I'll Never Vote for Hillary Clinton

@joefromchicago,

Well, I know the republican vacuous platitudes are even less appealing. I know that allowing them to gain control of all 3 seats of government is NOT the way you'd like to see the country governed.

And I believe the Moving America Forward is simply a slogan. You're familiar with those too, I imagine.

0 Replies

@joefromchicago,

Do you agree that if all of the far-leftists in America did what you a proposing (hoping?) they do, and put their support behind a third party candidate (Sanders), resulting in a Sanders loss, a Clinton loss, and a Trump/Rubio/Cruz win that literally millions of Americans and millions of those around the world will become more poor, have less job prospects, lose more freedoms, have their rights restricted, and in general be more harmed (in various ways) than if Clinton was president and Sanders returned to Congress?

2 Replies

@joefromchicago,

I respectfully disagree. I am a democrat. First of all, I do prefer Elizabeth Warren as well as Bernie Sanders over Hillary Clinton. I never said that I was against Hillary Clinton's candidacy. Yes, I do have some issues regarding Hillary Clinton. I still believe she would make a good president. Especially, if my alternative is to vote for the eventual republican nominee. If Hillary Clinton does win the nomination she will definitely get my support and my vote.

As far as voting for a third party is concern, I would consider that as throwing my vote away because I live in the real world. Whether we like it or not we live in a two party system, especially in regard to voting for president. There are some rare instances where third party candidates were (viable). But those rare (viable) candidates were not running for president. Maybe a senatorial, congressional, or governors race, but not the presidency. Examples might include independents Governor Jesse Ventura or eventual independent Senator Joe Lieberman. Those two independents had successful runs. By the way, I don't support either of those two candidates. In the real world I cannot see a third party winning the White House. In the distant future, who knows maybe there could be a (viable) third party candidate for the White House. Who knows maybe in another 100 years or maybe never, who knows.

Many believe that H Ross Perot ultimately gave the presidency to Bill Clinton over George H Bush. Many also believe that Ralph Nader ultimately gave the presidency to George W Bush over Al Gore. I suspect that there are many liberals who are still upset that their vote for Ralph Nader handed the White House over to George W Bush. I also suspect that there are many conservatives who are still upset that their vote for H Ross Perot handed the White House over to Bill Clinton.

The term independent does not always means in the middle. The term independent often means far left or far right. Which means often independents are generally more in line with the ultra conservatives or ultra liberals.

1 Reply

@maporsche,

maporsche wrote:

Do you agree that if all of the far-leftists in America did what you a proposing (hoping?) they do, and put their support behind a third party candidate (Sanders), resulting in a Sanders loss, a Clinton loss, and a Trump/Rubio/Cruz win that literally millions of Americans and millions of those around the world will become more poor, have less job prospects, lose more freedoms, have their rights restricted, and in general be more harmed (in various ways) than if Clinton was president and Sanders returned to Congress?

No doubt a Republican administration will be a disaster. But my vote won't put the GOP candidate in the White House. Indeed, my vote won't put the Democratic nominee in the White House either. My vote is largely symbolic no matter who I vote for, so I might as well make the most of the symbolism that I have to offer.

If Clinton wins the Democratic nomination but loses the general election because of a revolt on the left, it will be her own damn fault. Losing the general election to any one of the GOP's clowns could only be the result of a catastrophic failure on Clinton's part. I can't imagine why I'd share any responsibility for such a debacle.

2 Replies

@Real Music,

Real Music wrote:

I respectfully disagree. I am a democrat.

That's where you and I differ. No doubt you feel a certain obligation to support your party's candidate, whoever that might be. I feel no such obligation.

1 Reply

@joefromchicago,

You'd share in the responsibility whether or not you chose to accept that.

If the republicans win and control all of our government, and if they do so in part because you didn't vote or you and millions like you voted for a 3rd party, then everyone (everyone!) who allowed that to happen shares in the responsibility.

Your rights will get trampled. Millions will be worse off. Lives will be ruined. This will happen to you regardless if you voted for your ideology. Your ideology will lose if you split the democratic vote.

You may choose to ignore the truth, but the truth never has to be believed in order to be true.

2 Replies

@maporsche,

maporsche wrote:

You'd share in the responsibility whether or not you chose to accept that.

If the republicans win and control all of our government, and if they do so in part because you didn't vote or you and millions like you voted for a 3rd party, then everyone (everyone!) who allowed that to happen shares in the responsibility.

Your rights will get trampled. Millions will be worse off. Lives will be ruined. This will happen to you regardless if you voted for your ideology. Your ideology will lose if you split the democratic vote.

You may choose to ignore the truth, but the truth never has to be believed in order to be true.

The Earth will shake, the heavens will open up and demons will spawn from the ground. Satan himself will walk the Earth collecting only those that voted for Hillary.

The moon will explode and cats and dogs will begin unnatural relations while baboons piss on the goons in the jungle.

It will be a true horror show and it will be ALL YOUR FAULT!

0 Replies

@maporsche,

Blaming a possible Clinton defeat on the voters is like blaming consumers for the failure of a commercial product. We don't say "it was the consumers who caused New Coke to be a disaster." Likewise, if Clinton doesn't get my vote, it's because she failed to convince me. That's on her, not on me. As I said, if she loses the general election, it will be her own damn fault.

2 Replies

@joefromchicago,

joefromchicago wrote:

No doubt a Republican administration will be a disaster. But my vote won't put the GOP candidate in the White House. Indeed, my vote won't put the Democratic nominee in the White House either. My vote is largely symbolic no matter who I vote for, so I might as well make the most of the symbolism that I have to offer.

All fine and good Joe, but while this may be the reality, it's not what you WANT to happen (at least not what you posted earlier). You want a true far-left candidate to run 3rd party. You want them to cause the democrats to lose so that the far-left can't be ignored anymore. You want this to happen even KNOWING the damage that WILL happen if your dream comes true.

How many people lives, freedoms, financial well-being, etc will you sacrifice so that you can prove your point?

1 Reply

@maporsche,

maporsche wrote:

You want them to cause the democrats to lose so that the far-left can't be ignored anymore.

I never said that. I vote for candidates that I want to win. I don't vote for somebody so that somebody else can win. And if my candidate doesn't win, well, I've done all that I can. I can't control how other people vote.

0 Replies

@joefromchicago,

I believe in voting for the candidate that is more in line my views, just as long as they have an actual chance of winning. I refuse to throw away my vote for anyone. I refuse to help the republican candidate to win the White House by voting for a third party liberal that has no chance in hell of winning. Let's be clear, I am not referring to Bernie Sanders. If Bernie Sanders does win the democratic nomination he would be a strong (viable) candidate who has an actual chance of winning the White House. On the other hand, if Bernie Sanders were to run as third party, the republican would easily win the White House. Just like if Donald Trump were to run as a third party the dems would easily win the White House. I'm sorry, it's not always pretty, but it is the real world. (Strong) third party candidates almost always help one of the two major parties win over the other when running for president. That's just a fact of life. Remember H Ross Perot and Ralph Nader

1 Reply

@engineer,

engineer wrote:

My personal rules for voting are:
- I will definitely vote. Not voting out of disgust is not a reasonable option.
- If there is a candidate running that I am truly passionate about I will likely vote for them even if they have no chance to win.
- Otherwise, I will vote for a candidate that has some chance to win.

I can see someone saying I am so passionate about Sanders I will vote for him anyway, but if he is not running, he is not going to get my write-in vote. I'm not going to vote for a third party candidate that I know nothing about other than policy papers and is likely going to get less than one percent of the vote. I considered Perot when he ran. I would consider Bloomberg if he runs as an independent. That said, if it comes down to Clinton vs Trump or Rubio, I'm going to vote for Clinton. I don't like all of her positions or all of her votes, but from rule one, I will definitely vote and voting a write in or third party would essentially be voting a half vote for Clinton and a half vote for Trump and Trump is not getting my half vote.

I didn't vote in 2012. Obama still got elected.

There is no difference between Clinton, Trump, Cruz, and Rubio. All of them pay lip service to the electorate, but they are all bought and paid for by the same people. They don't represent the people of this country; they represent the interests of big corporate businesses and the richest one percent of the people. It doesn't matter who any of the candidates would place on the Supreme Court because the economic interests of big corporate businesses will always be protected while red meat is thrown into the "divide and conquer" pit to keep the people at each other's throats. Just the remote possibility that Roe v. Wade might be overturned has kept the rabid morality police ripping this country apart for over 40 years. And now they have Obergefell to keep their hateful fangs bared for another 40 years. Our votes mean almost nothing because our political system is corrupt and rigged, but at least we have a steady supply of red meat to squabble over.

I have a small glimmer of hope for a better future for my country, but maybe Bernie Sanders would be a huge disappointment the same as Obama has been a huge disappointment. Perhaps we need to consider taking action to dismantle the political parties and get rid of the corruption. Maybe we have to hit rock bottom for that to happen ... don't know ... and I will be dead soon enough. All I can do is use my voice to complain about a government that doesn't function as it should for the people and refuse to participate in the sham of the political system we have. I'm very sad for the next generations that have to live with the mess because their lives are going to be much harder than the lives we have led.

1 Reply

@joefromchicago,

Equating voting for or against a candidate or party to the failure of a consumer product is a false equivalence.

I don't care if you like Clinton or not, I just can't see how you can possibly prefer Trump/Rubio/Cruz over Clinton. I still don't believe you actually do.

If you can't look past your own hurt feelings if Sanders doesn't get the nomination, and if you can't get off of your own high-righteous-horse and vote against the republican candidate, then THAT is on you.

2 Replies

@Real Music,

Real Music wrote:

I refuse to throw away my vote for anyone.

Once again, you and I differ. I don't believe a vote is ever thrown away, except for a vote that is not cast. That's why I go to the trouble of voting.

1 Reply

@Debra Law,

Debra Law wrote:

There is no difference between Clinton, Trump, Cruz, and Rubio.

This may be the most inaccurate post posted in the history of time.

1 Reply

@revelette2,

revelette2 wrote:

And it is looking like it is going to be Trump, he won Nevada, I don't see him see him being stopped. I believe she said Trump would be less of a disaster than Hillary. She said something like Trump just says stuff like this to be elected. The irony of it is incredible. Sanders was being arrested for protesting segregation in 1963. In 1989 Trump was calling for the death of the five teenaged black youths wrongly accused of rape.

Watch A Young Bernie Sanders Get Arrested While Protesting Segregation

Donald Trump might have called him a "thug."

Trump cares about Trump and sitting on his gold toilet in his penthouse throne room. He flips flops every time there's a breeze and often times when there's no breeze at all just to stir things up. He loves the "poorly educated" for a reason. I'm not voting for him; I was being sarcastic.

0 Replies

@maporsche,

maporsche wrote:

Equating voting for or against a candidate or party to the failure of a consumer product is a false equivalence.

Because ... ?

maporsche wrote:

I don't care if you like Clinton or not, I just can't see how you can possibly prefer Trump/Rubio/Cruz over Clinton. I still don't believe you actually do.

I never said I preferred those lunatics over Clinton. But then I'm not voting for them either, so I'm not sure what your point is.

maporsche wrote:

If you can't look past your own hurt feelings if Sanders doesn't get the nomination, and if you can't get off of your own high-righteous-horse and vote against the republican candidate, then THAT is on you.

No hurt feelings are involved, I assure you. Clinton has proven that she is entirely unfit for the office of president. So have the GOP candidates. Given that fact, why would I want to vote for any of them?

1 Reply

@joefromchicago,

We both agree to disagree.

1 Reply

@McGentrix,

McGentrix wrote:

DrewDad wrote:

The GOP has long pandered to the racists and bigots, while trying to maintain a semi-civilized facade, but it's coming home to roost for them, now.

I am sure most of the people here agree with you, all that does is make a bunch of people wrong. The GOP doesn't pander to those people, show me where you see that going on. The GOP hardly has a monopoly on idiots, but they certainly do not pander to them.

The onslaught of GOP proposed "First Amendment Protection" legislation to give the rabid morality police special privileges and immunities proves that the GOP does indeed pander to "those people" (racists and bigots, et al.).

0 Replies

@maporsche,

maporsche wrote:

Equating voting for or against a candidate or party to the failure of a consumer product is a false equivalence.

I don't care if you like Clinton or not, I just can't see how you can possibly prefer Trump/Rubio/Cruz over Clinton. I still don't believe you actually do.

If you can't look past your own hurt feelings if Sanders doesn't get the nomination, and if you can't get off of your own high-righteous-horse and vote against the republican candidate, then THAT is on you.

Talk about false equivalences.

Not voting for someone you think would make a bad president is not the same as voting for someone you think will make a worse one.

Your argument only makes any kind of sense if you think one candidate will destroy the country.

If Trump wins the nomination I won't vote for him, but I can assure you I don't think HRC will make a better president than him. As much as I think she will hurt the nation, I trust in the system to keep her reigned in.

People get way to whipped up about candidates and comparisons between Trump and Hitler are as ludicrous as comparisons between Sanders and Stalin.

It's not habitual of me to defend Joe, but his take on the election and his vote is entirely defensible.

Personally, I will vote for whomever the Libertarian candidate may be as I did in 2000, and for just about the same reason Joe will vote for the Green or Daily Worker candidate.

I've commented before that I'm enjoying the split in the left-wing ranks here, but I have a lot more respect for the deluded dreamers voting for Sanders than the willfully blind cynics voting for Clinton.

1 Reply

I'll Never Vote for Hillary Clinton

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know