Mango Positive
Member
The broken horses are the main candidates. You folk are getting angry at people trying to find a healthy horse.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Stop using my oppression as an argument for your favored candidate
- Thread starter Amibguous Cad
- Start date
- Status
NoblesseOblige
Banned
Clearly you failed to understand the metaphor.
wesleyshark
Banned
The two party trap argument annoys me to no end. I vote my conscience, and sometimes my conscience tells me that both the Republican and Democratic candidates are really terrible options.
titiklabingapat
Member
A common theme from many of these 'ugh Hillary' people that haven't been convinced by logical thinking seems to be a combo of contrarian point of view and that 'special snow flake syndrome', especially in light of Trump.
A Fish Aficionado
I am going to make it through this year if it kills me
I would say voting for someone you do not believe in is throwing your vote away, especially if you are going against your beliefs for the sake of winning.. how many Republicans do you suppose there were who voted for Trump for the sake of joining the winning team? I personally can applaud the Republicans who voted against Trump knowing full well their candidate wouldn't win
but besides that, there is more to these elections than the race for president, here in California we're voting on pretty much everything, marijuana legalization, the death penalty, income tax, tobacco tax, increasing parole opportunities for non-violent offenders, whether or not corporation have the same rights as citizens, and more. We're also voting in a new senator for the first time in 24 years.
So yeah, the race for president is just one of many issues in the election
Not even almost true. We just miss Teddy Roosevelt going by century, but we still got Strom Thurmond and George Wallace.
Embarrassing.
Affeinvasion
Member
You can't possibly be delusional enough to think that a third party has even a ghost of a chance in modern American politics, right?
You know what else has trained America to see it that way? The US Constitution and the 12th Amendment.
titiklabingapat
Member
If you really think that both parties are the same after 8 years of Obama and the just concluded Republican and Democratic conventions, than I don't know what else to tell you. You have basically abandoned all rational, objective and logical thought at that point.
old manatee
Banned
Monocle
Member
Then you're muddying the waters with semantics. Be practical here. The probable consequences of a Trump presidency are objectively worse than a Hillary presidency. Every US voter who cares about minority rights has a moral responsibility to avert the disaster of President Trump. The most obvious and efficacious way to do that is to vote for the opposing candidate.
This is not hard. Rarely is it so easy to do the right thing, but here you go: a golden opportunity to help preserve the well-being and happiness of millions.
Here's the problem as I see it. The fundamental issue is not about who actually gets voted into office. While that concern is very real and long lasting, the underlying issue OP is referring to is trying to convince voters NOT to vote their conscience. Holding voters hostage because the system functions as a binary choice between two candidates is not democracy. That attitude only works when one candidate is actually superior to the other but that's not something we can take for granted. I'm not well versed enough in US political history to say whether or not we've ever had a presidential election where both party candidates are legitimately horrible choices but this is the closest we've come to that scenario in my lifetime. This election really drives home for me the fact that such a scenario is not outside the realm of possibility. It's absolutely happened elsewhere in the world, I can guarantee that. If such a thing were to happen in the US, the reinforcement of the binary system people continue to push is going to bite us in the ass.
So while I understand the obsession people have with cajoling voters to abide by the system, I don't think it's right to attack them on a personal level for voting as they wish. People should always be allowed to vote as they wish, even if those votes aren't the "right" vote according to your personal political ideals. The goal should be to educate and attempt to persuade but never shame someone for having the audacity to vote as the system is SUPPOSED to work, not as it actually does. People should have a choice. They're entitled to that much, and it's not right to rob them of that freedom, regardless of how fucked up the alternative is. You have to remember that the other side, the GOP, view the system in the exact same way, as a binary choice between objectively right and objectively wrong. They push the narrative just as hard because it benefits them just as much. A binary democratic system is only a good thing if your candidate happens to win.
So while I understand the obsession people have with cajoling voters to abide by the system, I don't think it's right to attack them on a personal level for voting as they wish. People should always be allowed to vote as they wish, even if those votes aren't the "right" vote according to your personal political ideals. The goal should be to educate and attempt to persuade but never shame someone for having the audacity to vote as the system is SUPPOSED to work, not as it actually does. People should have a choice. They're entitled to that much, and it's not right to rob them of that freedom, regardless of how fucked up the alternative is. You have to remember that the other side, the GOP, view the system in the exact same way, as a binary choice between objectively right and objectively wrong. They push the narrative just as hard because it benefits them just as much. A binary democratic system is only a good thing if your candidate happens to win.
old manatee
Banned
Yeah, they suck too. I just take issue with people who support a major party candidate dumping on anybody who explores other options months before the election.
hodayathink
Member
I feel like the bigger issue is that the OP thinks that voting for Johnson (or more to the point, not voting for Clinton) is how you affect change in the Democratic platform. Because, well, it isn't. How you affect change in the platform is by voting locally for people who agree with you on your issue, and donating nationally to representatives that do as well. And, a lot of the time, voting for the person that's better on your issue of the two main parties, even if they aren't ideal. And I don't see how you could think Trump would be better about civil liberties than Clinton.
Chaos2Frozen
Member
Voting for your feelings over facts huh, reminds me of the recent John Oliver segment.
"The media"
You sound a bit like the modern GOP.
Call it a horse race or a presidential race, I don't care. There are prospective winners and losers like any other contest and I'm putting all of my chips on the contestant that can pull out a win and not cut my civil liberties off at the knees.
I'm all for idealism and changing the system, but it seems practicality and pragmatism are out of fashion this election cycle and that's terrifying.
titiklabingapat
Member
While Hillary is not Obama, equating her to just a little below Trump in horribleness is doing a great disservice to her and all the public she has done in her 30 odd years of being in the public eye. They are not even close by any objective standard.
Also don't particularly agree with the sentiment that you are voting third party because of your conscience. My conscience tells me that one of only two people are going to win and one of those two people will change this country for years to come just by appointing Supreme Court justices. And I'd rather have the person choosing that justice be Hillary Clinton than Donald Trump. Frankly I reject that "I vote with my conscience" stuff, some things are more important than your convictions, thinking otherwise is selfish.
Man the Simpsons were spot on during that whole Kang and Kodos thingy "what are you gonna do, vote for a third party candidate".
I'm not american OP but everytime i had to vote i did it null, a lot of people get upset "but if you do that you are supporting X!", which is ridiculous since i'm not the one voting for X.
I'm not american OP but everytime i had to vote i did it null, a lot of people get upset "but if you do that you are supporting X!", which is ridiculous since i'm not the one voting for X.
What about what I said makes you think I disagree with that?
Fantastapotamus
Wrong about commas, wrong about everything
Vote whoever you feel like voting but think about what your vote might do. If Trump gets actually elected would you look back and say "Don't blame me, I voted Stein!"? If you absolutely can't vote for Clinton then don't do it but let me tell you just one thing: Out of all the elections america had in the last couple of decades this might be the absolute worst to try and stick it to the Democrates.
TAJ
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
You might want to check your numbers. I'm not aware of any presidential election where those two ran third-party and got almost 19% and almost 20 million votes.
SatoAilDarko
Member
Plenty of people are in non-battleground states where it'll always go comfortably to one or the other major candidate.
What criticism is their of those people voting third-party?
What criticism is their of those people voting third-party?
A Fish Aficionado
I am going to make it through this year if it kills me
Whoo boy.
It's isn't a case of third parties being illegitimate. Because you can vote for lower levels of government get a voice.
It's the case of someone who is going to continue the progressive movement or, be basically a fascist. That's no hyperbole.
Yeah it's really crazy how many people think there's some nobility in straight up not understanding the rules of the game.
There's no democracy in the world where most people end up with their ideal candidate. That's the whole thing. Find a bloc to belong to, put together a coalition, comprise where you have to to make that coalition happen. That's how this works.
Yes, OP, you make perfect sense.
You will not vote for the candidate of a party that champions civil/gay rights (which is your singular point of interest), but will instead throw your vote into the dumpster and risk a victory for a party that strongly and openly opposes gay rights every step of the way.
Why not just vote Trump directly, and at least make the job a little easier for the people counting votes?
You will not vote for the candidate of a party that champions civil/gay rights (which is your singular point of interest), but will instead throw your vote into the dumpster and risk a victory for a party that strongly and openly opposes gay rights every step of the way.
Why not just vote Trump directly, and at least make the job a little easier for the people counting votes?
titiklabingapat
Member
Republicans still control many state governorships, legislatures and congressional districts in those states.
The bolded part.
Amibguous Cad
Member
I actually don't believe that Trump would be worse. In fact, I think he'd be better. Not because his policies would be (they'd be about the same; you literally can't go any lower than claiming the authority to murder any US citizen without due process of law on the advice of intelligence analysts), but at least Democrats would go back to pretending to care about the issue and make some political hay when the abuses happen. Compare the crickets when Obama did in fact assassinate the family members of terrorists back in 2012 to the thunder when Trump even suggested it this election cycle. Or just imagine how apoplectic the left would have been if the Snowden leaks had happened under Bush's watch.
I mean, it's not likely, but...
Internal Johnson campaign poll, but the only one specifically targeting Utah has Trump at 29%, Clinton at 27%, and Johnson at 26%. Mormons apparently dislike Trump's unchristian hate as much as they hate Clinton's feminism. Noted nevertrumper and Utah native Mitt Romney may well endorse Johnson and kick it all off. I also remember reading that he's polling well in his home state of New Mexico, though I can't find the link again. He's also neck and neck with Trump among millennials. Most importantly, he's polling at 10 percent nationally,, and needs to hit fifteen to make the debate stage. If he does, all bets are off.
Johnson also doesn't need to win the vote to make it to the white house. His most likely path is carrying Utah and New Mexico, which in a close enough race would prevent anyone from getting a majority of electoral votes and throw the election to the house. Once there, he becomes the natural compromise pick for Democrats that won't have the votes to elect Clinton and Congressional Republicans that loathe Trump.
A longshot, like I said. 538 gives the odds of an electoral college deadlock at 0.5%, and the chances of Johnson winning at least one electoral vote at 3.8%. But it's closer than we've ever been, and this election cycle is strange enough that anything's possible. What prevents people from voting third party is the perception that they have no chance; if he gets the legitimacy of being on the debate stage he might pull it off.
...All that's kinda just spitting in the wind, though. I don't live in a swing state, either Utah/New Mexico or of the more standard variety. Which is kind of another thing that frustrates me about the third party hate: most people aren't in swing states. Voting third party, however, can nudge them towards the 5% share of the national vote they need to get federal funding for next election cycle. Hell, if you're not in a swing state your tactical vote is for the third party that most drains votes from the opposition party, so yeah, hardcore conservatives in California should really be voting Green if they actually want to effect electoral politics.
Uh, this is an argument in favor of not yelling at people for voting third party. Ifr you can fire up a Stein supporter to show up that person's pretty likely to vote Democrat downballot. I know I'm planning on voting most Democrat once we're away from the person that actually control the US military.
What's sad is how few third party voters do anything to actually make third party voting viable. After nearly thirty years of trying for a federal office, the Libertarians finally figured out they were trying to jump Snake River Canyon on a tricycle. They are nowhere near the point where they have a realistic chance of seating any federal candidate, but they have had minor successes at the city and state level. And since election rules that might make it more likely for third parties to succeed are controlled at the state level, it's where all third parties should be focusing. But that's a lot harder than casting a vote for President, as some sort of message. The only message you send to the two parties -- who control the government -- by not voting is that they don't have to pay attention to you.
I'm not going to insult anyone for voting their conscience, but I do think it's important to acknowledge the realities of our system as currently configured.
I'm not going to insult anyone for voting their conscience, but I do think it's important to acknowledge the realities of our system as currently configured.
If your conscience tells you that both the Republican and Democratic candidates are equally terrible options, then that's an excellent reason to vote third party, and I suspect that few people would take issue with that.
However, I also think very few people would argue that that is the case in this cycle. Of the two viable options, it is hard not to see one as clearly better than the other. Which, I should add, goes both ways; for the people who Trump speaks to directly, he is clearly better than Clinton, and for others, Clinton is clearly better. Vote with your conscience, but you will get one of those two, no ifs, ands or buts. If you have an opinion that one would be worse for you than the other, then your vote is your power to assert that opinion.
Yep. Ive seen this a lot - people don't understand how to influence party platforms. Voting third party is the *worst* way to do it. You know what big parties do about third parties? Nothing. The democrats are never going to become more libertarian to try and take their votes or more green to take from green voters. That's not how big parties think - trust me. The centre ground is far more rewarding than going to extremes in terms of voter numbers. If you vote third party the main parties don't think about how to get your vote - they write it off.
If you want to change a party platform, you have to be in the party. Look at Bernie Sanders - do you think if he hadn't joined the democrats he would have had anywhere near his level of success? If you want to change the democrats, you have to *be* a democrat. You can't impose change on a party from the outside.
You don't want to be like those Brexit fools who were interviewed the next day saying "I didn't think my protest vote would matter, I assumed the good option would still win."
NoblesseOblige
Banned
I think I'd just not vote before I'd waste my time voting third party. Play some video games with that hour or two. Seems the wiser option between those choices.
FreedomFighter
Member
Agree with OP and The Exploder on this issue. I also recognize that voting 3rd party takes away from Hillary. Won't make me vote for her though. I'm not voting for a candidate I dislike.
It seems like Clinton supporters give more crap to third party voters than they do to Trump voters.
A Fish Aficionado
I am going to make it through this year if it kills me
Their votes aren't entitled to the top 2 candidates.
This attitude you and other people have about voting is childish.
As for the OP all I can say I dislike your decision because saying Trump won't be any better is the same as saying Trump can't do much to make things worse.
You are right to be outraged that Clinton in her position allowed and failed to put a program like PRISM in check. Having the our national intelligence agency spy on us is a grave threat to our liberty. Trump on the other hand has expressed destroying freedom of the press through increased interpretations of how they can be sued. He has given a foreign power encouragement to release confidential private details after hacking us. He is alot worse than Clinton in other ways but when it comes to specifically attacking our basic freedoms he has shown an inclination to go beyond what Clinton was a part of indirectly or not.
*face palms*
What am I reading. Don't be surprised if minorities don't agree with you.
Diprosalic
Banned
I'm fine with Sanders people not voting Clinton to an extent but jumping to Johnson or Trump who have absolutely zero in common with Sanders is just mindboggling. If you absolutely can't vote for her, just don't vote for president and support all the good down ticket candidates
ExplodingKetchup
Member
You don't have to like her to vote for her. Voting isn't about who you 'like' it's about who's best for the job!
I just don't understand how people don't get this.
Dot Matrix
Member
Any other election year and you might have a point. But this election isn't about voting in who you want anymore, it's about keeping out a dangerous war monger. Letting Trump win just because the other option doesn't 100% represent you is just cutting your nose off to spite your face.
Really, the only honorable thing for 3rd party candidates to do is drop out now if they know there is no chance of them winning and splitting the Trump opposition vote.
Just swallow your anger, and wait 4 years for an election where your protest vote won't cause widespread death and destruction.
Really, the only honorable thing for 3rd party candidates to do is drop out now if they know there is no chance of them winning and splitting the Trump opposition vote.
Just swallow your anger, and wait 4 years for an election where your protest vote won't cause widespread death and destruction.
- Status
Similar threads
- Poll