• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

If These Were The 2016 Presidential Candidates...

If These Were The 2016 Presidential Candidates...

  • Jeb Bush

    Votes: 11 20.0%

  • Hillary Clinton

    Votes: 18 32.7%

  • Gary Johnson

    Votes: 12 21.8%

  • I don't/wouldn't vote

    Votes: 2 3.6%

  • Other

    Votes: 12 21.8%
  • Total voters
    55
CanadaJohn said:
In case you hadn't noticed, the economic and foreign affairs positions taken by an American administration affect Canada and other nations in the world both directly and indirectly.
Click to expand...

Specifically, how did YOUR life change in 2008?
Specifically, how do you think YOUR life will change in 2016?
 
Dragonfly said:
Specifically, how did YOUR life change in 2008?
Specifically, how do you think YOUR life will change in 2016?
Click to expand...

I have no intention of derailing this thread - if you want to create a new thread with that very topic, it might be an interesting question for all members of DP to ponder.
 
Gary Johnson looks like a weasel.
 
i'm not really thrilled by any of those choices. i'd probably do a write in.
 
If it were those choices. I would probably have to cast my vote for Hill Dog.
 
TeleKat said:
If the 2016 election were tomorrow and these were the candidates, who would you vote for?
Click to expand...

How about we wait and see who really runs. Of the ones you listed, I can only say that there is absolutely no way I would vote for the Whore of Satan, outside of that, don't have any idea yet.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
If it were those choices. I would probably have to cast my vote for Hill Dog.
Click to expand...

I'm having trouble figuring out why a socialist would vote for a candidate as obviously under the corporate thumb as Hillary is.
 
Under no circumstances will I vote for Hillary Clinton. I refuse to vote for any politician for any office who voted in favor of the Iraq War. Hillary, as a Senator from New York, did just that. So, no vote for her. And under no circumstances, until I see something better out of them, will I vote for a Republican for national office. As far as I'm concerned, the Republican Party is an absolute embarrassment to the country.

Third party for me, for the second straight presidential election.
 
As a left leaning libertarian I would have to go with Johnson. I don't see eye to eye on a good many things but he has the most things that I could agree with. Some of the major things I don't agree with him on are Campaign finance reform and Education, but we're pretty close elsewhere.
 
Gipper said:
Gary Johnson, if I thought he had a shot in hell of winning.
Click to expand...

Well Gary Johnson has no chance of winning, because nobody will vote for him, because he has no chance of winning. Kind of a catch 22. That's why I don't really take electability into account when I'm voting. I vote for the right man for the job, not the man who has the best chance of getting it.
 
TeleKat said:
Well Gary Johnson has no chance of winning, because nobody will vote for him, because he has no chance of winning. Kind of a catch 22. That's why I don't really take electability into account when I'm voting. I vote for the right man for the job, not the man who has the best chance of getting it.
Click to expand...

That's why I'm more about the abolition of the two-party winner-take-all system as opposed to electing a third party leader.
 
Gipper said:
That's why I'm more about the abolition of the two-party winner-take-all system as opposed to electing a third party leader.
Click to expand...

I'd like to see the party system abolished in it's entirety. Then we can judge each individual on their own merits rather than the letter beside their name.
 
TeleKat said:
Well Gary Johnson has no chance of winning, because nobody will vote for him, because he has no chance of winning. Kind of a catch 22. That's why I don't really take electability into account when I'm voting. I vote for the right man for the job, not the man who has the best chance of getting it.
Click to expand...

So there's not a single person in the country you think would do a better job as President than Gary Johnson?

Because if there is, then your argument for how/why you vote is illogical if you're saying you're voting for Gary Johnson. The only reason to vote for him, as opposed to writing in the specific person you think could do the best job, is you acknowledge to SOME degree that someone actually running at least has a better chance of garnering at least SOME votes, i.e. electability. If ALL you cared about was whose the right man for the job, whether or not they're actually running should be 100% irrelevant to your vote.
 
Zyphlin said:
So there's not a single person in the country you think would do a better job as President than Gary Johnson?

Because if there is, then your argument for how/why you vote is illogical if you're saying you're voting for Gary Johnson. The only reason to vote for him, as opposed to writing in the specific person you think could do the best job, is you acknowledge to SOME degree that someone actually running at least has a better chance of garnering at least SOME votes, i.e. electability. If ALL you cared about was whose the right man for the job, whether or not they're actually running should be 100% irrelevant to your vote.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, perhaps I chose a poor use of words. Let me clarify: I don't take electability into account as much as I take into account how well of a job they will do.
 
TeleKat said:
Fair enough, perhaps I chose a poor use of words. Let me clarify: I don't take electability into account as much as I take into account how well of a job they will do.
Click to expand...

I can understand and respect that. I don't think there's anything particularly wrong with that approach. When it comes to voting, as long as a person has an explainable reason for their vote that is at least a bit more thought beyond "he's got better hair", then I have no issue. Our vote is one of the most important things we have as citizens, and it's up to each citizen to decide what's most important to them.
 
TeleKat said:
I'm having trouble figuring out why a socialist would vote for a candidate as obviously under the corporate thumb as Hillary is.
Click to expand...

What candidate out of those is more "left"? I vote based on realism. I wouldnt vote for "Green" or "Socialist Party" unless they had a realistic chance.
 
anonymous polls suck
 
TeleKat said:
If the 2016 election were tomorrow and these were the candidates, who would you vote for?
Click to expand...

I will do what I did the previous two elections. I will leave that part of the ballot blank and vote in all the other elections and ballot issues on the ballot.I refuse to vote for another piece of **** globalist pro-illegal scumbag and RINO.
 
Gary Johnson, if it was just those three. Not with a whole lot of enthusiasm though.

I won't consider Hillary, ever. And while I like Jeb, I think this country needs to move on from the Bush family (and the Clintons).
 
TheDemSocialist said:
What candidate out of those is more "left"? I vote based on realism. I wouldnt vote for "Green" or "Socialist Party" unless they had a realistic chance.
Click to expand...

Are you kidding? Hillary is far right. She's a warmonger, corporatist, fascist, and her husband passed DOMA into law. She seriously couldn't be further from socialist ideals, or liberal ideals for that matter.
 
TeleKat said:
Are you kidding? Hillary is far right. She's a warmonger, corporatist, fascist, and her husband passed DOMA into law. She seriously couldn't be further from socialist ideals, or liberal ideals for that matter.
Click to expand...

Nicely summed up, TeleKat. And so very very accurate.
 
I'd definitely vote for Clinton.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom