Support NeoGAF

[Amibguous Cad]

I'm a disabled queer, and I'm voting Johnson.

Minorities and oppressed people can have many kinds of relationships to the political parties that mediate their oppression. We come from all walks of life, have different temperaments, and different strategies for navigating the world we find ourselves in.

I don't want to derail this to the object level, but briefly, I'm close to a single-issue voter on civil liberties. Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State during the worst of the NSA abuses and the assassination of a sixteen year old American citizen whose only crime was being born to the wrong father. I don't believe that Trump will be any better, but I do believe that the only way things will get better is if Democrats have a compelling reason to listen to their civil libertarian wing. If Clinton loses no votes for her atrocious record on the subject, the Democrats will have no reason put forth a better candidate in 2020.

We can disagree about that, and I'm certainly willing to be persuaded. And I'm certainly not saying that the candidates' records on immigration, or gay rights, or civil rights, or anything else ought to be out of bounds.

What ought to be out of bounds is this:

Accusing minorities of hating themselves if they don't fall in lockstep doesn't make you progressive. In fact, it kind of makes you a bigot. And if I can be persuaded to vote Johnson, self-loathing free, then you should lay off of accusing people of hating me personally because they have a different way of trying to fix things.

 

[ThoughtsOfSpeaking]

Voting for someone you know is not going to win is the very definition of throwing away your vote.

And yes, in a two horse race, when you are not voting for one, you are voting for the other. The names on the ballot don't change that.

If you are happy with that, then I don't see the problem. So what if your vote is technically a vote that benefits trump. you can still be voting for what and who matters to you. It's still your choice.

 

[Already Torn]

The strangest part is that you can be convinced to vote for Johnson self-loathing free.

 

[neojubei]

Voting for someone you know is not going to win is the very definition of throwing away your vote.

And yes, in a two horse race, when you are not voting for one, you are voting for the other. The names on the ballot don't change that.

If you are happy with that, then I don't see the problem. So what if your vote is technically a vote that benefits trump. you can still be voting for what and who matters to you. It's still your choice.

Exactly. I'm not a fan of Hilary but god damn I'm not going to waste my vote on someone who won't win. The conservative racist people will go to the polls in droves to elect that hate monger Trump.

 

[UnemployedVillain]

Voting for someone you know is not going to win is the very definition of throwing away your vote.

That's the unfortunate reality, but a vote for a 3rd party candidate is 100% symbolic and without consequence.

Voting third party in a First Past the Post in a presidential election is the very definition of throwing your vote away.


Nah, we got bush last time people thought this.

Acting like Clinton is anywhere near as bad as Trump is some serious denial. But hey if as a disabled queer person you're okay risking having the latter as a president then that's between you and your conscience I guess.

what

Err, I should clarify. I meant without consequence in terms of getting whatever 3rd party candidate you voted for any closer to being elected. Obviously a vote for one of them is a vote that isn't going for one of the two main candidates

 

[riotous]

Well who wrote that?

 

[titiklabingapat]

Voting third party in a First Past the Post in a presidential election is the very definition of throwing your vote away.

That's the unfortunate reality, but a vote for a 3rd party candidate is 100% symbolic and without consequence.

Nah, we got bush last time people thought this.

 

[yanipheonu]

Yeah I'd at least agree that accusing someone of not loving a whole group of people due to their vote seems way too extreme.

It's a scary time so I understand without condoning. The vote really is important, but people should try and be above giving into fear like this.

 

[Brakke]

I saw this episode of the West Wing.

Since when does the NSA answer to Secretary of State?

 

[NoblesseOblige]

You do you, OP. As another person of a non-straight orientation (though uncertain as what specifically to identify as) my conscience won't allow me to ignore that any non-democratic candidate would be the worse outcome for this nation. Especially with the supreme court on the line. Ask yourself, would you honestly trust a justice pick from Johnson?

 

[ExplodingKetchup]

"I don't believe that Trump will be any better, but I do believe that the only way things will get better is if Democrats have a compelling reason to listen to their civil libertarian wing."

Do you at least believe that Trump would be worse? If you can't even say that then I just don't get your position - you fight for civil liberties, but will be complicit with a candidate who wants to revoke citizens' rights?? And do you really believe that more votes for a third party candidate would have a lasting effect? Parties don't change platforms unless 10s of millions of people come out in support of change, e.g. Sanders voters. Even 2,000,000 people voting for Johnson won't do anything but make it easier for Trump to win.

 

[azyless]

Acting like Clinton is anywhere near as bad as Trump is some serious denial. But hey if as a disabled queer person you're okay risking having the latter as a president then that's between you and your conscience I guess.

That's the unfortunate reality, but a vote for a 3rd party candidate is 100% symbolic and without consequence.

what

 

[Plum]

Sorry but if you vote for Johnson, Stein, whoever, you are taking one vote away from the only liable person likely to beat Trump. That's not opinion it's reality, and as a minority you have got to ask yourself whether that gesture is worth risking going back 20+ years in terms of progress under Trump (and having it stay that way for long after).

 

[titiklabingapat]

Also, please watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo

Until the system changes, there is diddly squat we can do about it and I have the opinion that we should vote for the ones that can damage us the least in such circumstances. Yes, I'm aware that the only way to change this is by voting. But voting for it using presidents as a vehicle for such change is such a misguided attempt at doing so and a colossal waste of time of everyone's time. If you really want to have the best impact, then vote locally, vote often and convince others to do the same.

Voting at the grassroots, basically. Otherwise you are just wasting your time and wasting your vote at best and being a dangerous spoiler at worse.

 

[A Fish Aficionado]

Johnson and Stein fans are the worst. Your logic breaks down at every damn thing. Just admit that you are wrong.

 

[Einchy]

Sorry but if you vote for Johnson, Stein, whoever, you are taking one vote away from the only liable person likely to beat Trump. That's not opinion it's reality, and as a minority you have got to ask yourself whether that gesture is worth risking going back 20+ years in terms of progress under Trump (and having it stay that way for long after).

And stagnating progress for god knows how long with whomever Trump puts in the SC.

 

[WhateverItTakes]

That's the unfortunate reality, but a vote for a 3rd party candidate is 100% symbolic and without consequence.

When you could've put that vote into the parties in contention it does kinda have consequence. I guess it wouldn't if an equal amount of people from both sides of Dem or Con went third party but I think most are worried about too many Dem leaners using their vote to make a statement rather than a change.

OP you can let the democrats know of your discontent without using your vote uselessly. After the (mild) shitstorm of the hack the party is probably ripe for change.

People aren't 'shilling' for their candidate. They aren't getting paid for it (mostly, I dunno). But they care about minorities, people like you and with your situation, and are doing their very best to try and make sure the party that best serves your interests will get their candidates elected in November. You're allowed to feel however you want about that but people are just trying to help you, not simply their candidate.

 

[Jaeyden]

People have such short memories. Ralph Nader is a shining example of how throwing away votes can fuck you. George W. says "Hi!"

 

[old manatee]

I voted for Nader and I got really tired of hearing about how I was responsible for all of Bush's atrocities.

The 2 parties both use the same fear tactic to try and hold everybody hostage, and I find it very easy to grow resentful of it.

 

[Already Torn]

I voted for Nader and I got really tired of hearing about how I was responsible for all of Bush's atrocities.

The 2 parties both use the same fear tactic to try and hold everybody hostage, and I find it very easy to grow resentful of it.

Yeah, I suppose that would get annoying. Probably the nagging guilt got annoying too, yeah?

 

[UnemployedVillain]

When you could've put that vote into the parties in contention it does kinda have consequence.

I definitely had my edit in before this post!

 

[old manatee]

Yeah, I suppose that would get annoying. Probably the nagging guilt got annoying too, yeah?

Not even once.

 

[NoblesseOblige]

People have such short memories. Ralph Nader is a shining example of how throwing away votes can fuck you. George W. says "Hi!"

Short memories and/or selfishness. Some people feign stock into their 'principles' even though they ignore them most other times. Or they think they're sending some message to the parties, but are they really?

 

[Already Torn]

Not even once.

I guess its constant presence does serve as a reminder to not make such a selfish mistake again.

 

[Trokil]

So because they chose the person who makes people hate politics almost as much as Trump and voting for would leave this taste of vomit in your mouth, you have to still vote for that person, because the other choice is worse?

Would would not even have this discussion if they brought in somebody else, but now they wanted to go with the second most hated candidate against the most hated candidate and everybody else has now to pay the price. Yeah, that is really going to bring people to the voting booth.

 

[CloudWolf]

The strangest part is that you can be convinced to vote for Johnson self-loathing free.

It would be hilarious if out of the blue Johnson or Stein won the election.

 

[mercenar1e]

Not even once.

same here... nobody is telling me how to vote. not now or ever.

 

[titiklabingapat]

So because they chose the person who makes people hate politics almost as much as Trump and voting for would leave this taste of vomit in your mouth, you have to still vote for that person, because the other choice is worse?

Would would not even have this discussion if they brought in somebody else, but now they wanted to go with the second most hated candidate against the most hated candidate and everybody else has now to pay the price. Yeah, that is really going to bring people to the voting booth.

Yes, essentially. A First Past the Post system naturally produces two sides eventually. Again unless the system changes, we're just gonna have to live with what he have and making the best of it.

 

[NoblesseOblige]

It would be hilarious if out of the blue Johnson or Stein won the election.

Funny in a Shakespearean way, right? Like a tragic comedy.

 

[Squire]

Acting like Clinton is anywhere near as bad as Trump is some serious denial. But hey if as a disabled queer person you're okay risking having the latter as a president then that's between you and your conscience I guess.

what

It's so popular. I'm still trying to figure what Kool-Aid people are drinking and where on earth they're getting it from.

As a disabled person myself, I'll say this: Make it any easier for Trump to claim the presidency and you're absolutely voting against your own interests, OP.

 

[guek]

I feel ya, OP.

The challenge is that this is the system we live in. It's incredibly difficult to change such a rigid 2 party system. If you vote in step with one or the other, it doesn't do anything to change how politics work in the country. If you vote for a third party candidate, your vote doesn't do anything. It's fucked up.

 

[Hoo-doo]

I voted for Nader and I got really tired of hearing about how I was responsible for all of Bush's atrocities.

The 2 parties both use the same fear tactic to try and hold everybody hostage, and I find it very easy to grow resentful of it.

That's simply how the current system works, sadly.

Trying to oppose the system by voting for a third party plays right into the hands of the two parties anyway. In this case, Trump. It only makes matters worse.

I'd say fight for change when it isn't the presidency that's on the line. Because right now shit's looking dire and every vote for a third party is a indirect boost to the party of bigots, racists, sexists and climate change deniers. Awful that it has truly come to this.

 

[120v]

you'll never get a candidate tailored for you. if you want to be a single issue voter it's your right but don't expect to be content, ever

 

[crackhead_bob]

Who the hell is Johnson and Stein? It's almost like they popped up less than a month ago when it became increasingly apparent that Sanders wasn't going to win.

 

[titiklabingapat]

you'll never get a candidate tailored for you. if you want to be a single issue voter it's your right but don't expect to be content, ever

Even if your favored one-issue candidate wins in a more 'fair' system like a parliamentary system, they still have to work with other parties or individuals to form a government or a ruling coalition. Its as if compromise is the name of the game in politics or something...

 

[Squire]

Who the hell is Johnson and Stein? It's almost like they popped up less than a month ago when it became increasingly apparent that Sanders wasn't going to win.

Stein is Dr. Jill Stein.

This is the first I've heard of Johnson, so that's immediately alarming.

 

[Korey]

I'm a disabled queer, and I'm voting Johnson.

Minorities and oppressed people can have many kinds of relationships to the political parties that mediate their oppression. We come from all walks of life, have different temperaments, and different strategies for navigating the world we find ourselves in.

I don't want to derail this to the object level, but briefly, I'm close to a single-issue voter on civil liberties. Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State during the worst of the NSA abuses and the assassination of a sixteen year old American citizen whose only crime was being born to the wrong father. I don't believe that Trump will be any better, but I do believe that the only way things will get better is if Democrats have a compelling reason to listen to their civil libertarian wing. If Clinton loses no votes for her atrocious record on the subject, the Democrats will have no reason put forth a better candidate in 2020.

We can disagree about that, and I'm certainly willing to be persuaded. And I'm certainly not saying that the candidates' records on immigration, or gay rights, or civil rights, or anything else ought to be out of bounds.

What ought to be out of bounds is this:

Accusing minorities of hating themselves if they don't fall in lockstep doesn't make you progressive. In fact, it kind of makes you a bigot. And if I can be persuaded to vote Johnson, self-loathing free, then you should lay off of accusing people of hating me personally because they have a different way of trying to fix things.

You're not only voting for the President.

You're also voting for the Supreme Court justices that will be replaced in the next 4-8 years.

And the policy and laws passed in the next few years that will benefit or harm minorities such as yourself.

 

[A Fish Aficionado]

And Johnson on vaccines

Reference Clinton's, "I believe in science"

Not everything is a state right.

 

[Joni]

Who the hell is Johnson and Stein? It's almost like they popped up less than a month ago when it became increasingly apparent that Sanders wasn't going to win.

It makes sense. I mean, with Johnson's position on completely removing the welfare state and relying on private individuals he makes the perfect follow-up for Sanders.

 

[old manatee]

Stein is Dr. Jill Stein.

This is the first I've heard of Johnson, so that's immediately alarming.

I guess it is alarming that you never even bothered to look at the 3rd party candidates this far into an election.

 

[kadotsu]

It makes sense. I mean, with Johnson's position on completely removing the welfare state and relying on private individuals he makes the perfect follow-up for Sanders.

He is also good at privatising shit. Like the prison system.

 

[Squire]

I can't.

It makes sense. I mean, with Johnson's position on completely removing the welfare state and relying on private individuals he makes the perfect follow-up for Sanders.

This is your guy, OP? Seriously???

 

[Monocle]

From where I'm standing the logic of the argument about not throwing away your vote is sound. This election is too important to dick around voting for candidates that don't have a ghost of a chance. Neither major party pays attention to people who don't vote or toss their vote in the independent dumpster. They court the majority of voters who pick a candidate from one or the other significant party. Groups with influence, people they actually have data on.

Sorry OP, but you really are part of the problem if you don't take this one and only chance to help keep Trump out of the White House. A Trump presidency would spell calamity for human rights, and minority rights in particular. Hillary will not, and her reasons for safeguarding equal rights simply do not matter at this stage.

 

[NoblesseOblige]

I guess it is alarming that you never even bothered to look at the 3rd party candidates this far into an election.

Or they just value their time more. Why waste resources betting on a broken horse?

 

[Squire]

I guess it is alarming that you never even bothered to look at the 3rd party candidates this far into an election.

I keep tabs on the prospective winners.

 

[TAJ]

It would be hilarious if out of the blue Johnson or Stein won the election.

jlawok.gif
Ross Perot got the most votes of any third-party candidate in the last century and he got zero electoral votes.

 

[Meadows]

Why the fuck aren't you people voting for Hilary god dammit.

I'm British, but from the outside it is so fucking plainly obvious that she is not only the only viable option, but a great one.

Years of experience, great relationships around the world, smart and presidential.

She is - as Obama said - perhaps the most qualified person in the last few decades to be president. She will do a fantastic job.

Voting for anyone else is voting for Trump.

 

[Matty77]

I am not queer but I am permanently disabled and barely scrape by between food stamps and my fixed income.

There is a lot I do not like about Hillary but not only am I truly scared of trump, but even more Johnson and the libertarians if they even had a shot.. Maybe you are not actually on disability but if you are honestly take a minute to think what becomes of us with a party in control tgat does not believe the government should help pay or support anyone because they think the free market will solve everything and no one needs aid that's what charity and society is for.

Voting on purity and principal may make you feel good but being pragmatic and sometimes voting for the lesser evil will actually be better for you.

Sending a message is great but I wonder as I am sure others that depend on aid, or are gay, or Muslim, or not white also wonder even if the message is received by the time they get power back if they do will I have survived?

 

[Feep]

We're not saying you hate yourself, we're saying you're voting against your own and others minorities' interests. Which, uh, you are, almost objectively.

Do what you want, but don't pretend like we should be cheering you on.

 

[old manatee]

I keep tabs on the prospective winners.

The media does have people trained to view it as a horse race.