Music Banter

Go Back   Music Banter > Community Center > The Lounge > Current Events, Philosophy, & Religion
Register Blogging Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Welcome to Music Banter Forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with over 70,000 other registered members. After you create your free account, you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 1,100,000 posts.

View Poll Results: can he do it?
yes 23 52.27%
yea 21 47.73%
Voters: 44. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-13-2016, 07:28 AM   #2461 (permalink)
Brain Licker
 
Xurtio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,082
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Two Spirit View Post

In other words, if they weren't offended by all of the things he's said over the past year, what makes people think they'll dump him over the Khan thing or his recent Second Amendment comments?
Just because people werent offended by things that fit their world view doesnt mean they cant be offended by other things that seem trivial to you in comparison.

We also dont know how much of trumps support was the vocal minority vs. a reluctant majority that see him as a lesser evil - until he does something more stupid.
__________________
H̓̇̅̉yͤ͏mͬ͂ͧn͑̽̽̌ͪ̑͐͟o̴͊̈́͑̇m͛͌̓ͦ̑aͫ̽ͤ̇n̅̎͐̒ͫ͐c̆ͯͫ̋ ̔̃́eͯ͒rͬͬ̄҉
Xurtio is offline  
Old 08-13-2016, 10:44 AM   #2462 (permalink)
Dragon
 
Wpnfire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Kansas, United States
Posts: 2,631
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chula Vista View Post
Might as well stay home.
That is the worst decision you can make. Not voting because you hate both major candidates allows the vocal majority (the extreme right and extreme left), who will vote no matter what, to have an uncontested vote. Voting for a third party takes votes away from the candidates, and may force one of them to compromise on values. It's similar to way the open market functions. Two major companies at odds with each other compete against each other, until a new company shows up with a business strategy to offer decreased prices. That company steals customers from one or both of the major companies, and the best and most strategic company will absorb the business practices of the smaller company in order to survive or gain an edge against competitors.

Basically, it encourages competition. This is all in theory btw, it's never this simple in reality.
Wpnfire is offline  
Old 08-13-2016, 12:12 PM   #2463 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
William_the_Bloody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Sunnydale Cemetary
Posts: 2,093
Default

I would encourage people to vote for a third candidate party this election if that is their desire, because we are literally seeing the implosion of the Republican Party, which will most likely go down to a historic defeat.

They are getting what they deserve though, for years the Republican establishment has been ripping off their base with false promises, which has allowed a con man (Trump) to walk through the door, who now finds himself in over his head.

I have no doubt that Hillary will make a good President, she is a policy wonk who has some strong economic advisors behind her, but she is also very corrupt. I doubt she will significantly raise taxes on the wealthy, or do the things that are needed to get the US off the path that's been killing American manufacturing and wages in the US.

I personally don't think Sanders would have won even if Clinton didn't have the DNC in her pocket, but the party corruption of Debbie Wasserman Schultz and other DNC big wigs that helped ensure her victory is reprehensible.

There is therefore a very strong moral argument not to vote for either Trump or Clinton at this point.
William_the_Bloody is offline  
Old 08-13-2016, 12:16 PM   #2464 (permalink)
Key
hi
 
Key's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 12,180
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by djchameleon View Post
You have to be realistic and the reality of the situation is this. If more people decide that they want to stick to their principles and vote for a third party. It will end up just splitting the vote. This could be a way for Trump to win and I'm not sure why his team isn't like doing some underhanded stuff to push more third party candidates to the forefront. If people are stupid enough to vote for a third party instead of the necessary evil then it splits the votes that Hillary would get and Trump would end up winning with his little bit of votes.
You're telling me to be realistic, but then you're telling me not to stick to my guns when it comes to conscientiously choosing who I vote for. Realistically, we're all ****ed either way, but I'm not going to bend over backwards and let it happen if I have the choice to be a part of a change. The people who are voting for one of two evils are just too lazy or ignorant to try to change the rules. This election isn't like an election that we've seen in the past where one person was the obvious choice. Both choices we have here are both terrible choices, so why not try to go for someone that is worth putting my vote for, i.e. Gary Johnson. And don't give me the "he's not part of your beliefs" bull****. I've looked into him, and I'll be damned if I don't vote on him especially with the credentials he has under his belt. Again, I stress that I'm not going to just bend over and take it in the ass by voting for Hillary or Trump, I'm at least going to try to accomplish something with my vote.
__________________

CWH
Key is online now  
Old 08-13-2016, 12:49 PM   #2465 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: SoCal by way of Boston
Posts: 10,663
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ki View Post
The people who are voting for one of two evils are just too lazy or ignorant to try to change the rules.
Don't be so naive. How many presidential elections have you paid really close attention to to understand how third party candidates fare on election day? This is my tenth.

The only two real viable third party candidates have been Ross Perot and Ralph Nadar. In 1992 Perot actually got about 18% of the general election vote but not a single electoral vote. And Nadar pretty much gave Bush the win in 2000. Bush beat Gore by only 537 votes in Florida. Nadar got over 19,000 votes there. The vast majority of his voters said they'd have voted for Gore if Nadar hadn't run.

So ya, either throw away your vote or tilt the odds a bit more in Trumps favor.
Chula Vista is offline  
Old 08-13-2016, 12:55 PM   #2466 (permalink)
Key
hi
 
Key's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 12,180
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chula Vista View Post

So ya, either throw away your vote or tilt the odds a bit more in Trumps favor.
You're saying that like it wouldn't the same outcome if Hillary was in office. Again, we're ****ed either way.
__________________

CWH
Key is online now  
Old 08-13-2016, 01:00 PM   #2467 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: SoCal by way of Boston
Posts: 10,663
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ki View Post
Again, we're ****ed either way.
You keep saying that but still haven't backed it up with any substance. Clinton has tons of political experience. Trump has none. Clinton spent 4 years traveling the globe visiting foreign leaders. Trump? He owns a lot of golf courses. Clinton's had an office in the West Wing and sat in the situation room during multiple wars. Trump's bankrupted multiple businesses.

How can you look at them both as being equal?
Chula Vista is offline  
Old 08-13-2016, 01:03 PM   #2468 (permalink)
Resistance is futile
 
Blank.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Dank memes
Posts: 4,005
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chula Vista View Post
You keep saying that but still haven't backed it up with any substance. Clinton has tons of political experience. Trump has none. Clinton spent 4 years traveling the globe visiting foreign leaders. Trump? He owns a lot of golf courses. Clinton's had an office in the West Wing and sat in the situation room during multiple wars. Trump's bankrupted multiple businesses.

How can you look at them both as being equal?
If you seriously think trump wasn't traveling the globe meeting other leaders of industry then you have no idea what you're talking about.
__________________
Minoru Suzuki will kill you!
Blank. is offline  
Old 08-13-2016, 01:03 PM   #2469 (permalink)
Key
hi
 
Key's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 12,180
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chula Vista View Post
You keep saying that but still haven't backed it up with any substance. Clinton has tons of political experience. Trump has none. Clinton spent 4 years traveling the globe visiting foreign leaders. Trump? He owns a lot of golf courses. Clinton's had an office in the West Wing and sat in the situation room during multiple wars. Trump's bankrupted multiple businesses.

How can you look at them both as being equal?
There's been plenty said in the thread regarding Clinton's inability to be in office, so i'd be repeating what other people have said. Her past experiences don't mean anything if she's not fit to run in office. Trump is the same way, he can't run in office based on his past experiences.
__________________

CWH
Key is online now  
Old 08-13-2016, 01:07 PM   #2470 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: SoCal by way of Boston
Posts: 10,663
Default

Another cop out Ki?
Chula Vista is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads



2003-2019 Advameg, Inc.

SEO by vBSEO 3.5.2 ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.