What's the "conservative" explanation?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/...132325489.html

By all means, someone please explain why Trump isn't a socialist clown, and why this, like all Trump promises, is making "America Great", and not, you know, currying favor to distract opposition with literal debt checks while expanding the debt on a scale unseen by even liberal/progressive/quasi-socialist presidents, all while you know, promising not to?


Alexander Fraser Tytler:

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years. "

Hurray!!!! We’re above average!!!

Because once we master space travel there really is no limit. Similar to the Louisiana Purchase and Sewards Folly (Alaska) the investments have been phenomenal. Thats why all the billionaires have invested. 2 grand will not even come close to improving my quality of life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BushMasterBoy

Because once we master space travel there really is no limit. Similar to the Louisiana Purchase and Sewards Folly (Alaska) the investments have been phenomenal. Thats why all the billionaires have invested. 2 grand will not even come close to improving my quality of life.

---

NASA accounts for less than half of one percent of the US federal budget, typically around 0.4% of the total discretionary spending. We'll be bankrupt long before we master even "NEO" at the rate of inflation/devaluing of the US dollar, just reality...

If anyone does master it, it will likey be the Chinese in ~20-30 years. They invest a lot more into aerospace, and Xi doesn't drop money from airplanes when the populace is getting unhappy with them (He just sends them to camps, most likely).

Trump has no principles except self promotion and his ego.

He is anti 2A, except when he needs the vote.
He has no fiscal responsibility, see his many bankruptcies and failed businesses.
He flip flops based on popular opinion.
He fired Musk for cutting to much and causing him grief with the media.
He backs down to create a "deal"

Trump is not even close to being a conservative.

I got an email from the Whitehouse. Sounds like it came from some crazies

https://www.whitehouse.gov/mysafespace/

Magnets……..it’s all about magnets.

Fox:

Great!
Now do this one:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...ew-york-mayor/

Even WAPO is concerned over the Mayor elects change of tune.
At least he didn't waste anytime, it was during his acceptance speech.

No, seriously comment on him next.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oscar77

Fox:

Great!
Now do this one:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...ew-york-mayor/

Even WAPO is concerned over the Mayor elects change of tune.
At least he didn't waste anytime, it was during his acceptance speech.

No, seriously comment on him next.

---

He's shit. But just stop for a moment and realize something...

The #1 go to for defense of Trump is by comparing him to socialist/progressive/communist whack jobs and saying "but, but, but, Stalin also did this". It's called relative privation, and it's almost the only reason Trump has remaining fans. There's always going to be someone worse to compare to. Currently, you are asking me to compare the "conservative" POTUS to the Mayor of New York City, the liberal/progressive bastion of the world, second only perhaps to Berkley (or Boulder these days???). There shouldn't be any similarities at all. Unfortunately, there are a ton. Both come (e.g. have lived in) liberal New York City, both have donated money to liberal and progressive causes, both are self interested, and both want to inflate government spending and the size of government tremendously.

Shouldn't there be zero similarities?

Latest has Trump talking about sending ObamaCare $ straight to people too. This guy is the biggest socialist we've ever had in office, imho. But he does flop positions like a beached carp, so there's no telling what is actual intent is, and I don't think he even knows, we may as well have a methed out POTUS for all the difference and consistency it would make.

Would Zohran Mamdani be a worse president? Most likely. But we've yet to see what Trump will do, he's erratic enough that a severe national tragedy is not entirely out of the question.

Trump isn't a socialist, he's a populist. He has proven time and again he doesn't have any fixed governing philosophies so there are no conservative explanations for his proposals to rebate $2000 or to send any Obamacare subsidies directly to taxpayers except that he was (and still is) against the Obamacare subsidies in general. His proposal as I understand it is that if we have to have them in the spend plan to get the government funded then at least put the money directly in the hands of the consumers instead of making it a corporate welfare scheme for healthcare insurance companies.

Trump is very vary far from a perfect Constitutionalist or conservative but he's hardly a bigger socialist than Biden or Obama.

Despite that, the negatives of a President Trump are still far far less than a President Clinton, Obama, or Biden or any of the other candidates fielded by the Democrats in the last 30+ years. Trump has at least avoided appointing SCOTUS justices that take their cue from international courts like Ginsberg or just make up shit from whole cloth like Sotomayor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oscar77

Fox:

Great!
Now do this one:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...ew-york-mayor/

Even WAPO is concerned over the Mayor elects change of tune.
At least he didn't waste anytime, it was during his acceptance speech.

No, seriously comment on him next.

---

This aged well with Trump's comments....

https://www.cnn.com/2025/11/21/polit...ffice-new-york

All it takes is some butt kissing, and Trump will give truly anybody a reach-around, even if they are a dictator of a puppet state that repeatedly threatens to nuke the U.S., or avowed communists, even if the day before, Trump called them satan.

Don't make this something it's not. This is politics, nothing more.

The world knows how Trump feels about this guy, but he also knows millions of people voted for him and he's the mayor elect of the largest (by population) city in the United States.

Given "politics", no one should have expected the post-discussion press conference to have been any different than it was. Trump has to find a way to work with this guy for the next 3 years and burning bridges now wouldn't achieve that goal. Schmooze a bit, offer some non-committal platitudes while smiling at the cameras and strategize behind the scenes on how to keep this guy from becoming a royal pain-in-the-ass for, at least, the next 3 years.

If, or more precisely WHEN, this guy steps all over his own dick in failure as he to turns NYC into a bigger mess than it already is, Trump can still easily say "See? I told you."

He's not a political genius and master tactician, he's also good buds with Kim Jong Un and Putin.

He's advocated for printing money for direct payments to individuals more than any president in our history, previously donated to HRC, and was a long-time NYC democrat.

He has no political positions, no platform, not a conservative in the slightest. He's the party of Trump. That's it.

You guys can bitch and complain all you want but Trump as president is way better than president Kamala. The election was between two people and we ended up with the lesser of the two evil's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beast556

You guys can bitch and complain all you want but Trump as president is way better than president Kamala. The election was between two people and we ended up with the lesser of the two evil's.

---

That's like saying a stab wound is better than a severed arm...

Both were horrible candidates.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric P

That's like saying a stab wound is better than a severed arm...

Both were horrible candidates.

---

Look back through history. The presidential candidates are ALWAYS horrible options.

Quality, capable leaders know better than to want to be President. Therefore, we get the candidates we deserve.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clodhopper

Look back through history. The presidential candidates are ALWAYS horrible options.

Quality, capable leaders know better than to want to be President. Therefore, we get the candidates we deserve.

---

This is my thought too. For too many years people aren't voting for the person who they feel is the best to lead our country but voting against the other guy. Somehow I don't think this is what our founding fathers had in mind when they created this system. Decade after decade people hold their nose to pull the lever for someone they fully know is awful for our country... they just believe within their heart of hearts that if the other person wins it will mean the end of our country as we know it.

That's a very abysmal way of looking at things and assumes that our founding fathers weren't intelligent enough to build the checks & balances into the system that it has.

For me, I vote for the best candidate for our country. Not the best candidate for me or my personal beliefs but the one who will represent our country with the respect it deserves and do their part to leave it better than it was before they got into office. IMO there hasn't been a candidate from either party that represents that in a long, long, long time. So that means I often times vote 3rd party. I can already feel the people reading this who think I'm now "the enemy" for voting for the person I think is the right person for the job. Think of that in a vacuum for a moment and why that's considered "foolish" or worse by many who are red until they die or blue no matter who. Neither of those parties gives a solitary hobo's crap about you or even this country no matter what lies they spew while campaigning.

These same people all tell me when I talk w/them in person around election time that they would 100% vote for that same 3rd party candidate but they know they won't win. By the dozens. Most people that I talk with, in fact. I'd venture to guess that over 50% of the voting public has that same thought. That number might be even higher for the non-voting public who feels that neither party represents anything about them and don't bother because they know a 3rd party candidate has no chance. Now imagine if every American simply voted for the person they felt would do the best job? Crazy thought, huh? Voting FOR the person you like. Wild.

But people will come along shortly to tell me how much of a commie I am or how I helped XYZ win that one election (an election they also told me would end the free world if candidate XYZ won... incorrectly) for thinking this way. That's fine. I'll rest easy at night knowing that I had the courage of my convictions to vote for the right man for the job. If more people did that rather than being sucked into the system and perpetuating it then we'd actually have a worthy candidate. Until everyone starts letting them know what we really think and stops giving their tepid approval by voting for them we'll continue having the government we deserve.

It's pretty wild when you think of what courage it took to form this country and now people simply are afraid to honor that by voting for the right candidate for the job.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jer

This is my thought too. For too many years people aren't voting for the person who they feel is the best to lead our country but voting against the other guy. Somehow I don't think this is what our founding fathers had in mind when they created this system. Decade after decade people hold their nose to pull the lever for someone they fully know is awful for our country... they just believe within their heart of hearts that if the other person wins it will mean the end of our country as we know it.

That's a very abysmal way of looking at things and assumes that our founding fathers weren't intelligent enough to build the checks & balances into the system that it has.

For me, I vote for the best candidate for our country. Not the best candidate for me or my personal beliefs but the one who will represent our country with the respect it deserves and do their part to leave it better than it was before they got into office. IMO there hasn't been a candidate from either party that represents that in a long, long, long time. So that means I often times vote 3rd party. I can already feel the people reading this who think I'm now "the enemy" for voting for the person I think is the right person for the job. Think of that in a vacuum for a moment and why that's considered "foolish" or worse by many who are red until they die or blue no matter who. Neither of those parties gives a solitary hobo's crap about you or even this country no matter what lies they spew while campaigning.

These same people all tell me when I talk w/them in person around election time that they would 100% vote for that same 3rd party candidate but they know they won't win. By the dozens. Most people that I talk with, in fact. I'd venture to guess that over 50% of the voting public has that same thought. That number might be even higher for the non-voting public who feels that neither party represents anything about them and don't bother because they know a 3rd party candidate has no chance. Now imagine if every American simply voted for the person they felt would do the best job? Crazy thought, huh? Voting FOR the person you like. Wild.

But people will come along shortly to tell me how much of a commie I am or how I helped XYZ win that one election (an election they also told me would end the free world if candidate XYZ won... incorrectly) for thinking this way. That's fine. I'll rest easy at night knowing that I had the courage of my convictions to vote for the right man for the job. If more people did that rather than being sucked into the system and perpetuating it then we'd actually have a worthy candidate. Until everyone starts letting them know what we really think and stops giving their tepid approval by voting for them we'll continue having the government we deserve.

It's pretty wild when you think of what courage it took to form this country and now people simply are afraid to honor that by voting for the right candidate for the job.

---

This why democrats get elected. Conservatives self fracture their votes based on individual principles, liberals get in line behind who they are told to vote for by the machine. It?s sad, but true.

Term limits and no investments while in office would help reduce the lifelong grifters. IMO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Firehaus

This why democrats get elected. Conservatives self fracture their votes based on individual principles, liberals get in line behind who they are told to vote for by the machine. It?s sad, but true.

Term limits and no investments while in office would help reduce the lifelong grifters. IMO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

I voted 3rd party as well. There was no conservative president on the ticket, so I wrote one in.

It's not about "individual principles", I wasn't going to vote for a populist/socialist grifter with a glaring personality disorder that was compromised by other nations. Sad, but true.

Now here we are, with a president who "transferred" his business interests to a trust that lists him both as the beneficiary and the grantor, with the trustee as his son (this is a defective trust, by the way), who still maintains all business interest, declared to still maintain all business interests, started a crypto currency that other nations heavily invest in at his own personal profit, and has issued executive orders pledging to defend nations immediately after receiving gifts of 400-500million from them.

Now, once elected, spending has ramped up to new highs, just like his last term (as some of us predicted, *cough* *cough*), and he is promising to print money to send directly to people, and for no fucking reason whatsoever, which is the cardinal sin of any real conservative if there was one.

Let me repeat: There was no conservative to vote for on the ticket for 2024.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Firehaus

This why democrats get elected. Conservatives self fracture their votes based on individual principles, liberals get in line behind who they are told to vote for by the machine. It?s sad, but true.

Term limits and no investments while in office would help reduce the lifelong grifters. IMO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Democrats get elected because more people voted for them based on our electoral college. You can try to explain that away and blame people like me all you want but the reality is that if the Republican party put forth a better candidate then the Democrat wouldn't have won. But you continue voting for the candidate you KNOW sucks and this is your tepid approval of their choice for candidate. Why would they change? Their "Turd Sandwich" candidate _almost_ beat the "Giant Douche" candidate so what reason do they have to blow it up and change their flawed system?

I also find it interesting that you think that you voting Republican no matter who the candidate they put forward is somehow not being a cog in the very machine you bemoan in the same breath. If more people thought the way I did & voiced that with their vote (for the best possible candidate available to them regardless of affiliation) then BOTH parties would have to realize they've been out-of-touch for far too long and need to change.

Also, what about what I just said allows you to so confidently label me a "conservative" to tell me I'm voting wrong? I'm an American first and foremost and I fail to see how voting for the best candidate for the country (as I see it) can be faulted so confidently. If being a conservative means I have to hold my nose as I pull the proverbial lever for an inferior candidate (even if the best option available is a 3rd party candidate) then I guess I'm not a conservative. I don't see myself as such anyway so that fits my way of thinking. I also don't particularly like being put in a box where I MUST think a certain way on dozens of topics and not have a mind of my own on the individual topics. It's kind of silly that we as individuals are expected to conform this way and support every single aspect of our affiliation.

Again, if either party wants my vote they'd stop putting for Giant Douche & Turd Sandwich as my only choices. I'm not casting my vote as a spite vote because someone else thinks I should because it's what they did and I should just get in line and vote for an inferior candidate so that an even more inferior candidate doesn't win when the best option (the way I see it) is also on the list of options. That isn't logical and I'm not adding to the problem by doing so.

(credit to South Park for so perfectly nailing our presidential choices going back over 2 decades ago now in an obvious case of the more things change, the more they stay the same to anyone who bothers looking)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FoxtArt

I voted 3rd party as well. There was no conservative president on the ticket, so I wrote one in.

It's not about "individual principles", I wasn't going to vote for a populist/socialist grifter with a glaring personality disorder that was compromised by other nations. Sad, but true.

Now here we are, with a president who "transferred" his business interests to a trust that lists him both as the beneficiary and the grantor, with the trustee as his son (this is a defective trust, by the way), who still maintains all business interest, declared to still maintain all business interests, started a crypto currency that other nations heavily invest in at his own personal profit, and has issued executive orders pledging to defend nations immediately after receiving gifts of 400-500million from them.

Now, once elected, spending has ramped up to new highs, just like his last term (as some of us predicted, *cough* *cough*), and he is promising to print money to send directly to people, and for no fucking reason whatsoever, which is the cardinal sin of any real conservative if there was one.

Let me repeat: There was no conservative to vote for on the ticket for 2024.

---

I disagree, your individual principle on this matter is a hatred for Trump. You?ll never vote for him, but what about the conservative judges that get nominated from having him in office? Remaking the judicial branch with more conservative judges is as important or more for true change to happen.

Look at how many liberal judges keep using their bench to stop everything Trump, but you probably get a smile from it every time it happens.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jer

Democrats get elected because more people voted for them based on our electoral college. You can try to explain that away and blame people like me all you want but the reality is that if the Republican party put forth a better candidate then the Democrat wouldn't have won. But you continue voting for the candidate you KNOW sucks and this is your tepid approval of their choice for candidate. Why would they change? Their "Turd Sandwich" candidate _almost_ beat the "Giant Douche" candidate so what reason do they have to blow it up and change their flawed system?

I also find it interesting that you think that you voting Republican no matter who the candidate they put forward is somehow not being a cog in the very machine you bemoan in the same breath. If more people thought the way I did & voiced that with their vote (for the best possible candidate available to them regardless of affiliation) then BOTH parties would have to realize they've been out-of-touch for far too long and need to change.

Also, what about what I just said allows you to so confidently label me a "conservative" to tell me I'm voting wrong? I'm an American first and foremost and I fail to see how voting for the best candidate for the country (as I see it) can be faulted so confidently. If being a conservative means I have to hold my nose as I pull the proverbial lever for an inferior candidate (even if the best option available is a 3rd party candidate) then I guess I'm not a conservative. I don't see myself as such anyway so that fits my way of thinking. I also don't particularly like being put in a box where I MUST think a certain way on dozens of topics and not have a mind of my own on the individual topics. It's kind of silly that we as individuals are expected to conform this way and support every single aspect of our affiliation.

Again, if either party wants my vote they'd stop putting for Giant Douche & Turd Sandwich as my only choices. I'm not casting my vote as a spite vote because someone else thinks I should because it's what they did and I should just get in line and vote for an inferior candidate so that an even more inferior candidate doesn't win when the best option (the way I see it) is also on the list of options. That isn't logical and I'm not adding to the problem by doing so.

(credit to South Park for so perfectly nailing our presidential choices going back over 2 decades ago now in an obvious case of the more things change, the more they stay the same to anyone who bothers looking)

---

Thank you for making my point about people who vote more conservative than liberal self fracturing stick while making it about you and misgendering your political stance.

Do you think more people voted for Trump in 2016 for him or the Supreme Court seats?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

* The house of reps now blocks the introduction of conservative bills without Trump's personal seal of approval, requiring the use of discharge petitions to get around him. In reaction, they intend to make the discharge petition impossible so that Trump fully controls the House of Representatives.

* The judiciary... Appointments are not just about (R) and (D). See e.g. Aileen Cannon for reference. If your judiciary appointments are entirely sycophants... you've eroded and destroyed the fragile check-and-balance that was. I want judges who uphold the Constitution. Will his sycophants do that? Absolutely not.

This candidate has effectively undermined all our checks and balances to the point that there are essentially none. Ironically, some see that as a "bonus".

Meanwhile, conservatives/federalists are appalled by the spending, the expansion, and consolidation of federal power and the executive. Everything that people praise Trump for, every judicial ruling that is bent to justify his unconstitutional behavior, will ultimately come back around with the next POTUS to cause great harm. The opinions that ultimately come out to justify extra-judicial killing, domestic terror labeling, personal financial interest, even tarriffs, all of these will give your upcoming liberal president even greater power. People forget this shit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Firehaus

Thank you for making my point about people who vote more conservative than liberal self fracturing stick while making it about you and misgendering your political stance.

Do you think more people voted for Trump in 2016 for him or the Supreme Court seats?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

No, your point was based on how conservatives vote. My statement was pretty clearly that I'm not a conservative. However you want to label that.

We do agree on one point though... people not voting for a particular candidate can cause them & their party to lose. If the parties themselves understood this they would put forth better candidates to earn those "lost" votes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BPTactical

Magnets……..it’s all about magnets.

---

Uh, I'm gonna go ahead and disagree with you on this. Fletch says ball bearings - it's all about ball bearings these days.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jer

No, your point was based on how conservatives vote. My statement was pretty clearly that I'm not a conservative. However you want to label that.

We do agree on one point though... people not voting for a particular candidate can cause them & their party to lose. If the parties themselves understood this they would put forth better candidates to earn those "lost" votes.

---

When was the last time a 3rd party person came close to winning a percentage close to the Republicans or Democrats? Ross Perot?

That?s how Clinton was elected.

You can argue semantics, but generally you have the Republicans/ Conservatives or the Democrats/ Liberals to vote for who actually have a chance of winning the election.

I understand your point and it?s not necessarily wrong, but it?s idealistic. I?m a realist.

I remember in 2008 at the intersection of Wads & I-70 in Arvada there would be protesters every weekend protesting Bush and the Iraq war.

Obama won and no more protesters. Did the war stop? Did the bombs and killing of children stop? No. Their candidate was elected and that?s all that mattered. That?s the liberal hive mind at work. That is who we are up against.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Firehaus

When was the last time a 3rd party person came close to winning a percentage close to the Republicans or Democrats? Ross Perot?

That?s how Clinton was elected.

You can argue semantics, but generally you have the Republicans/ Conservatives or the Democrats/ Liberals to vote for who actually have a chance of winning the election.

I understand your point and it?s not necessarily wrong, but it?s idealistic. I?m a realist.

I remember in 2008 at the intersection of Wads & I-70 in Arvada there would be protesters every weekend protesting Bush and the Iraq war.

Obama won and no more protesters. Did the war stop? Did the bombs and killing of children stop? No. Their candidate was elected and that?s all that mattered. That?s the liberal hive mind at work. That is who we are up against.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

A party needs to consider both independent voters and voter sentiment/motivation. The primary reason an election is lost is that many voters stay home. 2026 and 2028 will be a blood bath for the GOP, and not because of third-party votes, and it absolutely deserves it.

Honestly, I believe preference voting is a way forward, despite the knee-jerks and screams that people like Trump wouldn't make it into office, that's exactly the point. The bottom-of-the-barrel of political corruption probably wouldn't make it into office. Maybe, just maybe, a candidate that isn't a controversial extreme would be in office, oh, the humanity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Firehaus

When was the last time a 3rd party person came close to winning a percentage close to the Republicans or Democrats? Ross Perot?

That?s how Clinton was elected.

You can argue semantics, but generally you have the Republicans/ Conservatives or the Democrats/ Liberals to vote for who actually have a chance of winning the election.

I understand your point and it?s not necessarily wrong, but it?s idealistic. I?m a realist.

I remember in 2008 at the intersection of Wads & I-70 in Arvada there would be protesters every weekend protesting Bush and the Iraq war.

Obama won and no more protesters. Did the war stop? Did the bombs and killing of children stop? No. Their candidate was elected and that?s all that mattered. That?s the liberal hive mind at work. That is who we are up against.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Your stated stance actually proves my point. You vote party lines and nothing will ever change because your voting FOR the current broken way of doing things. Doing the same thing that's always been done and expecting a different outcome is the definition of insanity. You're happy with the way things have gone? If not, why keep voting for the same way of doing things? Like it or not, your vote for the (R) party is a vote of approval, tepid as you may think it is. My vote couldn't be more clear as to how NOT a vote for either (D) or (R) it is. If more people did it and that low percentage you talk about went up... things would change as soon as others saw it was a viable option. That won't happen if nobody votes their mind and just votes so "they other guy" doesn't win.

Now just imagine if BOTH sides of the aisle who claim their party no longer represents them (or any other sane member of their party) actually voted logically for the person who was the best candidate. This idea that you can only vote (D) or (R) even if you don't like the candidate is quite literally the ONLY reason we don't have any other choices. I fully understand that my vote may be "wasted" in your eyes but it's my vote. Fortunately, as stated, I don't care what others think about how I voted. I voted for the person best for the job because I firmly believe that's the vision by which this country was founded. I sleep like a baby at night knowing that. I have zero reservations about voting for the person I believe best fits the role of the leader of these United States.

I just wish others who consider themselves Americans would take the same logical approach and stop overthinking themselves into voting for the same crappy government. Politics as usual. So many of them are 100% unwilling to compromise in any way... until it comes to the most important aspect of our nation. Then they get all "well, I compromised because I'm realist" and other such lame excuses for not having the courage to vote as 100% uncompromising as they claim to do everything else. Not sure how they sleep at night voting for a candidate that isn't the best one on the ballot simply because of party affiliation but... here we are. That seems pretty un-American.

Somehow many have convinced themselves that this is the most logical approach. For me, it seems to make the least logical sense for a single person to be that concerned about everyone how else is voting and then basing their decision solely on that data point. I vote for who I think is the best candidate and if others did the same we'd be in a better place in term of options. I know I keep saying that same thing but even as basic if an idea it seems to be lost upon a majority of voters so it seems that it needs to be said repeatedly. For me, I value this country FAR more than any political party. Not sure why anyone would choose a political party over the country, especially when said party has shown it will choose itself over the country at every possible turn.

Do you think if George Washington were alive today he'd be urging people to vote for a crappy candidate of one party just to block the other party from winning? No chance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jer

Do you think if George Washington were alive today he'd be urging people to vote for a crappy candidate of one party just to block the other party from winning? No chance.

---

I think if George Washington were alive today there would be mass executions for treason.

I think after all this back and forth my original statement stands.

Democrats vote Democrat no matter what, people that vote Republican self fracture due to strong ideology differences within the conservative movement weakening the conservative voting block getting Democrats elected.

You can self justify it all you want about why & how you choose to vote, but it doesn?t change the end result.

Is the current administration perfect, no.

Is the current administration better than Biden & Kamala, 100%.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Game theory and history will tell you that third party candidacies just enable the most effective plurality to win. Bill Clinton won both his elections with a plurality, not a majority, in key states and there's a lot of evidence that Perot's candidacy is what he needed to win. Certainly, Carville and Clinton believed that since they supported Perot's candidacy and even fed Perot misinformation to blame some of their own dirty tricks on Bush and Dole.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Firehaus

When was the last time a 3rd party person came close to winning a percentage close to the Republicans or Democrats? Ross Perot?

That?s how Clinton was elected.

---

That was also when they introduced electronic voting machines... with widespread malfunctions in numerous areas.

Also, IIRC, Perot voluntarily dropped out the day before Election Day, but remained on the ballot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Firehaus

I think if George Washington were alive today there would be mass executions for treason.

I think after all this back and forth my original statement stands.

Democrats vote Democrat no matter what, people that vote Republican self fracture due to strong ideology differences within the conservative movement weakening the conservative voting block getting Democrats elected.

You can self justify it all you want about why & how you choose to vote, but it doesn?t change the end result.

Is the current administration perfect, no.

Is the current administration better than Biden & Kamala, 100%.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

The very reason Trump got elected is because Democrats didn't vote Democrat no matter what.

Just like the other guy is always influencing the elections and commiting election fraud (when the other guy wins); Democrats also stay home in droves, and they did. Much as conservatives will in 2026 and 2028. People are not a light switch; they are fickle beings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FoxtArt

The very reason Trump got elected is because Democrats didn't vote Democrat no matter what.

Just like the other guy is always influencing the elections and commiting election fraud (when the other guy wins); Democrats also stay home in droves, and they did. Much as conservatives will in 2026 and 2028. People are not a light switch; they are fickle beings.

---

Are you comparing Joe Biden?s numbers to Kamala?s numbers?

I know a few boomer women who voted for Kamala that usually vote for conservatives.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So with all the belly aching from the Trump Haters and those who complain about any candidate.
Name the ultimate perfect candidate and explain why they are the best for the nation and what they would do different.
If you hate Trump we get it, you make that clear. So what exactly is your solution? I hear complaining but no solutions.
The lesser of two evils blah blah.
Who is the ultimate candidate that would solve the US’s problems that the left and right can unit behind?
Tell us because you seem to have it all figured out but are keeping it secret.
Set up the candidates for the next election.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TEAMRICO

So with all the belly aching from the Trump Haters and those who complain about any candidate.
Name the ultimate perfect candidate and explain why they are the best for the nation and what they would do different.
If you hate Trump we get it, you make that clear. So what exactly is your solution? I hear complaining but no solutions.
The lesser of two evils blah blah.
Who is the ultimate candidate that would solve the US’s problems that the left and right can unit behind?
Tell us because you seem to have it all figured out but are keeping it secret.
Set up the candidates for the next election.

---

I never said I hated Trump so maybe this wasn't directed towards me?

This argument has grown more tiresome than the caliber debates of the 90s. FFS...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bailey Guns

This argument has grown more tiresome than the caliber debates of the 90s. FFS...

---

Who's arguing? Someone stated earlier that all that we get are shit options for the two main parties. I agreed and offered reasoning as to why as well as a potential solution. I was always taught that if there's a problem and you have no potential solution you're just complaining.

People want to say it won't work but it's pretty hard to deny that if everyone who was fed up with the current 2-party system voted 3rd party they would literally win. Now imagine if just enough people voted for the best candidate (even if it was 3rd party) to just show others who see the poll results this time that there is a trend towards that and maybe next time their vote won't be "wasted" and we can get more people to just vote for the best candidate for the position regardless of party affiliation.

This idea that you can only vote for one of those two parties while readily admitting that their candidates are shit is defeatist. I'm a free American and I'll vote whomever the hell I want. Too bad more people didn't feel that way and are trapped by a prison of their own creation.

I wish all this shit were as simple as handgun calibers because everyone knows 9mm is better. [LOL]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jer

Everyone knows 9mm is better. [LOL]

---

Only for weak-wristed FBI agents!
(10MM has entered the room)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FoxtArt

Only for weak-wristed FBI agents!
(10MM has entered the room)

---

9mm is just fine to get the job done... That's what my wife tells me anyway.

I agree that this is a tiresome debate that has been going on for far too long (decades). Now, I'm going to throw in my two cents to add to the debate (why not; everybody else is doing it?!)

The first POTUS general election I could vote in was 1988. I contend that, then and since then, there have been no "good" candidates to vote for, just "less bad" candidates. This, in my opinion, includes all 3rd party candidates. However, I do believe that many excellent choices got discarded along the way in Primary elections. All we're ever left with are the "Giant Douche & Turd Sandwich" D & R candidates, along with the Syrup of Ipecac (vomit inducing) 3rd party candidates. In the end, the American people have a choice of the "least bad" candidate.

"Least bad". Which candidate is less likely to do further harm to our Republic?

I agree that the Dems & GOP have consistently put forth horrible candidates for us to choose from and I haven't seen one 3rd party candidate worth my consideration. The GOP, in particular, loves to choose shitty candidates. Why are these the candidates we get to choose from? Because of politic favors and which candidate can be best controlled by their party. It's as simple as that. Is it what's best for our Republic? Hell no! It hasn't been in my lifetime and it's only getting worse - which is why this nation is crumbling.

Whether the candidate is Dem, GOP, or 3rd party, I encourage you to vote your conscience. But I remind you that, when another candidate wins the election and you get to deal with their policies, YOU played a role in that happening and have zero room to complain about the circumstances of their administration.

Elections, as they say, have consequences. I can choose to be an optimist or a realist when I make my choice at the poll. This is what drives me to consistently choose the candidate who I believe has the greatest chance of winning and who will cause the Republic the least harm.