HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » What exactly will not vot...

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 04:43 AM

What exactly will not voting for the nominee accomplish?

For those of you who say that you won't vote for the nominee if he/she is not your candidate....can you please explain to me what it is you hope to accomplish by doing so?

I seriously want to know. At one time a few years back, I myself seriously considered not voting for the nominee because I was so angry after the primaries and I was not inclined to compromise.....but after having doing a bit of soul searching I came to the conclusion that sitting out the GE or voting for a third party candidate or republican was not an option. Social issues in particular and the SCOTUS were too important and what finally convinced me to cast my vote for the nominee.....and amazingly, I wound up really liking the nominee.

So in all seriousness, I would like some thoughtful answers on this. What will not voting for the nominee accomplish?

155 replies, 13928 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 155 replies Author Time Post
Reply What exactly will not voting for the nominee accomplish? (Original post)
BooScout Oct 2015 OP
Scootaloo Oct 2015 #1
BooScout Oct 2015 #2
Scootaloo Oct 2015 #6
BooScout Oct 2015 #9
enid602 Oct 2015 #74
FreakinDJ Oct 2015 #3
The CCC Oct 2015 #15
Fawke Em Oct 2015 #64
Art_from_Ark Oct 2015 #145
FreakinDJ Oct 2015 #73
geek75 Oct 2015 #41
FreakinDJ Oct 2015 #76
TM99 Oct 2015 #4
SusanCalvin Oct 2015 #8
TM99 Oct 2015 #26
dsc Oct 2015 #20
TM99 Oct 2015 #25
dsc Oct 2015 #28
thesquanderer Oct 2015 #46
dsc Oct 2015 #51
TM99 Oct 2015 #55
dsc Oct 2015 #57
TM99 Oct 2015 #63
BooScout Oct 2015 #100
TM99 Oct 2015 #104
BooScout Oct 2015 #114
TM99 Oct 2015 #121
BooScout Oct 2015 #126
TM99 Oct 2015 #132
Chan790 Oct 2015 #65
dsc Oct 2015 #72
Major Hogwash Oct 2015 #142
Chan790 Oct 2015 #143
Indepatriot Oct 2015 #36
TM99 Oct 2015 #59
edgineered Oct 2015 #47
GoneFishin Oct 2015 #5
Post removed Oct 2015 #27
geek75 Oct 2015 #43
jeff47 Oct 2015 #79
geek75 Oct 2015 #95
jeff47 Oct 2015 #96
GoneFishin Oct 2015 #149
840high Oct 2015 #152
840high Oct 2015 #151
joshcryer Oct 2015 #7
Betty Karlson Oct 2015 #10
joshcryer Oct 2015 #37
artislife Oct 2015 #110
joshcryer Oct 2015 #144
geek75 Oct 2015 #44
pinebox Oct 2015 #106
Capt. Obvious Oct 2015 #147
Motown_Johnny Oct 2015 #11
rpannier Oct 2015 #18
NCTraveler Oct 2015 #22
cantbeserious Oct 2015 #12
SoapBox Oct 2015 #39
geek75 Oct 2015 #45
restorefreedom Oct 2015 #48
onenote Oct 2015 #60
edgineered Oct 2015 #148
840high Oct 2015 #153
Broward Oct 2015 #13
1StrongBlackMan Oct 2015 #34
joshdawg Oct 2015 #50
Fawke Em Oct 2015 #113
joshdawg Oct 2015 #150
thesquanderer Oct 2015 #56
1StrongBlackMan Oct 2015 #99
thesquanderer Oct 2015 #108
uponit7771 Oct 2015 #58
Android3.14 Oct 2015 #14
BrainDrain Oct 2015 #19
The CCC Oct 2015 #21
TM99 Oct 2015 #29
joshcryer Oct 2015 #38
geek75 Oct 2015 #49
Android3.14 Oct 2015 #52
joshcryer Oct 2015 #77
Android3.14 Oct 2015 #91
1StrongBlackMan Oct 2015 #102
1StrongBlackMan Oct 2015 #101
840high Oct 2015 #154
NCTraveler Oct 2015 #16
GoneFishin Oct 2015 #94
NCTraveler Oct 2015 #124
rpannier Oct 2015 #17
Martin Eden Oct 2015 #23
onenote Oct 2015 #67
jeff47 Oct 2015 #84
Martin Eden Oct 2015 #107
randr Oct 2015 #24
geek75 Oct 2015 #53
Fawke Em Oct 2015 #70
jeff47 Oct 2015 #85
LWolf Oct 2015 #30
Jan Bunson Oct 2015 #31
FreedomRain Oct 2015 #32
Loki Oct 2015 #33
Vinca Oct 2015 #35
JoePhilly Oct 2015 #40
bowens43 Oct 2015 #42
onenote Oct 2015 #68
Lizzie Poppet Oct 2015 #105
onenote Oct 2015 #115
Lizzie Poppet Oct 2015 #131
thesquanderer Oct 2015 #54
onenote Oct 2015 #62
thesquanderer Oct 2015 #80
onenote Oct 2015 #92
thesquanderer Oct 2015 #97
Fawke Em Oct 2015 #61
onenote Oct 2015 #69
Fawke Em Oct 2015 #71
thesquanderer Oct 2015 #86
restorefreedom Oct 2015 #66
jeff47 Oct 2015 #75
redstateblues Oct 2015 #89
jeff47 Oct 2015 #93
onenote Oct 2015 #118
jeff47 Oct 2015 #120
onenote Oct 2015 #127
jeff47 Oct 2015 #128
Alittleliberal Oct 2015 #122
HassleCat Oct 2015 #78
CBGLuthier Oct 2015 #81
seaglass Oct 2015 #82
Boomer Oct 2015 #83
davidn3600 Oct 2015 #87
randome Oct 2015 #88
artislife Oct 2015 #90
edgineered Oct 2015 #146
YabaDabaNoDinoNo Oct 2015 #98
pinebox Oct 2015 #103
artislife Oct 2015 #111
onenote Oct 2015 #117
pinebox Oct 2015 #119
onenote Oct 2015 #125
pinebox Oct 2015 #134
onenote Oct 2015 #135
pinebox Oct 2015 #136
onenote Oct 2015 #137
pinebox Oct 2015 #138
onenote Oct 2015 #140
Tarc Oct 2015 #109
BooScout Oct 2015 #116
Tierra_y_Libertad Oct 2015 #112
workinclasszero Oct 2015 #123
99Forever Oct 2015 #129
onenote Oct 2015 #133
Gothmog Oct 2015 #130
840high Oct 2015 #155
NurseJackie Oct 2015 #139
Ino Oct 2015 #141

Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 04:47 AM

1. Well, what did YOU think it would accomplish, BooScout?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #1)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 04:52 AM

2. At the time....

When I was considering it.....I don't think I was thinking much beyond my anger. I remember being mad as hell and bitterly disappointed. It took me awhile before I could talk myself into actually voting in the GE. In the end, I knew I didn't want a Republican in the WH....and would if nothing else, vote to try and prevent that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Reply #2)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 05:35 AM

6. Right. And you were angry because... Why?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #6)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 05:51 AM

9. Looking back....

I was angry mostly because my candidate didn't win. At the time I remember giving myself a lot of reasons for not voting for the nominee.....but I think, in my case, I wanted revenge.

It took a lot to convince myself that revenge was not the way to go forward. I will also say the my preferred candidate helped convince me to get out and vote when they swung behind the nominee and supported him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Reply #9)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:26 AM

74. new Republican President

The stakes are much, much higher this time. If anything a President McCain would have been much more subdued, following the Bush excesses. But a new President McCrazy on steroids will be following a black president. It's a wet dream for Republicans. Remember how Reagan gutted the Department of Energy right after inauguration, scaled back taxing of the wealthy, and built up the Defense establishment at a fevered pace.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 05:12 AM

3. If you perceive someone as a Wall St shill

 

Then what is there to get excited about

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Reply #3)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 06:11 AM

15. If you perceive someone as a Wall St shill

If nothing else it gives me bitching rights. But thank you for giving having so much trust in me to make the decisions for you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The CCC (Reply #15)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:11 AM

64. You can still vote and have bitching rights.

But, if you're in a solidly red or solidly blue state, you can vote Green or Independent or whatever and it not make a hill of a beans of difference - expect to your conscious.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fawke Em (Reply #64)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 07:26 PM

145. You know, the last time my state voted for a Democratic ticket

that didn't include at least one Southerner, was 1948*.

*If you count Kentucky as "South", then it would be 1944. And if you include Missouri as "South", then it would be 1940.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The CCC (Reply #15)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:26 AM

73. Good advice for millions of mellinials

 

I'm sure it will work

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Reply #3)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 07:39 AM

41. Stupidity there

 

Most of our first choices are Bernie. The primary winner could be Bernie, Hillary, Biden or someone else.

But if it comes down to Hillary - Trump if someone doesn't see a difference and lets Trump win you'll be wishing for Hillary every day. I'm hoping Bernie all the way but will vote democrat in the general always.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek75 (Reply #41)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:27 AM

76. I'm not the one pretending it isn't true

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 05:31 AM

4. There are two factions currently vying for power

 

within the Democratic Party. The minority position - neoliberal/New Dems/Third Way - has gained control yet they are not popular and they often lose on the local and state levels. The majority position - traditional FDR progressives - have loss national control yet they are popular on the local and state levels. Progressive issues poll well and win well vote after vote.

If another New Dem gets the primary nod, the only way to reject that position instead of tacitly approving it is to vote against the nominee. Yes, the Democratic Party may lose. And if it does, then it will have to respond to why it loss in order to win again. If the neoliberalism is rejected, the Party must head back towards the progressive left.

Honestly, I do not think there are enough principled voters for that to occur. Party loyalty in the two party system for the last 35 years pretty much assures that registered Dems will vote for the candidate with the D after their name.

Now there are only about 30% of registered voters currently in the Democratic party. So this election may be very very different. Left leaning, progressive independents will decide this election. We are not beholden to the two party loyalty model, and in fact most of us are sick to death of it and its consequences.

That is why I have said that Clinton is a poor choice for a nominee even if Sanders were not in the running. She is not trustworthy. Her history is riddled with scandal -fairly or unfairly. She is the epitome of what Truman called the Democrat acting like a Republican. There is zero enthusiasm for her or those policies any longer. Many are burned on 'Hope & Change' only being a marketing slogan to get elected and not an actual governing style. I could go on and on. I just do not see her winning the general.

Grimes and Davis were losses on the local level that were bad. But Clinton losing like that on the national level will be very bad. And the DNC, DWC, and the Third Way have only themselves to blame.

I vote on principles and policies. I am a progressive independent who has registered Dem only to vote in the primary in a semi-closed state. I always vote.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TM99 (Reply #4)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 05:41 AM

8. Yep.

I'm still going to vote for her if she is the nominee. But the party machinery has serious issues.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SusanCalvin (Reply #8)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 06:57 AM

26. That is your choice.

 

I might argue with you. But in the end I always respect the right to vote as one sees fit.

And yes, we agree the machinery has serious issues, perhaps well beyond repair.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TM99 (Reply #4)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 06:25 AM

20. what rights will you be wiling to give up that you are

apparently willing to see others give up? If abortion rights are eliminated in wide swaths of this country are you going to be willing to forgo sex or at least take in some unwanted babies. If you are god forbid raped are you going to be willing to find a child of your rapist to carry for 9 months and then face the choice of either putting it up for adoption or giving your rapist some ability to enter your life for the next 2 decades? If you are married will you divorce your wife if marriage equality is eliminated? If Obama care goes down will you be wiling to give up your health insurance in solidarity?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #20)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 06:56 AM

25. The fear of losing abortion rights

 

has been going on my entire life and I am a half a century old soon.

And attacks on abortion rights has occurred during GOP and Dem administration.

Roe v. Wade will not be easily overturned as has been demonstrated so no that alone does not sway me.

ACA is a health insurance mandate. It has been good for some, and it has been shitty for others. I personally have seen its negative effects. Going back to the way it was previously will not be that different for me or many of the others I know.

Again, I am not someone who acts out of fear. That is not the way to vote or to be engaged in politics. Both sides use and rely on the electorate to follow them where ever they want to go just by dangling a few fears in front them. Whether it is Dems and the supreme court/abortion fears or the GOP with feminazi's implementing Marxist PC control and taking away all of the guns.

I will add that the marriage equality question is one you really don't want to use as an argument. Had we not had the New Dems, from Nunn to Bill Clinton to Hillary Clinton to Obama, DADT & DOMA would not have existed. And we would have made cultural changes much sooner. Obama didn't begin to shift until just before his 2nd turn, and Hillary just came around a few years ago. My sister and her now wife suffered for 20 years under Democrats equally as much under Republicans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TM99 (Reply #25)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 07:01 AM

28. spoken as a male

that is one needs to say. It won't be you in a back alley now will it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #28)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 07:48 AM

46. Although I am firmly pro-choice

I don't think it is the moral obligation for every voter to make that subject a priority... and I don't think one needs to be female to have a respected opinion on the subject, either. Women over 50 aren't at risk of needing abortions either, should their opinions be irrelevant? I'm not saying that personal impact can't be a factor in someone's opinion, or that it's not worth taking that into account or discussing it, but I think it's wrong to just dismiss someone's positions out-of-hand based on their gender or whatever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to thesquanderer (Reply #46)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 07:52 AM

51. I think he should give up what those he thinks should be wiling to give up

instead of dismissing the fears. He seems very willing to write checks that others have to pay for.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #28)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:00 AM

55. You know nothing of my past

 

or my history.

Take your petty judgements and sexist bullshit elsewhere.

And maybe you might wonder why tactics such as this rarely work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TM99 (Reply #55)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:02 AM

57. you have yet to state what rights you would be willing to give up

I think it is a very fair question. You are more than willing to have others give up rights so which rights are you willing to part with?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #57)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:11 AM

63. This is nonsense.

 

What rights?

Abortion is not a 'right'. You can be pro-choice and recognize that reality.

You still fail to address how the New Dems protected the rights of LGBT civil rights for the last 30 years when in actuality they worked actively against them with DOMA and DADT.

As a bi-racial man, I really don't think you want to get into a debate with me about 'rights' and what I am willing to give up considering what I already have had to deal with just because my skin is not white.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TM99 (Reply #63)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 10:05 AM

100. Abortion is a right....

It falls under Women's Rights. It our right to choose. My body, my choice, my right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Reply #100)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 10:14 AM

104. Legally speaking

 

Roe v Wade came down to privacy rights.

I may agree with both the legal argument and the inherent right of women to choose.

But the arguments concerning the overturning of Roe v. Wade (which are not sound) are to take abortion as one thing out of that context and use it to beat either side with it as a political tool.

That I disagree with.

Does that make more sense when worded like that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TM99 (Reply #104)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 11:03 AM

114. Sort of.....but....

I think you and I disagree on the substance of the issue. It's my opinion that what is the core or Roe vs Wade is very much threatened. A woman's right to chose is most definitely being taken away from us by the Religious Right with their control of the Republican Party. Law after law that limits a woman's ability to have an abortion if she deems it necessary is being taken away from us. These laws are eventually working their way through the courts while they are challenged (and while they are being challenged our rights are often taken away or curtailed severely). If once the appeals make their way to the top of the tier and the SCOTUS is not leaning left because someone who is to the right was appointed by a Republican president then it's my opinion that it could be disastrous for Women's Rights and in fact set us back decades.

I feel the same way with the issue of voting rights and the environment and in fact with most issues that come before the SCOTUS. The next President is most likely going to set the direction of the Supreme Court for the next two or three decades. It's too important for me to ever not vote in the GE for a Democrat....whoever it may be.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Reply #114)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 11:24 AM

121. Another poster shared in this thread

 

that Roe v. Wade is pretty solid and it won't be overturned no matter how the court swings.

Yes, a Democrat could give us a strong left leaning court but it is no guarantee. After all, we can thank Biden for Justice Thomas.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TM99 (Reply #121)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 11:36 AM

126. I saw that....

...and I disagree with that premise based on my reasoning above. It was interesting to me that the reasoning given in that argument was based on the teachings of a very conservative professor. It's pretty obvious to me that Roe vs Wade is threatened on a daily basis.....just look what they are trying to do with Planned Parenthood....that alone scares the hell out of me.

As to Biden.....I agree with you there. His handling of Anita Hill and the Thomas affirmation was despicable not to mention his recent comments that "Abortion is always wrong".....and I don't care what Biden's vote on the issue of abortion is.....when someone makes statements like that then they are not a supporter of Women's Rights. Period.

Btw.....I am enjoying this exchange. It's nice to just discuss things for a change.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Reply #126)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 12:52 PM

132. I tend to agree with it

 

and I still strongly support choice and privacy.

Yes, I have two younger sisters. And yes, I have experience with an abortion with a fiancee in college. It was a medical necessity even if we did not want it. And having the right to make it was paramount.

I am just not a single issue voter. If I was a woman, I am certain I would think differently. I get that. But I am not, so I own that I take into consideration numerous issues, and I am not as concerned with this one as others.

And yes, it is nice to discuss this without rancor. Thank you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #20)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:11 AM

65. I'm going to repeat to you something the dean of the law school at my undergraduate Alma Mater said.

 

(This man is not coincidentally (to his job (it's a pontifical university) or my quoting him) a superstar of conservative jurisprudence and legal theory. Though I disagree with him on most issues, his perception of the political arena is exceptional. He's also annoyingly anti-bullshit...he's rather vocal about "movement conservatives" needing to stop referring to everything to the left of center as socialist before they lose all credibility or make socialism appealing.)

You ready?

"The time to overturn Roe v. Wade has come and passed. It's a dead-letter issue of activists everywhere; as close to settled law as something so controversial can be. Conservatives use it to rile up the religious base of the GOP to vote; Democratic moderates use it as a hedge guard to keep liberals in check ("if we let the liberals make decisions, America will reject their extreme progressive values & liberal economics and we'll lose the 'baby' of moderate social gains with the bathwater."; Democrats, as a whole, use it to rile out voters in Presidential years.

All for what? It's never going to be overturned or substantially-curbed. Democratic leadership knows it, Republican leadership knows it--even if the GOP managed to end legal abortion, it would end them as a viable party as they were swept out in the next series of elections only to see reproductive choice reinstated and their opportunities on the issue ended.

It's time to end the charade and tell values conservatives that we're not going to pretend to wage this fight, it only harms us (the GOP) at the ballot box."


Fortunately for us, the GOP doesn't listen even to their own smart people...and the GOP leadership still knows they really don't want to end or impair abortion access--they just want to talk about curbing abortion access. The same is true of healthcare reform...it's a nuclear football they want to talk about to rile up the conservative base but they never want to "go off" because it will end them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chan790 (Reply #65)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:20 AM

72. really

wanna bet on this? Frankly I think the current one will gut Roe V Wade by upholding Texas' law which is a defacto ban on abortion for most of the state. Kennedy has yet to find a restriction on abortion he feels is an undue burden and I don't think he will be finding one soon. Simply upholding the requirement for admitting privileges would make abortions impossible to obtain in wide swaths of the country. Yes, the words Roe V Wade will exist but that is about all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chan790 (Reply #65)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 03:00 PM

142. When Dubya Bush was in the White House and the Republicans controlled both Houses of Congress . . .

. . . not 1 single bill was presented in either House to overturn Roe v Wade.
Such a bill as that would have been sent by the fastest courier in Washington D.C. straight to President Bush's desk, and signed before lunchtime that very day!!

So, why didn't it happen?

Because the Republicans have been huffing and bluffing about overturning Roe v Wade for over 30 years!!
In the early part of this century, the Republicans were caught with their pants down, looking like deer caught in the headlights . . . they were paralyzed.
They had the power, they had the majority in BOTH Houses of Congress, they had Dimson in the White House --- they controlled the federal government!!

So, why didn't they pass a bill into law to overturn Roe v Wade?

Because it would have removed the single, most effective wedge issue the Republicans use every 2 years when they run for office against Democrats who defend Roe v Wade!!

The Republicans are chickenshits!!
The entire GOP party is made up of chickenshits!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Hogwash (Reply #142)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 05:31 PM

143. Exactly. +1 n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TM99 (Reply #4)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 07:27 AM

36. ^^^^^^^^^ + 1,000 ^^^^^^^^

 

I would add, I have two young children, and the continuation of the status quo is terrifying to me. If the "shit is gonna hit the fan" better now than later. I'm 54 yrs-old, and had the promise of a great nation yanked from under my generation by the GOP nut jobs and their Third-Way enablers. It's Bernie or nothing for me. Period. I will vote for my local LIBERALS, but if HRC gets the nod she'll go to battle without my financial or, more importantly, my volunteer help. I worked my ass off to help President Obama get elected, but will not lift a finger for Hillary. I know at least a dozen active liberals who feel the same.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Indepatriot (Reply #36)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:05 AM

59. I am Gen-X as well.

 

We are the forgotten generation.

Between the glut of Boomers who created this mess and the upcoming mass of Millennials, we are overlooked.

So many of us are saddle with debt - from credit to education loans to medical debt. We have lost jobs or see no prospect for advancement. We were sold out on 401K's and private investment options and now bullshit like no COLA's increases and means testing of Soc Sec are promoted by Dems as well as the GOP who wants to completely gut the system.

I am done playing the game.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TM99 (Reply #4)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 07:48 AM

47. Nicely stated.

The risk of beating someone relentlessly and unmercifully is that the pain from being beat will be replaced by many things far worse: desire for revenge, suppressed feelings, hardened heart, etc.

We've been beaten enough. Although we have begged you to stop you wouldn't, you punished us more. Now you are not trusted enough to help and no one wants to wear the shame of being the weak victim that you taught everyone to hate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 05:31 AM

5. Not giving in to blackmail. I don't begrudge those who choose to give in. It's their vote.

Mine is mine. And I won't feed the political blackmail machine any longer.

Rahm Emanuel asked rhetorically "where else are they going to go?". That confirmed 100% what I already knew, which is that they don't give a shit about democratic principles.

I will never vote Republican, and I will vote Democratic on down ticket races. But I won't give in to corporatist blackmail. I just won't play that game.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GoneFishin (Reply #5)


Response to GoneFishin (Reply #5)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 07:44 AM

43. What blackmail

 

Do you need to go through a Trump presidency to get it where Trump takes away our freedoms? We already suffered through eight years of Bush. Trump is much worse.
Common sense is voting for the best realistic option available. Bernie in the primary and I hope the general. Regardless the democrat in the general. Not because it's a democrat, but because whoever it is will be much much much better than Trump.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek75 (Reply #43)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:40 AM

79. Try rereading your first sentence.

And this time, realize you are doing the blackmail that the poster describes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #79)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 09:21 AM

95. Then go ahead allow in Trump

 

and I hope you don't have any Hispanic friends of family because Trump will deport them. Sometimes votes have to be against someone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek75 (Reply #95)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 09:30 AM

96. And yet more blackmail.

How about giving voters a reason to vote for a Democrat instead of against a Republican.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #96)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 09:34 PM

149. It is telling that you should need to point that out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek75 (Reply #95)

Tue Oct 20, 2015, 02:21 AM

152. Nope. Tired of voting against.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GoneFishin (Reply #5)

Tue Oct 20, 2015, 02:19 AM

151. Thank you. +10

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 05:38 AM

7. Not voting achieves nothing. Talking about not voting...

...depresses turnout.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #7)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 05:57 AM

10. "Who else are those f*cking retards going to vote for" depressed turn-out.

 

Taking progressive voters for granted achieved nothing.

Sitting on the fence on gay rights, health care reform, et alia, achieved nothing.

EDITED to add: turn-out is a two-way street.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Betty Karlson (Reply #10)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 07:27 AM

37. Progressive voters turn out.

Disaffected independents, disappointed moderates, and the youth don't turn out.

And note I'm talking about turn out in general, in 2012 the Green Party got more votes than it had gotten since 2000. So even the disappointed progressives still voted. But overall turnout is depressed by this "there's nothing to vote for" rhetoric. And that's exactly what the Republicans depend on. The Republicans can only win if they depress the vote. That's their only lasting strategy. It's not Democrats making people have to show ID at the polling station, it's not Democrats doing all sorts of polling subterfuge. It's the Republicans.

Turnout is key.

If we had 100% turnout the Democrats would never lose an election and Congress would have supermajorities of Democrats.

But nope, the meme must be hammered home. There's nothing good to vote for. Don't vote. Stay home. Sit home. Don't do anything.

Then the people on the left saying it go off and vote for their token third party candidate and feel oh so good about themselves for being pure. While Congress goes rightward and nothing gets done.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #37)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 10:32 AM

110. Usually people who vote green or other

 

still vote for local dems more often or not.

It isn't all for one and one for all.

Which is what is kind of pissing off the Democratic Party.


I will vote for the Dems locally, I vote in a repubican district on the east side. I vote for the most left on everything.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to artislife (Reply #110)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 05:31 PM

144. This is true.

But even then the local guy loses due to those same leftists talking down the vote. That's what happened in 2010 & 2014.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Betty Karlson (Reply #10)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 07:46 AM

44. All the major dems are now for gay rights

 

Trump is anti gay, anti abortion, and a xenophobe. No democrat is close to that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek75 (Reply #44)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 10:18 AM

106. Are they?

 

I'm not so sure but this may be worth checking into to see if they've all changed their minds. Granted it's 2 years old.

Gay Marriage Rights: The 10 Democratic Senators Who Still Say No
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/26/gay-marriage-rights_n_2957319.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Betty Karlson (Reply #10)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 07:41 PM

147. Jury results

On Mon Oct 19, 2015, 05:31 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

"Who else are those f*cking retards going to vote for" depressed turn-out.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=700419

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

"Who else are those retards going to vote for?" No one said that, so the quotes are disingenuous. And "retarded"? Really?

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon Oct 19, 2015, 05:36 PM, and the Jury voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Nice language!
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No idea why this was alerted. This sentiment is somewhat widely held here at DU.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: You should have just left the alert at the use of retards. Your claiming that use of quotation marks as a hide worthy annoys me.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: "Et alia" is used incorrectly here. It means "and others" in the sense of people or names. "Et cetera" is the correct phrase here. The misuse of Latin phrases is annoying but not offensive.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Agree with the alerter. Pick a different word next time.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: hiding ""retards" needs no explanation, does it?

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 06:01 AM

11. Who says they won't vote for the nominee?

 

I keep seeing these accusations but I don't see anyone claiming that they won't vote for whoever is nominated.

Are the former PUMAs just projecting their actions onto others?



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Motown_Johnny (Reply #11)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 06:21 AM

18. Post 12 and 14

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Motown_Johnny (Reply #11)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 06:31 AM

22. I've seen well over twenty people make the claim.

 

It's pretty common here and not east to miss. All but on has been a Sanders supporter. Yes, they are PUMA-like. You nailed it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 06:02 AM

12. I Will Vote For The Candidate Of My Choosing Via Write-In Ballot If Necessary - That Is My Right

What would I accomplish; my vote starves the corrupt DNC DLC Third-Way Beast of power.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cantbeserious (Reply #12)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 07:31 AM

39. Ditto.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cantbeserious (Reply #12)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 07:47 AM

45. I'll take the DNC over the RNC

 

And I'll take anyone over xenophobic bigot Donald Trump.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cantbeserious (Reply #12)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 07:50 AM

48. ^^^^^this^^^^^ nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cantbeserious (Reply #12)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:08 AM

60. If you think that is the only thing that is accomplished by the election of a republican

you must live in a bubble.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cantbeserious (Reply #12)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:04 PM

148. Allow everyone to vote as they please in the elections.

Pass out pencils in the parking lot of your local polling place.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cantbeserious (Reply #12)

Tue Oct 20, 2015, 02:23 AM

153. Yes!!!!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 06:03 AM

13. What will not voting for Sanders accomplish?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Broward (Reply #13)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 07:22 AM

34. The exact same result as not voting for HRC or O'Malley ...

 

the unthinkable ... a republican President.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #34)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 07:51 AM

50. ^^^^THIS^^^^

If one does not vote for the Democratic nominee, republicans win.
If one votes third party or write-in, republicans win.
If one doesn't vote, republicans win.
If one votes for the republican, the country loses..............big time.

Whether it's Sanders, Clinton, or any other Democratic candidate who gets the nomination, they have my vote, plain and simple.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshdawg (Reply #50)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 10:53 AM

113. This is simply not true:

If one does not vote for the Democratic nominee, republicans win.
If one votes third party or write-in, republicans win.
If one doesn't vote, republicans win.
If one votes for the republican, the country loses..............big time.


My state is SOLID RED. I can vote for the Green candidates for president and vote for Democrats down ticket. Chances are that the ONLY Democrats who will be elected are the ones in my city, which is a Blue City in a Red State.

I could vote for the Democratic nominee, but Republicans would still win (in my state).

Your premise just fell apart.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fawke Em (Reply #113)

Tue Oct 20, 2015, 02:06 AM

150. Yeah, well, just look what happened in the mid-terms.

My premise still stands.
Don't vote and republicans win.
Vote third party and republicans win.

Republicans will vote all or most of the time every election. Democrats get a little complacent or lazy or whatever and when they don't vote, guess what................republicans win.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #34)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:00 AM

56. But what if it actually wouldn''t lead to that result?

See posts 54 and 23.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to thesquanderer (Reply #56)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 10:04 AM

99. Which district is solidly Blue enough where we (Democrats) can afford your strategy? ...

 

For example, if all (or a decided majority of) Bernie supporters in NY or Mass. follow your "send a message" strategy; NY or Mass. turn from solidly Blue to purple (or worse, red-leaning). Right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #99)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 10:20 AM

108. I would suggest looking at the most current polling before anyone did this.

But my guess is that Hillary would easily win New York in the general even without the votes of those Bernie supporters who would even consider not voting for her in the general.

If it's at ALL close, then no, don't do it. I had no problem with Nader running, but I wouldn't endorse voting for him in Florida. (Though I'm not one of those who lays the Florida issue entirely at Nader's feet, either.)

And again to clarify, it's not "my" strategy, it's something I see as reasonable. Personally, I support Bernie, but I expect Hillary to win the nomination and I expect to vote for her in the general, even though I'm in a solidly blue state. I generally prefer Bernie's positions and think he has deeper true convictions about them, but I still think Hillary would make a good president.

That said, as unlikely as Bernie is to get the nomination, I do think he would be the stronger candidate in the general. (See my post #30 at http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251700505 and also post #139 at http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251697741 ) So to the extent that "winning in November is the thing," I think HRC supporters should really consider that in more depth.

(edited to add the first URL that was accidentally left out)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Broward (Reply #13)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:04 AM

58. Voting for someone who has a plan vs captain obvious sound bites? tia

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 06:10 AM

14. I despise blackmail, loyalty oaths and those who promote them

 

Suppose there are only two restaurants in town, both of them shitty (but one slightly less shitty). You know what we receive by supporting the slightly less shitty restaurant? Shit.

You know what we accomplish by not patronizing those establishments? They go the fuck out of business, and we build better restaurants.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Android3.14 (Reply #14)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 06:22 AM

19. BINGO!...sort of

 



It's my vote and if I decide I can't hold my nose hard enough to keep the stink out, then NO I won't vote for someone "Just because they would be better than a republican". That's like saying "I'll take hot bamboo under the finger nails instead of the thumb screws." Android is right, if we don't vote for the crap they hand us, then eventually they will stop handing us crap. BUT, and this is a big BUT, we the people, as a group, must make "them" and by them I mean the third-wayer's etc etc., understand that we mean it, and you know what, there are always other places to go to, whether they believe it or not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Android3.14 (Reply #14)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 06:27 AM

21. I despise blackmail, loyalty oaths and those who promote them

About 47% of the patrons will go to the Republican restaurant, and about 47% will go to the Democratic restaurant. Both restaurants will do quite well without your patronage. The remaining 6% decide which will get the most patrons. Your not patronizing either does nothing, but make sure the Republican restaurant stays in business.

If voting doesn't matter why are Republicans so hell bent on trying to keep you from it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The CCC (Reply #21)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 07:01 AM

29. Wrong!

 

Actually 30% of all registered voters are Dems and another 30% are GOP. Both will not get all 30% of those patrons either.

The remaining 40% will decide whether either stay in business.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The CCC (Reply #21)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 07:29 AM

38. Depressing the vote is the Republican's key strategy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #38)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 07:51 AM

49. You are right

 

Republicans want democrats to be bitter and not vote.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #38)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 07:53 AM

52. Then the Dems need to support a candidate that excites the voters (Hint - It isn't Hillary)

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Android3.14 (Reply #52)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:33 AM

77. That is what primaries are for.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #77)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:59 AM

91. I sure hope so. This primary season has been such a corporate cluster fuck

 

It is difficult to see how the process is expressing a democratic ideal with the corporate takeover of the Democratic Party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #38)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 10:11 AM

102. And the disaffected "send a message" left can succeed where the gop's ...

 

dirty tricks cannot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The CCC (Reply #21)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 10:08 AM

101. Exactly; but, ...

 

If voting doesn't matter why are Republicans so hell bent on trying to keep you from it?


It is (largely) NOT them, that the republicans are trying to keep from voting. They are hell-bent on keeping those that will definitely vote Democratic from voting ... while they sit back and hope the others will follow DU's advice to send a message.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Android3.14 (Reply #14)

Tue Oct 20, 2015, 02:25 AM

154. ...^ that

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 06:20 AM

16. It is a game to some...

 

And is completely based in white privilege and ego for most. Abortion isn't a big deal to them because traveling hundreds of miles is easy for them. Racial equality doesn't matter to them because they live in neighborhoods that simple don't have these problems(Remember NRN, "we already solved that problem". The kicker is that their money isn't Gates like money and won't be enough to protect them from the thirty plus more years of the continued conservative Supreme Court they are going to give us.

The rest are no different than the LIV's Rand attracts who vote against their best interests. When we talk about LIV's, this wishy washy group is often exactly who is being discussed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NCTraveler (Reply #16)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 09:16 AM

94. You mean the Republicans, right? You sure as hell aren't describing Bernie supporters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GoneFishin (Reply #94)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 11:28 AM

124. I agree that those who believe they are so pure that they will be sitting out the election....

 

if Hillary wins in the primary aren't Sanders supporters. Right wingers. Stupid. Self-centered. Might be a stray Sanders supporter in there but for the most part they are trolls.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 06:20 AM

17. My Purity Will Be Intact

Because it's all about me...

Or something like that

To paraphrase Barry Goldwater who correctly lamented the close bonds being developed between the Republicans and fundies, "...Politics and governing demand compromise. But these ... believe they are acting in the ..., so they can't and won't compromise...."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 06:40 AM

23. There is nothing to accomplish by voting FOR the Dem nominee, IF ...

... you live in a solidly Red or Blue state. In which case, be sure to vote in the important congressional & local races, and vote for the best candidate (possibly 3rd party) for POTUS. I would love to see a real challenge to the stranglehold of the Two Party system, though for that to happen we need Instant Runoff Voting.

Many of us older voters are sick and tired of having to hold our noses when casting ballots. We've had enough of voting for candidates we don't believe in, just to keep the R out of office. Voting for the establishment/corporate candidate serves to reinforce that power structure when we desperately need to wrest political power away from them.

Hillary Clinton forever lost my vote in October 2002 when she voted to give GW Bush authority to invade Iraq. There is absolutely no reasonable excuse for it, and the consequences have been beyond disastrous. Furthermore, her recent speech at the Brookings Institution clearly reveals she is very much a hawk and likely to continue our horrible and costly course of militarism in the Middle East. Add to that her close ties to Wall Street and her neoliberal/DLC political roots, she is pretty much the epitome of what is wrong with the Democratic Party today.

Voting for Hillary Clinton goes against everything I believe we need to accomplish in changing the disastrous course of our Party and our country.

Nevertheless I would hold my nose and do it if there was the remotest chance of the Republican presidential candidate winning my home state of Illinois because that would be a bigger disaster, at least in the short term. Something tells me a bigger disaster is necessary to spur The People into the kind of political revolution this country needs, but I'm not ready to cross that threshold yet.

A Hillary Clinton presidency would delay the despearately needed change, and make it harder to accomplish the needed change through the Democratic Party because it would reinforce the faction that has to be eradicated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Martin Eden (Reply #23)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:15 AM

67. How would a Clinton presidency delay change?

When a republican presidency would accelerate change in the wrong direction: voting rights, gay rights, abortion rights, and on and on. Moreover, with the almost certain opportunity to name one or two justices to the SCOTUS, those rights would be set back for a generation. At least.

Do you think there are a lot of repubs out there that think a Sanders presidency would be preferable to a Bush presidency because it would "delay" the change that they'd get if only Trump or Cruz or Carson was elected?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onenote (Reply #67)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:47 AM

84. By keeping the neoliberals in power within the party.

We have to clean out our own party, regardless of what is going on in the Republican party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onenote (Reply #67)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 10:18 AM

107. jeff47 provided the answer

Also, you apparently ignored the big IF in my subject title as well as the text of my post in which I explicitly stated I'd vote for the Dem nominee IF there was the remotest chance of the Republican winning my home state of Illinois.

Your question is predicated on a false assumption.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 06:43 AM

24. The entire situation we are in is the result of people not voting...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randr (Reply #24)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 07:53 AM

53. Yup and we can start reversing it

 

by voting.

If anyone you know is not registered, time to register. The prospect of xenophobe Donald Trump should be enough. Very scary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randr (Reply #24)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:18 AM

70. I contend the people saying this are voting - just not for the

Red or the Blue team.

They are voting third-party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randr (Reply #24)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:48 AM

85. Then perhaps our party should do something different to attract voters

instead of relying on "AHHH!! Scary Republicans!!".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 07:05 AM

30. Who said that? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 07:06 AM

31. Sound and Fury signifying Nothing

 

I think that those who "threaten" to not vote for the OTHER candidate are engaging in hyperbole in order to impress on the OTHER's constituency how much they don't favor that candidate.

Those threats are just that.
Nearly every person here will vote Dem next November.
No matter what they say now.

Don't let it get to you.

This is the only OP on this issue that will post a reply to.
Thanks for the opportunity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 07:15 AM

32. my primary vote is for Bernie

In the GE, I probably would vote for the democratic nominee whoever she or he may be. and certainly down ticket, unless I have reservations about the fitness for office of a particular candidate. These rarely happen, but when they do I just vote Green party or even a Republican if they are exceptional-very rare indeed

What I hope to accomplish with this is to vote my preference like any other voter. (And I certainly respect the choice of other voters who vote party line no matter what, or oppositely withhold their vote for a candidate they cannot stand.) It seems like you are asking for some kind of strategic goals. I find these not generally worth it, the signal you are trying to send is so likely to be lost in the random noise of the data. I guess i do keep that somewhat in mind though when voting for a Green party candidate, hoping they get the percentage they need to qualify for matching funds, or auto-listing on ballots. I like having that voice represented. Again, it is usually the Dem candidate with a better chance of actually implementing Green policies anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 07:17 AM

33. I'm not sure who I will vote for yet

I'm leaning toward Hillary , but I love the ideas that Bernie is bringing to the table. But I also know, neither nominee would EVER tell me to stay home and not vote for my party's nominee. As a Democrat, I recognize the absolutely predictable disaster that would await this country should we allow a Republican to be President, control the House and Senate. Lincoln alluded to it in one of his speeches about out nation never being conquered from foreign enemies from across the ocea, but we will be the masters of our own demise by suicide. The election of a Republican President in this kind of political atmosphere would be catastrophic. I'm not selfish enough to think that by not voting, I'll teach someone a lesson, no I will have to take responsibility for the pain that will be directed toward the people who will have the least ability to protect themselves against the Republican onslaught of their own brand of domestic terrorism. And don't fool yourself, no one will be safe or unaffected.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 07:22 AM

35. I will vote for my candidate in the primary and vote against the GOP in the general.

It's a shame this wasn't like the last 2 elections, but those were an exception to the norm. I'm glad I lived to see one election (2008) that caused me to sob with joy on election night.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 07:35 AM

40. It'll teach those meanie Democrats a lesson.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 07:42 AM

42. Don't expect to accomplish anything other then keeping my integrity intact.

 

We are in this mess because we have accepted that we will vote for the lesser of two evils. After voting a straight Democratic ticket in every election since 1976 I'm done with that. Hillary, IMO is NOT an acceptable choice for President. I wouldn't vote for her any sooner then I would vote for trump or cruz or one of the other unacceptable candidates.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bowens43 (Reply #42)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:16 AM

68. Groovy for your integrity

Not so much for voting rights, women's rights, abortion rights, gay rights, etc etc etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onenote (Reply #68)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 10:15 AM

105. My vote won't make the slightest different on those issues...

 

...or any others. While I'll track the polls to be sure there aren't too many people who feel like I do, there's basically no way in hell my state's Electors go to the Republican. I don't have to hold my nose and vote for a Third Way corporatist in order to avoid effectively voting for an even worse candidate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lizzie Poppet (Reply #105)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 11:06 AM

115. So you really hope most people don't feel like you do.

Do I have this right? You actually do want the Democratic party nominee to win, but unless enough other people are willing to vote for the Democratic nominee (either holding their noses or enthusiastically) you don't want to affirmatively support that result.

If that's your idea of integrity, so be it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onenote (Reply #115)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 12:34 PM

131. I doubt I need to hope that, regardless.

 

There's damn little chance of my state going "red." While I actually woudl like to see the anachronistic Electoral College abolished, one of its few good points is that in cases like Oregon, it frees those who might truly despise that "lesser of two evils" candidate from having to make a choice that makes them feel dirty and traitorous to their own principles.

Sorry, but "slightly less of a corporate tool than the Republican" isn't a choice I will make unless I genuinely have no choice. The lack of a competitive race in my state would allow a different choice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 07:56 AM

54. A serious answer to your question

and basically the same as I posted to someone else who asked the same question...

If you're in a swing state, I agree, vote for the Dem no matter who it is, for a host of reasons, not the least of which is that we can't afford to have a Republican appoint the next Supreme Court justice.

But you know, if you live in New York or some other state that is definitely giving its elecoral votes to the Dem candidate no matter what, then there's no risk that not voting Dem is actually going to help put a Repub in the WH.

In that case, when there are no "real" stakes, someone might easily prefer to use his or her vote to send a message, by voting for the Green candidate or whatever. Or even just stay home, because they don't want to be part of a perception of an even bigger popular vote win for the victor. Maybe you'd prefer that the candidate who doesn't sufficiently support your views win, but not necessarily by margins that indicate overwhelming support. Maybe it's worth doing what you can to help send a message about the direction you really want the country to go in. At least as long as you're not really helping putting a Republican in the WH.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to thesquanderer (Reply #54)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:11 AM

62. if you're right and a Democrat can win without the votes of Sanders' supporters

then what incentive is there for the party to move in the direction wanted by Sanders' supporters?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onenote (Reply #62)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:42 AM

80. Because it's only true in some states. (n/t)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to thesquanderer (Reply #80)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 09:02 AM

92. So basically you are saying you hope most voters don't think or act like you do

Since if they all did (i.e., if they withheld their support from the Democratic candidate in the GE), the Democratic candidate would lose and it seems you don't want that to happen. So, essentially, you want the Democratic candidate to win, but aren't willing to actually lend your affirmative support to that happening so long as enough other are willing to do so. Regular profile in courage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onenote (Reply #92)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 09:40 AM

97. Please don't put words in my mouth.

I was explaining what I see as a reasonable position, not saying what I would do. Personally, although I support Sanders, I expect that Hillary will win the nomination, and I expect to vote for her in the general, even though I live in a solidly blue state.

That said, if someone in a solidly blue state sees polls that assure him that blue candidate X will win, but he really sees candidate X only as the lesser of two evils--or really wants to show support for the Green party or whatever in those cases where it is viable and/or non-destrctive to do so--then I think not voting for candidate X in that situation is perfectly defensible. I would not sarcastically accuse that person of demonstrating a "regular profile in courage." Any more than I would accuse someone who votes for someone they don't care for as being a hypocrite. Either way, there is a bigger picture to look at.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:09 AM

61. In some states it really doesn't matter!!

Solidly red or solidly blue states are going to give their Electoral College votes to the Republican or the Democrat, respectively, so, sadly, you vote doesn't do much anyway.

The only states were your vote may count (if tallied correctly) is in the swing states.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fawke Em (Reply #61)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:17 AM

69. Then why ever vote in those states?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onenote (Reply #69)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:19 AM

71. Down ticket races and kvetching rights. eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fawke Em (Reply #71)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:48 AM

86. Also, if you strongly support a candidate...

...there is a political/PR advantage for that candidate if s/he wins by a bigger popular vote margin than a smaller one. (Well, I guess that's a variation of kvetching rights... but for the candidate rather than the voter!)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:13 AM

66. there have been so many good reasons given by others

i will add one more thought.

with the mounting evidence that Wasserman Schultz is rigging the game for Hillary, she's the one you have to talk to you if you don't like the results of the general. Every piece of democratic machinery is coming together to pave the way for Hillary to get the nomination. And then they want to turn around and blame us if that nominee loses the general. nope. If you guys truly believe that Hillary deserves the nomination because of her attributes, then you should be just as angry at this game rigging is anyone else. Should be able to win the nomination based on merits. some of us refuse to play a rigged game. decades of participating in rigged games is how we've gotten into the situation in the first place and lost our democracy.

when the fight is fixed, and a nonprogressive corporate hawk is shoved down our throats due to an unfair democratic process, then the entity that did the shoving has no right to complain about the results afterwards. they OWN the results of the general.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:26 AM

75. Hopefully make the party realize "who else you gonna vote for?" is a terrible strategy.

They didn't get the message in 2000, 2002, 2004, 2010 or 2014.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #75)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:58 AM

89. Maybe Nader will get in the race

Maybe we could undo all the good that Obama has done. Of course I'm sure that all the Obama haters on DU would disagree that he has been a good President. Democratic Underground ain't what it used to be.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redstateblues (Reply #89)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 09:07 AM

93. I apologize that reality does not conform to your political views.

But keep going with blaming the voters for terrible strategy by candidates. I'm sure that will totally change the outcome of the terrible strategy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #93)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 11:12 AM

118. Yet in the end, you really don't want a republican to get elected and would prefer a Clinton win

over a repub win. Right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onenote (Reply #118)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 11:19 AM

120. I get no say in the matter.

If Clinton is the nominee, she can't win my state (NC).

It's a rural-urban divide swing state. To overcome the rural voters who always vote, you need a large urban turnout. Obama got that in 2008, and failed in 2012.

Clinton has no chance of doing that. The Republicans are so excited to vote against Clinton that I expect we'll need mops to clean up the polling booths.

So the only "say" I get is in the primary. If Clinton is the nominee, I get no choice in the general - my state will be giving its electoral votes to the Republican.

(Sanders or O'Malley would still have a hard time in NC, but not impossible. And since there are easier states to win in order to get to 270, they're unlikely to campaign here to change that)

I'd prefer Clinton to an insane Republican. I don't see much space between her and a moderate Republican. Both are going to seek out a "warm purple space" to placate the insane members of the Republican party.

And given Clinton's track record, and support for the bad parts of her husband's administration, I'm going to be the bargaining chip thrown to the wolves.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #120)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 11:36 AM

127. So your answer is yes, you'd prefer Clinton to a repub.

"I'd prefer Clinton to an insane Republican."
I'm curious which "non-insane" Repub you think is running for President and whether you think this so-called "moderate" would appoint the same folks to the SCOTUS as Clinton.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onenote (Reply #127)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 11:40 AM

128. No, it's prefer to an insane Republican, and "won't matter" versus a moderate Republican.

I'm curious which "non-insane" Repub you think is running

At this point, I don't know. The Republican field is currently trying to out-crazy each other.

whether you think this so-called "moderate" would appoint the same folks to the SCOTUS as Clinton.

Yes, the party that "cleared the road" for a massively conservative serial sexual abuser totally has the upper hand on SCOTUS nominees.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redstateblues (Reply #89)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 11:24 AM

122. Right

It's full of authoritarian cowards.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:38 AM

78. Here is the theory

 

By voting for the candidate the DNC gives us, we reinforce the authority of the DNC to choose a succession of candidates just like what they have been giving us since 1980. If we want candidates not so closely tied to corporate interests, candidates willing to stand up for traditional Democratic values, we have to reject what the DNC forces upon us. Only when the "authorized" candidate loses by a big margin in the general election will we get something different.

So far, there is no indication this theory is any good. We have been losing seats in congress, governors, state legislators, county and local officials for the past 35 years, and the candidates we offer to the voters have been consistently afraid to challenge Republican social Darwinism as public policy. Our only chance to change things is to nominate someone like Bernie Sanders and elect him to office. It doesn't have to be restricted to the presidency. We can, and should, change the party by electing progressives at all levels of government.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:43 AM

81. What does promising to vote for any nominee even one that is compromised achieve?

More of the same old shit. Like Kodos and Kang on The Simpsons, go ahead fools you are stuck with the two party system.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:46 AM

82. People who don't vote are selfish. Their "principles" are more important than other people's lives.

I have never voted for a candidate that I have not compromised my beliefs for.

I am against drone warfare and don't want innocent blood on my hands. Which viable Democratic candidate supports my beliefs?

It would feel so much better to sit home on my ass (whoops I mean principles) and teach those Democrats a lesson for not agreeing with my priorities! Who cares if the result is electing a Republican, it's not my responsibility to care about the harm they would cause, it's the Democrats fault for being a bunch of sell-outs!

Voting is the LEAST we can do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:46 AM

83. I can compromise, but capitulation is more difficult

Bernie Sanders doesn't just reflect my values, he's also the last small ray of hope that we can wrestle our country back from the financial oligarchy.

At least for now, Clinton is the only other viable candidate likely to win the nomination and voting for her is akin to hammering in the last nail of the coffin on democracy. She may throw a few social issue crumbs my way, but she'll protect the fundamental structure of rapacious capitalism. Her base is Wall Street/bankers.

I'll vote, but this is the first election where the thought of not-voting really does cross my mind.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:49 AM

87. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz doesn't control my vote

 

...and neither do Hillary supporters trying to use the GOP to scare me into voting for Hillary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidn3600 (Reply #87)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:58 AM

88. It's your vote. If you're not going to use it for yourself, why waste it?

 

Why not help out those who prefer Clinton to Sanders?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A ton of bricks, a ton of feathers, it's still gonna hurt.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:59 AM

90. I always vote

 

My state sends me a ballot each and every time along with a voter's pamphlet. It is so easy to sit and study the measurements, look up bios on judges and read about the candidates. It is a shame that every voter in every state doesn't have such an easy time voting.

NCtraveler said it was basically like White privilege to sit out the vote if unhappy with the candidates. Not each voter, but generally those who do not vote are of this class. And this poster is not the only one to post this viewpoint and I understand it.

Going back to my ballot, sometimes there is no information on candidates for some job at the Port or where ever. I used to just pick one based on name or intuition or closing my eyes and putting my finger down. About 7 or so elections ago, I thought about that. It was silly. So from then on, if I didn't know or saw no difference, I didn't mark that part of the ballot

Getting to White privilege or being unaffected by who is in office, I will state that I am a Latina Xer. I have no husband, no family wealth, run a business that keeps me fed and housed but not much else and I am empathetic to all who suffer.

We all have issues that are important to us. Scotus, women's rights, civil rights, income equality, ERA, food, climate, national security, veterans affairs, children, animals....you get my drift.

What happens is that we see the opponents as not being interested in our issue and we use that issue to instill fear if our candidate does not get elected. When the supporters do not "care enough" about our issue, we see them as selfish, greedy and privileged because they are not affected by our issue.

My issue? First-the health of the planet.

I think we have run elections, the government and this country in short term goals. We have done nothing that affects the land in terms of long term care. We have a crumbling infrastructure, contaminated ground water, poisonous food supply, a policing department that is geared to squelching the people instead of serving the people, wars against each new mushroom of terror that pops up around the world.

The issue is that this election is people looking at 8 years ahead or people looking at 100 years ahead.

Short term, any dem will do. It will help keep the crisis of electing a new Scotus member, keep Roe v Wade intact, maybe get some criminal justice for the genocide of the African American community and maybe get a few more dems elected down ticket.


Long term, one will do. There needs to be an incredible shift in the this country to actually challenge the structures in place in our energy platforms, our economic platforms, bio diversity, policing, foreign policy, education, civil rights, immigration due to war, climate change and the natural patterns of movement.

So when we are arguing with each other about this election and why we think one side is greedy and selfish and the other side is myopic and simplistic, we have to ask ourselves if we are 8 years ahead or 100 years ahead people. And remember that there is merit and shittiness to both visions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to artislife (Reply #90)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 07:36 PM

146. very nicely said

We will never be a concern to establishment type politicians as long as we accept one piece of corn at a time, like a pigeon in a cage. What you said.

Short term, any dem will do. It will help keep the crisis of electing a new Scotus member, keep Roe v Wade intact, maybe get some criminal justice for the genocide of the African American community and maybe get a few more dems elected down ticket.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 09:55 AM

98. I will keep my dignity.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 10:13 AM

103. I'll tell you why

 

This is one thing that really makes up a big difference between Bernie supporters and Hillary supporters.
Many of Bernie supporters are sick of the system. We're indy voters, not Dems and we're fed up with the 2 party bullshit. Want an example? Look at what's happening with the DNC right now. That sort of stuff not only screams corruption, it screams "typical politician" and that is exactly what is wrong with things.

We see Hillary not as an answer but part of the exact problem which we're facing. Her wavering positions with whatever way the wind blows, her decades of controversy dating back basically to the 70s, her stances on the issues are literally to conservative, on and on. We're fed up. Plain and simple.

This below says it all exactly what I & myself are all about. We refuse to vote for the "lesser of 2 evils" when there are other choices with who represents us. No status quo.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pinebox (Reply #103)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 10:37 AM

111. It does seem the the Democratic Party needs

 

Bernie's supporters more than they need the Democratic Party as it is.

This might be something to keep in mind, for them.

Sure, a lot will come and vote for the big D in November 2016, but a lot won't. It won't be disappointing their party, they may feel like it isn't theirs to begin with.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pinebox (Reply #103)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 11:09 AM

117. I think the point here is that once we get to the general election

the choice is essentially binary: either a Democrat gets elected or a repub. If you don't support the election of the Democrat you are helping elect a repub. Maybe it's not the Democrat you wanted. I want Bernie to get the nomination. I'll vote for him in the primary. But if he doesn't get the nomination, I will be supporting Clinton. Because I couldn't live with myself if I didn't help elect a Democrat and defeat a repub.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onenote (Reply #117)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 11:16 AM

119. One in the same

 

Hillary = Jeb Bush and many of us see it that way. Nope, not doing it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pinebox (Reply #119)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 11:33 AM

125. I guess you're one of those that doesn't see any difference between

Thomas, Scalia and Alito on the one hand and Kagan and Sotomayor on the other.

Which is truly sad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onenote (Reply #125)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 01:15 PM

134. Nope i'm one of these

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pinebox (Reply #134)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 01:23 PM

135. My member of Congress was not among the 89 who voted for that cut

And I made sure he knew before hand where I stood on the issue, which was against the cut.

So, let's get back to the point you ignored. Simple question. Do you see a difference between the members of the Supreme Court appointed by repub presidents and the ones appointed by Democratic presidents? And do you think that there will be no difference between a SCOTUS justice appointed by a president Clinton than one appointed by a President Jeb Bush (or any of the other repubs running for office?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onenote (Reply #135)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 01:40 PM

136. However many Dems were

 

If you honestly think my vote matters, you're sadly mistaken. I'll vote whomever I feel like voting for and who best represents me as a person. Also are you forgetting that Roberts was appointed by Bush and he's let much of the high profile cases stand and awarded Obama victory? There's not a chance that a radical RW judge would get through congress.

You speak of how there's a huge difference but in reality, let's not leave out Hillary's Walmart and Monsanto ties either. Not to mention her refusal to back a national minimum wage of $15/hr. Thanks but no thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pinebox (Reply #136)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 01:57 PM

137. "There's not much chance a radical RW judge would get through Congress"

I guess Scalia (confirmed before Roberts), Alito (confirmed after) got in without being confirmed. Must have missed that.

And apart from the first ACA case, in what high profile case did Roberts provide the deciding vote? You indicated that it was "much" of them so it shouldn't be hard for you to name a few. In fact, I'm curious as to what other high profile cases he awarded Obama a victory by voting with Kagan, Sotomayor, Ginsburg, and Breyer and against Scalia Thomas and Alito?

Do you think the same sex marriage case was not a high profile case?

Here are a couple of other cases where Roberts was on the losing side with Kagan, Sotomayor, Ginsburg and Breyer and on the winning side -- cases in which the appointment by a repub president of a replacement for any of those four would have undoubtedly changed the outcome of the case:

Affirmation of authority of voters to move redistricting from legislature to independent commission.
Affirmation that housing discrimination lawsuits can proceed without proof of intentional bias against minorities.
Invalidation of a law requiring hotels to maintain a guest register subject to police inspection at any time.

Here's a thought: the oldest member of the Court is Ruth Bader Ginsburg (82) and the most likely to leave office next. After that, you have Scalia and Kennedy, both 79. And then Breyer (77).

By the way, just to make sure we're on the same page -- we're talking about what happens if Bernie (who I support) doesn't end up being the nominee and Clinton does.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onenote (Reply #137)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 02:10 PM

138. Look

 

You vote for whomever you wish to vote for but I'm not supporting this. End of story.
I'm putting my trust in a candidate who's a proverbial weather vane and is trustworthy as a rattle snake with how often she changes positions. You say gay marriage but in reality until recently, you're candidate was against it. Nope. I want change, not bullshit status quo of the 1%.

I'll vote Green Party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pinebox (Reply #138)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 02:27 PM

140. My candidate is Bernie Sanders

Said so right there in my message. I'll be voting for him in the Virginia primary.

But we're talking about what happens if Bernie doesn't get the nomination. At that point, my candidate becomes the Democrat, whether its Clinton or Biden or O'Malley -- because the alternative -- the election of a repub -- is unacceptable because of what it will mean. You, on the other hand, become petulant, consequences be damned.

What consequences? Change. Change and then some.

You'll get a Supreme Court that won't hesitate to reverse the same sex marriage decision
You'll get a Supreme Court that will elevate "religious freedom" to a point where it trumps (no pun intended) all other Constitutional rights.
You'll get decisions upholding limitations on abortion.
You'll get decisions extending Citizens United even further.
And so on and so forth.

That's not change I can live with.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 10:22 AM

109. Clinton, 2008 concession speech

"Now, I understand that we all know this has been a tough fight, but the Democratic party is a family. And now it's time to restore the ties that bind us together and to come together around the ideals we share, the values we cherish, and the country we love.

We may have started on separate journeys, but today our paths have merged. And we're all heading toward the same destination, united and more ready than ever to win in November and to turn our country around, because so much is at stake."


This is a sentiment that I'd love both Clinton and Sanders supporters to embrace, as either one candidate or the other will be calling on their supporters to throw their support to the other one sometime next year.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarc (Reply #109)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 11:09 AM

116. My sentiments as well....

....and fwiw, it was this speech that at the end of the day convinced me that I had to vote for Obama in 2008.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 10:43 AM

112. Accomplish? About the same thing I would "accomplish" by voting for the label.

 

Nothing. Want "realism"? Here it is.

I've voted in 27 federal elections including 12 presidential elections.

I've voted mostly for Democrats, never for a Republican, and 3rd parties a few times.

In not one of those elections "accomplish" anything. My vote didn't decide the outcome of any of them.

I expect the same to be true in 2016.

Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.
John Quincy Adams

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 11:25 AM

123. Total control of the federal government....

 

All three branches by the batshit insane republican party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 11:45 AM

129. What has holding our nose and voting for the less crappy candidate accomplished?

Beyond handing our treasury and control of our government to the .01%?

I WILL always vote my conscience.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99Forever (Reply #129)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 01:00 PM

133. Constitutionality of same sex marriage. Health care reform (even if flawed).

Lily Ledbetter equal pay legislation. Removal of restrictions on embryonic stem cell research. Iran agreement. Expansion of SCHIP program. Net neutrality rules. Affirmation of authority of voters to move redistricting from legislature to independent commission. Affirmation that housing discrimination lawsuits can proceed without proof of intentional bias against minorities. Invalidation of a law requiring hotels to maintain a guest register subject to police inspection at any time.

That's just a partial list of legislation that Obama signed that would not have been signed, or Supreme Court decisions that would not have been made, if people hadn't "held their noses" and voted for him against McCain and Romney.


Maybe your conscience could live with those results.

Mine can't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 11:57 AM

130. Not supporting the Democratic nominee only helps the GOP

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gothmog (Reply #130)

Tue Oct 20, 2015, 02:30 AM

155. I don't believe that.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 02:20 PM

139. People who make these types of threats

do so because they know they're in a weak position, or they suspect that their preferred candidate may be vulnerable, and isn't as strong as they'd like him/her to be.

In spite of their claimed justifications for doing so (ie: sending a message, taking a stand, personal conviction, etc.) the whole thing seems to be a way to feel more important and more in control. It appears to me that these types of declarations are a plea for attention.

That's not to suggest that they're not serious. No doubt, those who make such threats are 100% serious and will probably follow-through with not voting. We should take them at their word.

They're angry and frustrated, they fear that their candidate will lose. They feel like they've lost control over the outcome of the primaries, therefore, the only remaining thing they can control are the reactions of those around them.

Typically, they make their declaration and refusal to vote for the "other" candidate. Next, they sit back and enjoy all the "atta-boy" validations, and the "how-dare-you" lecturing posts that follow.

This type of behavior can best be compared to a toddler's tantrum at the candy rack in the grocery store. They know they've lost the battle, but their tantrum gets them the consolation prize of extra attention and feeling important.

Any parent knows that when you respond to this type of behavior, it only encourages more of the same. So, why bother? It's probably best to ignore people like that, no matter WHO they threaten to not-vote-for.

They know exactly what they're doing, and they know what kind of reactions will follow. They understand precisely what the consequences are of losing an election, they don't need any lectures or reminders. But it's more important to them that they receive attention, especially negative attention.

They're afraid, and they want like-minded supporters to offer them comfort. Also, they feel powerless and vulnerable, therefore, they want YOU to feel powerless to control their actions. want to make YOU to feel vulnerable and worry about the outcome of the general election.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Mon Oct 19, 2015, 02:35 PM

141. IF Hillary is elected...

the chance that she would get primaried in 4 years is very low. So we would be in for 8 years of her, or she'd be replaced by a Repuke after 4 years.

If she's not elected, then after enduring a Repuke for 4 years, we can try again with some other Democrat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread