Have you ever regretted your vote for a US president?

[AlbqOwl]

Attaching poll. If your answer is yes, who and why?

Jimmy Carter in 1976. I adored him and campaigned for him--still like him personally--but he was a huge disappointment as President.

Reagan didn't disappoint and was what the country needed at that time.

Bush 41 was a status-quo kind of guy and bitterly disappointed me when he broke his no new taxes pledge. He still got my vote in 1992, but I voted with a lot less enthusiasm.

Bush 43 was spot on to get us through the 9/11 crisis and aftermath, but otherwise he was a disappointment when it came to education, energy, environment, immigration, and management of the war. He would have made a great Democrat on a lot of issues.

Trump so far has sometimes been a bull in the china shop, at times self-aggrandizing annoying, cringeworthy at times, sometimes misspeaks and/or gets a fact wrong, and can be unlikable, but when it comes to all issues important to me--economy, the courts, immigration, Constitution, law enforcement, military, trade, liberty, international negotiations etc.--he has not disappointed.

I'll put up with a sometimes obnoxious personality to get positive and worthwhile results and policy.

 

[Ikari]

But the Republican party never made it to hell. They were close, but thanks to your ignorance they never got there. As a result, they don't know what road they're on and won't change.

Do yourself a favor and educate yourself on what a Nash Equilibrium is. Until you understand these concepts you're not worth my time.

I don't think you understood the intent of that statement.

 

[Vox]

Attaching poll. If your answer is yes, who and why?

Obama. Because he turned out to be a lying Predator Drone war criminal when he promised to end the wars.

 

[Helix]

Well, I guess, there is always this option to consider.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-putin-theory-mike-rounds_us_5b4e49e7e4b0de86f4879ecd



Now that is a winning talking point.

Lol, for sure. Talk about tying yourself in knots.

 

[Helix]

Maybe Russia can help with the Syria mess? The Middle East mess? The Ukraine mess? The Iranian mess?

Oh, I guess not. Let's just give them the middle finger.

EDIT: Oh, I forgot, other than the US, Russia has the most nuclear weapons. Nah, we've got no reason to negotiate with Russia....

I didn't argue that we should give them the finger. I argued that Trump seems beholden to Putin.

 

[Helix]

Odd how? I see it as treating every world leader in different ways, keeping in mind their personality, their customs, their experience, decorum, etc. What we see is a façade meant for public consumption in order to enhance diplomatic relations. I don't doubt for a minute that Trump is aware that Putin is an enemy.
That reminds me of an episode of 'Scandal', (vague, from recollection) when Prez Fitz is standing next to a world leader, shaking hands, making nice, whispering in his ear "we just bombed the hell out of your ….facility".
We aren't privy to everything, we know little of what is happening behind the scenes, and we have to take the bits and pieces we are being told with a grain of salt. I withhold my opinion, willing to give everyone the benefit of the doubt until more FACTS are known.

I don't have inside knowledge of the investigation. His kids have been reported bragging about big money deals with Russians, though, so I'm wondering if Putin has something financial to hold over his head. I suppose that we'll find out one way or the other.

 

[iliveonramen]

The electorate wanted a retaliation and they wanted it...yesterday. If you lived through those times, you realize this. The correctness of the 'war' wasn't as important as the retaliation.

I was in college when 9/11 took place. I left college and joined the army as a result of 9/11. I lived through the time and remember the atmosphere. Afghanistan housed the terrorist. Bush actively sold Iraq and used imagry like “mushroom clouds over Manhattan” to scare already scared people.

Afghanistan was the retaliation. We bombed the ever living **** out of that country and then went in. Iraq was the Bush administration taking advantage of 9/11 to fight a war they wanted

 

[Lovebug]

I don't have inside knowledge of the investigation. His kids have been reported bragging about big money deals with Russians, though, so I'm wondering if Putin has something financial to hold over his head. I suppose that we'll find out one way or the other.

Before, during or after the election, or all the above?

 

[MrWonka]

I don't think you understood the intent of that statement.

I understand it fully. You think both parties are bad and going to hell, but what you don't grasp is that neither party seems to realize it because every 4-8 years they are convinced that the American people love them again. Because the American people keep bouncing back and forth between them neither party ever ends up in their own version of hell long enough to convince them that they should change. By not picking a side, and sticking with it you're propagating that problem.

 

[Ikari]

I understand it fully. You think both parties are bad and going to hell, but what you don't grasp is that neither party seems to realize it because every 4-8 years they are convinced that the American people love them again. Because the American people keep bouncing back and forth between them neither party ever ends up in their own version of hell long enough to convince them that they should change. By not picking a side, and sticking with it you're propagating that problem.

lol

No. Good try though. Both parties move the Republic in the same direction. Big Government, Big Spending, Big Debt, Big Brother, Big War, Corporate-State government. It doesn't matter if one is moving "more slowly" along that path, as it all ends in the same place.

Neither side of the OneParty is in fear of being replaced. They've rigged the system well enough, cut out all political competition, to ensure that they can stay in power indefinitely.

The lesser of two evils is still evil.

 

[MrWonka]

Yup, and if the Libertarian Party can aggregate enough votes to continually force the Republican arm of the OneParty Oligarchy to lose, then they will slide to recapture those votes. Which is one reason I vote Third party

But by not jumping all the way to the other side you're not doing enough damage to the Republican arm. You're only subtracting from one side of the see-saw without adding to the other. As we saw in 2016 the Republican arm survived without your vote so why would they slide to recapture you?

You just said you want the Republican arm to continually lose so they will change. But they won without you. You subtracted from one side but didn't add to the other. You minimized the damage that your lost vote did to them. In order to make sure they lose you can't just subtract votes from one side, you need to add them to the other.

You want to get a raise at work? You don't just threaten to quit. You threaten to join your companies biggest competitor.

You're delusional if you think that supporting the status-quo is going to change the status-quo.

No, you are delusional if you think refusing to sit on the see-saw will help tip it over. The see-saw stays balanced because you don't pick a side.

 

[Helix]

Before, during or after the election, or all the above?

Before. Since then, who knows? Here's one of the articles :

Donald Trump Jr. in 2008 said a lot of Trump assets were in Russia - Business Insider

 

[Ikari]

But by not jumping all the way to the other side you're not doing enough damage to the Republican arm. You're only subtracting from one side of the see-saw without adding to the other. As we saw in 2016 the Republican arm survived without your vote so why would they slide to recapture you?

You just said you want the Republican arm to continually lose so they will change. But they won without you. You subtracted from one side but didn't add to the other. You minimized the damage that your lost vote did to them. In order to make sure they lose you can't just subtract votes from one side, you need to add them to the other.

You want to get a raise at work? You don't just threaten to quit. You threaten to join your companies biggest competitor.



No, you are delusional if you think refusing to sit on the see-saw will help tip it over. The see-saw stays balanced because you don't pick a side.

"The other side" doesn't offer anything I want either. So why would I support them. The OneParty is fine so long as they keep in power. Supporting the OneParty will help them do just that. I subtracted from the OneParty and give to the Third Parties to make sure that the OneParty doesn't receive my vote. Both sides win and lose without me. Obama won without me. So it's all a wash in the end. Even if I just support the Dems, the Republicans aren't going anywhere. Playing on the teeter-totter doesn't stop it.

If I want to get a raise at work, there is little good threatening to join the biggest competitor if the biggest competitor isn't going to pay me any more money.

Supporting the status quo will not change the status quo.

 

[MrWonka]

Both parties move the Republic in the same direction. Big Government, Big Spending, Big Debt, Big Brother, Big War, Corporate-State government.

That's just stupid, but irrelevant.

Neither side of the OneParty is in fear of being replaced. They've rigged the system well enough, cut out all political competition, to ensure that they can stay in power indefinitely.

No, you have rigged the system against yourself by not taking a stand. You've made yourself irrelevant. Nobody is trying to win your vote because they know you won't vote for the other side either. You complain about a see-saw going back and forth, but by not voting for either side you're doing equal damage to both sides. You're not on the scale at all so you're not relevant to either side.

The lesser of two evils is still evil.

I say again, did you wake up and go to work today or did you stay at home and get fired?

Virtually every decision you make in life is the lesser of two evils whether you realize it or not. That's called being a ****ing adult.

 

[Ikari]

That's just stupid, but irrelevant.

It's true and completely relevant. If the Dems aren't moving in a direction I agree with, why would I support them just to spite the Republicans?

No, you have rigged the system against yourself by not taking a stand. You've made yourself irrelevant. Nobody is trying to win your vote because they know you won't vote for the other side either. You complain about a see-saw going back and forth, but by not voting for either side you're doing equal damage to both sides. You're not on the scale at all so you're not relevant to either side.

That's stupid. Everything from campaign finance laws to participation in the debates is set to seclude the Third Parties from participation. So good, I'm doing damage to both sides. I'm not getting on your little see-saw because you're upset that Trump won.

I say again, did you wake up and go to work today or did you stay at home and get fired?

Virtually every decision you make in life is the lesser of two evils whether you realize it or not. That's called being a ****ing adult.

What if I like my work and the money it makes me? Doesn't seem like much of an evil in that sense.

So now you're just getting angry because I don't buy into your little game, claiming I'm not an adult because I support the candidates who best represent my own political platforms instead of just trying to spite on of the OneParty sides.

Get a grip.

 

[<alt>doxygen]

Yes. Reagan - 1980. First time I could vote for a pres. I was tired of Carter, but Reaganomics accelerated the destruction of the middle class. I was doing well myself, so I didn't really notice that until around 2002.

 

[MrWonka]

"The other side" doesn't offer anything I want either. So why would I support them?

To kill the other. To throw the see-saw out of equilibrium.

The OneParty is fine so long as they keep in power.

You keep them in power. Kill one half.

I subtracted from the OneParty and give to the Third Parties to make sure that the one party doesn't receive my vote.

And you make your vote irrelevant. Nobody is listening to you because you're not hurting them or helping them. You might as well not even be registered to vote at all.

Both sides win and lose without me. Obama won without me. So it's all a wash in the end.

Exactly!!! How is this so difficult for you to understand? Both sides win and lose without you. You're not giving them a reason to change. But if people like you all picked the same side, then the other could no longer win. It would have to change.

Even if I just support the Dems, the Republicans aren't going anywhere. Playing on the teeter-totter doesn't stop it.

Do you not know how teeter-totters work? Have you ever actually seen a scale?

The reason the Republicans don't go anywhere is that as you said, they keep winning without you. You are neutral. The loss of your weight on their side doesn't really hurt them, but if you move your weight to the other side it's twice as damaging.

If I want to get a raise at work, there is little good threatening to join the biggest competitor if the biggest competitor isn't going to pay me any more money.

They don't have to. You just have to tell your current company that they are paying you more money, and they'll match it to keep you.

Supporting the status quo will not change the status quo.

But supporting one side of it will. Supporting one side helps you steer it, but you're not even in the car.

 

[Phys251]

Yes.

The year 2000 was the last time I voted for a Republican president.

By 2004 I realized what a mistake that was.

The Republican party has a LONG way to go if they EVER want to earn my vote again for the presidency.

 

[Ikari]

To kill the other. To throw the see-saw out of equilibrium.

It's not going to kill the see-saw. It would just be me supporting a system that moves opposite of the direction I want to go. If I vote Democrat, the Republicans aren't going to vanish. These parties have existed for decades with people faithfully voting on either side, and they haven't gone anywhere. It's silly to state that I'm going to stop the see-saw by playing on the see-saw.

You keep them in power. Kill one half.

I don't like either half, I am no longer one keeping either side in power, as I do not support nor do I vote for them.

And you make your vote irrelevant. Nobody is listening to you because you're not hurting them or helping them. You might as well not even be registered to vote at all.

It's equally irrelevant if I vote Democrats. So if my vote is going to be irrelevant no matter what, I might as well support the candidate who best represents my own political beliefs.

Exactly!!! How is this so difficult for you to understand? Both sides win and lose without you. You're not giving them a reason to change. But if people like you all picked the same side, then the other could no longer win. It would have to change.

So why should I play into the system. You just admitted that if I vote Dem, I won't kill the Repubs.

Do you not know how teeter-totters work? Have you ever actually seen a scale?

The reason the Republicans don't go anywhere is that as you said, they keep winning without you. You are neutral. The loss of your weight on their side doesn't really hurt them, but if you move your weight to the other side it's twice as damaging.

Juvenile insults all you have left then? There is enough aggregate weight on either side of the see-saw that my moving to one side isn't going to stop the motion. I don't like the see-saw, I do not like the Republicans, I do not like the Democrats. They use the see-saw as nothing more than a tool to consolidate and solidify their OneParty power and I do not support the OneParty. So why should I support the OneParty? I have to because the other side is doing the same things? It's an insane argument you make as to why I need to vote for a party that doesn't reflect my political ideology and that moves the Republic in a direction I do not like.

They don't have to. You just have to tell your current company that they are paying you more money, and they'll match it to keep you.

Or tell me to get packing. In which case, I best have a better paying job lined up.

But supporting one side of it will. Supporting one side helps you steer it, but you're not even in the car.

Both sides are the status quo. Supporting one is not going to kill the other side. Both sides have set the system for their teeter-totter of power which ensures that neither actually ever lose power, and thus they have removed themselves from the influence of The People. Which is how we end up with things like our Corporate-State and Infinity War.

Supporting the status quo will not change the status quo. It is crazy to suggest otherwise.

 

[X Factor]

Yes.

The year 2000 was the last time I voted for a Republican president.

By 2004 I realized what a mistake that was.

The Republican party has a LONG way to go if they EVER want to earn my vote again for the presidency.

This seems representative of most “yes” votes, someone more left leaning voting for someone more right leaning.

 

[Lovebug]

Before. Since then, who knows? Here's one of the articles :

Donald Trump Jr. in 2008 said a lot of Trump assets were in Russia - Business Insider

So a business man looked out for his very own best business interests back in 2008? As for since, most former Presidents have benefitted from the expertise, may that be fundraising or writing books, or giving speeches. I fail to see the problem, at least not yet.

You can say "Ok, if you put it that way"...

 

[X Factor]

It's not going to kill the see-saw. It would just be me supporting a system that moves opposite of the direction I want to go. If I vote Democrat, the Republicans aren't going to vanish. These parties have existed for decades with people faithfully voting on either side, and they haven't gone anywhere. It's silly to state that I'm going to stop the see-saw by playing on the see-saw.



I don't like either half, I am no longer one keeping either side in power, as I do not support nor do I vote for them.



It's equally irrelevant if I vote Democrats. So if my vote is going to be irrelevant no matter what, I might as well support the candidate who best represents my own political beliefs.



So why should I play into the system. You just admitted that if I vote Dem, I won't kill the Repubs.



Juvenile insults all you have left then? There is enough aggregate weight on either side of the see-saw that my moving to one side isn't going to stop the motion. I don't like the see-saw, I do not like the Republicans, I do not like the Democrats. They use the see-saw as nothing more than a tool to consolidate and solidify their OneParty power and I do not support the OneParty. So why should I support the OneParty? I have to because the other side is doing the same things? It's an insane argument you make as to why I need to vote for a party that doesn't reflect my political ideology and that moves the Republic in a direction I do not like.



Or tell me to get packing. In which case, I best have a better paying job lined up.



Both sides are the status quo. Supporting one is not going to kill the other side. Both sides have set the system for their teeter-totter of power which ensures that neither actually ever lose power, and thus they have removed themselves from the influence of The People. Which is how we end up with things like our Corporate-State and Infinity War.

Supporting the status quo will not change the status quo. It is crazy to suggest otherwise.

Whatever can and has been said about Trump, he does not represent the status quo.

 

[Ikari]

Whatever can and has been said about Trump, he does not represent the status quo.

He's just the other-side of the Corporate-State coin. He's the status quo without breaks or a filter.

 

[MrWonka]

It's true and completely relevant. If the Dems aren't moving in a direction I agree with, why would I support them just to spite the Republicans?

Because the only way they change is to force them to. By remaining neutral you're not forcing either side to change.

That's stupid. Everything from campaign finance laws to participation in the debates is set to seclude the Third Parties from participation.

So destroy the Republican party, and then the Libertarian party can take over as one of the two parties.

So good, I'm doing damage to both sides.

Right, you're damaging both sides equally. So why should we listen to you?

I'm not getting on your little see-saw because you're upset that Trump won.

You just said that you're upset Trump won too.

What if I like my work and the money it makes me? Doesn't seem like much of an evil in that sense.

It's still the lesser evil. You just don't think of it as such, because you're not given the illusion of a third choice.

So now you're just getting angry because I don't buy into your little game,

You're the one who is hurting yourself here. I'm just trying to help you understand how leverage works.

claiming I'm not an adult because I support the candidates who best represent my own political platforms

What makes you not an adult is whining about imperfect choices. If you'd grow up and make a choice, you'd find that over time your choices would improve.

Just like going to work every day sucks on that day, but over time you save up and you can take a nice vacation or retire.

 

[maquiscat]

Attaching poll. If your answer is yes, who and why?

Nope, and I regularly vote third party. Can't answer poll from Tapatalk.

Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk