-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
This "I'm a progressive but if Hillary is the nominee, I'm not voting" shit is stale
- Thread starter PlayALLtheGames
- Start date
- Status
There is more going on than just Wall Street and the Middle East. Vote how you want, but the fact of the matter is is that there will only be two viable candidates on the ballot.
teruterubozu
Member
Well, so was Dick Cheney at one time.
shoplifter
Member
Too bad he was too poor a candidate to win election.
uncelestial
Member
You should feel free to disagree with prochoice women who don't vote for Hillary. But I don't think you should call them "fucking idiots," like backslashbunny.
He was a good enough candidate. Holier than thou Nader voters in Florida fucked things up.
Gore lost those states. Nader cost him Florida which was a leans red state.
We all know what went down in Florida.
uncelestial
Member
shoplifter
Member
I'm done explaining to you how many opportunities Gore fucked up. Florida was one such opportunity.
Melkezadek
Member
I wouldn't call them "fucking idiots" but I would call them...foolish, for the reasons I stated. Again, that's assuming that this hypothetical person is a single issue voter.
I can't tell you how I fucking love people blaming Clinton for Iraq or Lybia.
Iraq? Surely if Clinton alone voted against it Bush Administration would have looked at future Queen Clinton and recanted on the foolish behavior!
Lybia was purely Clinton coaxing France, United Kingdom and Italy into pushing an intervention to oust the dictator!
Thanks Obama!
Iraq? Surely if Clinton alone voted against it Bush Administration would have looked at future Queen Clinton and recanted on the foolish behavior!
Lybia was purely Clinton coaxing France, United Kingdom and Italy into pushing an intervention to oust the dictator!
Thanks Obama!
JesseEwiak
Member
No, Gore lost 7 or 8 states Clinton won because Ross Perot wasn't running and those states were moving to the right anyway. Maybe you can blame OH on Lieberman's centrism, but no Democrat, including a leftier Al Gore was winning Arkansas.
Nope, nothing good happened between 1993-2016. It's been one horrible thing after another because of neoliberal sellouts. If only the Democratic Party had nominated Dennis Kucinich and Cynthia McKinney in 2004, we'd be living in a new Golden Age.
uncelestial
Member
Jesus, guys. Please go read some stuff. Please?
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=nader+didn't+cost+gore+the+election
shortsFortallPeople
Banned
Shoplifter,
Do you think we would be better off with a more or less conservative supreme court?
I'll hang up and listen.
Do you think we would be better off with a more or less conservative supreme court?
I'll hang up and listen.
Most Bernie supporters are millennials, they are too young too understand how politics works in my experience.
You know how easy it is to blame something on easy targets?
Like there's an issue somewhere? WAAAAAAAAAALL STREEEEEEEET
Well here for Gore, it's NAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADEEEER!
You know what I hate most about Lybia?
It gives an easy out to not blame fucking Sarkozy on it.
Seriously that little shit gets to parade how this was a success.
Hmmm...
it was political suicide to do otherwise. HIllary would have been targeted as unpatriotic. Now she is targeted as a warhawk as a result.
damned if you do, damned if you dont.
the only thing you show is a lack of context for the times.
shoplifter
Member
^^^^ so the appearance of patriotism under pressure was more important than standing up for what was right. Good to know.
MICHAEL DUKAKIS WON WEST VIRGINA AND AL GORE DIDNT.
Think about how insane that sounds.
MICHAEL DUKAKIS WON WEST VIRGINA AND AL GORE DIDNT.
Think about how insane that sounds.
Did people call Inouye unpatriotic because of his no vote?
JesseEwiak
Member
I'm aware a bunch of lefties try to tell themselves some of the blood from Iraq isn't partly on their hands. Here's the simple truth - if every Nader voted had but their big boy pants on and voted for Gore, Dubya wouldn't have been President. Period.
Yes, states change. West Virginia decided they hated gay and black people more than they liked social welfare programs and a bunch of Democrat's died and were replaced by people who had grown up in Reagan's America listening to Rush Limbaugh. Nominating Tom Harkin as VP wouldn't have won Gore WV.
I'm sure Fox News did, but Daniel Inouye had no dreams of being a national political candidate.
I'm talking about the Senator of New York. You know, the place that got attacked.
uncelestial
Member
shoplifter
Member
I've already answered earlier in the thread. It's not relevant to the fact that Gore failed as a candidate on multiple fronts. Nader was only relevant on one of those.
I didn't know "most" was 36%
That's his biggest base so yeah "most".
teruterubozu
Member
It's like people forgot Gore's cringeworthy debates. The dude was struggling.
Well maybe I was wrong on that. Still, it doesn't change the fact that it was ultimately Gore who didn't do enough to woo enough voters to his side (he didn't even win his own state IIRC). And you can't blame Nader for actually doing HIS job.
shortsFortallPeople
Banned
I wasnt talking about gore.
Last I heard you thought Hillary was going to put centrists on the court.
But neither answer the question I proposed.
NoblesseOblige
Banned
I didn't know "most" was 36%
You linked a graph showing that most are millennials.
shoplifter
Member
By Iraq?
Primethius
Banned
No shit Sherlock?
What were you even trying to get at with this post? Trump's a racist. And your voting for him. And your white.
What am I missing?
JesseEwiak
Member
Because obviously, Hillary Clinton is somehow going to put more conservative members of the Supreme Court than Bill Clinton did in the 90's. Because she's an evil bitch who hates every Sanders supporter, gay person, immigrant, and single payer supporter.
Nah.
That did not work out for you.
I think some people here have confused the Congress with kindergarten. Just because the other kids do something bad it doesn't mean that it's OK for you to do it as well to avoid being called a loser. I think it's one of the first lessons I learned there: Personal responsibility.
Clinton prioritized her career over the lives of thousands of people, this is what I'm reading in your post. The context is that corporate media that were advertising the war at the time and the rest of the status quo would have attacked her and she couldn't stand losing popularity points.
shoplifter
Member
I answered that earlier as well. I'm not confident she will do anything other than putting neoliberal justices on the court.
It may be better for LGBT/racial/gender issues, which is admirable, but I don't see it improving on economic issues or things like govt surveillance.
Edit: my kid is finishing soccer training up so I won't be posting for at least a few hours.
Who do you think the American people thought attacked NY?
The Bush administration actually convinced (with the big help of the media) people that it was Saddam's fault.
I was on the other side of the world and even I saw that.
Clinton would have been hung, quartered and drawn if she voted against.
uncelestial
Member
Argh, I could've sworn there was an isolated-to-Sanders bar graph. That one does not show how it breaks down. Basically 18-30 is the biggest single chunk but is less than half -- most Sanders voters are over 30, myself included. Whatever.
Fully agree. Those in non-swing states shouldn't feel guilty for voting 3rd party. In fact, it would be great if there was a real organized movement towards something like that this year.
Unless my state becomes competitive, I will be definitely be voting green, and I hope plenty of others join me.
You Are Viewtiful
Member
Nah:
Edit: Better image:
There's a skew but plenty of older voters go for Sanders too
30-35 are Millennials too, it still adds up.
theignoramus
Member
No, I think the blame for Iraq lies squarely with the Bush administration and politicians like Hillary who voted for the invasion. And least we forget, before Bush and the war, there were thousands of Iraqi kids dying under the sanctions regime and Madeleine Albrite told us she and the rest of the Clinton admin had no moral issue with that.
I don't think you read my post. I could make a laundry list of moral objections genuine lefties would have to voting for Hillary. Not being anti-abortion, not banning Muslims from entering the country (but is okay with bombing them abroad) and suddenly being pro equal marriage (having been vehemently against it) now that it's a done deal is a really low bar.
Also those who vote Green know that Jill Stein won't win, it's about building momentum for future elections. The more people who vote for her in this election the more viable the next Green candidate is for the next election and so more people will vote for him/her and so on. If you keep writing off third party candidates as no hopers it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Angry Puppy
Member
If i were to vote, it would be for Trump. Since I'm abstaining my vote, I guess it would be considered a vote for Hilary.
Is it just the anger talking or do you like angry racist white businessmen?
... Seriously, Hillary has said that the number one litmus test to her supreme court nominee choices has been Citizens United. And do you think she'll appoint a court that would strike down universal healthcare when she wants universal healthcare?
Third party candidates won't go anywhere until they have an actual base. They need people in congress and the state houses. They need to be throwing everything they've got into local races if they want to go anywhere, unless they do that they'll never be anything more than a protest vote. The green party goes no where because they have no idea what they're doing. They are to blame for their lack of success.
uncelestial
Member
You're aware of very little, including the fact that most Nader voters wouldn't have voted for Gore, and that Gore lost a ton of states that Clinton won by margins greater than the entire Nader voting base.
I would lose the smugness. It's not becoming of people who don't know what they're talking about.
AphelionXII
Banned
Dear PantherLotus
You say things like this and wonder why more and more people become disenfranchised by liberal political polarization. Hillary Clinton is a lire, a nepotistic demagogue, and possibly a criminal, which are all good reasons for not voting for her. And then you conflate Sanders with Bush Jr. Which makes little to no sense at all.
The only arguments I could possibly see with putting Hillary in the White House is that:
a.) A vote for Hillary is a vote for things staying the same. Which granted, things are REALLY not that bad in this country right now. Unemployment is going down and the market is coming back up.
b.) She's a woman and it is <insert current year>
Which are both kind of flimsy.
You have to stop assuming people aren't as intelligent as you because they believe in different things. The only safe assumption is to assume that in the stratus of intellect, you probably rank notably lower than the median. That way you don't miss out on learning things from people you don't know, which are the most valuable lessons you will learn in your life.
Your pal,
Aphelion
Maybe it's satire?
Septimus Prime
Member
45 > 50? Is this a Kyle Orland graph?Nah:
Edit: Better image:
There's a skew but plenty of older voters go for Sanders too
- Status