Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

mac56

(17,566 posts)
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 10:18 PM Jun 2016

The scales have been lifted from my eyes.

Last edited Thu Jun 9, 2016, 11:25 PM - Edit history (2)

I had an online political discussion this morning with a friend, an intelligent and thoughtful woman with extensive firsthand knowledge about the workings of Washington. Not surprisingly, the discussion was about the two presumptive Presidential nominees. I lamented to her the following:

"This time around, I wish I was voting FOR someone rather than AGAINST Donald Trump."

I pondered this for most of the day, chewed on it like a hungry puppy with a Nylabone. Then, as if by divine grace, I had an epiphany. I knew what to do.

This fall, I am going to vote for Vice President.

I'm quite serious. It is very likely that neither of the presumptive nominees will still be President by 2020.

Hillary is already under investigation by the FBI about the private email server. These lads don't give out slaps on the wrist. There's also the possibility of an investigation of money-changing at the Clinton Foundation. Even if nothing comes of these investigations, it will divert a ginormous amount of her time and energy. In addition, she made an assload of money giving speeches to Goldman Sachs and other investment firms - who don't typically give out assloads of money without expecting a ROI - and has stubbornly refused to release the transcripts of these speeches, which has not played well with the Democratic branch of the Democratic Party. Plus, and maybe most importantly, House Republicans have ALREADY began drawing up articles of impeachment for Hillary, and they don't exactly dilly-dally. She will have an enormously difficult time getting through the term, and anyone who does not recognize this is either naive or willfully deceived.

Trump? Judas Priest on a popsicle stick, he's given us at least 20 good reasons to impeach his sorry ass already. And the pressure to impeach won't be coming just from the Dems -- there are plenty of Reeps who will be eager to see him go down as well. It's questionable whether his candidacy will survive the GOP convention. Plus he's under investigation too, about Trump University, and he hasn't exactly helped his cause by openly insulting federal judges. Plus he refuses to release his tax returns, and it's not hard to figure out why. And just as importantly, Trump may very well get overwhelmed and/or bored - and decide to bail. He has the attention span of a goldfish. Though it's dangerous to underestimate the carnival barker, the odds are good he also may not see 2020 in the White House.

So where does that leave us? Vice Presidential candidates. I'll lay you odds-on that Hillary's Veep will be in the Oval Office in 2020, 8 to 5 for Trump's Veep. The party who puts up the better Vice Presidential candidate will get my vote in November. And as a life long yellow dog Dem, it pains me to realize it may mean a vote for the dark side.

So there you have it. A simple, airtight, and elegant solution. I won't be voting AGAINST Trump - I'll be voting FOR the best Veep.

Feels good. I will sleep well tonight.

193 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The scales have been lifted from my eyes. (Original Post) mac56 Jun 2016 OP
I'd also lay odds that you don't vote in November. Voting just doesn't seem like a priority to you. tonyt53 Jun 2016 #1
If anything, the OP seems to be bvf Jun 2016 #14
with shit sauce and a side or of deep fried shit. yourout Jun 2016 #44
Yes. 840high Jun 2016 #77
We all vote for our own reasons. I can see the reasoning. Many people are having a hard time kerry-is-my-prez Jun 2016 #154
I think you meant this as a reply to the OP. bvf Jun 2016 #171
What an asinine post. nt Live and Learn Jun 2016 #55
Careful, I got a hide for much less than that. pangaia Jun 2016 #92
Hides come pretty easy these days but commenting on a post is supposed to be fair game. Live and Learn Jun 2016 #93
Who are you to judge whether someone's own thoughts are true or not? Are you the arbiter of kerry-is-my-prez Jun 2016 #155
That's a terrible thing to say, and I hope you decide to self-delete emulatorloo Jun 2016 #151
I agree. kerry-is-my-prez Jun 2016 #156
I smell Brockoli. HooptieWagon Jun 2016 #190
Really? blackspade Jun 2016 #192
Wtf ever. seabeyond Jun 2016 #2
+1 bravenak Jun 2016 #5
This. Nt metroins Jun 2016 #12
You could have walked on by. Instead you choose to bully. Scootaloo Jun 2016 #29
are you familiar with what the verb "to bully" means in the English language? geek tragedy Jun 2016 #34
I am, in fact Scootaloo Jun 2016 #38
+1. n/t bvf Jun 2016 #74
if someone feels bullied by "wtf ever" then their psyche is probably too fragile geek tragedy Jun 2016 #97
It's the behavior itself, not the exact statement. Scootaloo Jun 2016 #101
This person is saying they might vote for Donald Trump geek tragedy Jun 2016 #104
You didn't read the OP, obviously Scootaloo Jun 2016 #107
I did read it, and posts like this will be TOS violations geek tragedy Jun 2016 #109
Too bad trolls with 10+ hides will still be welcome though Scootaloo Jun 2016 #111
Ooh, you're bullying me. nt geek tragedy Jun 2016 #117
Oh hey, you have ten hides. Scootaloo Jun 2016 #119
Speaking of bullying. In 6 - 7 days the bullies will be turned lose. Is that what you are saying. rhett o rick Jun 2016 #116
Speaking of bullies... zappaman Jun 2016 #129
Speaking of bullies...moderate much? nt msanthrope Jun 2016 #139
OP is not advocating lancer78 Jun 2016 #128
There it is. If one feels bullied then shame on them. Classic. rhett o rick Jun 2016 #113
It was her turn to try for the number one response slot and that's all she rhett o rick Jun 2016 #115
"Choose?" It's a twitch response with a large cadre of posters here. nt villager Jun 2016 #51
I wasn't bullied. 840high Jun 2016 #78
Agreed Dem2 Jun 2016 #53
This. A thousand times this. nt Codeine Jun 2016 #89
+1 tallahasseedem Jun 2016 #176
Hey, what ever knots you have to tie yourself into to vote for our nominee in Nov, go for it. ashtonelijah Jun 2016 #3
Don't assume my vote will be for "your" nominee. mac56 Jun 2016 #4
Aren't DU members supposed to support Democrats? PJMcK Jun 2016 #35
Jeepers, Mister DU Cop, don't beat me up or nothin'. mac56 Jun 2016 #39
Easy there, mac56 PJMcK Jun 2016 #46
You nailed it. mac56 Jun 2016 #54
you are comparing a comment on an internet discussion board to that kind of police brutality? niyad Jun 2016 #52
You are sarcasm impaired? mac56 Jun 2016 #56
no, but then, some things should not be treated lightly. niyad Jun 2016 #159
Yep GulfCoast66 Jun 2016 #42
--- mac56 Jun 2016 #45
LOL GulfCoast66 Jun 2016 #48
Nice. bvf Jun 2016 #64
Agreed, should be so enlightening All in it together Jun 2016 #90
I don't think you have to worry much about people that won't support your candidate hanging around Live and Learn Jun 2016 #62
Right on, Live and Learn. mac56 Jun 2016 #65
...!100++++ 840high Jun 2016 #83
... AzDar Jun 2016 #123
This message was self-deleted by its author rjsquirrel Jun 2016 #127
LOL You wish we were so few. And I will happily claim Sarandon. nt Live and Learn Jun 2016 #130
This message was self-deleted by its author rjsquirrel Jun 2016 #134
I can assure you that I have been a member of the Democratic party for longer than you. Live and Learn Jun 2016 #152
but there are plenty of trolls on here dlwickham Jun 2016 #79
There certainly are. mac56 Jun 2016 #88
And lots of establishment supporters that don't post for years and only come during big elections. Live and Learn Jun 2016 #91
Yup. "Hello--- lo--- lo----" mac56 Jun 2016 #94
LOL...lol...lo..lo...l nt Live and Learn Jun 2016 #96
I'm a bit confused.... jzodda Jun 2016 #6
Then you don't need to worry, do you? mac56 Jun 2016 #8
+1 NCTraveler Jun 2016 #138
All of that to say you don't know not to vote for a repug? brush Jun 2016 #7
I want to vote FOR someone instead of AGAINST Trump. mac56 Jun 2016 #9
Frankly, yes. Keeping Trump out of the White House is a huge priority. brush Jun 2016 #23
Then Hillary knows what she needs to do. mac56 Jun 2016 #98
You're missing the point. Scootaloo Jun 2016 #33
Scootaloo FTW mac56 Jun 2016 #40
That's your opinion. Keeping Trump out of the White House is the overriding point. brush Jun 2016 #47
By my assessment, he WILL be out of the White House by 2020. mac56 Jun 2016 #57
Huh? Clarity in language is good. brush Jun 2016 #67
Okay. I'll type slow so that you get it. mac56 Jun 2016 #71
Brevity in language is nice too. So you still don't know not to vote for a repug, huh? brush Jun 2016 #84
What I don't know how to do is vote for someone I think will be bad for the country. mac56 Jun 2016 #87
Don't have anymore time for people that don't know whether to vote against Trump brush Jun 2016 #100
It's not your fault that your reading comprehension is bad. mac56 Jun 2016 #103
Ad hominem insults will work everytime when you don't have anything else. brush Jun 2016 #122
I KNEW I recognized your tone! mac56 Jun 2016 #124
What Mac56 is saying lancer78 Jun 2016 #131
Yeah, yeah. We've all heard that argument over and over throughout the primaries brush Jun 2016 #148
You seem obsessed with me. mac56 Jun 2016 #158
Still privileged navel gazing IMO. brush Jun 2016 #163
Don't you have someone else to harrass? mac56 Jun 2016 #164
Hey, I gave you a break through the night brush Jun 2016 #169
I expect you to get a life. mac56 Jun 2016 #170
You were so wordy before, now nothing to say about contemplating voting repug on . . . brush Jun 2016 #172
Are you flirting with me? mac56 Jun 2016 #173
Ok, you got me with that one. That'll shut me up. brush Jun 2016 #174
In post 57 the meaning was clear and precise, but you failed to comprehend it. Dark n Stormy Knight Jun 2016 #133
Nothing confusing there? brush Jun 2016 #149
There's a difference between not confusing and not correct. Dark n Stormy Knight Jun 2016 #185
He wasn't clear, IMO, because we were talking about him voting in 2016 . . . brush Jun 2016 #187
It doesn't matter at this point, but just to be clear, Dark n Stormy Knight Jun 2016 #188
"The party who puts up the better Vice Presidential candidate will get my vote in November." brush Jun 2016 #189
Wow. Seriously??!! No one is claiming that! Dark n Stormy Knight Jun 2016 #193
As I said below, your post #57 already explained it quite clearly. Dark n Stormy Knight Jun 2016 #136
having to vote "against" rather than vote "for" IS a shite deal though AntiBank Jun 2016 #140
That sums it up perfectly. SheilaT Jun 2016 #49
Sorry, but I see a completely different HRC than you do Raastan Jun 2016 #58
I've not agreed 100% with President Obama so far. mac56 Jun 2016 #61
So she is more qualified then him? lancer78 Jun 2016 #132
.+1 840high Jun 2016 #85
If that gets you through the day................. Trust Buster Jun 2016 #10
Here's a reply for you bvf Jun 2016 #118
I am so tired of this sandyshoes17 Jun 2016 #11
Yup. You got it, sandy. mac56 Jun 2016 #13
They give us a bad candidate marions ghost Jun 2016 #70
Yeah. That's why I came up with this. mac56 Jun 2016 #72
I get it marions ghost Jun 2016 #110
the people voted handmade34 Jun 2016 #137
Never again. 840high Jun 2016 #86
Who is "they?" Cosmocat Jun 2016 #144
Sorry, but I think they will just sell the whole VP will become Pres to get people to the polls. My Skwmom Jun 2016 #15
Your mileage may vary with individual driving patterns. mac56 Jun 2016 #17
You know, he does have a good point. We SHOULD be looking beyond this cycle. raging moderate Jun 2016 #99
Yes. And sometimes they become President sooner than we expect. mac56 Jun 2016 #106
She will not pick someone who she believes is as strong as or libdem4life Jun 2016 #108
several paragraphs jcgoldie Jun 2016 #16
Bless you for working your way through till the end. mac56 Jun 2016 #19
Weird. I guess this is what people are supposed to get out of their system in these last days. YouDig Jun 2016 #18
There should be some kind of award for most passive agressive sufrommich Jun 2016 #20
"There are so many people to thank for this award... mac56 Jun 2016 #24
Lol.nt sufrommich Jun 2016 #26
what's passive aggressive about it? NJCher Jun 2016 #50
NJCher, it's surprising how many people this year mac56 Jun 2016 #59
You seem to hold yourself in very high esteem. I doubt anyone cares as BreakfastClub Jun 2016 #21
You mistakenly believe I have rationalized voting for Madame Secretary. mac56 Jun 2016 #27
It is you with the reading comprehension problems. Read my post again, slower this BreakfastClub Jun 2016 #41
If I vote for the Democratic ticket, it will be for the VP. mac56 Jun 2016 #43
SCOTUS is About 10 Times More Important than Vice-President Stallion Jun 2016 #22
Um.. okay.. think think think... mac56 Jun 2016 #28
Honestly, I don't care who you vote for leftofcool Jun 2016 #25
Judging from a lot of the responses here bvf Jun 2016 #30
Hard to believe, isn't it? mac56 Jun 2016 #32
I only vote for democrats. wendylaroux Jun 2016 #36
Up till my epiphany, I did too. mac56 Jun 2016 #37
I will too,where are they? wendylaroux Jun 2016 #60
We'll know by the conventions. mac56 Jun 2016 #63
ok,we shall see! wendylaroux Jun 2016 #66
Or people have little use for somebody who has said they might vote for a ticket including Trump mythology Jun 2016 #76
I'm voting for the best VP. mac56 Jun 2016 #81
LMAO. 7 days left. geek tragedy Jun 2016 #31
6 by my count brooklynite Jun 2016 #68
The Were Talking About Neo-Confederate Sessions Today Stallion Jun 2016 #80
One more week to let these overblown histrionics play out around here. LonePirate Jun 2016 #69
Even odds that HRC is in office in 2020 if she is elected? I'll take that. Adrahil Jun 2016 #73
I'll give this delightful post 840high Jun 2016 #75
* blush * Delightful. mac56 Jun 2016 #82
Since when is there a separate voting box on the ballot for the VP? procon Jun 2016 #95
very logical NJCher Jun 2016 #102
Bless you, NJCher. mac56 Jun 2016 #105
Another OP Fan ! libdem4life Jun 2016 #112
Ha! Another "it-getter"! mac56 Jun 2016 #114
++, I agree. NJCher was quite correct in the post upthread. JonLeibowitz Jun 2016 #120
Thanks, JL. mac56 Jun 2016 #121
Have you thought about any specific VP pairings? Jim Lane Jun 2016 #125
6 more days.... chillfactor Jun 2016 #126
"Got along without you before I met you..." mac56 Jun 2016 #146
Lol, ok, "look at me", we get it! Nt Logical Jun 2016 #135
That is still voting for Hillary - I doubt there are any GOP VPs you admire, really. djean111 Jun 2016 #141
We shall see what we shall see. mac56 Jun 2016 #143
No, it does not. djean111 Jun 2016 #145
.... LexVegas Jun 2016 #142
Wondered why this title bugged me, then realized it's because the idiom is that betsuni Jun 2016 #147
Still can't see straight though if navel gazing about whether or not to vote repug brush Jun 2016 #157
Ha! Thanks! mac56 Jun 2016 #165
why do you have to vote FOR someone? treestar Jun 2016 #150
Do what you want. mac56 Jun 2016 #160
politics is not a game like that treestar Jun 2016 #175
As I said, do what you want. mac56 Jun 2016 #177
so you don't mind if Trump wins? treestar Jun 2016 #180
I don't plan to live in fear. mac56 Jun 2016 #181
Good well thought out argument. Rec n/t emulatorloo Jun 2016 #153
Thank you! mac56 Jun 2016 #166
"Feels good" in the sense that hitting yourself in the head with a hammer feels good when you stop. eppur_se_muova Jun 2016 #161
You missed my point by a mile. mac56 Jun 2016 #162
Do you have high expectations for a Trump VP? n/t redStateBlueHeart Jun 2016 #167
I genuinely don't know. mac56 Jun 2016 #168
I voted for Nader in 2000. Worse vote I ever made n/t kevinmc Jun 2016 #178
Please elaborate. mac56 Jun 2016 #179
You make an excellent point. nruthie Jun 2016 #182
-- mac56 Jun 2016 #183
OP: if this makes sense to you SCantiGOP Jun 2016 #184
I would NEVER vote for a Republican WolverineDG Jun 2016 #186
Excellent idea! Betty Karlson Jun 2016 #191
 

tonyt53

(5,737 posts)
1. I'd also lay odds that you don't vote in November. Voting just doesn't seem like a priority to you.
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 10:19 PM
Jun 2016
 

bvf

(6,604 posts)
14. If anything, the OP seems to be
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 10:29 PM
Jun 2016

making an argument for voting, despite being faced with a shit sandwich, and a shit sandwich with extra shit.

kerry-is-my-prez

(8,133 posts)
154. We all vote for our own reasons. I can see the reasoning. Many people are having a hard time
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 10:15 AM
Jun 2016

with making a decision. I applaud you because it makes sense to me. Ignore all the people who are eating sour grapes.

 

bvf

(6,604 posts)
171. I think you meant this as a reply to the OP.
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 01:08 PM
Jun 2016

While I rec'd it, I don't recall saying I intended to follow suit.

Live and Learn

(12,769 posts)
93. Hides come pretty easy these days but commenting on a post is supposed to be fair game.
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 11:31 PM
Jun 2016

Especially when it is true. And it is certainly not as bad as the post right below. Though those posts have always been tolerated too.

kerry-is-my-prez

(8,133 posts)
155. Who are you to judge whether someone's own thoughts are true or not? Are you the arbiter of
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 10:51 AM
Jun 2016

everyone's thoughts and their thought processes? We all make decisions based on our own experiences and the information we have taken in. In addition, people have their basic temperaments and identities. For instance, some people here identify as a "Democrat," do or die. Some identify as a "Sanders supporter," do or die and will write his name in. We have people who a "risk takers" and others who are "risk adverse."

Age has something to do with it. If you are younger, you will be more likely to take risks. If you are older and have lived through and witnessed things such Nixon, Reagan, the losses of McGovern, Mondale, and Dukakis, you are going to be less of a risk taker. We all have our own thought processes.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
34. are you familiar with what the verb "to bully" means in the English language?
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 10:41 PM
Jun 2016

I'm pretty sure expressing indifference as in "wtf ever" is not considered bullying.

 

Scootaloo

(25,699 posts)
38. I am, in fact
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 10:45 PM
Jun 2016

Are you aware that in the format with which we communicate here, indifference can be adequately expressed by nonparticipation?

If you instead take the time to sit down and belittle another person - "what the fuck ever" - then you're not being indifferent. You're actively engaging, and doing so in a hostile, bullying way.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
97. if someone feels bullied by "wtf ever" then their psyche is probably too fragile
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 11:34 PM
Jun 2016

to risk exposure to the Internet.

 

Scootaloo

(25,699 posts)
101. It's the behavior itself, not the exact statement.
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 11:52 PM
Jun 2016

There's a thread talking about children bullying Latino students with the line, "You were born in a taco bell." That's a pretty fucking ridiculous insult, even for children. But that's not the point. it's the fact that the assholes using the line feel so entitled to be such assholes to other people.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
104. This person is saying they might vote for Donald Trump
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 11:55 PM
Jun 2016

on DEMOCRATIC underground, while also throwing in a perfunctory "Hillary for Prison 2016" line of commentary.

That's called trolling. People who troll invite unfriendly commentary.

 

Scootaloo

(25,699 posts)
107. You didn't read the OP, obviously
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 12:00 AM
Jun 2016

And now we've transitioned from "expressing indifference' to "unfriendly commentary."

How 'bout that.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
109. I did read it, and posts like this will be TOS violations
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 12:05 AM
Jun 2016

in 6-7 days. This person deserves much harsher responses quite frankly.

 

Scootaloo

(25,699 posts)
111. Too bad trolls with 10+ hides will still be welcome though
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 12:07 AM
Jun 2016

Frankly I'd rather have somewhat ignorant posters, than vituperative, hate-filled rageaholic posters.

 

Scootaloo

(25,699 posts)
119. Oh hey, you have ten hides.
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 12:26 AM
Jun 2016

All earned through being as innocent as a baby deer in a meadow, I'm sure.

Honestly hadn't noticed your Big Yellow Button. I'm just broadly annoyed that people who have proven an inability to speak to others with any modicum of civility are more welcome here than people who say something politically ignorant.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
116. Speaking of bullying. In 6 - 7 days the bullies will be turned lose. Is that what you are saying.
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 12:15 AM
Jun 2016

Bullying for righteousness.

 

lancer78

(1,495 posts)
128. OP is not advocating
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 03:44 AM
Jun 2016

others to vote for the republican nominee or their running mate. Therefore not a TOS violation.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
115. It was her turn to try for the number one response slot and that's all she
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 12:13 AM
Jun 2016

could come up with in less than two minutes. It's a tactic dreamed up in their so-called "think tank".

ashtonelijah

(340 posts)
3. Hey, what ever knots you have to tie yourself into to vote for our nominee in Nov, go for it.
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 10:22 PM
Jun 2016

So long as you vote for our nominee, I don't really care. Not even enough to refute that silly theory.

mac56

(17,566 posts)
4. Don't assume my vote will be for "your" nominee.
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 10:23 PM
Jun 2016

I make no assumptions at this point. The better VP gets my vote.

PJMcK

(22,035 posts)
46. Easy there, mac56
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 10:51 PM
Jun 2016

I'm asking a legitimate question. You're OP implies that you'll consider voting for the Republican ticket if you like their VP better than the Democrats'. If I've misunderstood you, forgive me but enlighten me.

mac56

(17,566 posts)
54. You nailed it.
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 10:54 PM
Jun 2016

It will be the first time in nearly 42 years, but I'm going to cast my vote FOR someone this time around.

niyad

(113,279 posts)
52. you are comparing a comment on an internet discussion board to that kind of police brutality?
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 10:53 PM
Jun 2016

realllllly?

Live and Learn

(12,769 posts)
62. I don't think you have to worry much about people that won't support your candidate hanging around
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 10:58 PM
Jun 2016

DU. There is much to be done and supporters of Bernie's ideas will be busy sharing them on sites that work for progressive ideas.

Response to Live and Learn (Reply #62)

Response to Live and Learn (Reply #130)

Live and Learn

(12,769 posts)
152. I can assure you that I have been a member of the Democratic party for longer than you.
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 10:10 AM
Jun 2016

And we are many more than you are aware.

"Doofuses like Hartmann and Malloy" "Comrade Sarandon?" Hmmm. Tells me all I need to know.

dlwickham

(3,316 posts)
79. but there are plenty of trolls on here
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 11:15 PM
Jun 2016

not saying the OP is a troll because that would be wrong but there are still plenty on here

Live and Learn

(12,769 posts)
91. And lots of establishment supporters that don't post for years and only come during big elections.
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 11:30 PM
Jun 2016

If the leave (and they will) and Bernie supporters leave, this place will be a pretty darn empty echo chamber.

jzodda

(2,124 posts)
6. I'm a bit confused....
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 10:23 PM
Jun 2016

You say you are a Democrat for a long time. It goes without saying that HRC will nominate somebody much more progressive than the Republican.

Trump is already considered a RINO on most core conservative issues so he HAS to go to the right for his VP.

Also who in the Republican party do you respect so much that you would support?

brush

(53,774 posts)
23. Frankly, yes. Keeping Trump out of the White House is a huge priority.
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 10:35 PM
Jun 2016

Last edited Thu Jun 9, 2016, 11:43 PM - Edit history (1)

 

Scootaloo

(25,699 posts)
33. You're missing the point.
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 10:41 PM
Jun 2016

There are two candidates now.

One is "I'm Not Donald Trump."
The other is "I'm Not Hillary Clinton."

Neither are running "vote for me because I'm awesome" campaigns. They're both doing "Vote against that other suck-fish" campaigns. It's really rather disheartening that we've reached the point where our best option is someone who define themselves by not being someone else.

mac56

(17,566 posts)
57. By my assessment, he WILL be out of the White House by 2020.
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 10:55 PM
Jun 2016

I am (possibly) proactively casting a vote for his successor.

Easy, huh?

mac56

(17,566 posts)
71. Okay. I'll type slow so that you get it.
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 11:07 PM
Jun 2016

No matter whether Hillary or Trump wins in November, there is a very good chance that whichever one wins the election will not still be in office by 2020. And if that person is still in office by then, he or she will be so tied up in procedural knots that nothing substantial will be accomplished. It will make the GOP's obstruction of President Obama look like patty-cake.

So. Rather than vote "against Trump" or "against Hillary," I have chosen to proactively vote FOR the Vice Presidential candidate that best matches my values, seeing as how that person has a pretty good chance of becoming President anyway. Whichever ticket he or she happens to be on.

With me so far? Anything else I can clear up for you?

brush

(53,774 posts)
84. Brevity in language is nice too. So you still don't know not to vote for a repug, huh?
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 11:20 PM
Jun 2016

Even if it's a vp repug.

Gotcha!

mac56

(17,566 posts)
87. What I don't know how to do is vote for someone I think will be bad for the country.
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 11:24 PM
Jun 2016

Must have skipped that day in civics class.

brush

(53,774 posts)
122. Ad hominem insults will work everytime when you don't have anything else.
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 12:52 AM
Jun 2016

Learn to write clearly and with economy though.

Might help you to know better than to vote for a repug.

mac56

(17,566 posts)
124. I KNEW I recognized your tone!
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 01:10 AM
Jun 2016

Miss Jensen, my grade ten English teacher!

Gosh, it's been so long. I think I still owe you 500 words on "How I Spent My Summer Vacation."

 

lancer78

(1,495 posts)
131. What Mac56 is saying
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 03:55 AM
Jun 2016

He is done voting for "lesser of two evils". I easily see where he is coming from, as voting for "the lesser of two evils" is basically that person throwing away his freedom to vote FOR someone.

brush

(53,774 posts)
148. Yeah, yeah. We've all heard that argument over and over throughout the primaries
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 09:53 AM
Jun 2016

In his OP he was debating as to which vp candidate to vote for, the Democratic candidate or the repug.

Which to me means, he/she doesn't know whether to vote for Clinton or Trump, which seems ridiculous.

There are other choices. Write-in, vote Green, stay home even (none of which are optimal), but to come on a progressive site whose raison d'etre is to get Dems elected and state that you don't know whether to vote for the Democrat or the repug, that is just . . . well . . . privileged navel gazing IMO.

mac56

(17,566 posts)
164. Don't you have someone else to harrass?
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 12:50 PM
Jun 2016

Am I today's assignment?

Go peddle your papers, junior.

brush

(53,774 posts)
169. Hey, I gave you a break through the night
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 12:54 PM
Jun 2016

If you still persist with not knowing whether to vote for a Dem or a repug on a site dedicated to getting Dems elected, what do you expect?

brush

(53,774 posts)
172. You were so wordy before, now nothing to say about contemplating voting repug on . . .
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 01:20 PM
Jun 2016

a site dedicated to getting Dems elected?

Dark n Stormy Knight

(9,760 posts)
133. In post 57 the meaning was clear and precise, but you failed to comprehend it.
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:25 AM
Jun 2016

So, a longer explanation was given. After which you were suddenly nostalgic for brevity.

Just for the record:

By my assessment, he WILL be out of the White House by 2020.
Considering that this was in response to your statement that "Keeping Trump out of the White House is the overriding point," surely nothing confusing there.

I am (possibly) proactively casting a vote for his successor.
As clearly explained in the OP, the theory is that the VP will soon enough be the President because both Trump and Clinton will be lucky to make it through a first term. In case they don't, the Veep will step in. Unless you don't know what "proactive" or "successor" means, how could you not get that?

Easy, huh?
Yes, easy.

I'm not endorsing the OP's theory, just objecting to your blaming them for your lack of understanding.

brush

(53,774 posts)
149. Nothing confusing there?
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 09:56 AM
Jun 2016
By my assessment, he WILL be out of the White House by 2020.
Considering that this was in response to your statement that "Keeping Trump out of the White House is the overriding point," surely nothing confusing there.


Well, we're not talking 2020, it's 2016 for God's sake. Did you both miss 4 years? What's with the leap-frogging of this upcoming election?

Dark n Stormy Knight

(9,760 posts)
185. There's a difference between not confusing and not correct.
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 07:32 PM
Jun 2016

Your response, "Huh? Clarity in language is good," strongly suggests you didn't understand what mac56 was saying rather than that you disagreed.

Mac's response to you saying, "Keeping Trump out of the White House is the overriding point", was, "Don't worry he won't be there for long." It just seems a more logical answer from you would have been something along the lines of, "Any length of time is too long to have Trump as president!"

Just in terms of logical discussion, which seems to be frequently lacking here, that would have been more productive than saying the person wasn't clear.

But then, "Huh? Clarity in language is good," wasn't particularly clear in itself, so maybe I misinterpreted what you meant.

Seems to be a lot of that going around. Nothing personal, I just happened to be in a replying mood when I read and responded to your post.

I've just been lately really noticing that "discussions" on DU could really benefit from all of us trying to express ourselves more clearly and reading more carefully what others write. And that includes being willing to read a bit more than might be easy before jumping to TLDR.

Have a lovely weekend.

brush

(53,774 posts)
187. He wasn't clear, IMO, because we were talking about him voting in 2016 . . .
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 09:15 PM
Jun 2016

then suddenly he's talking about 2020, skipping 4 years and skipping who he was to vote for in 2016.

I don't call that particularly clear.

Dark n Stormy Knight

(9,760 posts)
188. It doesn't matter at this point, but just to be clear,
Sat Jun 11, 2016, 01:11 AM
Jun 2016

you're wrong. He was referring quite unambiguously to the 2016 election, espousing his theory that either presidential candidate we elect will probably not last until 2020. Therefore, the veep would become the president before 2020.

So, his vote in 2016 will be for the presidential candidate whose running mate he likes best.

He said it quite clearly initially in the OP,

The party who puts up the better Vice Presidential candidate will get my vote in November.

and again at least twice in replies.

You made your points: a)don't vote for an R (and especially don't say so here) and b) any amount of time this country has President Trump is far too long.

I'm with you 100% on those points.

However, if you thought he was unclear, that's not his fault.

brush

(53,774 posts)
189. "The party who puts up the better Vice Presidential candidate will get my vote in November."
Sat Jun 11, 2016, 09:42 AM
Jun 2016

Yeah, right. That makes it abundantly clear that either party's presidential pick, if successful, won't last through 2020.

Hah!

Dark n Stormy Knight

(9,760 posts)
193. Wow. Seriously??!! No one is claiming that!
Sat Jun 11, 2016, 02:57 PM
Jun 2016

Neither mac nor I claimed that that first statement proves the second.

Good grief, either you really do have astoundingly poor reading comprehension skills, or you are a person so insecure that you would rather die than admit you're wrong.

Either way, I'm done with you. Enjoy stumbling though life in the dark.

Dark n Stormy Knight

(9,760 posts)
136. As I said below, your post #57 already explained it quite clearly.
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:35 AM
Jun 2016

Then, when you elaborate because they failed to comprehend clear English, they get snarky about "brevity." Wow. Ignorance with arrogance.

 

AntiBank

(1,339 posts)
140. having to vote "against" rather than vote "for" IS a shite deal though
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 07:03 AM
Jun 2016

This election is pure burning evidence how fucked up the 2 party system has become.


When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites and/or with organized interests, they generally lose. Moreover, because of the strong status quo bias built into the US political system, even when fairly large majorities of Americans favor policy change, they generally do not get it. . . [T]he preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy.

?Martin Gilens and Benjamin I. Page

 

SheilaT

(23,156 posts)
49. That sums it up perfectly.
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 10:52 PM
Jun 2016

And the entire campaign is going to consist of a lot of depressing back and forth about whether or not Bill's escapades should be discussed, or Donald's bankruptcies, or whether Hillary should lose a few pounds, and so on.

Almost nothing of substance will be discussed. I'm depressed already.

Raastan

(266 posts)
58. Sorry, but I see a completely different HRC than you do
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 10:57 PM
Jun 2016

As the POTUS said earlier today, she is the most qualified for the office than anyone in a generation.

 

lancer78

(1,495 posts)
132. So she is more qualified then him?
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 04:00 AM
Jun 2016

Someone with as bad of judgement as her (IWR, E-mail issue) is someone I don't want in charge of our military.

She could have saved hundreds of thousands of lives if she had been a true leader during the IWR debate. Chafee(R, Rhode Island, who switched to the democratic party a few years later) was going to vote against the IWR, and with all of the Dems, with HRC at their head being a leader, then the Iraq war would have never have happened.

sandyshoes17

(657 posts)
11. I am so tired of this
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 10:25 PM
Jun 2016

They give us a bad candidate. Then put this big bogey man up. And ooh we're supposed to be so scared into voting for the status quo again! Either way the establish wins again. Not again, not anymore, not this time

marions ghost

(19,841 posts)
70. They give us a bad candidate
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 11:06 PM
Jun 2016

when they had a good candidate with plenty of support. They got what they wanted. Status Quo.

And we lose.

handmade34

(22,756 posts)
137. the people voted
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:42 AM
Jun 2016

Sanders has received a little over 12 million votes so far
Clinton has received almost 16 million votes so far

we are all in this together...

Cosmocat

(14,564 posts)
144. Who is "they?"
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 07:47 AM
Jun 2016

The powers to be walked into every voting booth in the country and voted for everyone?

People get REAL confused about this stuff.

Yeah, the monied tip the scale every way possible.

But, end of the people walk into voting booths and vote for who they want to vote for.

There is NO "establishment" republican who wanted Donald Trump to be the nominee of that party.

Skwmom

(12,685 posts)
15. Sorry, but I think they will just sell the whole VP will become Pres to get people to the polls. My
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 10:29 PM
Jun 2016

$ is on just another manipulative game.

mac56

(17,566 posts)
17. Your mileage may vary with individual driving patterns.
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 10:31 PM
Jun 2016

This is the solution that works for me.

raging moderate

(4,304 posts)
99. You know, he does have a good point. We SHOULD be looking beyond this cycle.
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 11:41 PM
Jun 2016

The veep sometimes does become the president. Or the acting president temporarily. And the veep pick does tell us a lot about a presidential candidate's judgement and confidence and ability to think about possible future scenarios. Remember Bush jr's pick? Or, for that matter, Bush sr's pick? And, for that matter, even our candidates have made some less than stellar choices. Since Hillary apparently is going to win the nomination, I hope she will choose somebody strong enough and wise enough to handle the presidency if necessary.

 

libdem4life

(13,877 posts)
108. She will not pick someone who she believes is as strong as or
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 12:02 AM
Jun 2016

stronger than she is. That's one huge ego there. In fact, I'd lay money that her intent is just the opposite. A kind of insurance.

Agree with OP. The impeachment filing is probably a done deal...just awaiting the right time. This is Mecca to the Republicans.

Trump? Meh. He's never going to get near the White House. The re-invigorated Tea Party will tank again. I think he did it as a lark...bored and rich...and has been as surprised as anyone else about his success. He's doing everything he can to be unpopular and back out...seems. Now that's a sad statement about an American Party.

Neither one of them are very well liked...unfavorability ratings. That says more than anything about our political system.

sufrommich

(22,871 posts)
20. There should be some kind of award for most passive agressive
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 10:33 PM
Jun 2016

OPs of this primary season. So many to choose from.

mac56

(17,566 posts)
24. "There are so many people to thank for this award...
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 10:36 PM
Jun 2016

... I'd first like to thank my dear friend sufrommich for nominating me."

mac56

(17,566 posts)
59. NJCher, it's surprising how many people this year
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 10:57 PM
Jun 2016

are annoyed when you decide to vote FOR someone rather than AGAINST someone else.

BreakfastClub

(765 posts)
21. You seem to hold yourself in very high esteem. I doubt anyone cares as
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 10:33 PM
Jun 2016

much as you how you've rationalized voting for Hillary, which you will be doing if you vote for the democrat in November.

mac56

(17,566 posts)
27. You mistakenly believe I have rationalized voting for Madame Secretary.
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 10:37 PM
Jun 2016

Perhaps reading comprehension is a problem?

BreakfastClub

(765 posts)
41. It is you with the reading comprehension problems. Read my post again, slower this
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 10:47 PM
Jun 2016

time. I said you will be voting for Hillary IF YOU VOTE FOR THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE IN NOVEMBER. Does that help you to comprehend? Maybe you need glasses?

 

bvf

(6,604 posts)
30. Judging from a lot of the responses here
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 10:39 PM
Jun 2016

it's pretty clear that not being a full-blown, puckered-up Clinton acolyte is unacceptable.

 

mythology

(9,527 posts)
76. Or people have little use for somebody who has said they might vote for a ticket including Trump
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 11:13 PM
Jun 2016

I get voting for the Green party or some other left wing party. You shouldn't advocate for it here of course. But honestly unless Clinton unburied Bull Connor to be her vp, I think it's mind-boggling that somebody claiming to be a Sanders supporter would think that voting for a ticket that includes Trump is a good plan.

mac56

(17,566 posts)
81. I'm voting for the best VP.
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 11:16 PM
Jun 2016

The adjacent name on the ticket is a minor consideration at best.

Certainly you agree that people should vote FOR a candidate rather than AGAINST one?

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
31. LMAO. 7 days left.
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 10:40 PM
Jun 2016

P.S. I'm sure Trump will nominate a real winner for VP. His choices include Christ Christie, Ben Carson, Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin and. .. . well that's about it.

 

Adrahil

(13,340 posts)
73. Even odds that HRC is in office in 2020 if she is elected? I'll take that.
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 11:10 PM
Jun 2016

How about $100 to the charity of the winners choice?

procon

(15,805 posts)
95. Since when is there a separate voting box on the ballot for the VP?
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 11:33 PM
Jun 2016

These convoluted, crazy rationales for not voting for the Democratic nominee, reminds me of my kids excuses for not eating peas.

NJCher

(35,661 posts)
102. very logical
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 11:55 PM
Jun 2016

Last edited Fri Jun 10, 2016, 12:25 AM - Edit history (1)

I don't understand why anyone would think this post is outlandish. As I read it, I said "this guy has a lot of common sense."

Who among us would debate that at some point, HRC's going to come up against the legal system? You would almost be crazy to think she wouldn't.

An old friend of mine, a legal aficionado, used to assuage my impatience by reminding me of what Euripedes said:

Mills of the Gods,
Grind exceedingly slow,
But grind exceedingly fine..


Remember this: as corrupt as our politicians may be, we have a system. That system has been in effect for hundreds of years. The people who run that system are not politicians, they are bureaucrats. The politicians will always seek to sway things their way, but the bureaucrats are not there for just four or eight years. They are there for a career lifetime, and it is their will that will grind exceedingly fine. Maybe not tomorrow, maybe years from now, but the truth about what HRC did will come out.

The poster goes straight to the point: neither one of these candidates, if they even make it through the primaries, is going to last. It is consummately logical to vote for the VP.



Cher

 

libdem4life

(13,877 posts)
112. Another OP Fan !
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 12:08 AM
Jun 2016

I obviously am not a HRC supporter, but a long-time Democrat. I need to be convinced she is honest...well, sort of anyway. And I'm going to be pissed it they drag this out forever.

I personally think she's screwed the pooch...hubris overload...Clinton Shuffle, etc. If she's found not guilty, I'll vote for her. She pulled it off. If she has not yet been proven to be innocent...i.e. the investigation Still not complete, that can't be good, but I'll decide the day before the GE. That's the best I can do.

JonLeibowitz

(6,282 posts)
120. ++, I agree. NJCher was quite correct in the post upthread.
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 12:29 AM
Jun 2016

Very clever thinking; it is an interesting way of looking at who to vote for.

mac56

(17,566 posts)
121. Thanks, JL.
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 12:31 AM
Jun 2016

People make their decision based on many different criteria. This is mine and I'm sticking with it.

 

Jim Lane

(11,175 posts)
125. Have you thought about any specific VP pairings?
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:57 AM
Jun 2016

I'm in the hold-your-nose-and-vote-against-Trump school myself, but I understand where you're coming from.

The part I don't understand is that you seem open to the possibility that the VP vs. VP choice will be a close call. I just can't imagine Trump picking a running mate who'd be better than the VP candidate on the Democratic ticket, let alone one whom I'd be happy to vote for. Take a very broad view of Trump's possibilities -- his defeated rivals (16 horrorshows right there), all current Republican elected officials at the Governor-Senator-Congressmember level, and anyone else who's been mentioned, such as Newt Gingrich -- and they're all terrible.

The only idea that occurred to me was that Trump, feeling desperate, might pick Ron Reagan, Jr., aiming at the low-information voters who got confused between him and his father. I'd rather see Ron Reagan, Jr. as President than, say, Max Baucus (a conservaDem who's been mentioned on DU as a possible VP candidate). The trouble is that even Trump, wild as he is, is extremely unlikely to be so wild as to pick Reagan.

Do you have anyone in mind who might conceivably induce you to vote for the GOP ticket? I'm curious about what running mate(s) might help Trump win over undecided.

 

djean111

(14,255 posts)
141. That is still voting for Hillary - I doubt there are any GOP VPs you admire, really.
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 07:37 AM
Jun 2016

That is the purpose of the VP slot, ya know, getting you to vote for someone you don't care for, and then being relegated to dinners and funerals.

I am not playing that game. And that "logic" doesn't work.

mac56

(17,566 posts)
143. We shall see what we shall see.
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 07:46 AM
Jun 2016

Honestly, I don't understand the opposition to finding someone I can vote FOR instead of needing to vote AGAINST someone else.

I guess a refusal to join the cult of personality doesn't play well 'round these parts.

betsuni

(25,476 posts)
147. Wondered why this title bugged me, then realized it's because the idiom is that
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 07:51 AM
Jun 2016

the scales have fallen from your eyes, not that they've been lifted. Had to Google to remember that it's a Biblical reference. Saul. So there you have it. That's why it bugged me. Feels good. I will sleep well tonight.

treestar

(82,383 posts)
150. why do you have to vote FOR someone?
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 10:02 AM
Jun 2016

People who say that make me SMH. The world is the way it is. Republicans exist. We have to vote AGAINST them. Otherwise they win. It's self preservation. There's simply no choice. It's nice if you can really like the Democrat running. But that's a luxury. There are people out there who are also able to vote who want to roll back progress.

This lament is very nonsensical. It's putting feelings ahead of common sense.

mac56

(17,566 posts)
160. Do what you want.
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 12:04 PM
Jun 2016

I prefer to be FOR someone than constantly playing defense. But that's just me.

treestar

(82,383 posts)
175. politics is not a game like that
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:20 PM
Jun 2016

common sense - the Republicans will vote - you have to vote against them unless you don't care about them getting what they want.

mac56

(17,566 posts)
177. As I said, do what you want.
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:27 PM
Jun 2016


Maybe their campaign logos should read "NOT TRUMP" and "NOT HILLARY."

mac56

(17,566 posts)
181. I don't plan to live in fear.
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:33 PM
Jun 2016

I'm willing to accept the consequences of my vote.

If this is the best that the Democratic Party can do, they'll have consequences to accept as well.

How about you? Are you willing to accept the consequences of your vote?

eppur_se_muova

(36,261 posts)
161. "Feels good" in the sense that hitting yourself in the head with a hammer feels good when you stop.
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 12:24 PM
Jun 2016

Don't like the thought that Trump could get the football ? Don't think about it ! Problem solved !

mac56

(17,566 posts)
162. You missed my point by a mile.
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 12:38 PM
Jun 2016

I refuse to make this election about voting AGAINST someone. If the Democratic Party won't give me a Presidential candidate to vote FOR, I'll find someone that I can support. You do what you want.

mac56

(17,566 posts)
168. I genuinely don't know.
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 12:52 PM
Jun 2016

I wish I had higher expectations for the top of the ticket, but I just and simply don't.

WolverineDG

(22,298 posts)
186. I would NEVER vote for a Republican
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 07:35 PM
Jun 2016

no matter how much I dislike the candidate put in place by the DNC establishment.

I'm watching to see who gets the VP nod, though.

 

Betty Karlson

(7,231 posts)
191. Excellent idea!
Sat Jun 11, 2016, 12:44 PM
Jun 2016

Cynical, but then that is today's climate. I am cynical too, after all the election shenanigans by Debbie and her DINO-saurs.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»The scales have been lift...