Ideally everyone votes for something. Voting against something as your sole motivation leads to complete burnout. This is a reason any candidate should be working on convincing a voter why they should vote for them.
Playing why you shouldn’t vote for the other guy just creates apathy.
What do you mean by “flip seats?” That doesn’t even make any sense.
So disappointing. It’s a Moderate Republican ticket vs. the Batshit Crazy ticket. What kind of choice is that?
Yeah, I know, vote for a third party. To quote Rocky, “That trick never works.”
This is why I am worried that the DNC next week is just going to be a repeat of the RNC but with Trump as the target instead of Hillary. That scares me, in a perfect world the Democratic National Convention would be focused on the party’s platform, ideals, policies, and maybe if they want to really attack something, the conservative platform (instead of Trump)… I highly doubt that anything remotely like that will happen. Instead I fear that that we are going to see a “Trump Bad” convention.
Seriously, fuck everything right now.
Chevron, Goldman Sachs, and Monsanto also got 100% from them. Whatever their criteria are for supporting someone, I don’t think it can be taken as synonymous with “progressive”, or even “pro-LBGT” anymore.
As I understand it, Kaine’s positions on two big social issues - gay rights and abortion rights - are complicated (and evolving, just as Clinton’s position on gay marriage has evolved), and these scorecards are a little bit of a cartoon response. That doesn’t mean he’s as bad as some progressives are painting him, just that these scorecards don’t tell much of a credible story.
God, more than ever I wish I could vote Stein, but I live in Florida. Anybody in Massachusetts want to trade votes?
To be fair, that was a case of an extremely weak president, and a more politically savvy VP. The idea of the Veep running roughshod over Clinton is absurd.
I joke.
Well it’s certainly worked so far. Except for a very few outliers, Clinton has led consistently in polls in Ohio, Florida, and Pennsylvania for months, so I don’t know what the hell you’re complaining about.
People in general (if this is a good thing is a totally different conversation) vote downticket on the party. If you have a close election (popular vote - ignore the college here) in general that means that we most likely are seeing a cookie cutter red/blue breakdown and the senate and house seats (the word that confused you) will stay safe and the status quo will most likely be maintained.
The gerrymandering that has happened over the past decade only help ensure this outcome.
However if you excite the nation - and perhaps capture that energy that Sanders showed was possibly out there - you can drive people to vote that would have stayed home - in these cases you have a very good chance at upsetting the carefully drawn district maps - because they all are based on past voter turnout. Now you can flip seats - and loosing a senate seat isn’t as big of a deal.
…and as we’ve seen from the Republican primaries, “Trump Bad” just turns into Trump Wins.
I dunno about you, but I don’t want Hilary to lose this, and she’s still too close for comfort.
I might just be a knee-jerk Twitter Dick Nixon poster, since he cracks me up.
[quote=“themadpoet, post:51, topic:82006”]
(the word that confused you) [/quote]
It was your lack of clarity that confused me, not the meaning of a specific word.
You’re just making this up, unfortunately. All the data and analysis on VP picks over the past 60 years or so shows that the selection of a running mate essentially has little to no effect on the outcome of a Presidential election, no matter who the candidate chooses. It’s mostly a media narrative.
What is wrong with speaking Spanish? Spain is in Europe. My very White wife speaks Spanish, because she grew up in West Texas, Did her internship at a public hospital in Houston, and her residency at the VA in San Antonio.
But the idea of Spanish language, or sombreros, or tequila being some kind of appropriation confuses me. those are things introduced by colonial Europeans. If anything, the indigenous people should reject them, along with Catholicism.
Wow you are being really disingenuous here - if you think that the pick of Sara Palin for VP didn’t influence that election you have to have your head in the sand.
Counterpoint: How many VP picks have the kind of buzz and excitement that Sanders has? Not many. We’ve only had a ‘picked’ VP since 1940. Prior to that it was something the voters actually chose.
Finally! Now we can start billing the bout as the TRUMPENCE vs. the HILARIKAINE
I’m creeped out by the pictures. Their fawningness says it all. I get that this isn’t a site that claims to be an objective news site (which doesn’t exist anyway) but the personal investment is just weird to me. We’re supposed to be voting for an executive. I wish we didn’t think of this like voting for the cult-leader-in-chief every four years. Even when it’s someone I would vote for, the slogans and the narratives and the oh so carefully curated pictures just completely turn me off. “Feel the Bern” creeped me out. My own mom or dad could be running for president and I’m not going to “feel” them, I’m going to care about their philosophy of governance and how that applies to various issues.
The US president has way, way, way, too god-damned much power. Because the other two branches of the government have rolled over and allowed it to happen.
Hillary had to pick someone who would make her look reasonably ethical in comparison.
This rules out many.
