5682

Yeah, that’s kind of what I was trying to get at before - Trump is so bad, that if the choice were Clinton/anybody or him, I’d go Clinton/anybody. Well, maybe not Clinton/Zombie Hitler, because Zombie Hitler might just chomp on Clinton after taking office and become POTUS that way (and then name Trump as his VP).

5683

But see I don’t know that I think Trump is worse than say Ted Cruz. I don’t know that I think Trump would be worse than Sarah Palin eithe. I have to consider that that second person could very well be the next President. No I am not okay with Kasich being president. I also think it’s very unlikely that the Democrats would need to take such an extreme measure. I mean where is Trump on the national polls… not just the GOP but out of everyone?

5684

social security and medicare are a whole hell of a lot better than nothing and have kept millions out of poverty (black and white).

5685

I am squarely of the position that Trump is a better option than Cruz. Cruz frankly scares the shit out of me. Anyone who would shut down the government over 500m of spending on an issue which roughly half of Americans disagree with him should not be President. He is not to be trusted with nuclear launch codes, ever.

I loathe what his policies would do, but beyond that, a Cruz Presidency scares the bejeezus out of me. “You want to see man made Climate Change - here you go - boom!” Game over.

5686

Same here, actually. I’d still vote for Clinton/Cruz over Trump.

I don’t know that I think Trump would be worse than Sarah Palin eithe.
Yeah, I’d agree that’s a tough one. But still, Clinton/Palin over Trump.
I have to consider that that second person could very well be the next President. No I am not okay with Kasich being president. I also think it’s very unlikely that the Democrats would need to take such an extreme measure. I mean where is Trump on the national polls… not just the GOP but out of everyone?

Not arguing that Clinton should pick Kasich - I actually think it would be a bad move because I think it would depress turnout and that tends to be bad for Democrats. But why are you so focused on the thought that Clinton might not make it through her presidency and have the theoretical Kasich take office that you would rather Trump win? I mean, I’m against the majority of contentious issues that Kasich is for, but that’s also the case for Trump. With one as a VP, there is a very good chance that will never matter overly much. With one voted into office as President, it absolutely will make a difference and that’s why I’d vote to prevent it.

I just don’t get the logic.

5687

I guess from my POV, you have to consider that second person as someone you would have voted for for President, because it could very well happen. If I wouldn’t vote for them as President, why would I be okay with them in VP. We’re not talking about say Bernie or Hilary here, we’re talking about the guy I just spent a page and a half talking about how not moderate he is, a man who wants to run the USA like a big exclusive church, a woman who is as extreme as Trump is, a man who might be a good physician but can’t seem to think two minutes ahead of him, and a zombie.

5688

I guess from my POV, you have to consider that second person as someone you would have voted for for President, because it could very well happen. If I wouldn’t vote for them as President, why would I be okay with them in VP.

Yeah, but if your vote translates into just straight up electing a Republican, how is that somehow better than electing a Democrat with the slight possibility of the Republican then coming into power by accident?

It’s like, instead of a 5% chance of a republican becoming president, you prefer a 100% chance?

That just makes zero logical sense.

5689

Sure, but don’t you weight “could very well be” as less dangerous than “definitely will be”? I’m not an actuary, but would guess that 20% would be a high estimate of the odds that the VP will actually wind up taking over due to the death/incapacitation of the president, and I’ll stick with the more likely scenario that they serve out their term every time. No one’s saying that the VP choice doesn’t matter, or that a VP pick you’re opposed to is “ideal”, or that it’s actually likely for Hillary to do this. A VP pick might sway me if I felt somewhat torn between the presidential candidates, but in this specific hypothetical scenario, there is no possible set of VP picks (yes, even Clinton / Zombie Hitler vs. Trump / Resurrected Gandhi) that would make me either vote for Trump or stay home and increase his odds of winning.

5690

There is (almost a) zero chance of this. Hilary’s VP will be one designed to gain votes - either Latino or Swing State - ideally both. She’s pretty much the only candidate who has all of the requisite domestic and foreign policy credentials, and she’s got Bill to lean on if necessary. Kasich could be helpful in tilting Ohio, but he would have to show he can win it by double digits in the GOP Primaries, while it looks like he will be lucky to even get to double digits.

5691

Let’s be clear about one thing. I am not morally opposed to electing a Republican to the White House. I am morally opposed to electing these Republicans to the White House. I think that is a key difference. And I wouldn’t be as opposed if someone was in there focusing on fiscal changes, tax reforms… etc. This entire group seems intent on forcing their morality on others and preaching the best way to face fear is to target a group and blame them for it.

5692

Sure, but the choice you would have in the hypothetical is either Clinton/Kasich, or one of those Republicans.

Given your opposition to those Republicans, the only logical choice would be the Clinton/Kasich ticket, in that the small chance of a president you don’t support is better than the guarantee of a president you don’t support.

5693

This is at least a comforting thought

5694

Timex, I think you need to consider the reasons why people vote for president. A few include:

  1. Trying to change the outcome of the election. Rationally, I think this is the worst reason. No single vote has ever changed the outcome of a presidential election. In most states, it’s particularly futile.

  2. Give a bigger mandate to the victor. This is why I would vote for someone with a chance to win.

  3. Signal your confidence in the party. This is why a Sanders supporter might vote for Clinton/Warren, but not Clinton/Cruz

  4. Personal preference, “vote your heart” regardless of chance of winning. Another reason why a Sanders supporter might vote third party

5695

For what it’s worth I’m with Nesrie on this hypothetical Clinton/Kasich ticket speculation. I’d probably not vote for it either. IIRC she’s in Oregon as I am (represent!), so a few principled people not endorsing such a terrible VP pick isn’t going to throw this by now thoroughly Blue state Trump’s way (assuming he really becomes the nominee).

5696

I’m a bit thrown by how many people are referring to personal details of Nesrie in this thread. A celebrity in our midst that I’m oblivious to? No offense, Nesrie…

5697

From Wikipedia:

In the 2000 presidential election in Florida, George W. Bush defeated Al Gore by 537 votes. Nader received 97,421 votes, which led to claims that he was responsible for Gore’s defeat. Nader, both in his book Crashing the Party and on his website, states: “In the year 2000, exit polls reported that 25% of my voters would have voted for Bush, 38% would have voted for Gore and the rest would not have voted at all.”[18] (which would net a 13%, 12,665 votes, advantage for Gore over Bush.)

Those folks probably thought something along the lines of what you just wrote.

5698

The difference was 537 votes. So, like I said, no single vote ever changed the outcome of an election.

5699

Non-taken. I have given some personal details in various subjects because I thought it was relevant to the discussion. I also think it’s important to remind others people like me exist, on gaming forums. On most gaming forums, I would be hesitant to even reveal I am a woman. I’ve been here a few years so… i have some comfort level with the group but hopefully I didn’t cross a TMI line.

Yeah Oregon isn’t likely going to change for the POTUS election although the the local reps, senate and I think even he governor have been GOP in the past.

5700

Entitlements can perpetuate poverty, that was my concern.

5701

Yeah, but when 97 thousand people all think that no single vote matters, all those single votes add up.