Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
belongs to the hurricane
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
I wouldn't go as far as Garcon did, but I do think it is true that if you dislike Trump it's better to vote for the candidate that won't completely destroy the country that can actually win.
Having to choose between two people you don't necessarily like very much, or even just between a horrible person and a mostly decent person who you still disagree with on a lot of issues is basically political elections in a nutshell.
edited 4th May '16 9:26:49 AM by wehrmacht
Yankee Doodle Dandy
A final tribute to the man, the myth, the legend...
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
How is Clinton comparable to Trump exactly?
Oh really when?
Destroyer of Worlds
They both have low favorability ratings.
"You can't change the world without getting your hands dirty."
I've seen elections compared to the Trolley problem. By refusing to flip the switch, you're still implicitly choosing who's gonna die...
First, is Kasich's withdrawal is official now if it wasn't already
"Now for the hard part" - http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0XU0TP
Also, despite my "there's no distinction" post earlier, choosing to vote third party is not inherently a vote for Trump. Or, at least in my mind, it isn't unless you planned to vote Democrat then changed your mind since otherwise the Dem would not be getting that vote anyway. It's basically a zero-sum, if I'm using the term right.
In my honest opinion, an individual vote is little more than a fart in the wind. The real victor is the one who gets the greatest turnout at the Mexican buffet.
Heck, isn't voter turnout considered the only real threat to a democrat victory?
edited 4th May '16 9:39:34 AM by sgamer82
I just realized something....
All Presidential candidates once they've become the presumptive nominee will get briefed by the US intelligence community as a courtesy for them to not be blindsided by anything should they win the nomination in November.
...And Trump is going to get one.
Fuck.
He may blab about something on national TV he shouldn't have.
New Survey coming this weekend!
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
Come on, I really wanna hear why you think those two are somehow equally bad.
Oh really when?
It's not that they're equivalent, It's more like each is horrible in their own special way.
I guess they are both fundamentally dishonest, if you must find something in common.
edited 4th May '16 9:47:28 AM by Bense
Lost in Space
Except that Clinton's reputation for dishonesty doesn't arise from anything she actually did or said, but rather from a decades-long smear campaign by right-wing media.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Again, you can believe what you like.
I'm sure there's a few things that, at minimum fall under Not Helping Your Case.
edited 4th May '16 9:50:41 AM by sgamer82
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
Facts aren't subjective.
Whether or not someone is noticeably dishonest (for a politician at least) doesn't really seem like it's a matter of belief. Either you can name things they've lied about (and proved they actually lied) or you can't.
Basically, said it better and shorter.
edited 4th May '16 9:53:56 AM by LSBK
True, facts aren't subjective. The facts are that both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump have told many lies, and there is no reason to believe they won't tell any lies in the future.
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
The severity and frequency of their lies is not even remotely comparable in the slightest. Trump is an almost pathological liar. Clinton is no more dishonest than any other politician.
I'm still struggling to see how these two are remotely comparable in terms of how bad they are, please enlighten me.
Oh really when?
I don't see the point in trying. When you open with "Any vote not for a Democrat is a vote for Trump," then I have to assume I'm not dealing with a reasonable person.
"No more dishonest than any other politician" is playing to a stereotype. And you are effectively admitting that she is not an honest person, so we agree.
edited 4th May '16 10:04:03 AM by Bense
Is there any incident in particular that's bothered you about her?
I'm on record saying that I don't think anything in Clinton's closet can make me see her as a worse choice than Trump, so I'll acknowledge you probably won't change my mind, but I am honestly curious.
edited 4th May '16 10:04:23 AM by sgamer82
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
Well due to the way the math works it is. First past the post says that any vote not for one of the big two is essentially thrown away and due to how demographics and voter turnout has always been if you don't vote Democrat or stay home you're saying you're fine with a Trump victory.
Oh really when?
That is a reasonable (if blunt and perhaps cynical) argument, because the winner of a FPTP system only needs to have more than the one in second; not voting for one of the two top candidates lowers the bar (i.e., number of votes) needed to win.
edited 4th May '16 10:05:59 AM by megarockman
I feel that only really applies if you were going to vote for one or the other then decided not to. See my earlier Mexican buffet metaphor.
If your vote was never going to either candidate anyway, then at worst it affects exactly nothing to cast it elsewhere or not at all. Though I personally would advocate voting even if the person you desire has no chance vs not voting at all.
Hell, the fact that bense would otherwise have voted conservative/Republican and now won't is more like an implied vote to the Democratic candidate (no offense intended bense)
edited 4th May '16 10:16:34 AM by sgamer82
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
There is a scale of dishonestly and terribleness, Bense, it's not a yes or no question.
If we're gonna do that then I'm as bad as Trump because I've lied before.
edited 4th May '16 10:08:32 AM by LeGarcon
Oh really when?
edited 4th May '16 9:23:53 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"