General News If Hillary is the nominee...

I'm a bit too lazy to thoroughly address this, but this redditor has, and I suggest that you read his comment. It's too long for me to quote here without it being a copyright issue.

You seem to be saying that you don't care if he's wrong, you're voting for him anyways.

I believe that Clinton would take whatever political position she thinks would make her most electable. As much as I despise her for that, I'd much rather someone make (mostly) decisions that benefit me while in office for their own political gain rather than someone who is sincere but messes up the country by constantly making bad decisions.

When it comes to someone supporting my rights in particular, I trust someone who avoids saying racist/homophobic/sexist things to avoid the political consequences over someone who sincerely spews out racist/homophobic/sexist things.

All it takes is a swing of one justice since the Obergefell v Hodges ruling in order for us to lose nationwide marriage equality (which certainly isn't the only LGBT rights issue at stake). I could easily see Trump appointing (and getting ratified) a conservative justice to replace Scalia who would rule against my rights as a gay American. Chances are, at least one other SCOTUS justice will die or resign within the next eight years, and Trump placing a homophobic justice then could do a lot of long-term damage.

So yes, I think that Trump could easily set back LGBT rights quite a bit. How could I trust someone who constantly says racist and sexist things with my rights?

Bernie is about the same age that John McCain was when he ran. Regardless, presidential candidates do come with running mates for a reason. It's not like the country would plunge into chaos if the president suddenly dies.

EDIT: I also want to add that Trump isn't much younger than Bernie. He's only 5 years younger, and is probably at least as likely to die in office (if elected) since he's overweight. Usually, I'm indifferent to a candidate being overweight, but since you brought up health I would think that Trump iis more likely to die of a sudden heart attack than Bernie.

 

All good points. We're treading dangerous waters though, arguing about politics on the internet.

Looking at Bernie Sanders and looking at Donald Trump, who looks healthier? At least Trump has weight on his bones. And while no matter which one of the three is elected (Bernie, Hildog or Trump) they'll be the oldest, Bernie is still the oldest of the oldest, and he's also the Ringo of the group, meaning he's in the worst obvious health and I don't want to vote for a guy I know is going to pass away of old age in office anyway just so the vice president can get a free ride.

Look at it this way: Whether or not you like Obama, would you really want Biden as president? Most college students don't even know who the vice president is, all they know is that Obama is king. So by electing Bernie Sanders, no matter how awesome his ideas are (and believe me, I think they're great), you're basically electing whoever his running mate is with Bernie as an interim. It's a cold, terrible thing to say but Bernie will be 78 or 79 by the time his first term is over. Most men don't live past 75. I won't vote for Hildog on principle, as I see her as a lying, conniving, vile woman who undermines everything great about this country, so I can either vote for Trump or throw my vote away on a third party candidate who I know goddamn well isn't going to win.

If Bernie somehow makes it to a second term, he'll be 82 or 83 when his presidency is through, and it's no small secret that being POTUS ages you quickly. Look at Bush 43 or Obama, they both started their terms with full faces and dark hair, and both ended with graying hair and gaunt countenances. Bernie has no time left to age like that. He'd end up looking like the grandpa from the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre by the end of his first term, and like I said, a vote for Bernie is a vote for his running mate anyway-- who knows who that's going to be and if they even have the LGBTQ community's best interests in mind? What if we end up with another Andrew Johnson?

If you don't know, Andrew Johnson was the Democrat who happened to be Lincoln's VP and when he took over, he immediately tried to undo everything Lincoln had done and set in place what eventually became the Jim Crow laws, segregating blacks and whites. What if Bernie's running mate is someone who guises themselves as having our best interests in mind and then underhandedly destroys everything we believe in? At least with Trump we know what to expect and what to protest. Otherwise, it's a crapshoot.

 

I'm not American but I would either vote for Sanders or vote Green if I was, so in this scenario I would vote Green.

 

Being overweight poses a significantly higher health risk than being Bernie's size, and I'm saying that as a guy who has a long way to go in his weight loss plan before being of a healthy weight.

I would much rather have Biden as president than Trump or Clinton. Given that I trust his judgement, he'll probably pick a running mate who would be a good president. many speculate that he would pick Elizabeth Warren as his running mate if nominated, and I would be fine with her being president.

Actually, he'd be 83 after completing two terms.

You say that as if his death in office would be a certainty if elected. He may be in his 80s at the end of two terms, and he may be even more worn down by the stress of the job, but I think it's far from given that he would expire before the end of two terms. His long-term health certainly a concern though.

The overwhelming majority of healthy 74 year olds live past 75.

You could say the same thing about the presidential candidates.

To me, this sounds a lot like saying, "At least we know that Bill has stolen cash from tills before, so lets give him the cashier job instead of Tim, who may or may not steal from us."

 

I don't know if I'd call Trump "overweight," maybe, but certainly not obese. Like I said, most people don't really know who Biden is, let alone what his job is, all they know is that Obama's the king. 83 is very old to be President, who knows if he's even in a proper state of mind to run a country now? He could develop dementia by then, he could develop dementia by tomorrow. Bernie doesn't strike me as a health nut, so I don't really see him being a healthy president at his advanced age, regardless of the 'statistics.' As for your cash register allegory, that's how we hire employees in the United States; we make them take that stupid online test about it in every job application-- why shouldn't it apply to the POTUS?

 

I wouldn't vote if she won (even if it's down to her and Trump or Cruz). I'm only here for Bernie.

 

I wouldn't even vote for any democrats in the 1st place since I'm more conservative.

 

Looking at pictures of Trump, he's definitely overweight, but not as overweight as I remember. Regardless, I don't really consider a candidate's weight, unless I think that there's a good chance they'll die in office and I'm not confident they'll have a good VP to back them up.

Once in office, what matters for the VP is their judgement as a potential president, not name recognition. Name recognition has little to do with whether or not they'll perform the duties of president well if needed.

Thankfully, the 25th Amendment to the US Constitution specifies multiple means by which the powers of the presidency can be removed from the president:

With the cashier job analogy, I was trying to address the, "At least we know" argument. the fact that you know someone has stolen from the till during his/her previous job does not make them a better candidate than someone who may or may not steal. Any reasonable hiring manager should consider them to be disqualified for being a known thief. Similarly, I think that Trump being a known racist/sexist/homophobe should automatically make him an inferior candidate for president than the candidates who may or may not be secretly racist/sexist/homophobic.

 

Well, I disagree, but I respect your opinions. Your obviously well-informed and well-educated on your side of the story and that's good. But I don't see how this discussion can serve any further purpose so I suggest an amicable "agree to disagree."

 

Sometimes I enjoy these discussion for their own sake, but certainly not everyone is like me in that regard.

---------- Post added 22nd Feb 2016 at 02:06 PM ----------

Would you prefer Trump or Cruz as president? I can understand reluctance to vote for Clinton, but not voting for her (in the general election) in a swing state like Pennsylvania may increase the likelihood that the Republican nominee will be elected president.

 

I could only vote for Kasich if he ran against Hillary. Otherwise, it's Gary Johnson time. If Bernie ran against either Cruz, Rubio, or Trump, I would certainly vote for Bernie.

---------- Post added 22nd Feb 2016 at 08:28 PM ----------

Yep, Bernie gets this moderate independent's vote. I like populist ideas, whether it is from the left or right these days. Time to get big money out of politics and let people have freedom: 1st amendment and 4th amendment rights are crucial in this day and age. And when I talk about the 1st amendment, I am referring to free speech. Authoritarians in both parties like to silence their enemies using their PAC $$$. Time for a chance and an honest politician. I believe both Bernie and Kasich are honest men and good at heart, though they may disagree.

 

I feel the same way about Clinton like I do Cruz and Trump. If she ends up being the nominee, then we're all pretty fucked no matter who wins--unless that's just me being negative.

 

"Would you vote for Hillary Clinton?"
[YOUTUBE]3zNjQecyjE8[/YOUTUBE]

 

[YOUTUBE]LqLfvQfuvsA[/YOUTUBE]

---------- Post added 26th Feb 2016 at 09:26 AM ----------

[YOUTUBE]3K1jpOrTI44[/YOUTUBE]

 

When you say take the money out of politics, you're giving nothing but right wing examples. Money = buying ads to inform the public. If you take money out of it you won't just be affecting the NRA and wall st. You'll also be affecting teachers unions, Million Moms against guns, the Coalition against gun violence, environmental groups, etc.

 

Yes. No republicans. She will most likely not undo lgbt rights and even extend them. Not saying she doesn't have vices... but fuck republicans basically.

 

I don't think Clinton is perfect; she's been involved in some sketchy stuff, I don't like her video game censorship, and she's an opportunist who backs whatever issue is popular at the time.

However, I would still vote for her over any of the clowns the Republicans have come up with.

 

The NRA or any other organization doesn't have any direct voting power in elections. Obviously organizations can use their money to inform their members and give money to candidates that support their position, but no politician can just buy their way into office if their voting record and statements are in conflict with what the voters believe in their districts or state. The NRA has millions of dues paying members. Also for every NRA member there's probably ten times that many gun owners that are sympathetic to the NRA's position on gun control issues. Until people in general vote for candidates that openly support issues like comprehensive background checks you're not going to have them. It's the same with any other political issue.

I am antiquated with someone who is currently running for the US Senate, and is running ads against his opponent r/t his opponents previous A rating with the NRA. Although he might get the nomination with this tactic, unless there's a sea change in voters opinion of gun control issues he'll end up losing to the Republican in Nov. There's not even a guarantee that it'll help him get the nomination. I've talked to other democrats that have seen his anti gun ads, and the reaction from them was to look more favorably on the guy he was trying to demonize.