2016 Presidential Elections

[Hickory]

This is a bit of a hot button topic, but it was up on the old forum, so why not here. Keep it civil, respect each other's opinions.

[James Gryphon]

If the poll's open to non-Americans or non-registered voters, "Who would you vote for" might be a better poll.

If the voting was done today, I would write in Ted Cruz. I don't agree with him on everything, but I think there's more similarity there, on what I feel are some of my most important issues, than with most politicians, and I feel this is the only way I can clearly get my point across as to how I feel about the "candidates" both major parties are running. That said, my political views are always evolving. Maybe I'll vote for Rubio.

More or less my current perspective, except I would change my answer on businesses being allowed to deny services to simply "Yes", without qualifications.

[The Skarzs]

If Cruz had gotten further, I would undoubtedly vote for him.
As it stands, though, it appears my vote will be going to Trump. . . My reasons? Trump is a wild card. He's unpredictable. While that's not necessarily a good thing, that means we don't know exactly what he's going to do, whereas with someone like Sanders or Clinton, we know what they're going to do, and it's not something I want to happen.

[Jetthebinturong]

Just saying literally everyone outside America is scared of Trump starting WWIII. The British parliament also had a meeting discussing whether or not he should be banned from the UK.

[The Skarzs]

Most of the options in this election are scary.

[LT Sandpaw]

 I'm voting for Trump, and to tell you the truth I'd rather not be. But I can't get behind Gary because he's just running to get the green party noticed, he's not running to win. And that doesn't inspire the greatest confidence in me. As for Clinton I'm one of those people who look at Benghazi, who looks at her Email scandal, and just listens to the amount of lies and media driven bias about things like Global Warming, and I'm disgusted.

I really wish that the Democrats could put a candidate forward that spoke out against these kinds of things. Because Democrats like FDR and John F. Kennedy are the kind of people I can get behind and support.

I'm with Skarzs on initially voting for Cruz and then moving to Trump. And while I'd rather not have a bully as president, its better then the other choices. Besides he does have a background in business, so he might be able to get the U.S foreign deals back on track, which would be great.

[James Gryphon]

But I can't get behind Gary because he's just running to get the green party noticed, he's not running to win

Johnson is the Libertarian candidate; Jill Stein is the Green candidate.

It's more than about getting them "noticed" or "getting attention"; if the Libertarian party secures more than 5% of the popular vote nationwide, they'll qualify for federal funding in future elections, taking a serious step towards credibility and becoming a viable option.

I'm not sure what criteria you're using to tell whether Mr. Johnson believes he can win or not. But even if he doesn't, I'm not sure what that has to do with his campaign and whether voters should support it. No third-party candidate has received electoral votes from multiple states, besides segregationists in the deep South, since Theodore Roosevelt. Given the American system's current extreme slant towards a bipolar party system, and the Libertarian party's current state and funding, it would be foolish to think that this is the cycle where 104 years of third parties being crushed is going to be suddenly and dramatically reversed. Sure, I guess it's possible, but everybody knows it's extremely unlikely, and I don't see how being able to trick yourself into thinking you've got a great chance better qualifies you for the presidency. The most realistic objective for the Libertarians at this point is to win enough support today to help them become viable in the future, and it seems to me that Johnson is going above and beyond to get that done.

[LT Sandpaw]

Your right, Gary is for Libertarians, not the Green Party, my mistake. But I was right in saying he's just running to get the party noticed, he's on record with Louder with Crowder saying that. And therein lies why I wont support him. He's not running to win, he's running to get noticed, and why should I support someone who is just running to make his party more popular and get federal funding?
Besides you kinda doubled on yourself saying that I should support him because he can't win? Just so the party can have a better chance in the future?

That doesn't make sense to me.

[Jetthebinturong]

The bipolar party system is just ridiculous to me.

[LT Sandpaw]

The bipolar party system is just ridiculous to me.

Which is where Trump comes in.

[Jetthebinturong]

Trump is a Republican.

Besides I wouldn't vote for Trump if a gun was pressed to my head.

[The Skarzs]

Trump is Republican only by name, and nothing else.

Besides I wouldn't vote for Trump if a gun was pressed to my head.

Good think you don't have to, then!

[LT Sandpaw]

 He's hardly a Republican ideal-wise.


Hypothetically who would you vote for Jet?

[James Gryphon]

He's not running to win, he's running to get noticed, and why should I support someone who is just running to make his party more popular and get federal funding?

When you use the word "just" you make it sound like it's a contemptible goal. That really isn't the case, if you believe in breaking up the two-party system.

Besides you kinda doubled on yourself saying that I should support him because he can't win?

No, I didn't say that. What I'm saying is that whether they can "win" or not is not relevant, given their legitimate chances of getting closer to achieving their objectives by doing well in this election, and that because of this, if you agree with his party's principles, you should support them in spite of their probable loss. If you really want more than two parties to choose from, then logically, at some point you have to support a third one. That means supporting their growth, because it isn't realistic to hope that one will just pop up, fully mature and ready to take over the country, overnight.

[Jetthebinturong]

I don't know much about any of them except the prime two candidates, and since a vote against Clinton is basically a vote for Trump, I'd vote for Clinton. I prefer her to Trump, if only slightly.