presidential elections are not where we fix this shit anyway. You take the best you can get, organize, and spend effort trying to fix the system at levels of government where individuals can make a difference. The same way it's always been. Thinks global. Act local. It's not new.

Protest votes are slacktivism.

If somebody wants to do that, you just gotta show the receipts that you've given a shit for the past 4-6 years and I'll take it back. Otherwise it's just disingenuous chest puffing as far as I can see.

 

[Speely]

As a Bernie supporter, I just keep telling Busters that no matter what issues (however valid on paper) they have, the actual real-world results of their petulant and privileged obstructionism/whataboutism could be the election of a person who goes against the issues they claim to care about more so than literally any presidential candidate in history.

But more and more it seems like the results matter less to many folks than do the politics.

 

[TarNaru33]

Why should it automatically be respected?

It will be judged like any other vote would. Like you would a Trump voter or a Clinton voter.

I will say it is not fair to call an abstainer a bigot. That is a personal judgement that requires more then a person's vote to determine. Aiding a bigot? I think that is fair game because the connection is able to be clearly shown.

But I think it is 100% accurate to assert they do not care about the stakes in this election. Or at least not enough to drive them to positive action. Which is IMO the same as not really caring.

Yes, this is your opinion and that is fine, but it isn't accurate in the slightest. Just because a person do not line up when the stakes are high to you do not mean they do not understand those same stakes when they decide to risk it. Especially when these "stakes" aren't even in trouble by them not voting because they are an insignificant amount relative to the actual people who will vote.

It should be respected because that is their choice to make, yes it is stupid (if you are voting Trump), but I don't outright start flinging mud like a child when they don't agree with me even when the facts are clear. After all that would be expecting too much from the average voter currently. There is a difference between a person on the wrong side and a person who do not like either side, so abstains from it.

They might not be bigots, but they would be enabling them. Whether that's any better is up to you, I suppose.

It is a bit amusing that people are taking their ball and going home over the suggestion that they might not be backing up their claims of being progressives, rather than actually voting like a progressive would.

To me, being a bystander who watches the world burn is better than being the person who lights the torch, goes without saying. Could they have done something? No doubt, but it do not automatically put them up on a higher scale of non-caring douche bag.

Like I said, I'm not going to mince words today, I don't respect you if you choose to stay home and not vote, there's a legitimate threat of fascism looming that stands against the very thing this nation was founded on, and you have the power to ensure that millions of lives don't suffer both nationally and internationally. Voting is a right, but it should be a civil duty of all American citizens because it is just that important for the nation and the world itself. I do not have the luxury as some of you to sit at home and do nothing, because if I did, my life and those around me will greatly suffer. A vote is a vote, whether you use it or not, so think wisely. This is not a game, and for once, this election has much more dire consequences than previous ones.

Oh, and I don't care if this is fear mongering, because that's the reality. I know Trump's type, I saw the RNC, I read their platform. There are lives at risk under his presidency, mine including, and I'm tired of coddling people the past 6 months over this issue while I'm not even sleeping half the time and having nightmares over it.

It should be a civic duty but it is not, otherwise everyone would already have been automatically registered without exceptions, there would be an election day, and there would be less money involved. We are trying to get there, but currently this is not the case and the people you are claiming are not doing their duty still are. Duty do not mean "pick the candidate that will win", it is "pick the candidate that best defines you and the goal you want for the country." This is regardless of the candidate's chance of winning, that is what the party is for, to establish candidates that can win majority of the people's vote through their policies.

I don't know why you fear his election, only way he wins is if a dramatic amount of democrats do not show up for voting and this is the party's fault more-so than the voters.

Listen all that this is about is respect one another's choice, so long as it isn't an extreme choice *cough*Trumpvoter*cough* that completely disregards all the facts. This is about U.S election, it is very likely you won't change their mind by going about being a condescending prick basically, unless that isn't even your goal.

 

[The Adder]

I do not agree with this... U.S citizens.

To quote myself:

A liberal who would otherwise be voting Democrat not voting or voting 3rd party Clinton is a vote for Trump in the same way a conservative who would otherwise be voting Republican doing the same is a vote for Clinton.

It is taking a vote away from the only actual competition on the ticket.

A liberal voting for Trump is 2 votes for Trump, and ditto a conservative voting for Clinton.

The only vote that isn't a vote for the major party furthest from your views is voting the major party closest to your views OR if you've never voted for a major party (or voted in general) at all.

And to put it differently

Taking a stone from pile A and putting it in no pile or tossing it in the pond is like adding a stone to pile B. Ditto vice versa. Taking a stone from pile A and putting it in pile B is like putting 2 stones on pile B. Taking a stone that isn't in a pile and tossing it in the pond adds no stones to either pile.

 

[SneakersSO]

All great, yet tired points that some people are bringing up with regards to not voting or choosing to vote for a 3rd party because they're unhappy with the current selection. But this whole electoral process in choosing a POTUS nominee has left me completely disenfranchised with my current pledged party (Democrat) and many of us have been making our voices known that the current nominee was not an option for many of us (for a variety of reasons).

HRC got the popular vote; she won - she's probably the only candidate I can remember where i've ever seen people draw hard lines in the sand & say they will not vote for her. I'm not a Bernie or Bust, more like i'm a Never With Her.

I'll vote down-ticket democrat in both the general & the mid-term like I always do. I'll continue to support & research my local politicians, and help people in my community register to vote (regardless of who they want to vote for). But me? I have too many hangups with Senator Clinton to ever be able to vote for her.

With all that said, I hope she does win over Trump, or a 3rd party candidate win over Trump. I don't want to see him elected into office. Had there been someone else on the DNC ticket, I would LOVE to go in & help ensure that that won't happen. I've been saying this same thing for over a year now, so this isn't a new sentiment coming from people like me. This isn't new data at all. Fear mongering isn't going to change my mind, not when I also fear Senator Clinton also getting elected.

 

[cdyhybrid]

To me, being a bystander who watches the world burn is better than being the person who lights the torch, goes without saying. Could they have done something? No doubt, but it do not automatically put them up on a higher scale of non-caring douche bag.

Luckily, voting for Hillary is not lighting the torch. It's actively preventing people from lighting the torch.

With all that said, I hope she does win over Trump

If only there were a way you could help make that happen.

 

[SneakersSO]

If only there were a way you could help make that happen.

If only we had nominated someone that wasn't Hillary Clinton. We had ample opportunity, and plenty of people made it well known that this is what they'd be doing should she get the nomination.

 

[jack_package_200]

If only we had nominated someone that wasn't Hillary Clinton. We had ample opportunity, and plenty of people made it well known that this is what they'd be doing should she get the nomination.

Yeah fuck all those people who supported her.

They deserve Trump!

 

[cdyhybrid]

If only we had nominated someone that wasn't Hillary Clinton. We had ample opportunity, and plenty of people made it well known that this is what they'd be doing should she get the nomination.

Except it didn't happen. Are you going to keep living in February or do you care to join us in the present day?

 

[Fallout-NL]

Bullshit. It's bullying, especially when you start labeling people as bigots just for not voting Hillary.

Call it whatever you want. You guys should still do everything in your power to keep that fuckwit from getting into the White House.

 

[Trouble]

If only we had nominated someone that wasn't Hillary Clinton. We had ample opportunity, and plenty of people made it well known that this is what they'd be doing should she get the nomination.

So you want your primary vote to be respected but you don't respect the votes of the majority who disagreed. Now you hold your GE vote hostage because you didn't get your way. Grow up.