Author Topic: 2016 Election  (Read 218770 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline eropS

  • Out Run Speedster
  • *****
  • Posts: 5117
  • That's right, I went there
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #1260 on: May 31, 2016, 08:43:20 pm »
Yeah but people are willing to risk that since they see the status quo as a negative. So the options are negative or ?? And people are going ??
No, no, he did. In the everything else section, at least. Officially, this makes him king.

Offline Inkling

  • S.T.U.N. Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 8054
  • Not a Squid.
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #1261 on: May 31, 2016, 08:57:05 pm »
Status Quo, Wild Card, or Third Party protest vote.

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYtjpIwamos" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYtjpIwamos</a>
Probably not a Goat, either.


Offline Rysworld

  • Fooblitzky Fooble
  • *****
  • Posts: 4261
  • hhhhhhhh
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #1262 on: May 31, 2016, 09:04:12 pm »
Anything would be an improvement. Trump is the closest thing I can get to actually just tearing America down and starting over*. It's why I'm voting for him.

Any difference from the status quo would be good, even if it was negative. Maybe if it gets bad enough people will realize they have to pay attention to politics.

Plus, the way the Democratic party is rigging themselves towards Hillary makes me actually, physically angry. There's no way I'm voting for a party Democrat for a while after this.

Like, you don't want Bernie? You want to continue our slog through a corpulent bureaucracy, through the necrotic and pussed flesh that used to be the democratic process? Fine. **** you. Trump.

TRUMP.

TRUMP! TRUMP! TRUMP! TRUMP!

*I don't necessarily think he'd actually get very close to it- we've got legal firewalls in place so the President cannot do exactly that among other things- I just think he's the closest option to it.

Offline Krakow Sam

  • Moderator
  • Dungeon Sieger
  • *****
  • Posts: 24440
  • Stern dissaproval
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #1263 on: June 01, 2016, 03:00:09 am »
Any difference from the status quo would be good, even if it was negative.

Be careful what you wish for.









Sam is basically right, he's just cranky.

Offline eropS

  • Out Run Speedster
  • *****
  • Posts: 5117
  • That's right, I went there
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #1264 on: June 01, 2016, 05:27:16 am »
Idk, I don't look at Trump and see aspiring genocidal maniac with a book blaming a minority group for all our country, and basically all the world's, problems.

PotUS can only do so much before Congress has to cut him a check

No, no, he did. In the everything else section, at least. Officially, this makes him king.

Offline Krakow Sam

  • Moderator
  • Dungeon Sieger
  • *****
  • Posts: 24440
  • Stern dissaproval
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #1265 on: June 01, 2016, 07:15:39 am »
Yeah I know comparison between Trump and Hitler is ridiculous and overblown and tends to sap credibility from the argument. I was more targeting the general idea that a change from the status quo is always going to be a good thing. Change is good, but not too much change, all at once, where the outcome is totally up in the air and signs point to it not being a good outcome.
Sam is basically right, he's just cranky.

Offline /lurk

  • Dragon Warrior Slime
  • *****
  • Posts: 5202
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #1266 on: June 01, 2016, 08:43:41 am »
Now come on Sam that comparison is just insulting.


Nobody voted for Chis Evans.
Not a winner anymore.

Offline Rysworld

  • Fooblitzky Fooble
  • *****
  • Posts: 4261
  • hhhhhhhh
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #1267 on: June 01, 2016, 11:32:09 am »
Okay, fine, I'm willing to admit I was being hyperbolic. Most changes from the status quo would be good, from my perspective.

My point was, foremost, that I'm willing to buy that Trump would be a negative change from the status quo. Maybe he'll run this country into the ground. Hopefully, though, he'll at least be able to give the people some political wiggle room whatever he does, make the parties sit up and listen for fear of another grassroots, barely-a-party-candidate candidate.

It's a bit of a longshot. But I honestly don't see any other options. Getting Bernie in office is more of a priority, if it's possible, but if it isn't I can't justify voting for Hillary.

Offline Krakow Sam

  • Moderator
  • Dungeon Sieger
  • *****
  • Posts: 24440
  • Stern dissaproval
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #1268 on: June 01, 2016, 11:45:40 am »
Surely the more anti-establishment thing to do would be to vote for a third party?

If enough people do it then it sends a clear message that people don't like the two parties they're being offered. Also the republican and democrat defectors will more or less balance each other out so the outcome won't really be different. Never Trump republicans can vote Libertarian and Never Hillary Democrats can vote Green or Communist or whatever.
Sam is basically right, he's just cranky.

Offline PatMan33

  • Fable Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 28834
  • GREAT SCOTT!!
    • View Profile
    • DuckDuckGo
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #1269 on: June 01, 2016, 11:54:05 am »
I don't have the numbers, but I remember a story from a month or two ago where they were analyzing Trump's business success rate and failure rate versus the average success and failure rates across all businesses. And their conclusion was something along the lines of: people love to puff up the times when Trump's business have failed, but given the number of businesses he has started, of those that failed, his success rate is still a good deal higher than the global average.

Offline Rysworld

  • Fooblitzky Fooble
  • *****
  • Posts: 4261
  • hhhhhhhh
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #1270 on: June 01, 2016, 12:29:45 pm »
Surely the more anti-establishment thing to do would be to vote for a third party?

If enough people do it then it sends a clear message that people don't like the two parties they're being offered. Also the republican and democrat defectors will more or less balance each other out so the outcome won't really be different. Never Trump republicans can vote Libertarian and Never Hillary Democrats can vote Green or Communist or whatever.

Who cares if people don't like what the two parties are offering? If they're voting third party, their votes don't matter, and if their votes don't matter why would politicians care about what they think?

Even so, I'm probably going to start voting Green after this election. I just think Trump has a use, here.

Offline PatMan33

  • Fable Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 28834
  • GREAT SCOTT!!
    • View Profile
    • DuckDuckGo
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #1271 on: June 01, 2016, 12:32:20 pm »
Even if he loses, Trump's impact has forced a discussion on the nature of our nomination system and electoral processes that was not happening on such a scale before. I only hope people remember to keep talking about it.

Offline Ultimatum

  • SunDog Pilot
  • *****
  • Posts: 3367
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #1272 on: June 01, 2016, 02:10:33 pm »
Trump's success may encourage others like him to come forward,and they don't have to be republican


 

Offline PatMan33

  • Fable Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 28834
  • GREAT SCOTT!!
    • View Profile
    • DuckDuckGo
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #1273 on: June 01, 2016, 02:16:12 pm »
Or wealthy or lawyers, hopefully.

Offline Krakow Sam

  • Moderator
  • Dungeon Sieger
  • *****
  • Posts: 24440
  • Stern dissaproval
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #1274 on: June 01, 2016, 02:16:35 pm »
Trump doesn't work if he's not wealthy.
Sam is basically right, he's just cranky.