View the latest news and breaking news today for U.S., world, weather, entertainment, politics and health.

Who will it be?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Who will it be?

    Ok, lets fast-forward to November and the only candidates from the major parties is Clinton and Trump. Who will you vote for an why, or will this be the moment you finally decide to go third party? There are others still running for the highest office in the land, but historically we have only chosen from the two major parties, and a very negligible amount voted third party. We have folks like Gary Johnson who are starting to show a strong support base and could make this election interesting.

    So, will you vote one of the two major parties or will you finally decide to look for another option?
    4
    Clinton
    0%
    0
    Trump
    25.00%
    1
    I will vote third party
    75.00%
    3

  • #2
    I'm kind of torn because Trump is hugely problematic but Bernie is unrealistic. Everything that Bernie has been trying to sell to America about free healthcare and schooling is going to cost us more money that can afford, even if we steal from the top fortune five hundred companies. I could never vote for Clinton, she isn't loyal to anything but her own personal self-interest and has failed to do anything good since she's been in politics. Trump is the least worse options available at this time. Is there another third party option besides Bernie?
    Comment>

    • #3
      None of the above.
      Comment>

      • #4
        There are rumors floating around now that Ron Paul might announce his candidacy, running as a Libertarian. I am curious as to whether or not his son's campaign was just sort of a "test the waters" kind of thing.
        Comment>

        • #5
          I'm very curious about Trump, not only as a candidate but as a qualified leader. We have to break him apart into categories here. He creates jobs, we know that already. He likes to create jobs here in the states but doesn't coddle people by handing over stuff on a silver platter. We got that from him already. He protects his interests, and in the case of the Presidency. that means us, the people. We know he's stubborn. He won't be easily swayed by the protests of weird interest groups, nor will he bend easily to liberal un-ease. He probably has his bending point, as all candidates do, and that's where he becomes tricky. Not sure how fast or how far he might bend to another's will. But, we do know that he's a hard worker and someone who is extremely dedicated to whatever is on his plate. A person does not get THAT filthy rich by accident, or by birth alone. He knows what's up with this country in a lot of ways and knows how to make stuff happen. It's easy to like him and fear him at the same time for all of the above reasons. But... Sanders? Seriously? No. I would never vote for Sanders as he is way too openly socialist for my taste.
          Comment>

          • #6
            This article was good, and I shared it on Facebook. http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/...two-evils.html So I reshare it here. I really think that a choice between the Republicans and the Democrats at this point is a choice between two evil candidates. Certainly, Jesus isn't on the ballot, and so anyone that we choose will be imperfect. I suppose you could always write in Jesus Christ as a joke vote, because no matter how serious you may be, I doubt that he would consent to take a seat behind the desk of the Oval Office for 8 years, or even 4.

            The gist of that article is as follows: our system is supposed to be a government of the people. In other words, our leaders only serve at our pleasure. We appoint them to do the right thing on our behalf. I would ask you to consider the issue this way. If you were the only voter, and you could appoint any person to the presidency, who would you appoint? Let's assume that you cannot appoint yourself or anyone you know. So, you could appoint Pope Francis, if you wanted to, but you couldn't appoint your local church pastor. Then, ask yourself under what circumstances you would be willing to appoint Donald or Hillary to the presidency. I can't imagine having free reign to name any person and actually picking one of those two names. Like I said, I do disagree with them both on several crucial issues. I understand that we are not attempting to vote for a pastor but a president. I don't necessarily want the president to be able to give a good exposition of Romans 9. In fact, I would be willing to appoint an atheist to the presidency if he would basically agree with fundamental morality, including such things as that abortion is murder, and be infinitely supportive of religion and all the good that it has done in the world. So, under that criteria, if you would still be willing to say that Donald Trump is the best bet, then go ahead and vote for him. However, I think that each of us could find a better name. And if you could find a name that is actually running on a ticket, say for the Constitution or libertarian party, I would encourage you to vote for that person. The election is not always a two-party choice. They would like you to believe that it is, but it isn't. Abraham Lincoln was a third-party candidate.
            Comment>
            Working...
            X
            Articles - News - SiteMap