(08-11-2016 04:06 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-11-2016 03:52 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(08-11-2016 03:43 PM)JDTulane Wrote:  Truly undecided. Between a sad HRC vote and 3rd party vote.

A gleeful vote for Trump? I feel nothing but the most visceral revisions to such a stance.

Good!

Be butt hurt over it!

Sorry...not meant to bash on you, but this is without a doubt one of the most stupid overused and ridiculous assertions continually made on here...it just is.

Well, I guess if you get used to it your butt doesn't hurt anymore?

Hillary! Not my first choice but Republicans are evil and want to starve the poor, kill our environment, endanger public health, give tax breaks to the rich and corporations and in general comfort the comfortable. She's not a giant step in the right direction but at least we're not moving backwards.

(08-11-2016 08:46 PM)Max Power Wrote:  Hillary! Not my first choice but Republicans are evil and want to starve the poor, kill our environment, endanger public health,

Lmao. Wow, hyperbole much?

Sent from my VS980 4G using CSNbbs mobile app

Mrs. Clinton, willingly, for two reasons. First, the Supreme Court. No way I want an idiot like Trump making such important appointments. Second, either Trump is the dumbest man on the planet (and a remarkably slow learner) or he is deliberately lying to stoke the anger of the lunatic right. Either way, a man like that shouldn't hold public office.

I am unaffiliated in North Carolina after having been registered in either the Conservative or Republican Party while living in New York or overseas in the army.

Not at all. Can't fight Zika because of the Republicans. Republicans always try to cut food stamps. Always try to repeal environmental regulations to please their corporate and fossil fuel donors. Tip of the iceberg.

(08-11-2016 08:54 PM)Max Power Wrote:  Not at all. Can't fight Zika because of the Republicans. Republicans always try to cut food stamps. Always try to repeal environmental regulations to please their corporate and fossil fuel donors. Tip of the iceberg.

Food stamps SHOULD be cut except for the elderly, disabled and children.

Sent from my VS980 4G using CSNbbs mobile app

(08-11-2016 08:54 PM)Max Power Wrote:  Not at all. Can't fight Zika because of the Republicans. Republicans always try to cut food stamps. Always try to repeal environmental regulations to please their corporate and fossil fuel donors. Tip of the iceberg.

Food stamps SHOULD be cut except for the elderly, disabled and children.

Sent from my VS980 4G using CSNbbs mobile app

(08-11-2016 08:54 PM)Max Power Wrote:  Not at all. Can't fight Zika because of the Republicans. Republicans always try to cut food stamps. Always try to repeal environmental regulations to please their corporate and fossil fuel donors. Tip of the iceberg.

Food stamps SHOULD be cut except for the elderly, disabled and children.

Sent from my VS980 4G using CSNbbs mobile app

(08-11-2016 08:57 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(08-11-2016 08:54 PM)Max Power Wrote:  Not at all. Can't fight Zika because of the Republicans. Republicans always try to cut food stamps. Always try to repeal environmental regulations to please their corporate and fossil fuel donors. Tip of the iceberg.

Food stamps SHOULD be cut except for the elderly, disabled and children.

Sent from my VS980 4G using CSNbbs mobile app

This!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(08-11-2016 09:49 AM)boroeagle2 Wrote:  I plan to abstain from voting, don't like either major choice, don't see the point in voting for a 3rd party candidate.

How is voting 3rd party any more pointless than voting for the two major parties?

To me, the point is to vote for the candidate that you wish would win, not merely a candidate that you expect to win. A secondary point is to reject/discredit the two major parties by maximizing the # of votes for everybody else.

(08-11-2016 10:36 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(08-11-2016 09:49 AM)boroeagle2 Wrote:  I plan to abstain from voting, don't like either major choice, don't see the point in voting for a 3rd party candidate.

How is voting 3rd party any more pointless than voting for the two major parties?

To me, the point is to vote for the candidate that you wish would win, not merely a candidate that you expect to win. A secondary point is to reject/discredit the two major parties by maximizing the # of votes for everybody else.

That's a very short-sighted and simplistic outlook.

(08-11-2016 10:40 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(08-11-2016 10:36 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  To me, the point is to vote for the candidate that you wish would win, not merely a candidate that you expect to win. A secondary point is to reject/discredit the two major parties by maximizing the # of votes for everybody else.

That's a very short-sighted and simplistic outlook.

How so?

I'll never understand how someone can say they are tired of the establishment, corruption, and/or two party system and then not vote Trump. He is literally staging a mutiny. If you want things to actually change then vote for Trump. Nothing else will shake things up.

We have 10 naive Hillary voters on this board. Sodom and Gomorrah would be proud.

Trump is still leading the pack. It's All good

(08-11-2016 09:46 AM)boroeagle2 Wrote:  There are plenty of threads for arguing, I was hoping we could keep that to a minimum here, maybe just a BRIEF sentence on why you selected what you did. Your party identification and state.

Will vote third party (Johnson/Weld) because I align with their platform, they're experienced with proven good records as ex-governors, have even temperaments, and are pragmatic in addressing issues.

If I was forced to vote R or D, I would grudgingly vote for Hillary. If the R nominee was anyone other than Trump, then it'd be GOP.

Look at these results and we are supposed to believe Crooked Hillary is leading by 13 points nationally?

(08-12-2016 10:12 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  Look at these results and we are supposed to believe Crooked Hillary is leading by 13 points nationally?

I don't know if you're saying that in jest or not. But a message board of nearly all white males isn't the best representative pool.

(08-12-2016 10:24 AM)Motown Bronco Wrote:  

(08-12-2016 10:12 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  Look at these results and we are supposed to believe Crooked Hillary is leading by 13 points nationally?

I don't know if you're saying that in jest or not. But a message board of nearly all white males isn't the best representative pool.

and people wonder why I am always calling the cons out on this forum for not being very bright.

(08-12-2016 10:35 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(08-12-2016 10:24 AM)Motown Bronco Wrote:  

(08-12-2016 10:12 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  Look at these results and we are supposed to believe Crooked Hillary is leading by 13 points nationally?

I don't know if you're saying that in jest or not. But a message board of nearly all white males isn't the best representative pool.

and people wonder why I am always calling the cons out on this forum for not being very bright.

Actually, I earned the highest marks. You support the very stupid people that got us here.