Voting Against

[Ziggins]

I have probably made this point before, but here it is in more words.

Many people are profoundly uncomfortable with the idea of “voting against” one side by voting for the other. They want somebody to vote for, not somebody to vote against. So even if the voter dislikes Trump and all he stands for, if Biden isn’t good enough to vote for, then voting for a 3rd party or no-vote is “better” psycho-emotionally than voting pro-Biden which is really voting against Trump.

Mathematically, a vote for anyone other than Biden is 1-for-1 helpful to Trump. Many people understand that. But math is not what rules the mind; it’s emotion.

Recall all the bumper stickers: “Don’t blame me; I voted for {whoever lost the last election}”.

That blame thing is real, real big.

Another factor somebody mentioned that bears repeating. Every single voter who traditionally / typically votes R but is now between unhappy and appalled by Trump is struggling with the dilemma that he/she dislikes everything they think they know about the Democratic platform. Much of which is probably false, but that’s a different story for a different thread.

So it turns into “How awful do I fear a D president will be versus how awful to I fear Trump will be?” Once again there’s no good choice to be had once you phrase it that way.

In general people love to make decisions when there’s an obvious good choice.

They hate to make decisions that amount to selecting the least-bad choice. Those decisions will be postponed, procrastinated, and if at all possible deferred until outside circumstances make them disappear. That’s how you get somebody undecided at this late date: in their mind they’re facing a least-bad choice and delaying the resolution as long as possible. Hell, if they decide to show up on polling day they may not be able to force themselves to make a decision until they’re in the booth with marker in hand. Eenie meanie minie moe …

 

[KeithD]

I think Biden is just fine, despite the Russian campaign to run him down. I voted for him with no reservation other than his age--and his backup is fine with me too.

Did I mention the Russian campaign, fomented by that corrupt, criminal, predatory, looney, treasonous bastard, Donald Trump, to denigrate Biden? That dog don't bark with me. I don't know why you'd think it would work with anyone else here not working for the Russians, as you obviously are.

 

[JackLuis]

Voting For vs voting Against is preferable, but voting Least Evil is probably our choice, like last time.

Now we know just how Evil Trump is and the Rethug's may not have a party unless the Lincoln Project ginns up a new Conservative party.

 

[KeithD]

I didn't see it as a choice between two evils last time, either. I don't care much for the personality of Hillary Clinton, but I look for demonstrated experience, leadership ability, and both common sense and care for the welfare of and services to citizens and Clinton had a better combination of all of those in 2016 than anyone else who was running, from any party. People who push this "lesser of two evils" crap all of the time or usually people with little or no understand what is needed in running an administration serving it's people well in a society as wide-ranging and complex as the United States is. It's usually just sour complainers who live to be dissatisfied and to think they know more themselves than they do about governing.

One thing is damn sure. If Hillary Clinton had been president in January of this year, she would have been off the mark immediately with a national plan and staff to counter this pandemic and there would be hundreds of thousands of Americans alive this Christmas who now will be unnecessarily dead. She would have understood the threat--unlike Trump, she quite probably would have recognized it as an opportunity to show what she could do as a responsible world leader--and had the plans and staff in hand that she helped put there to begin with. And she would have shown that she understood and could handle other crises at the same time.

But the "lesser of two evils" people would still be bitching.

 

[Ziggins]

And local races. I haven't bothered to do deep searches of local candidates yet because the one I liked lost the primary. What's left looks like blue puke or red shit. I procrastinate on my least-bad choices.

 

[Lazaran]

^
Sounds like someone needs to get in the game.

 

[FescueFan]

Voting For vs voting Against is preferable, but voting Least Evil is probably our choice, like last time.

Now we know just how Evil Trump is and the Rethug's may not have a party unless the Lincoln Project ginns up a new Conservative party.

Jack is so far left, he thinks liberalism is EVIL!

Meanwhile he supports the most mass murdering political ideology OF ALL TIME.


LOL god damn you hyper-dramatic leftist are funny.

 

[bhurry]

I have probably made this point before, but here it is in more words.

All this said. Vote Trump.

 

[FescueFan]

I would have preferred a President Tulsi.

But since the (D)'s insist on being fucking retarded and capitulating to terrorist shitheads........ I'll be voting AGAINST Biden and the "progressive" scum he represents.

 

[LLCox]

I am voting to remove trump. Who his challenger is makes no difference.

 

[WillJ8787]

Trump has me reevaluating how I see voting. I'd pretty much vote for any of the Republican candidates in 2016, except for the female writer. They were all qualified.

I'd vote for any of the Dems that ran in2016, except for Hillary. Sanders is my top choice.

Trump was and remains unqualified and in over his head.

Biden and Harris are qualified and Biden has a proven track record (with blemishes and all) and he will do just fine.