Even though it's still early, I just wanted to put this thought into people's heads:
If you aren't planning to support 45 for re-election, regardless of whomever you are currently supporting, I really hope you are planning to support whomever is going to be running against him in the general election.
The whole "I have to vote my conscience" thing doesn't work.
It's how we keep getting saddled with assholes.
The only person responsible for Hillary not defeating an unelectable candidate is Hillary.
I completely disagree.
I've said this here before but I firmly reject this idea.
I get it, you want results. I'm firmly against Trump, he's an embarrassment -- but I'm also not blindly supporting whoever the Dems trot out against him. If that makes me a bad person in your eyes, I'm sorry.
We're either people of principles all the time or we're not at all. If I have moral objections to a candidate, then don't blame me for not voting for them, don't blame people like me if they aren't elected.
Everyone wants to blame down when something goes wrong. Shit rolls downhill, but blame shouldn't. When Hillary got beat, it was Bernie supporters that got blamed instead of the Democrats, whose leadership has been one quagmire of slapstick fuckery after another for decades. We lucked into Obama.
You are entitled to believe whatever you choose.
I actually do agree with you, to an extent.
However, when it comes to 45, there was AMPLE evidence that he was
most definitely the LEAST qualified, and NOT fit for the position - on a number of fronts.
Those who didn't vote, and those Sanders supporters who could not bring themselves to vote for Clinton, are directly responsible for ALL of us being saddled with that miserable con man.
Their "principles" fucked everyone.
How many of them do you think haven't had regret over that decision?
He is running for re-election. Unless someone is voting for him, it is the responsibility of everyone else to vote AGAINST him.
The PRINCIPLE of the whole thing is to REMOVE him.
That's the "principle" that matters most right now.
@KKGator A wise, totally non-fictional person once said "only the Sith deal in absolutes."
There are no qualifications to be president, excepting that you have to be 35, born in the U.S. and having lived in it for at least 14 years.Oh, and you can't do it more than twice.
Not fit for the position is a proposition only voters can decide. I agree he's an utter shitstick, if it helps.
People always blame another candidate when their favorite loses. It's an utterly foreign position to a democracy.
One, you assume all those bernie bros who didn't vote would have voted for Clinton. They wouldn't have. Of all Jill Stein and Gary Johnson supporters, 25 percent favored Hillary over Trump according to exit polls. You're ignoring the faults in your own candidate.
You can hate Trump all you want, but there is a large section of the population that believes Hillary was equally intolerable, or close to it.
Undeniably, at least in my estimation, 2016 saw the worst candidates for president in American history.
If in 2020 Democrats trot out a Hillary equivalent, don't blame non-voters or third-party supporters for not getting excited about heading down to the polls. That's entirely un-American. Blame yourselves. Blame the people who continue to choose a candidate who does not resonate with the majority of the American people. It's not Trump against the world, it's both candidates against my scrutiny.
Principles are not so easily changed. To have a principle you can disregard for certain situations is to not have principles. I'll keep saying it -- Trump is just as bad as you say, but there is no point in figuring out how to remove our neurodegenerative disease only to replace it with stage 4 brain cancer.
I will not vote for someone who may be just as bad, or close. Find me an acceptable candidate. That's the Democrats job. That's all they have to do.
Exactly. If there is anybody who doesn't believe we would be better off with Clinton as President, what reason would there be not to question your ability at rational thought. You don't have to like these people. You are not going to be having dinner with them. They won't be coming around to see you during the holidays. You look at the two of them and decide which one will fuck it up the least and vote accordingly. There will never be the perfect candidate for everyone or even a majority.
I might add VOTE in your local elections, this crap starts at the city, county and state levels. We have to start electing people that will work for the majority not who gives them the most money.
Haven't missed an election yet.
If you don't vote, don't bitch.
Every time I hear anyone complaining about anything politically-related, I ask them if they vote. If they say "no", I tell them they have no right to complain, and I don't want to hear their shit if they aren't going to participate.
I piss off a lot of people that way, but they DO shut up.
LOL
Further, for every Democratic candidate, this must be a litmus-test question: Do you promise your positive support for whichever candidate gets the Democratic party nomination, regardless of the circumstances?
This question should be asked every time a candidate speaks in public...
100% agreed.
You couldn't be more right about how necessary that is.
@KKGator ...uncharacteristic of me...I am typically unconcerned with such questions...however I consider this to be an emergency,,,
My take on FB is that the 2016 election was decided by Sanders supporters who stayed home rather than vote for Clinton...Will this happen again?
I haven't forgiven them for that.
It was stupid. Their "principles" fucked us all.
2seattle, I agree with you.
It depends on whether our intelligence services deem Russian social media bots to be an unwanted interference in the election. In 2016 the bots blasted Bernie supporters who might vote for Hillary. Will they be stopped this time? Apparently not.