| The Glade 4.0 https://gladerebooted.net/ |
|
| Presidential Poll https://gladerebooted.net/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=11652 |
Page 1 of 6 |
| Author: | RangerDave [ Thu May 05, 2016 7:24 am ] |
| Post subject: | Presidential Poll |
Since this is kind of an unusual election year, I'm guessing the usual Republican/Democrat alignments may not apply, and I'm curious how Gladers plan to vote. Doing this as a poll rather than a Q&A, obviously, since many people prefer to keep their votes private. For simplicity's sake, I've assumed that nothing unexpected happens between now and the conventions and the two front-runners are nominated. |
|
| Author: | Mookhow [ Thu May 05, 2016 7:43 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Presidential Poll |
I'm voting Libertarian Party. If the LP candidate can get 5% of the popular vote, then the party can get federal funding for 2020. I don't actually know how Texas is going to swing this year, since Ted Cruz won our Republican primary, and he's not running anymore. |
|
| Author: | Khross [ Thu May 05, 2016 7:53 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Presidential Poll |
Not voting for the criminal or the lunatic. Will likely continue my crusade to get the Libertarian Party its 5%. |
|
| Author: | TheRiov [ Thu May 05, 2016 8:49 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'm pragmatic enough to vote for Clinton just to avoid Trump. |
|
| Author: | Lex Luthor [ Thu May 05, 2016 9:28 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Well I live in Massachusetts so my vote doesn't count, but I'll probably vote for Clinton or the Green Party since I'm pro-environment. |
|
| Author: | Diamondeye [ Thu May 05, 2016 9:48 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Presidential Poll |
I'll be holding my nose when I do it, but Trump. Hillary Clinton is probably the most despicable major party candidate in my lifetime. It's a shame the Democrats couldn't realize what a fantastic candidate Jim Webb was in their addiction to victim politics. |
|
| Author: | Ulfynn [ Thu May 05, 2016 10:50 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'd like to see Clinton jailed and Trump laughed out of the race. The problem is, neither of those are likely. I want to vote 3rd party, but that feels like a vote for Clinton, which I don't know that I can abide. |
|
| Author: | Micheal [ Thu May 05, 2016 11:43 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Sanders, but if he doesn't get the nomination I'll reassess the alternate party candidates. |
|
| Author: | Diamondeye [ Thu May 05, 2016 12:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
Ulfynn wrote: I'd like to see Clinton jailed and Trump laughed out of the race. The problem is, neither of those are likely. I want to vote 3rd party, but that feels like a vote for Clinton, which I don't know that I can abide. They (the media, the Republicans) already tried laughing Trump out of the race and everyone - me included - that thought he was a joke last year was proven wrong. Trump himself is a blowhard and I think more than a bit shocked at his own success, but his success is due to strong undercurrents that have been ignored for far too long - and those undercurrents are not "racism" and "misogyny"; in fact the use of concepts like that to dismiss portions of the population that number well into the double-digit percentages are a huge part of it. In fact, they're not all that different from the reasons for Sanders' success. |
|
| Author: | Midgen [ Thu May 05, 2016 12:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Presidential Poll |
If who you voted for mattered they wouldn't let you do it. My states electorate will go to Clinton. Ill probably vote libertarian as well. |
|
| Author: | Aethien [ Thu May 05, 2016 12:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I've been voting the "maybe my party can get 5% and qualify for funding" vote since Barry Commoner in 1980. I doubt it's going to happen for any of the third parties. I usually vote "conscientiously strategic." Here in California, since I'm OK with whatever the Democrats put forward in the general as a second choice, I vote my conscience, usually Green. But if there's the slightest chance that Trump can take California, I will vote for Clinton, and hope that for the first time in my life I voted for the winning presidential candidate. So, right now I'm a little unsure, but leaning 3rd party. |
|
| Author: | RangerDave [ Thu May 05, 2016 1:26 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Presidential Poll |
Diamondeye wrote: I'll be holding my nose when I do it, but Trump. That's where I'm at, but in the other direction. I can't stand Hillary Clinton, but I'll be voting for her. Call me a sucker, I guess, but I've actually been relatively content with the previous Democratic nominees in my adult life (Bill Clinton, Gore, Kerry, Obama), so this is my first experience actually having a strongly negative opinion of the candidate I'm voting for. |
|
| Author: | FarSky [ Thu May 05, 2016 1:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Clinton. I'd prefer Sanders, but c'est la vie. |
|
| Author: | Diamondeye [ Thu May 05, 2016 2:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
FarSky wrote: Clinton. I'd prefer Sanders, but c'est la vie. It's a shame about Bernie, actually. On a level of personal integrity and sincerity he easily outclasses almost any other politician. So lol if you're switching to Clinton. |
|
| Author: | Talya [ Thu May 05, 2016 3:14 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Presidential Poll |
Yeah. I really really like Bernie Sanders. If he were a Canadian and running for office here ... ... ... I'd still never vote for him. We had a politician like that here, the former leader of the rather socialist New Democrat Party, Jack Layton. I loved Jack Layton. I thought he was perfect as the leader of the official opposition, he made the ideal conscience for government. He seemed genuine and well intentioned and was a man of integrity. I'd have been horrified if he was the one in charge of the federal budget. I'd never have wanted him to be Prime Minister. Unfortunately, Jack Layton was diagnosed with terminal cancer after leading his party to an historic showing in replacing the Liberal Party as the official opposition in 2011. |
|
| Author: | darksiege [ Thu May 05, 2016 3:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Presidential Poll |
Khross wrote: Not voting for the criminal or the lunatic. Will likely continue my crusade to get the Libertarian Party its 5%. This |
|
| Author: | Vindicarre [ Thu May 05, 2016 4:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
^ Ditto |
|
| Author: | Timmit [ Thu May 05, 2016 6:04 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Presidential Poll |
Libertarian party as usual. None of the three candidates left IDs qualified/worthy. Sent from my Nexus 9 using Tapatalk |
|
| Author: | Jasmy [ Thu May 05, 2016 8:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Presidential Poll |
Khross wrote: Not voting for the criminal or the lunatic. Will likely continue my crusade to get the Libertarian Party its 5%. Thirded! |
|
| Author: | Raell [ Thu May 05, 2016 9:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I may write in Victor Von Doom... I can't stand Trump and I will shoot myself before I vote for that *****. |
|
| Author: | Kaffis Mark V [ Thu May 05, 2016 9:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'll do what I always do when the Republicans offer up a big government deficit spender.. vote Libertarian. |
|
| Author: | Xequecal [ Thu May 05, 2016 11:14 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Presidential Poll |
I really don't get the hate for Hilary Clinton. She's a bog standard center-left candidate. Yeah, her campaign definitely has the "you should elect me because I'm a woman and it's my turn" thing going on, but every candidate does that. Obama got elected for being black, and does no one remember Bush's "God wants me to be President" shtick? |
|
| Author: | Diamondeye [ Fri May 06, 2016 7:15 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Presidential Poll |
Xequecal wrote: I really don't get the hate for Hilary Clinton. She's a bog standard center-left candidate. Yeah, her campaign definitely has the "you should elect me because I'm a woman and it's my turn" thing going on, but every candidate does that. Obama got elected for being black, and does no one remember Bush's "God wants me to be President" shtick? She isn't a "bog-standard center-left candidate at all"; if she were Bernie Sanders would have put paid on her account a long time ago. She's Hillary Clinton. She's been running for President for the last 24 years now, and her platform has been exclusively that she's a ***** woman lawyer and wouldn't it just be so cool to have a woman president for the sake of having a woman president. She has no actual positions whatsoever on any issue other than "whatever is best for Hillary Clinton this week" - she's been in a scramble to get left of Sanders on any issue that presents itself for the last 9 months now. LGBT stuff is a perfect example; she rather suddenly decided she was all about that when the social trend tipped over to favoring same-sex marriage (same as Obama did). The possible sole exception is gun control, where she consistently never saw a gun control measure she didn't like becuase it plays well with the victim groups her tactics focus on. Her tactics consist entirely of pandering to victimhood groups and painting their interests as necessarily and diametrically opposed to the nonvictim group. This is how she's managed to keep Sanders at bay; without being quite so absurd as to call Sanders a racist she's implied he's the white people's candidate because he deals with economic issues as economic issues rather than portraying them in racial terms. She represents the liberal gold standard of portraying poor (particularly rural poor) whites as the enemy on one hand because they're obviously racists and do terrible things like mine coal, hunt, and listen to music too uncool for sophisticates that don't live out in the boondocks, then acting shocked that those same people don't believe she has their best interest at heart as working or poor people - which is the plan. Rural whites are much more valuable to the "machine" part of the Democrat party as a scary boogeyman that doesn't control all that many House seats or electoral votes in order to drive more minorities and people that just can't stand camoflage clothing into their arms. On top of that, she is utterly incompetent to deal with military and foreign affairs. Her history is entirely one of getting warring factions to stop fighting for just long enough to claim victory, congratulating herself, and then taking off and blaming someone else (generally George Bush because obviously it's still all his fault) either directly or by implication. She is perfectly willing to take foreign donations, and she is incapable of dealing with China or Russia becuase they aren't small countries that she can easily shove into line with aircraft carriers and marines for long enough to do the aforementioned victory claim. She has been part of the crowd scoffing at the idea that we are facing serious threats again because that would just be too inconvenient politically. Finally, her woman cred is absolutely laughable; it consists of continuing to pretend abortion is the be-all and end-all of "women's healthcare", her own possession of a vagina, elderly and hollywood feminists angrily lecturing other women, and of course the prominence that she has only because of her husband. She is a true coat-tail-rider in every sense. She'd be a second-rate corporate lawyer somewhere threatening her granddaughter's preschool with lawsuits for Chelsea's convenience if Bill Clinton had lost in 1992. On the issues, if you were planning to vote for Sanders, you're nuts not to go to Trump. It just might mean giving up the sacred cow of viewing other people as racist misogynists, but really, it's high time people confronted the fact that Megan Kelly and Rosie O'Donnell are wealthy, powerful people and bullies themselves and that saying nasty things about them or confronting them does not make one a misogynist. |
|
| Author: | FarSky [ Fri May 06, 2016 7:47 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Diamondeye wrote: She has no actual positions whatsoever Diamondeye wrote: Her tactics consist entirely of pandering to victimhood groups and painting their interests as necessarily and diametrically opposed to the nonvictim group. Diamondeye wrote: On top of that, she is utterly incompetent to deal with military and foreign affairs. OK, but you're planning to vote Trump...why, exactly? He has no platform (he didn't even list platforms on his website until around two months ago, and even then has no actual details on how he intends to accomplish his "goals"), has risen solely on pandering to groups with false victimhood, and whose tactic on military and foreign affairs is "I’m speaking with myself, number one, because I have a very good brain and I’ve said a lot of things. I know what I’m doing and I listen to a lot of people, I talk to a lot of people and at the appropriate time I’ll tell you who the people are. But my primary consultant is myself and I have a good instinct for this stuff." |
|
| Author: | RangerDave [ Fri May 06, 2016 7:58 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
Kaffis Mark V wrote: I'll do what I always do when the Republicans offer up a big government deficit spender.. vote Libertarian. I'm supremely disappointed that that ellipsis wasn't followed by "try to take over the world!". |
|
| Page 1 of 6 | All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|