101 replies to this topic

[Delphi]

I'm curious though who Hillary and Drumpf will choose as running mates. Depending on that I may not be as despondent regarding the election. Maybe. Possibly. No promises.

[wisp]

I started out pretty much Bernie or Bust at the beginning of the primaries. Last election I was disappointed with some of the things Obama had done (mostly drones, NSA, etc.) and voted for Jill Stein because I like her and I wanted to support a third-party candidate (plus my state was going to go red anyway, so my vote didn't count no matter what). But now that Drumpf is the GOP nominee, I feel like there might POSSIBLY be enough distaste for him to make this state lean more blue? I'm just not positive that my left-leaning vote won't matter a little this time. 

 

I really despise the crap Hillary's DNC has been pulling this primary season, and I don't see her as being all that much better than Drumpf. But the Supreme Court issue is one where I believe she would probably do better than he would, and that alone might be enough to give her my vote if she does turn out to be the nominee.

 

(I also have a sneaking suspicion that Drumpf might be prone to doing something stupid and illegal and earn himself an impeachment, so his pick for VP is quite relevant too.)

[Fëanen]

The biggest issue with "Bernie or Bust" is definitely the Supreme Court. Not only is Scalia's seat open, but I don't know if we can bank on Ginsberg and Breyer staying in the game for 4 more years, let alone 8. Presidential terms are limited, but the SCOTUS balance could be changed for 20+ years in the next administration. Do Sanders supporters really want court with 1-3 Drumpf nominees the next time an abortion law comes up? What happens if RBG has a stroke before the North Carolina bathroom law inevitably ends up in the Supreme court? Hard-nosed ideology is fine for the debate club, but when legitimate stuff like this comes up sometimes you just have to accept that life doesn't always give you what you want.

[Jasi]

Hard-nosed ideology is fine for the debate club, but when legitimate stuff like this comes up sometimes you just have to accept that life doesn't always give you what you want.

 

Exactly right. Pragmatism vs ideology. The only way I think the ideology train of thought bears out is if you really want to see your world burn.

[Selena]

Hillary is unlikable and corrupt and not at all interested in making the system more transparent/efficient. I get it. I don't like her, either. 

 

But real talk: Her actual presidency is just going to be like a third-term of Obama. They are almost lockstep in their agenda (which, really, is the DNC's agenda). And while Obama didn't quite live up to expectations, he also hasn't run the country into the ground and hasn't been a total trainwreck. Despite what the opposition might say. A Clinton presidency would largely be the same. "Meh."

 

Frankly, "meh" is a lot better than Drumpf. Because the dude plays to the nationalists, racists, religious zealous, and encourages people to be loud and open about their irrational hatred -- all of which could prove to be immensely destructive. Even if Drumpf doesn't actually believe half of what he says, he gives those people free reign to turn back the clock about 50 years and potentially bring back programs like Operation Wetback. Which is to say nothing of what he'll do to our foreign relations.

 

 

 

I am holding with Sanders all the way to the convention. 

 

But if he loses the nomination, and if he decides not to run as a third-party candidate, then you can bet your ass I will do what I have to in order to prevent President Drumpf. Bernie largely seems to know that a third party run would sink the Democrats in the general. I doubt he's going to run if he loses at the convention. People need to respect that. Writing him in after he's already withdrawn both disrespects his choice and sabotages what will ultimately be a strategic move on his part. 

 

A post-convention third party run has never worked and has almost always resulted in the opposition winning. Like when Teddy Roosevelt started a new party in 1912.

 

Of course, if he is convinced to run as a third party candidate.... well.... it's less disrespectful, but still really dangerous. It would take a ton of legwork to make it happen. And I fear Bernie is more popular on the internet than he is in the voting booth. Even in state with open primaries, he hasn't necessarily done well with certain demographics. Maybe versus Drumpf, but it's still risky.

[wisp]

I am holding with Sanders all the way to the convention. 

 

But if he loses the nomination, and if he decides not to run as a third-party candidate, then you can bet your ass I will do what I have to in order to prevent President Drumpf. Bernie largely seems to know that a third party run would sink the Democrats in the general. I doubt he's going to run if he loses at the convention. People need to respect that. Writing him in after he's already withdrawn both disrespects his choice and sabotages what will ultimately be a strategic move on his part. 

 

 

This part is something I've thought about a lot as well. I fully support him going all the way to the convention and giving it his best shot, and I'll support the hell out of that. But if he concedes to Hillary after all that (as I believe he's already implied he would, if she came through the convention as the winner), I don't believe that he would WANT us to vote for him after that point because it would be too risky. I keep hoping the establishment Republicans will put up a third-party candidate to compete with Drumpf and split their votes, but all that talk seems to have just been hot air. They know it's risky too.

[SteveT]

The biggest issue with "Bernie or Bust" is definitely the Supreme Court. Not only is Scalia's seat open, but I don't know if we can bank on Ginsberg and Breyer staying in the game for 4 more years, let alone 8.

 

Well, to be fair, only Republican presidents have the right to appoint Supreme Court Justices. It's called the Biden rule.

 

I have to join the chorus of "Meh."  T rump is a narcissistic bully.  Hillary is corrupt.  I don't want either of them in office.  Our best hope, I think, is to vote for Hillary and hope the e-mail scandal removes her from office.  Because that is some serious scandal, no matter how the media likes to downplay it.  Anyone without her wealth and connections would already be in Guantanamo Bay by now.

[JRPomazon]

It doesn't matter when it comes down to Clinton and Drumpf, they'll sell their constitutes up the river for whatever reason that might come up. Hillary is a known liar and has been known to take very lucrative deals for a few speeches, lord knows what she'd take in exchange for making something like the TPP. Drumpf is already rich and will more or less use the station of POTUS as a sandbox to do with as he pleases. They both have high regards for themselves and they both think they know better than most people in the country.

 

Honestly, I never thought I would be this discouraged to the point where I question whether voting would matter in November for a Clinton/Drumpf contest.

[Oberon Storm]

It WILL suck either way. But the world will also not end. I think we will survive a Drumpf admin.

[Egann]

It WILL suck either way. But the world will also not end. I think we will survive a Drumpf admin.

 

Huh. Never thought we would kinda agree.

 

My bottom line is that all a president has to do to turn the US into 1984 is aggressively expand PRISM. It doesn't even need to be legal if you collect blackmail material on a few members of congress. Sanders is the only candidate I feel I can confidently say won't do that. He's a Trotsky-style idealist. Drumpf has enough personal secrets he probably won't. Hillary is consciously trying to mantle Machiavelli and would do it in a heartbeat.

[Fëanen]

Now that Sanders has pretty decisively lost the pledged delegate count, I see supporters saying superdelegates should switch to him.

 

...The same supporters that were complaining about how unfair it was that so many delegates are decided by party insiders, not the people.

 

We can't have it both ways! Clinton's not as liberal as I'd like either, but the fact is more people voted for her than for Sanders. The system needs fixing, I think most people agree, but we can't only play by the rules when it benefits us. That is the definition hypocrisy, the very thing so many Sanders supporters accuse Clinton of. I guess ideology is more important than consistency.

[wisp]

Sigh... I guess all this means I'm probably going to have to consider putting a Hillary sticker under the Bernie sticker on my vehicle. XD