If the election were held today … cast your vote.

Perotista said:

LOL, I was thinking of the moon. But the sun would do nicely.

Click to expand...

Moon is not nearly far or hot enough

Sparky2 said:

Three, right off the top of your head, please.
:2wave:

Click to expand...

Off the top of my head:

Claiming Obama is the founder of ISIS - and Hillary is the cofounder.
Claiming that he opposed the Iraq war from the get-go.
Claiming that he opposed the Libyan intervention from the get-go.

The sad thing about Donald Trump is that he isn't even smart enough to lie about things that are difficult to disprove.

Sparky2 said:

I don't trust the opinions of politifact

Click to expand...

Politifact isn't an opinion column. It researches controversial statements made by people to determine how accurate they are.

joG said:

The choices by the two major parties have less to do with the parties than the American public. This might be more the case for the Republicans, but the public did vote for the woman and cannot honestly abdicate responsibility.

Click to expand...

Yeah, but there are two ways to look at this. Both parties have entirely different demographic which are entirely different the the public or general election at large or as a whole. One can say Trump won the nomination with 40% of the GOP primary vote. The Republican base makes up 27% of the total electorate which comes out to 10.8% of the total electorate choosing Trump to be one of the major party's nominee. 40% of 27%.

Hillary Clinton is different in two ways. She received 60% of the Democratic primary base vote. That base makes up 31% of the total electorate. So 18.6% of the total electorate choose Hillary to be the Democratic nominee. 60% of 31%. But let's not kid ourselves. Hillary was chosen as their nominee in a meeting between Bill, Hillary and Obama prior to the 2012 election. Heck, she had 30 super delegates pledge to her before the year turned to 2013 and well over 300, probably closer to 400 super delegates prior to Sanders announcing he would challenge her for the Democratic Presidential nomination. The national DNC was in Hillary's corner as were almost all the Democrat state party leaders. One could say her nomination was rigged or at least greased. Her nomination was the closest we can come these days to a smoked filled back room nomination.

I will admit that Hillary played within the rules as set forth prior to the 1976 presidential election when we entered the modern primary system. I do not begrudge her the nomination on that part. Was it a fair nomination process, I would say far from it, but it was done within the existing rules.

So is this election cycle an aberration? Possibly. But something is dreadfully wrong when the system produces two candidates who favorable ratings are in the 30's. Whose unfavorables are close to or above 60% of Americans as a whole. We do have two nominees that outside of their avid supporters no one wants as their next president.

No, I do not blame Trump or Clinton. Both took advantage of a system put in place 40 years ago. The difference is 40 years ago 70% of the total electorate identified or affiliated themselves with the two major parties. Today that is down to 58%. It is very possible that in 10-15 years from now the two major party's base will be down to 50% or less of the total electorate as they continue to lose strength. Perhaps it is time to rethink how we choose presidential nominees.

Then again, if this election cycle is an aberration, maybe not. Time will tell.

Cardinal said:

She's four times more honest than Donald, and his corruption has measurably helped him.

Click to expand...

:lamo

Kobie said:

Who is going to "ban" anyone from running, and why?

Click to expand...

imo, if "other" won and it is stipulated that the Hilary and Trump could not run again. The parties need to come up with other canidates.

Hey, its not reality. Was just posting how I would vote and what I would like to see as the outcome.

I do not want Hilary. I do not want Trump.

vesper said:

I will be voting other this election.

Click to expand...

You alerted me to Sweet Meteor O'Death's insurgent campaign.
I'm 100% on board with the man...uh, woman...uh, thing.
SMOD's potential impact cannot be denied.

Come October when Clinton and Trump get done with each other, I think there will be a whole lot more looking for a third option.

Click to expand...

True enough.
By election day, disillusioned voters will realize that SMOD and only SMOD understands the gravity of this election.

joG said:

Aleppo man, huh? I flirted with the idea in spite of his deficit in international experience. Sure that blupper may have been a one time laps. But as it now stands? That is rather difficult.

Click to expand...

The question is, who does the one who wins the election surround himself with. Who will be his advisors, his cabinet, his inner circle so to speak. I trust Johnson to surround himself with the best. Not so with either Trump or Clinton. Reagan was a hands off president for the most part, he let those who surrounded him run the show. Although he retained the power to approve or disapprove. He was one of the better presidents in my lifetime. That is if one can get above partisanship. Reagan would say, I want this done. Then he would leave the room letting whomever he said that to to accomplish it as he saw fit. Some backfired for sure, like Iran-Contra. But it worked for him and I think it would work for Johnson.

If Johnson wasn't on my ballot, then I would be voting for Stein or Castle or someone else. But never Trump or Clinton.

Quag said:

Moon is not nearly far or hot enough

Click to expand...

Gotcha and agree. Although reigning over a dead moon is exactly what Trump and or Clinton deserve. The sun works.

Gaea said:

Off the top of my head:

Claiming Obama is the founder of ISIS - and Hillary is the cofounder.
Claiming that he opposed the Iraq war from the get-go.
Claiming that he opposed the Libyan intervention from the get-go.

The sad thing about Donald Trump is that he isn't even smart enough to lie about things that are difficult to disprove.

Click to expand...

The silly sumbitch has built more things and accumulated more billions in wealth than you or I will in our lifetimes.

I can hardly imagine that he's 'stupid' exactly.

A bombastic, rude, over-the-top, impulsive hot-dog, yes.
But not stupid.

Re; founder and cofounder of ISIS;
If I recall the quote and the brief headline about it correctly, the hot-dog was speaking figuratively, not literally.

He implied that the Muslim-sympathizing Obama (who refuses to even speak the name of the enemy) and the foolish Hillary (who has gone on record as saying "Muslims 'have nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism") set up the conditions for the formation and staggering excesses of the ISIS killers.

And though I do not like Donald Trump, I must agree with him on those points.

Sparky2 said:

The silly sumbitch has built more things and accumulated more billions in wealth than you or I will in our lifetimes.

Click to expand...

You're a lot more generous than I am. I'm skeptical he's even worth $1B.

I can hardly imagine that he's 'stupid' exactly.

A bombastic, rude, over-the-top, impulsive hot-dog, yes.
But not stupid.

Click to expand...

People are intelligent in different ways. Donald is good at reading crowds. He's good at being entertaining.

But his overall level of critical thinking is about on par with George W. Maybe a little worse.

Re; founder and cofounder of ISIS;
If I recall the quote and the brief headline about it correctly, the hot-dog was speaking figuratively, not literally.

Click to expand...

The opposite is true. He was asked by Hugh Hewitt to clarify his comments - and he doubled down on calling Obama & Hillary the cofounders of ISIS, literally.

Christ on a popsicle stick.

Gaea, just go vote for Hillary Clinton and be done with it.

Vote early (and if you vote in Ohio, Pennsylvania, or Washington DC) vote often.
You'll be in good company, sir.

TheGoverness said:

Wouldn't we all?

Click to expand...

I'm prefer the 'Green Party of the United States'.

antiquity said:

:lamo

Click to expand...

Donald has told eight complete falsehoods since August 29 alone (the number goes up to thirteen if you include "mostly false" statements). In that time frame Clinton has told two "mostly false" statements. So yeah, once you look over the record objectively, it's no question that Donald is the single biggest liar of my life time.

jonny5 said:

You could at least put all the candidates in the poll.

Click to expand...

If they have less than 15% I did not include and that is I have "other".
Yet in a few weeks I will post another poll and include Johnson and Stein. Good suggestion.

I am voting for myself.

TheGoverness said:

I vote Cthulhu.

Click to expand...

After all, why vote for the LESSER of two evils?

Dion said:

If they have less than 15% I did not include and that is I have "other".
Yet in a few weeks I will post another poll and include Johnson and Stein. Good suggestion.

Click to expand...

'Other' is not on my ballot. Though he/she is winning 31% so far!

jonny5 said:

'Other' is not on my ballot. Though he/she is winning 31% so far!

Click to expand...

By this, do you mean that the mainstream candidates netted less than 70% of voters who actually showed up to the primary elections? That is amazing, since Other was not even an option.

My vote and my life depends upon the direction that Madam President will take her administration.

I support Trump, but I know Hillary will win.

My conscience won't allow me to vote for either one.

SCitizen said:

I support Trump, but I know Hillary will win.

Click to expand...

How do you know this? I hope she wins yet the race looks close.

Dion said:

How do you know this? I hope she wins yet the race looks close.

Click to expand...

The electoral college. Hillary is destroying trump in the EC. It is quite possible that hillary only wins the nationwide popular vote by a couple points or even lose and still destroy trump in the ec.

Hillary out of sad, unfortunate necessity.