View Poll Results: Presidential Election: Who are you voting for or might/could you vote for?

Voters
75. You may not vote on this poll
  • 1.)Barack Obama/Joseph Biden

    29 38.67%
  • 2.)Gary Johnson/James P. Gray

    16 21.33%
  • 3.)Jill Stein/Cheri Honkala

    11 14.67%
  • 4.)Mitt Romney/Paul Ryan

    26 34.67%
  • 5.) Write Ins / Other

    5 6.67%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 83

Thread: Presidential Election: Who are you voting for or might/could you vote for?

  1. #61
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    SE Asia
    Last Seen
    07-12-14 @ 10:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    2,333

    Re: Presidential Election: Who are you voting for or might/could you vote for?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    So you need to decide, between the two, who will do the least amount of damage to the country.
    That argument ONLY holds the least bit of water if you live in a swing state.

  2. #62
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    07-08-14 @ 06:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,325

    Re: Presidential Election: Who are you voting for or might/could you vote for?

    Quote Originally Posted by roflpublican View Post
    Obama is a radical liberal? he seems more center right, even his healthcare, his crowning achievement, is based around shoving money into the hands of big pharma and big insurance.
    I think you don't know what you're talking about. Read below, and then we'll talk further:

    The Real Purpose of Obamacare

  3. #63
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    SE Asia
    Last Seen
    07-12-14 @ 10:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    2,333

    Re: Presidential Election: Who are you voting for or might/could you vote for?

    Quote Originally Posted by roflpublican View Post
    i would have liked to do that, unfortunately i live in florida, and i got worn down by my dad, but i don't feel so bad voting for the lesser evil he likes since he is 50% responsible for my existence.
    It is difficult for me to begrudge a swing state voter allowing their pragmatism to trump their ideology. If I were one I would probably cave as well.

  4. #64
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Tampa
    Last Seen
    09-24-13 @ 11:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    1,526

    Re: Presidential Election: Who are you voting for or might/could you vote for?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dooble View Post
    I think you don't know what you're talking about. Read below, and then we'll talk further:

    The Real Purpose of Obamacare
    that's interesting but following the money is a better judge of purpose than an opinion piece.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sarcogito View Post
    It is difficult for me to begrudge a swing state voter allowing their pragmatism to trump their ideology. If I were one I would probably cave as well.
    well my dad is the type of guy who will calmly explain his position 500x in a row until you either walk away or shoot him in the voice box. resistance was futile, especially since i'm always swinging by to see whats on the menu, 5 years of independence on and he stills cooks way better than me
    Last edited by roflpublican; 11-05-12 at 01:25 AM.

  5. #65
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,803

    Re: Presidential Election: Who are you voting for or might/could you vote for?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sarcogito View Post
    That argument ONLY holds the least bit of water if you live in a swing state.
    If you don't live in a swing state, you might as well just stay home because nothing you vote means a damn thing anyhow.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

  6. #66
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    07-08-14 @ 06:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,325

    Re: Presidential Election: Who are you voting for or might/could you vote for?

    Quote Originally Posted by roflpublican View Post
    that's interesting but following the money is a better judge of purpose than an opinion piece.
    What you fail to understand, is that you are the opinion piece. Did you read the article?

  7. #67
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,754

    Re: Presidential Election: Who are you voting for or might/could you vote for?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    If you don't live in a swing state, you might as well just stay home because nothing you vote means a damn thing anyhow.
    Is PA a swing state?

    Does that mean I have to vote for one of the two main party assholes, if I dislike the other more?
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  8. #68
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    SE Asia
    Last Seen
    07-12-14 @ 10:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    2,333

    Re: Presidential Election: Who are you voting for or might/could you vote for?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    If you don't live in a swing state, you might as well just stay home because nothing you vote means a damn thing anyhow.
    There are still several reasons for third party voters to vote, swing state or not.

    First, you still count toward the popular vote. While Obama will likely win the popular vote, I can still play my little part in ensuring that he does not have a mandate. Whoever wins, Obama or Romney, I want them to know that most people who voted did NOT vote for him.

    Second is money. The more support a third party gets the more likely they are to be eligible for matching fund in the future, thus increasing the likelihood of getting the word of their agenda out.

    Third, while it is a foregone conclusion that a third party candidate will not win the Presidency, that is far from the only race on the ballot. There are plenty of more local elections going on in which the odds of a third party winning are not so long. So if you are already going to be at the ballot box voting in those, how much extra work is it to slide your hand over and mark the box for the Presidency as well?

  9. #69
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Tampa
    Last Seen
    09-24-13 @ 11:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    1,526

    Re: Presidential Election: Who are you voting for or might/could you vote for?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dooble View Post
    What you fail to understand, is that you are the opinion piece. Did you read the article?
    Following the money isnt an opinion.

  10. #70
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,803

    Re: Presidential Election: Who are you voting for or might/could you vote for?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sarcogito View Post
    First, you still count toward the popular vote. While Obama will likely win the popular vote, I can still play my little part in ensuring that he does not have a mandate. Whoever wins, Obama or Romney, I want them to know that most people who voted did NOT vote for him.
    If you think they seriously give a damn, you're out of your mind.

    Second is money. The more support a third party gets the more likely they are to be eligible for matching fund in the future, thus increasing the likelihood of getting the word of their agenda out.
    Which, unfortunately, is just as ridiculous. A third party has to get over 5% of the popular vote to qualify and the biggest, most powerful third-party, the Libertarians, have never gotten more than 1% of the vote and that percentage is dropping every election. Last time, they got 0.4% The best they've ever done is the Perot campaign in 1992, but even then, they lost their official party status following their failure in the 1996 election to maintain more than 5% and have never come remotely close again. Unless an independently wealthy candidate comes along again and buys into the election, the chances of a third party getting funded in the future is zero.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •