Voting for someone is 100% backing and supporting them. In literally the most important way.
But I mean you voted for trump, clearly there are cognitive problems here lol
Wow so you’re just like terrible at voting and easily manipulated then.
and anyone who votes for the major parties perpetuates it.
This is ironic because people who did what you did are the problem, certainly not Hillary/Biden voters trying to keep fascism at bay.
I voted for Bernie in the '16 primary and Trump in the general, Bernie because I thought he meant well and Trump because Clinton’s foreign policy terrified me as much as Bush’s, if not more. I sat out '20, which I’ve come to regret because Biden’s foreign policy is just as bad if not worse than I’d imagined Clinton’s would have been.
The Bush neocons didn’t disappear when Trump humiliated them in the '16 primary, they just went back to the Democratic party, where they came from in the first place. I used to think they were evil, and maybe the old ones were, but this generation just seems incompetent. Still, that incompetence can just as easily get us all killed.
I’m not really typical of a potential Trump voter, but I know enough conservatives who are who aren’t crazy about him but will definitely vote for him if he’s on the ballot. This is the endgame of lesser evil voting, and anyone who votes for the major parties perpetuates it.
[Added filler text to meet minimum character requirement.]
Yeah I really don’t understand how in 2012 you thought Obama was the worst thing to happen to immigrants, that would require living under a rock or plugging your ears.
But those 41% are single issue voters. They will never vote Democrat while the D stance on abortion is anything close to what it currently is.
Sure, absolutely, yes, that’s my point. They will vote, and it won’t be for the D, so it will be for the R.
They aren’t going to like, en masse switch to the libertarian candidate or whatever, because they didn’t in 2016 and they didn’t in 2020. They may poll badly for Trump but it’s not going to substantially impact their turnout or who they actually vote for.
So you can’t use polls showing that lots of Rs are dissatisfied with Trump as a barometer for how well Trump is going to do, because the polls are fundamentally warped by how many people will say they hate him but still vote for him.
“Biden is the devil and we sometimes have to make hard choices to protect our right to discriminate while calling it religious freedom and protected speech.”
fixed it for you
I think the knee-jerk reaction is this will help him in the primary - at the very least providing a huge fundraising boost, but it’s hard to imagine this isn’t a massive blow to his chances with non-MAGA independents he needs to win the general.
But when they’re actually in the voting booth, they’ll vote R.
They’re not lying to themselves; they really do hate him, don’t believe in him, etc.
It’s just that, when they’re in the voting booth and they’re forced to choose, they end up thinking that, as terrible as he is, he’s still better than the other guy (or, in the case of Hillary, woman).
The population doesn’t want a geriatric president, there’s no propping up Kamala, and Hillary is still hated. Yet here we are thanks to the stranglehold old, out-of-touch Democratic Party super delegates have on the party.
I live in a red state that has elected three women Democratic governors, and re-elected two of them. This is proof that Democratic candidates can attract Republican votes, but the party has got to put up better candidates.
Super delegates no longer even vote on the first ballot. Sorry, you can’t blame them any more for your pet candidate just losing.
But when they’re actually in the voting booth, they’ll vote R.
They’re not lying to themselves; they really do hate him, don’t believe in him, etc.
It’s just that, when they’re in the voting booth and they’re forced to choose, they end up thinking that, as terrible as he is, he’s still better than the other guy (or, in the case of Hillary, woman).
The population doesn’t want a geriatric president, there’s no propping up Kamala, and Hillary is still hated. Yet here we are thanks to the stranglehold old, out-of-touch Democratic Party super delegates have on the party.
I live in a red state that has elected three women Democratic governors, and re-elected two of them. This is proof that Democratic candidates can attract Republican votes, but the party has got to put up better candidates.
Forgive me for thinking one person, one vote should actually matter on all ballots.
Clearly, my thinking on the subject has been influenced by the comments in this sub on the subject of the Electoral College.
I probably just subliminally want to give the Democratic Party the benefit of the doubt as to why it keeps choosing candidates that are just so doggone difficult to elect that Donald Trump got over 74 million votes in 2020.
Super delegates no longer even vote on the first ballot. Sorry, you can’t blame them any more for your pet candidate just losing.
Either you’re arguing in bad faith or from a place of stunning ignorance, seeing as not once has the Democratic party selected a candidate that didn’t win the primary vote. So which is it?
Personally, seeing as you also apparently blame Democrats for Republicans going full fascist, I’m going to guess the former.
You can obviously think or guess whatever you want. And as reasonable people, we can always agree to disagree.
But with respect to good or bad faith, I’m confident that you know perfectly well that in 2016 the media reported superdelegate commitments right along with the results of each state’s primary and/or caucus as they occurred, undoubtedly influencing voters in states where primaries and/or caucuses had not yet occurred.
And Jacob Siegel’s A Guide to Understanding the Hoax of the Century suggests that Republicans aren’t the only ones going full fascist these days.
Obviously, you can try to defend the party elite and its machinery all you want. But Trump’s win in 2016 and 74 million votes in 2020 is hard evidence of what happens when people refuse to remove their heads from the sand.
Either you’re arguing in bad faith or from a place of stunning ignorance, seeing as not once has the Democratic party selected a candidate that didn’t win the primary vote. So which is it?
Personally, seeing as you also apparently blame Democrats for Republicans going full fascist, I’m going to guess the former.
Ah yes, acknowledging that Russia launched a concerted attack on the US’s election is now “going fascist”. Thank you for confirming you’re certainly not here to engage in reality-based discussion.
You can obviously think or guess whatever you want. And as reasonable people, we can always agree to disagree.
But with respect to good or bad faith, I’m confident that you know perfectly well that in 2016 the media reported superdelegate commitments right along with the results of each state’s primary and/or caucus as they occurred, undoubtedly influencing voters in states where primaries and/or caucuses had not yet occurred.
And Jacob Siegel’s A Guide to Understanding the Hoax of the Century suggests that Republicans aren’t the only ones going full fascist these days.
Obviously, you can try to defend the party elite and its machinery all you want. But Trump’s win in 2016 and 74 million votes in 2020 is hard evidence of what happens when people refuse to remove their heads from the sand.
Ah yes, acknowledging that Russia launched a concerted attack on the US’s election is now “going fascist”. Thank you for confirming you’re certainly not here to engage in reality-based discussion.