[POLL] Who are/would you vote for United States President?

[LightyKD]

>> Saw the debate. It was a shitstorm. Drank lots of wine. Laughed at the stupidity from both ends. STILL voting for Jill Stein! <<

 

[RevPokemon]

>> Saw the debate. It was a shitstorm. Drank lots of wine. Laughed at the stupidity from both ends. STILL voting for Jill Stein! <<

Good for you!
Jill Stein for President of America

And @LightyKD for President of Ouya!

 

[Lacius]

Watching or listening to her would make that pretty self-evident.

Again, could you be specific?

She also seems entitled to the presidenscy, seeing how she screwed Sanders out of the nomination.

She didn't screw over Sanders. She won fair and square.

Man, Hillary really did luck out facing Trump this election. Seems to be the only person unlikable enough for people to forget just how unlikable she is. Say something negative about her and people rush in to defend her because she's not Trump.

You're probably right.

Should've been more clear. Donald has qualities that I like. Particularly, he's funny

In my personal opinion, he's only funny in ways he doesn't mean to be. I don't want a clown as president.

strong on immigration

His immigration policy is garbage. It's pure political demagoguery that would, among other things, solve nothing. Take the wall, for example. It's impractical and wouldn't actually do anything to help the supposed issue.

seems sincere

Can blatant lies about his views on the Iraq War, his views on global warming, and his views on birtherism be considered sincere, by definition?

unlike cold robotic Hillary

Oh no, the woman wasn't warm enough.

and his message of "Make America Great Again!" would really resonate with people, and that certainly beats "I'm with Her!"

Stronger together is a much better slogan than both.

>> Saw the debate. It was a shitstorm. Drank lots of wine. Laughed at the stupidity from both ends. STILL voting for Jill Stein! <<

If you care who wins between Trump and Clinton, it's a choice between those two. A vote for Jill Stein is a vote in the trash, which increases the likelihood of a Trump win. Please don't be silly.

 

[RevPokemon]

If you care who wins between Trump and Clinton, it's a choice between those two. A vote for Jill Stein is a vote in the trash, which increases the likelihood of a Trump win. Please don't be silly.

From his profile it says he lives in Cali where Trump has a whooping 1% chance of winning. I think he is safe voting for whoever he wants to.

 

[LightyKD]

*SNIP*


If you care who wins between Trump and Clinton, it's a choice between those two. A vote for Jill Stein is a vote in the trash, which increases the likelihood of a Trump win. Please don't be silly.

A vote for Jill isn't a vote in the trash. It's MY vote. That's what you call freedom. I refuse to vote for the lesser of two evils and would be less of the man I try to be by giving my vote to a bunch of corrupted politicians. You can't bring good into this world by voting for evil. at some point you have to say "NO. I will not vote for what's wrong with humanity. I will use my time to help humanity." BTW voting for Hillary or Trump who are both likely to start WW3 does not help humanity.

 

[I pwned U!]

Please don't be silly.

Pot, meet kettle.

 

[LightyKD]

From his profile it says he lives in Cali where Trump has a whooping 1% chance of winning. I think he is safe voting for whoever he wants to.

LMAO, I take it that you never watched a single episode of "Mighty Morphin Power Rangers"?

 

[RevPokemon]

LMAO, I take it that you never watched a single episode of "Mighty Morphin Power Rangers"?

No I sadly have not so I do not get the reference of your post

 

[LightyKD]

No I sadly have not so I do not get the reference of your post

The original Power Rangers lived in the fictional city of Angel Grove, California.

 

[RevPokemon]

The original Power Rangers lived in the fictional city of Angel Grove, California.

Ohhhhhhhhh.

OK then. I am sorry but I have only seen a single episode of it about some volcano but that was 5 years ago and I remember almost none of it.

 

[Lacius]

From his profile it says he lives in Cali where Trump has a whooping 1% chance of winning. I think he is safe voting for whoever he wants to.

First, last I checked and if I remember correctly, he lived in Virginia. Second, it doesn't matter where he lives with regard to my point.

A vote for Jill isn't a vote in the trash. It's MY vote. That's what you call freedom. I refuse to vote for the lesser of two evils and would be less of the man I try to be by giving my vote to a bunch of corrupted politicians. You can't bring good into this world by voting for evil. at some point you have to say "NO. I will not vote for what's wrong with humanity. I will use my time to help humanity." BTW voting for Hillary or Trump who are both likely to start WW3 does not help humanity.

If you care who wins between Trump and Clinton, it's a choice between those two. A vote for Jill Stein is a vote in the trash, which increases the likelihood of a Trump win. Please don't be silly.

 

[RevPokemon]

First, last I checked, he lived in Virginia. Second, it doesn't matter where he lives with regard to my point.

If your point is voting x causes y to sin then where one lives matters very much as in certain areas it has no impactful affect.

 

[Lacius]

If your point is voting x causes y to sin then where one lives matters very much as in certain areas it has no impactful affect.

I'm not going to rehash this conversation. You can check my previous posts on how we're still talking about increasing and decreasing likelihoods regardless of one's state. Yes, we know the Electoral College system is broken, and some people's votes are more important than others'. It's irrelevant to my point. A vote for Trump in California, for example, is more likely to affect the election than a vote for Stein anywhere.

@LightyKD
To be clear, I asked you not to be silly because you once supported Senator Sanders. And yet, you would rather risk a Donald Trump presidency rather than vote for the person who is roughly 98% in alignment with Sanders and is endorsed by Sanders. It is silly.

 

[LightyKD]

I'm not going to rehash this conversation. You can check my previous posts on how we're still talking about increasing and decreasing likelihoods regardless of one's state. Yes, we know the Electoral College system is broken, and some people's votes are more important than others'. It's irrelevant to my point. A vote for Trump in California, for example, is more likely to affect the election than a vote for Stein anywhere.

@LightyKD
To be clear, I asked you not to be silly because you once supported Senator Sanders. And yet, you would rather risk a Donald Trump presidency rather than vote for the person who is roughly 98% in alignment with Sanders and is endorsed by Sanders. It is silly.

I supported Sanders because of this equation: "good for humanity + fits my values system = gets my vote." In no way is a Clinton presidency good for Humanity. If you want to bow your head and say: "sure, gimme more oppression" then go ahead and vote for her. I don't vote solely for myself or my family, and definitely NOT for some stupid convoluted idea of what my race needs. Every vote I have made has been determined by one question: "Is this person good for the human species in the grand scheme of things? Hillary is not.

Hell even if we were to use the whole, uplifting women via being a symbol thing, there are TWO women running for president, only one is more popular. I refuse to let my vote contribute to World War 3. You can say I'm being silly but Humanity is the closest to a nuclear war since the Cuban Missile Crisis. Saying this reminds me of the time where a former teacher tried to assure me that we wont destroy ourselves because we were the safest, since that event. Well guess what, we no longer are! Clinton wants more of the same from the Obama regime but what exactly did that muthafucka give us?

Did he help out the banks, keeping the great recession from becoming a depression? Sure but guess what, we are close to ANOTHER financial meltdown. How about we discuss the expansion of the mass spying that the Patriot Act gives us? We shouldn't expect to have privacy in the old school sense in the age of the Internet BUT my thoughts, my searches, the views I share on a forum should NOT be used to make myself or anyone else a enemy of the state. What about out corrupt justice system? Has Hillary said anything about really changing it? Making it so that Police aren't motivated by god damned quotas. Justice is NOT based on how much revenue you can bring in for the state. What about how Judges are trying to pull some Minority Report style bullshit and determining who gets bail or probation based on fucking algorithms?! What type of shit is that?! Oh, that's right, prison isn't used for rehabilitation, it's basically mass slavery because the 13th amendment still allows for the slavery of prisoners.

Until I see Hillary showing us that she actually gives a damn about social issues that affects us all and isn't just handing us bones, then and only then will I consider voting for her. As a father and a husband, I worry about surviving to see the next day because I can't trust law enforcement and the legal system any more than I can trust a mugger, paying my bills, keeping my family secure and hoping that the world isnt highly polluted or nuked so that there is still a livable, green, Earth left for future generations.

 

[RevPokemon]

As a father and a husband, I worry about surviving to see the next day because I can't trust law enforcement and the legal system any more than I can trust a mugger, paying my bills, keeping my family secure and hoping that the world isnt highly polluted or nuked so that there is still a livable, green, Earth left for future generations.

As a Johnson supporter who also is a fan of Stein, I must say I quite admire your reasons for voting for her. With the world how it is and the systemic use of force in America, it is really true that voting less evil is inefficient as opposed to voting for more good.

 

[Lacius]

I supported Sanders because of this equation: "good for humanity + fits my values system = gets my vote."

If by good for humanity and fits my values system you are referring to policy, then there's not much separating Sanders from Clinton.

If you want to bow your head and say: "sure, gimme more oppression" then go ahead and vote for her.

How are Clinton or her policies going to oppress you?

You can say I'm being silly but Humanity is the closest to a nuclear war since the Cuban Missile Crisis.

I would only agree with this because of the things Donald Trump has said about nuclear weapons. Otherwise, I'm not aware of any metric that suggests we're closest to a nuclear war since the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Did he help out the banks, keeping the great recession from becoming a depression? Sure but guess what, we are close to ANOTHER financial meltdown.

By what metric?

What about out corrupt justice system? Has Hillary said anything about really changing it?

Yep.

it is really true that voting less evil is inefficient as opposed to voting for more good.

We've already discussed how, for example, a vote for Clinton in a red state is many times more influential than a vote for a third-party candidate in any state. Your specific claim here seems analogous to voting for FDR in 2016 because no one else is as good on social programs; it's idealistic nonsense.

 

[TotalInsanity4]

I would only agree with this because of the things Donald Trump has said about nuclear weapons. Otherwise, I'm not aware of any metric that suggests we're closest to a nuclear war since the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Sorry to cut in, but I have. With Iran working towards nuclear refinement (although fortunately that has been staved off through the diplomatic efforts of Obama and Clinton) and North Korea reportedly in the testing phase of long-range nuclear missiles, I'd say that it's actually pretty likely that I will live to see a second Cold War

 

[Lacius]

Sorry to cut in, but I have. With Iran working towards nuclear refinement (although fortunately that has been staved off through the diplomatic efforts of Obama and Clinton) and North Korea reportedly in the testing phase of long-range nuclear missiles, I'd say that it's actually pretty likely that I will live to see a second Cold War

We've put a lid on Iran, as you mentioned, and North Korea isn't quite where they need to be in order to be able to say we're the closest we've been since the Cuban Missile Crisis. I agree with your point about perhaps living to see it.

Edit: In other words, to say it's worse now than it was in the late 1960s and the 1970s is a little bizarre.

 

[RevPokemon]

We've already discussed how, for example, a vote for Clinton in a red state is many times more influential than a vote for a third-party candidate in any state.

Or Trump in a blue state. Regardless we have to understand that either way the difference a vote for Trump or Stein makes for the outcome in Cali is both ultimately marginal to the point that it is hard to argue otherwise. I also would add that to other states with smaller margins but I digress.

Your specific claim here seems analogous to voting for FDR in 2016 because no one else is as good on social programs; it's idealistic nonsense.

How is it nonsense? If we acknowledge that in x many states your vote for a big 2 will likely be a wasted vote by virtue of it being excess or a losing candidate then I would add a vote for Hillary or Donald is the same thing. Again we can argue over how it would be x amount more influential but when ultimately it is realistically going to have no impact then that point is effectively moot. Because of that point, I choose to vote for whose ideas are most inline with mine since I acknowledge that.

 

[Shining Greninja]

Everyone ignore @Lacius he has no idea what he's talking about