For the overwhelming majority of us who don't live in Ohio or Florida, how EXACTLY does voting our

[Vote2016]

conscious help Trump win?

How is voting our conscience ever throwing our vote away? Voting for a candidate who we don't trust and who disparages our values is more of a throw-away vote in a non-battleground state.

If you believe otherwise, feel free to persuade me. I'm not unpersuadeable.

[Demsrule86]

1. Every vote counts

AS for conscience? I laugh at that one...no one with conscience could fail to vote for Hillary Clinton...when Trump is the opponent...a racist scum bucket who would dismantle Roe and all progressive policies...and this is a different sort of race with Trump...I doubt past years are a good indicator or what states may be important. We are not GOP ...we have different paths...not just Florida and Ohio.

[RKP5637]

4. I agree. I like Bernie, but I will definitely vote for HRC, no question. Trump, would be the

ultimate disaster for the US.

[Demsrule86]

6. Bernie has really ticked me off

But I would vote for him if somehow he won the nomination...Trump is the worst.

[RKP5637]

10. Same here if Bernie were the nominee. n/t

[CentralMass]

26. How has he ticked you off ?

[Vote2016]

37. His relentless advocacy for the middle class and those aspiring to join the middle class ticks some

people off, but mostly those people are not Democrats who share FDR's vision for the party.

[merrily]

5. MOSt votes for President don't matter these days. The OP is correct on facts.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12778561

[Vote2016]

11. So EVERY Green Party vote is unconscionable? Even in the reddest red state and in the bluest blue

states?

Why is that? Seriously, help me understand why.

[Demsrule86]

18. with a candidate like Trump

every vote counts...this is not a red vs blue thing...this year in my opinion...there may be different states in play. Trump is not a normal candidate and must be stopped cold. He is the most dangerous Republican nominee in my lifetime.

[Armstead]

49. It's the same in every election. That's not the damn point.

We can agree on one thing. Almost any Republican is worse, especially in the WH. That is not an issue on the center left to left in any election. Even genial, modrate old Bush Sr. was a disaster.

But the question is what are the Democrats? What should be the goals, values message of the party that opposes the GOP?

That can't just be lockstep acceptance of whatever the with money and power decide it should be. That transcends individual elections -- and elections are the times when that is supposed to be debated.

[riderinthestorm]

20. Getting the Green Party to 5% of the national count is a worthy goal imo

The Democratic party is better when we have a strong party or someone pushing hard from the left.

[Demsrule86]

44. No it is not

The Democratic party loses every time that happens, and we elect Republicans...the Greens make us stronger has always been bullshit. You want to elect Republicans then fine vote Green but don't waste your breath explaining in a convoluted manner why it is a good thing...because it is not. Bush came damn close to destroying this country...and should Trump win, he would finish the job...not only would there be no revolution the progress we have made since Roosevelt would be gone as well. So the Greens can pound sand because that would be more useful than what they actually do which is help Republicans.

[riderinthestorm]

51. It's a myth that Nader cost Gore the election. That's been thoroughly debunked.

Nader got 2.75% of the vote in 2000. The Greens were a non-factor.

Gore ran a bad campaign. He lost his own home state of TN and refused to let Bill Clinton campaign for him in Arkansas and lost there too.

300k Democratic voters switched in FL and voted for Bush - blame them before Nader who got 97k total. Gore fucked up even further by asking for select county recounts instead of the entire state which opened the door for SCOTUS to stomp all over it.

I happily voted for Gore but I don't engage in historical revision.

Lastly, every progressive agrees Bernie’s run has helped pull the Democratic party (and Hillary) to the left. That's a good thing unless you're a corporatist Warhawk. Those in blue states aren't helping the Republicans at all by voting Green - that's a straight up lie.

[thesquanderer]

21. In the reddest states, I think it's important to vote Dem.

The way for the Dem party to grow there in the future is to show increasing support for that party.

However in a solidly blue state, voting green can be a benefit in that it shows increasing support for that party. It also tells the Dems that there are more votes to be had to their left.

[Demsrule86]

43. This is not a normal election ...not with Trump

We don't know where we may have opportunities...thus, we need to vote overwhelmingly Democratic...and as I have said the Greens are dead to me after Kerry. Also, who would have thought before 2008 that Virginia would become a Democratic state...we have now won it twice. Voting for a party that can't win might make you feel good but it is not a good idea.

[Vote2016]

52. I'm thinking that voting Green at the top of the ticket and Democratic down below makes sense in

non-battleground states but nose pinching in Ohio and Florida.

If we vote Hillary in non-battleground states, it would send a message that we're ok with a neoliberal Democratic Party buckled with a neocon foreign policy, and I'm just not ok with that.

[Demsrule86]

71. Again you assume those are the states that matter.

With Trump there may be other states in play...consider Virginia. I see no reason why you would not vote for Clinton...having a Dem president is so important...in terms of the courts...Personally with five justices over 80, I would vote for Bernie if I had to ...and I have come to despise him. Honestly, I don't think he could win a general, but I would try like hell.

[AgingAmerican]

25. Not in our system they don't

Not in the GE

[hobbit709]

2. The chances of either Hillary or Bernie taking TX start at 0 and go downhill from there.

[WolverineDG]

8. All the Clintons & the DNC want from Texas is our money

which I've refused to give them for years. Once they stop treating us like garbage, I'll reconsider. But yeah, we can pretty much vote our consciences here & not have any impact on the national results.

[hobbit709]

12. And half the time they act like they don't want us to be seen with their kind.

[Demsrule86]

14. Well maybe if you voted for a few more Dems

You might improve the situation...but by not even trying what do you accomplish? I lived in Georgia and fought the good fight...in my area they did not even have Dems running at first but we got them on the ballot...and I will wager that since the good people of Georiga still fight the good fight to end GOP oppression...that Georgia will turn blue before Texas. Throwing your hands up in the air and sulking ...does not help anyone.

[WolverineDG]

17. We are putting up a good fight

and without any help from holier-than-thous in blue states.

And people wonder why many Texas Dems don't support Hillary.

[Demsrule86]

45. What kind of help do you require?

You need to begin in local elections...it can be done...might take time.

[WolverineDG]

62. Oh do tell

Please do the equivalent of "mansplaining" Texas politics to a lifelong resident of this state. I can safely say we *REALLY* appreciate being condescended to.

[Demsrule86]

70. I was explaining Georgia

and encouraging you not to give up...you have the demographics...there is reason to believe because of a court action which will hit Scotus before midterms...to believe some of the worst of the gerrymandering may be overturned...I don't doubt you have it rough...George sucked and still does...but you have to keep on trying...I live in occupied Ohio where we had such a bad Dem last time that Kasich got re-elected...and has turned this state into Alabama, but I keep on fighting...you can do as you please. I don't see why you need to attack me.

[VulgarPoet]

46. Preach the good shit, amigo. nt

[opiate69]

34. Yeah... you obviously know nothing about Texas politics...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_Texas_redistricting

[Txbluedog]

3. This is why it important for me personally

Give both candidates historic unfavorbility ratings, I am sure a few traditional blue and red states might be up for grabs and there might be more than the usual paths to 270 electoral votes

[PowerToThePeople]

7. I agree

This is a very good reason to have a nominee who can get votes in the GE.

[Demsrule86]

9. I think Georgia may be competitive

I lived in Georgia...and was surprised at the 2012 numbers...they were way closer than expected and Obama did not campaign there. Georgia has a boot on the neck GOP government and up until I think it was 2004, they had Dems running the state.

[Henhouse]

13. I live in SC. I traded my vote with a Nader supporter in Oregon in 2000...

There was a website where Gore and Nader supporters could pick someone to exchange votes with.

I kept my end of the bargain and I believe my "vote partner" in Oregon kept their end of the bargain as well...It was a nail biter, though....

Democratic Al Gore 720,342 46.96%
Republican George W. Bush 713,577 46.52%

[Demsrule86]

15. Sure... you were played and look how that worked out for us Greens are dead to me nt

[Tal Vez]

16. Why don't you revisit this question in November?

What difference does it make what you think right now?

[Vote2016]

22. In over 90% of states, we could call the state now at the top of the ticket in a non-landslide race

[Tal Vez]

30. I think you can call my state now.

I live in California. I have friends who seem to like Trump. I tell them that if they want to help elect Trump, they better get out there and start campaigning hard if they want California to go Republican.

The reality is that those of us who live in California are really just spectators in the general elections for president. If a Republican wins California, he/she will also win 49 other states, too. Our votes for president really don't count. The people of Mississippi are on the other side of the same boat.

[TwilightZone]

32. "Over 90%"

90% of 50 states is 45. You're ready to call 46 states right now?

You really don't know much about this election thing, do you?

[Vote2016]

33. If the election is close, only 3 or 4 (or fewer) states will be in play. If that is not the case

we're in landslide mode and no individual state will matter. This is known on 538 and betwise and 100 other election websites. In no event will Hillary win Texas or will Trump win California, for example .

[Hiraeth]

19. I wish everyone would vote their conscious all the time, every time.

To thine own self be true.

[MineralMan]

31. As far as I can remember, I have never been unconscious when I voted.

That would be extraordinarily difficult, I think.

[rbrnmw]

47. lol

[LWolf]

39. +1

[Demsrule86]

48. No thanks

I would rather keep Roe V Wade...and a few other important things like civil rights...gay marriage etc...you pure people keep going...hopefully not enough of you to mess things up for the rest of us.

[Garrett78]

23. Some might argue that the bigger Trump's loss is...

...the more likely we are to see broad systemic change for the better, including a more rational Republican Party. If that happens, more progressive candidates (at the local level and beyond) would be more likely to have success.

And a message would be sent that most people in the US reject bigotry.

[Vote2016]

24. Or maybe the better Jill Stein does, the more DLC-types will see it is better not take the base for

granted

[Garrett78]

27. I think that argument may also have merit. I'm just putting forth a different argument.

I do tend to agree with this argument put forth by Julio Huato: http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/2011/2011-June/007032.html

[LWolf]

40. It's making a pretty big assumption

to think that Trump is going to lose.

Even "safe" states for Democrats may not be all that safe this year.

[Garrett78]

50. It's not a matter of making an assumption. It's a response to the OP.

The OP is asking why he/she should vote for Clinton if he/she doesn't live in a crucial swing state. And I'm simply putting forth an argument that one might make as to why a vote for Clinton (regardless of which state it's in) could be considered worthwhile.

Let's pretend Trump loses by a small margin.

Now, let's pretend Trump loses by a wide margin.

Which of the above hypothetical scenarios would most benefit the push for progressive reform?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

28. Always vote for principle..and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.

Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost. John Quincy Adams

[Arazi]

29. Vote your conscience especially with the global environmental crisis

[bigwillq]

35. It doesn't.

Vote for who you want. I will.

[Thirties Child]

36. I live in a solidly red state.

If there is a tiny - make that miniscule - chance Georgia will vote blue, I have to vote HRC. Much as I dislike voting for a Wall Street promoting, foreign policy war hawk, she's a far, far better choice than Trump. We can blame the respective party establishments for giving us two such bad choices.

[JoePhilly]

38. Stay home!!!!!!!

No wait .... that is terrible advice.

You should vote for Trump and send the DNC bastards a message!!!!

[Vote2016]

41. That is the exact sort of advice I was looking for from stand-up fella just like yourself! Thanks!

[MisterP]

42. it shows up the conservadem drips that couldn't win the bluest state without millions in spending?

[ProgressiveEconomist]

53. You're encouraging BoB

activity in swing states. Voting for Trump, voting Green, writing in "Bernie Sanders", or staying home is hard to confine to just likely non-swing states. You'll be responding to a national movement that will hurt Democratic chances in swing states, whether you happen to be located in a swing state or not.

And whether or not a state is a swing state won't be fully determined until after the November election is over. Utah likely won't be a swing state, but Texas and even Georgia could be.

[Vote2016]

55. BoBs confining that voting pattern in non-battleground states is a winning compromise

[HereSince1628]

54. To paraphrase Nelson Mandela... A vote should always be for what you hope for

not because of what you fear.

[mmonk]

57. +1

[Vote2016]

60. Thanks for that

[Vinca]

56. If there are 2 viable candidates and you vote for a nonviable candidate,

that takes a vote away from the viable candidates. If one viable candidate is someone you disagree with and the other viable candidate is batshit crazy, that should be something you consider for the good of the country.

[Vote2016]

61. You missed my point. Hillary's not a viable candidate in Texas etc. Trump is not a viable candidate

in California etc.

Literally, Jill Stein and Tom Johnson have a mathematical equivalent chance of winning Texas as Hillary and as much of a chance of winning California as Trump. Call Texas for Trump now and call California for Hillary.

If you live in Texas or California (and almost 4 dozen other states), your vote is symbolic. Why not cast that symbolic vote for something you believe in?

[Vinca]

63. I don't know. I'd hate to feel responsible for President Trump.

For example, Trump is talking about going after New York, a traditionally blue state, and this election has been so bizarre you can't count the maniac out until the numbers are on the board. I also don't consider anyone's vote "symbolic." Enough of them could change an election.

[winter is coming]

58. It pads the national vote total, adding to the appearance of a "mandate".

Or, if the total's not that inspiring, indicating the opposite. So, if you live in a swing state, you'd be voting to actually elect someone. In a non-swing state, where your vote "doesn't matter", you're indicating approval of a candidate and/or their agenda.

[NCTraveler]

59. I'm not telling you to not vote your conscious.

I will say, while your conscious is yours and yours alone, the path it leads you on dramatically impacts others.

This isn't a vote for Clinton post. Sometimes conscious is discussed in crude black and white terms; which it cannot be. I would also say my conscious itself has undergone changes, sometimes quickly.

I hope you vote your conscious. Actually, I know you will.

[Nonhlanhla]

64. There are some states that could turn blue if liberals and progressives united in their vote.

And some states that could red if a lot of progressives "vote their conscience."

[woolldog]

66. Indeed.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512098922

[JoePhilly]

65. So now YOU are saying that YOUR vote is irrelevant?

Too funny.

[tabasco]

67. conscience n/t

[randome]

68. The greater the margin of our win, the greater our chances are of taking Congress.

So every vote counts. Every. Single. One.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[seaglass]

69. Are you a Democrat? The number of delegates per state are partially calculated based on the number

of votes for the presidential candidate.

I can't convince you that your vote matters. I live in MA and my puny little vote for Pres probably doesn't matter that much to the nominee though I do remember that MA voted for Reagan twice. .

My conscience is clear whenever I stand against RWNJs and what they represent. The only way to do that in this presidential election is to vote for the democratic nominee. My conscience would not be clear if I threw my vote away.