2020 Presidential Race

#40,676
#40,676
luthervol said:
How much do you have to support someone before voting for them is justified?
100% - never going to happen
90%?
75%?
58.4%?

If you support one candidate 73% and the opponent 12%, would you be justified in voting for the 73%?

Would you be justified in withholding your vote and letting the 12% candidate win?
Click to expand...
I agree with that.... I don’t come close to agreeing with trump on several things but I feel he has much more to offer than Joe does
 
#40,677
#40,677
luthervol said:
I agree with all of that.
I've always advocated that people rank their top issues and assign them a weighted number the total of which is 100.
Look at the choices and their stances on your prioritized list and then vote for the one that gives you the highest score.
Click to expand...
I dont think you should automatically vote for the highest. Especially if they dont cross your threshold. Like I have advocated for a while, people have been lowering their standards to vote for the lesser of two evils.

So instead of accepting a 71%, in my case, because they come the closest, I should hold out for a 75%. If i give into 71%, next time its 68, then 65, then into the 50s down to the point where Trump v Hilary and Trump v Biden happens.

And in my opinion you should be grading solely on their politics. And if you are left with a tie, or a couple choices above your threshold, only then do you bring in the other factors. How likeable they, how they treat other people, etc. So again you may not vote for your highest. The score%threshold just tells you who you should vote vote, but not determine it.

That way if you are left with one option, you can honestly say you support them without lowering your standard, before it comes to the personal stuff. If you have multiple then you can choose between the favorite between two goods.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#40,678
#40,678
hUTch2002 said:
Makes sense and you’ve already said you might be sitting this one out which aligns with your views given that, at this point, you don’t have a candidate you support. The way rdj was coming across was as if he had a 3rd party candidate he supported but he doesn’t. He also comes across as someone that will vote 3rd party simply to vote against the two party system. That would be in contradiction to his posts chiding others for voting for the lesser evil. We shall see if I’m correct or not. I was actually just trying to see who he supported and why but my plan went awry.
Click to expand...
Honestly i dance with the idea of voting third party just to break the two party hold.

But that boilds down to a more philosophical discussion rather than a political one.

If you dont believe in the system, or believe the system cant be saved, I can see not worrying about supporting a candidate to just vote third party.

I still have that bit of faith though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hUTch2002
#40,679
#40,679
lawgator1 said:
What is of more value to you, someone who can speak quickly and find the right words, but is full of nonsense and bullshiite literally every time he does speak, or someone not as quick but who is not a lying imbecile, like the first guy?
Click to expand...
Uh. Biden isnt truthful. You dont spend 40 plus years in DC and come out trustworthy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NurseGoodVol, 0nelilreb and McDad
#40,680
#40,680
LouderVol said:
I dont think you should automatically vote for the highest. Especially if they dont cross your threshold. Like I have advocated for a while, people have been lowering their standards to vote for the lesser of two evils.

So instead of accepting a 71%, in my case, because they come the closest, I should hold out for a 75%. If i give into 71%, next time its 68, then 65, then into the 50s down to the point where Trump v Hilary and Trump v Biden happens.

And in my opinion you should be grading solely on their politics. And if you are left with a tie, or a couple choices above your threshold, only then do you bring in the other factors. How likeable they, how they treat other people, etc. So again you may not vote for your highest. The score%threshold just tells you who you should vote vote, but not determine it.

That way if you are left with one option, you can honestly say you support them without lowering your standard, before it comes to the personal stuff. If you have multiple then you can choose between the favorite between two goods.
Click to expand...
I disagree with some of that.
My standard will always be that I'll vote for the person that scores the highest. I will never lower that standard.
If someone wants my vote, they need to score higher than all the other choices.
I also believe that things like character and honesty should at times be a big component. But it's each individual's choice.
 
#40,682
#40,682
k-town_king said:
He can read and he can also drink a glass of water with one hand.

Trump has set the lowest bar possible. If Biden doesn't crap himself at the inauguration and never says one word until the next election he will have done a much,much, much better job than Trump.
Click to expand...
If elected maybe he can tell us more during his inauguration speech about how sending his kids to school with black kids was sending them to a "jungle"
 
  • Like
Reactions: W.TN.Orange Blood and BigOrangeD
#40,684
#40,684
hUTch2002 said:
My point isn’t difficult to follow. I figured someone that was chiding others for voting for a candidate they don’t truly believe in would already have a candidate they believe in 90 days from the election but you don’t. It is what it is but it seems to me you’re in danger of doing the same thing from what I’ve heard of the 3rd party candidates. Maybe you’ll sit it out if you don’t like any of the candidates and maintain this integrity you’ve claimed but someone who clearly wants to send a message to the proponents of a two party system likely won’t sit out when given the chance to vote for someone outside that system to “send a message” if for no other reason. We shall see I suppose.
Click to expand...

Well, you figured wrong. When you open yourself up to more than two options, most of which you have to actually search out for positions they take because they get no national coverage, it is a little more engaging and difficult process. It's ok, most on here can't actually comprehend the concept of something other than a R or D (or more specifically, anti-R or anti-D) running the government.

We are hopelessly in debt, engaged in perpetual wars, botching pandemic responses, living in racial/social unrest, slowly becoming a full blown welfare state, and our infrastructure is falling apart. Perhaps we will sooner or later figure out we need to hand the reigns over to somebody else for a try. If somebody from the R or D party can gain traction that I believe will fix it, then I will vote R or D. But I don't have my hopes up.
 
#40,686
#40,686
RockyTop85 said:
I think it’s fair to propose a reduction in federal police funds. One of the municipalities around Chattanooga, the town of East Ridge, idk if you’re familiar with it or not. I’ve handled cases there for years. It’s a stretch of strip malls, used car lots, and seedy motels. They’ve never had any sort of mass uprising or insurrection that I’m aware of. There’s a lot of petty drug activity, some robberies, public drunkenness, and domestic violence. Typical, low-middle income blue collar crime. The City has a ****ing armored personnel carrier parked outside their police station.

Why? They don’t need that. That money didn’t make anyone safer. It didn’t prevent crime. It didn’t solve any crimes. They didn’t buy it, either. 0% chance that town collects enough revenue to buy one of those or that it would buy one, if it could. It was a federal grant of an expensive piece of equipment that had 0 benefit to the community.

About the time I started noticing their tank, Chattanooga was running a mental health court pilot program. MHC partners with all of the mental health providers in the community to attempt to reduce recidivism among people with mental health issues, who are some of the most frequent repeat offenders in the criminal court system. They managed to get it up and running through what was essentially a grass roots effort, but they had to really push for the city and county to help fund it. I don’t know their stats off the top of my head, but I know the people I placed in that program have generally done quite well. The judges and prosecutors are generally pleased with the results as well. I don’t know whether MHC receives any federal funding, but IMO, it would be a much much better investment than an armored vehicle for the city of East Ridge and it could probably be funded for 6 months on what was spent on the tank.

So I don’t agree that any reduction of funds from the police is a waffle or that it’s bad. To me, the benefit of a centrist or a moderate candidate is they can look at the crazies on both sides and find any good proposals and just not do it to the extent that the crazies want.

That said, I can agree to disagree about Biden. I don’t know for a fact that he won’t cave. I don’t know that he will play within the rules. I trust him on both more than Trump.

You’re probably right that things won’t go back to normal. But nihilism, grievance politics, and angry populism is just not my jam. Trump losing, if its half as bad as it looks in the polls, will do a lot to end the cult of personality. To me, that’s a step in the right direction.

If the wing of Democrats that act like Trumpists ever wrests control of the party away from the moderates, I’ll move on from them, too. I wouldn’t have voted for Bernie Sanders and, unless she convincingly moves more to the center, I won’t vote for AOC, either.
Click to expand...
They got that tank basically free from the government that was just going to scrap it anyway. So why is that a big deal? If they spent millions of local taxpayer $ on it and didn’t need it I’d agree with you
 
#40,692
#40,692
Stew Cook said:
General election absentee ballot rejection percentage is 2%.
Click to expand...
I wonder if it will remain that way when the number of ballots being mailed in increases by 10 fold. How many registered voters have updated their signature cards recently and updated their addresses? I did mine this year.
 
#40,693
#40,693
BigOrangeD said:
I wonder if it will remain that way when the number of ballots being mailed in increases by 10 fold. How many registered voters have updated their signature cards recently and updated their addresses? I did mine this year.
Click to expand...

I believe someone suggested that if there is a signature rejection, the voter is contacted to verify. But if a person has been purged, etc.. fat chance, I guess because they wouldn't have received an absentee request form.

As long as people know the risks, it's still the same as it ever was, otherwise. But I'm thinking an accompanying fingerprint would be useful, as my signature has changed somewhat since I last updated.
 
#40,696
#40,696
k-town_king said:
I told y'all Trump will try to steal the election. He has already been trying to set the stage.
Click to expand...

How did the mail become so slow, all of the sudden?

I wonder if that played a role in Wilford B's death, not getting his diabetes medicine on time or something.

I demand an investigation!
 
#40,698
#40,698
Stew Cook said:
I believe someone suggested that if there is a signature rejection, the voter is contacted to verify. But if a person has been purged, etc.. fat chance, I guess because they wouldn't have received an absentee request form.

As long as people know the risks, it's still the same as it ever was, otherwise. But I'm thinking an accompanying fingerprint would be useful, as my signature has changed somewhat since I last updated.
Click to expand...
Yeah, my signature definitely changed. Fingerprint could possibly work.
 
Last edited:
#40,699
#40,699
Rickyvol77 said:
They got that tank basically free from the government that was just going to scrap it anyway. So why is that a big deal? If they spent millions of local taxpayer $ on it and didn’t need it I’d agree with you
Click to expand...

Irrelevant. Biden doesn’t have the authority to control local taxpayer money.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top