Electile Dysfunction (Current students plz look!)

[V1GiLaNtE]

Probably Johnson, just to say I voted. I can't honestly stomach the thought of voting for either Trump or Hilary. At times I'm in utter disbelief as one story after the next comes out about either candidate. The whole process seems to have the lost the professionalism and sense of duty associated with the position. Instead, I feel like what others have said, I'm watching Jerry Springer or a terrible segment of TMZ. We've trivialized the whole position of "President" and essentially turned it into reality-tv. The more ridiculous, sensational, or outlandish the story (fact or fiction) the whole country gets in a tizzy.

I don't trust Hilary. She's into some real world "House of Cards" shit and as far as I'm concerned maintains just as much as a superiority complex to the law and others as Trump. She's slimy, manipulative, and crooked.

Trump is a grade A 100% douche piece of shit. My blood absolutely boils at his "douchebro" sexism comments and history. He's an arrogant scumbag, who, while has a semi-decent ability to work a business, I don't think has a global view on the world, it's people, and culture. That's a scary thought when our foreign policy is already crap. Trump being president would just exacerbate our piss poor image to the world has a consumerist, ignorant, selfish society.

[G.Irish]

I am amazed that of all the people who were in the Republican primary, Donald Trump is the one who made it. He is in no way qualified to be in a leadership role and I honestly hope I don't have any people in my life who I consider friends, who also consider him a viable person to lead a goddamn thing, let alone this country.

The GOP needs to reinvent themselves. Hopefully the Trumpster Fire is the motivation

Thing is, the smart people in the GOP realized after 2012 that the party needed to go in a different direction and expand their appeal if they wanted to win in the future. They recognized that demographic trends were only going to make it harder to win the presidency in the future.

Had the powers that be in the GOP had their choice, it would not have been Trump. Maybe it would've been Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio. But after using a lot of anti-establishment and dog whistle sentiment to rile up the base to win Congress back in 2010 and 2012, that base went on to nominate Donald Trump, who capitalized on those sentiments.

Don't know where the GOP goes from here. If the party splits from far right, they'll never hold onto either chamber of Congress. If they continue on this path, having to cater to the far right will probably make it difficult to win the White House.

Maybe in that environment the Libertarian party can get on the playing field in Congress, and actual start steering policy. Either way, I just hope there is some sort of sensible contrast in views so that we have a marketplace of ideas, rather than one party looking the govern from the left point of view, and the other being in disarray.

[Ken]

Maybe in that environment the Libertarian party can get on the playing field in Congress, and actual start steering policy. Either way, I just hope there is some sort of sensible contrast in views so that we have a marketplace of ideas, rather than one party looking the govern from the left point of view, and the other being in disarray.

Agreed. What makes this country great is the open discussion and balance of ideas. While I tend to lean left I am in no way under the impression that is the correct way to do everything. So many people tend to view issues as either their way, or no way, and that is just not the right way to do things.

[WRXtranceformed]

What makes this country great is the open discussion and balance of ideas.

I believe that this is what used to make our country great, but now Americans resort to name-calling, asking for safe spaces and butthurt-ness when we disagree and I actually do not believe that a lot of truly productive dialogue is going on right now at the public or legislative level.

Yes it is great that we can freely discuss our beliefs without retribution (within reason) but exchange of ideas and actions without collaboration and compromise IMO makes that discussion mostly meaningless.

[D_Eclipse9916]

Unfortunately I am still undecided.

I hate both of them personally and hate the way the Democratic party is moving socially, but just can't vote for Trump.

Hillary did commit crimes, and even the FBI said it was done. People lose their careers/lives yet she is allowed to continue. As anyone with a clearance knows, it's really hard to NOT be absolutely aware of what you are doing. #HouseofCards. With Trump on the other side I can almost let this go. Almost, except I can't turn my head away from some of her policies.

Third party? Most likely even though I don't agree with it. Would vote for them just to hope more people will do so to make a third-party candidate a possibility in 2 or 3 more terms.

[WRXtranceformed]

What makes this country great is the open discussion and balance of ideas.

I believe that this is what used to make our country great, but now Americans resort to name-calling, asking for safe spaces and butthurt-ness when we disagree and I actually do not believe that a lot of truly productive dialogue is going on right now at the public or legislative level.

Yes it is great that we can freely discuss our beliefs without retribution (within reason) but exchange of ideas and actions without collaboration and compromise IMO makes that discussion mostly meaningless.

Super relevant to my comment, slide from a Big Data / Visualization class I'm sitting through today. A visualization of senate voting becoming more partisan and less collaborative over the years:

[ScottyB]

best thread title ever :lol:

glad to see some of the younger people here making an effort to at least formulate a nuanced decision, if not also vote. i wish i had access to the amount of detailed info we have now, when i was in college. the responses so far are pretty much what i expected too.

i've almost checked out entirely on this whole election. every facet of it is just utterly depressing, and in the end nobody actually wins, we just get to choose in which direction we can project our disappointment and anger. i got about 5 minutes through the last debate and it was like having to listen to someone's kids fight in a restaurant. the part i'm actually excited about is seeing in what manner the GOP implodes and reorganizes after all this, regardless of who wins. we might actually get a new relevant party out of it. or maybe they'll double down, they seem to enjoy that also.

neither Orange Manchild, or Hill-bot 5000 will get a vote. i'm still working out who my third part option is, but they aren't much better.

Trumpster Fire

i'm using this again sometime, i hope you're OK with it :lol:

[fiveoh2go]

[youtube]G3B8MJoEA_U[/youtube]

[rherold9]

Trump is shit, cry baby, liar etc... Hillary is shit, liar (then again they are in politics and that's what they do), doesn't understand basic technological no-no's, etc... The few things she does have is actual experience, composure, and I can feel like not destroy our country as much as Trump.

I'm more middle of the line on my political views or libertarian but just can't seem to vote for Johnson even though I've thought about it. Don't agree with some of his thoughts and possible policy changes also his foreign policy knowledge is laughable. Overall, I'm registered to vote and want to vote but not for any of these three.

Sum it up: basically what everyone else else is saying so far.

Sent from my SM-T713 using Tapatalk

[ispoonwithmugen]

Okay I'm going to be the oddball here, and that's fine. Most likely going with Trump on my ballot. No I'm not a racist, sister loving hick. I'm a firm believer against some things that Hillary is moving towards (i.e. I love my guns). She is insanely corrupt and with the potential for judges on the Supreme Court being up I can't let the chance of people buying their seats, especially if they want to follow her agenda.

I don't agree with everything Trump does (and I do believe he is an idiot) but I'd take him over Clinton. I'd 100% vote for Johnson if he had a fair chance but if we're being realistic he doesn't even have a chance (he's been below 10% the whole election and he's about to dip under 6 now).

Overall my position is simple ABH (anyone but hillary) and currently that means I need to hold my nose, shamelessly raise my hand when Trump is called.

[Senor_Taylor]

People who don't vote for someone because they won't win are the reason they won't win. Someone has to be take the plunge.

Sent from my SM-G900R4 using Tapatalk

[ispoonwithmugen]

I acknowledge that but remember my position is first and foremost ABH. So Trump statistically has the better chance of beating her and Johnson has almost a 0% chance of winning at all. I can definitely appreciate that and if Hillary wasn't against a handful of my issues I would vote for a third party or a better GOP candidate. BUT the way the cards are currently dealt (WTF America) I feel as though my best push would be for Trump.

[G.Irish]

People who don't vote for someone because they won't win are the reason they won't win. Someone has to be take the plunge.

Sent from my SM-G900R4 using Tapatalk

It's basic game theory. You have three options. One is terrible with a 45% chance of happening, one is undesirable but better than terrible with a 49% chance of happening, and one might be a good choice but only has a 3% chance of happening. If you vote for the third option, the odds of you getting it are very, very low, so you may end up with a definitively worse result.

NOTE: Right now 538 is predicting 86% chance of Clinton win, 14% chance of Trump win, .1% chance of Johnson win

Do you gamble on the very unlikely to happen option, hoping that there are enough people that think like you to get that result? Keeping in mind that in the history of the United States no third party option has ever won the election or even come close. The closest in recent memory was Ross Perot (Independent), who only got 19% of the vote.

With the electoral college the math is more lenient if you're not in a battleground state. In a state where the middle option is significantly ahead, you can vote third party with no consequences. The upside being that if the third party candidate can secure 5% of the vote, the party qualifies for public funding in the next presidential election.

If someone truly believes in the Libertarian platform and wants to see them become a viable party in Congress and have a shot at the White House, they need to vote for them, donate to the party, support state and local candidates and potentially volunteer (if you feel strongly enough). Don't just forget about them until the next election when you're unhappy with the Republican and Democrat options.

[Senor_Taylor]

There's no way in hell Johnson wins this year, but change is a gradual process. It's about making a future third party win possible.

A wise man plants a tree in which he will never enjoy the shade. ... or something like that.

Sent from my SM-G900R4 using Tapatalk

[G.Irish]

Okay I'm going to be the oddball here, and that's fine. Most likely going with Trump on my ballot. No I'm not a racist, sister loving hick. I'm a firm believer against some things that Hillary is moving towards (i.e. I love my guns). She is insanely corrupt and with the potential for judges on the Supreme Court being up I can't let the chance of people buying their seats, especially if they want to follow her agenda.

The irony is that Trump has actually made it more likely that more restrictive gun laws will get put in place. Merely losing the election to Hillary wouldn't change things very much if Republicans maintain their majority in the Senate and the House. But Trump's negative effect on downballot Republicans means that some vulnerable Republicans could lose their seats because of him, which could cost the GOP the majority in the Senate. In that scenario Hillary can appoint more liberal SC justices and she would have more leverage to pass gun control legislation.

The other thing is that Merrick Garland is a fairly centrist choice for the Supreme Court, that the GOP has thus far blocked. If they block him until Hillary is elected they may end up with a worse choice that they are unable to stop.

I disagree with most prominent democrats on gun control, which is why having a reasonable GOP to maintain balance is so important. Unfortunately things have gotten so off the rails that all kinds of unintended consequences are coming into play.

[G.Irish]

There's no way in hell Johnson wins this year, but change is a gradual process. It's about making a future third party win possible.

A wise man plants a tree in which he will never enjoy the shade. ... or something like that.

Certainly. But to overcome the inertia of the current two parties, sustained effort will be required, can't just treat the third party like a once-every-four-years drunk hookup.

The Libertarian party needs to focus on getting on the board either as governors or in Congress. In Congress it would only take Libertarians winning a handful of seats to suddenly become a very powerful force in swinging votes on legislation. But they need a well-funded and strategically smart national party to achieve that.

[CaptainHenreh]

The upside being that if the third party candidate can secure 5% of the vote, the party qualifies for public funding in the next presidential election.

This. If you believe the two party system results in shitty choices, then you should work towards eroding that system. The L's aren't perfect, hell they might not even be good but if the GOP sees a real threat to their power then maybe at least they will shift to a more civil-liberty social platform and drop this religious right nonsense.

Merely losing the election to Hillary wouldn't change things very much if Republicans maintain their majority in the Senate and the House...

Also true. I think HRC will make it as painful as she possibly can to be a gun owner, just like Obama has done. (See: 41p, ITAR bullshit, etc) But she can't pass a goofy assault weapons ban or force universal background checks or confiscate people's boomsticks without Congress. And as long as the NRA et al keep the pressure on with their GIANT GODDAM VOTING BLOCK (seriously, it's yuge) then the biggest risk to second amendment rights is state legislation, not federal. Heller exists, as much as the DNC doesn't like it, and so for now, you'd need to burn a shitload of political capital to get anything done in the gun realm. There are still enough democrats in congress who remember 1996, and midterms are a sonofabitch.

[rherold9]

TIL: some or most people in MM actually are politically informed and can have a logical political discussion. This is a nice change/refresher to what I see daily in social media... :thumbup: :thumbup:

[CaptainHenreh]

TIL: some or most people in MM actually are politically informed and can have a logical political discussion. This is a nice change/refresher to what I see daily in social media... :thumbup: :thumbup:

Yeah but guys, you know...I'm really worried that Hillary or Trump might win this election. hock:

[Jake]

TIL: some or most people in MM actually are politically informed and can have a logical political discussion. This is a nice change/refresher to what I see daily in social media... :thumbup: :thumbup:

Yeah but guys, you know...I'm really worried that Hillary or Trump might win this election. hock:

I'm amused that people are legitimately worried about Hillary.