I'm back to not voting for POTUS this year..

[DawgMaticFan]

After watching Hillary slam Trump for ''being neutral'' on the Israel/Palistine issue, I just can't vote for her.
GD it why can't we come up with a good candidate and elect him/her ?
We reject a potentially great POTUS like Mark Warner for no reason other than he isn't a show horse.

F...K US, we deserve the trash we elect.

 

[steelchair]

While not voting is the equivalent of voting for Hillary, good for you. It's a whiny arsed cop out...but, anyone not smart enough to AT LEAST vote for "the lesser of two evils" just isn't very smart.

Even if you believe Hildabeast is only slightly better than Trump you should get off your dead arse and vote for her.

Heck, I'd go write in myself... or someone else over 35. Not voting is ultimate EASY way out. All you have to defend is why you didn't exercise your privilege.

 

[LumpLump]

While not voting is the equivalent of voting for Hillary, good for you. It's a whiny arsed cop out...but, anyone not smart enough to AT LEAST vote for "the lesser of two evils" just isn't very smart.

Even if you believe Hildabeast is only slightly better than Trump you should get off your dead arse and vote for her.

Heck, I'd go write in myself... or someone else over 35. Not voting is ultimate EASY way out. All you have to defend is why you didn't exercise your privilege.

Tell that to Lindsey Graham. : )

 

[LumpLump]

After watching Hillary slam Trump for ''being neutral'' on the Israel/Palistine issue, I just can't vote for her.
GD it why can't we come up with a good candidate and elect him/her ?
We reject a potentially great POTUS like Mark Warner for no reason other than he isn't a show horse.

F...K US, we deserve the trash we elect.

If Repubs were smart, they would have or maybe should at brokered convention, nominate John Huntsman, imo. Smart, good guy, very popular long time Gov, ambassador, etc.

 

[DawgMaticFan]

While not voting is the equivalent of voting for Hillary, good for you. It's a whiny arsed cop out...but, anyone not smart enough to AT LEAST vote for "the lesser of two evils" just isn't very smart.

Even if you believe Hildabeast is only slightly better than Trump you should get off your dead arse and vote for her.

Heck, I'd go write in myself... or someone else over 35. Not voting is ultimate EASY way out. All you have to defend is why you didn't exercise your privilege.

''A whiny assed cop out'', as opposed to voting for somebody you're sure would make a bad POTUS?
I'm not playing games with My vote, I won't cast a ballot just to say I voted.
Put somebody at the top of a ticket who I feel some degree of confidence to be a better choice than the alternatives, I'll give them my vote, even if it's for a 3rd party candidate who has no real chance.

 

[DawgMaticFan]

If Repubs were smart, they would have or maybe should at brokered convention, nominate John Huntsman, imo. Smart, good guy, very popular long time Gov, ambassador, etc.

I might would vote for Huntsman. There are some planks in The republican platform that might be sticking points, but he would be light years better than Trump.

 

[UgaTom]

If Repubs were smart, they would have or maybe should at brokered convention, nominate John Huntsman, imo. Smart, good guy, very popular long time Gov, ambassador, etc.

Is there any indication he would accept? After all, he didn't even bother running this year.

 

[DawginSC]

General election voting is always about the lesser of two evils.

Unless you think both suck absolutely equally, you should always cast a vote for who you think would suck less... even if both would suck a bunch.

 

[maugwa]

After watching Hillary slam Trump for ''being neutral'' on the Israel/Palistine issue, I just can't vote for her.
GD it why can't we come up with a good candidate and elect him/her ?
We reject a potentially great POTUS like Mark Warner for no reason other than he isn't a show horse.

F...K US, we deserve the trash we elect.

Anyone even considering to cast a vote for that skank needs to have their head examined.

 

[DawgMaticFan]

General election voting is always about the lesser of two evils.

Unless you think both suck absolutely equally, you should always cast a vote for who you think would suck less... even if both would suck a bunch.

I voted in every presidential election from 1976 thru 2008. I didn't vote last cycle and I likely won't this one.
I'm just not going to vote for somebody who I think will be a bad POTUS. that is my choice.

 

[DawgMaticFan]

Anyone even considering to cast a vote for that skank needs to have their head examined.

Trump is at least as bad.

 

[LumpLump]

Is there any indication he would accept? After all, he didn't even bother running this year.

Not that I know of. I think I remember last year sometime he was considering it, but didn't get in. I was just saying he's a reasonable politician, smart, likeable, etc. If the GOP is going to broker the convention and get somebody outside of the 3 running now, he'd be good. He would appeal to independents. The far right wouldn't like it, but there is not enough far right to win a general election, imo.

 

[LumpLump]

I might would vote for Huntsman. There are some planks in The republican platform that might be sticking points, but he would be light years better than Trump.

That's the problem. TOO MANY sticking points with GOP's platform. And it's a problem on Dem side too although not as severe I don't think. At least when it comes to folks in the center. For all I know, Huntsman has had enough of his party. Didn't hear anything from him during the Utah primary or caucus. Odd, imo. But like us, or Lindsey Graham said, like choosing between poison or a bullet.

Here's an article he wrote jointly with Lieberman. This kind of thinking does not go over well with the GOP. He probably knows it. I just think it would be smart of GOP to consider to consider him IF they want to have somebody that can appeal to most and win.

http://time.com/4271942/supreme-court-compromise/

 

[UgaTom]

Not that I know of. I think I remember last year sometime he was considering it, but didn't get in. I was just saying he's a reasonable politician, smart, likeable, etc. If the GOP is going to broker the convention and get somebody outside of the 3 running now, he'd be good. He would appeal to independents. The far right wouldn't like it, but there is not enough far right to win a general election, imo.

The thing is, any candidate who came out of a brokered convention would have to be really dynamic and already have pretty good name recognition since he would have just over three months to campaign. Huntsman doesn't fit that description, and I don't know of anyone one else who would. The GOP was supposed to have this incredibly deep bench and they have nobody. Absolutely nobody. Meanwhile, the Dems have Cory Booker waiting in the wings. If the GOP doesn't win the WH this year, they probably won't see it again for at least another 16 years.

 

[DawgMaticFan]

The thing is, any candidate who came out of a brokered convention would have to be really dynamic and already have pretty good name recognition since he would have just over three months to campaign. Huntsman doesn't fit that description, and I don't know of anyone one else who would. The GOP was supposed to have this incredibly deep bench and they have nobody. Absolutely nobody. Meanwhile, the Dems have Cory Booker waiting in the wings. If the GOP doesn't win the WH this year, they probably won't see it again for at least another 16 years.

Cruz or Rubio could come out with the nomination in any scenario that might have the nomination go to anybody other than Trump.

 

[Dawgman94]

The thing is, any candidate who came out of a brokered convention would have to be really dynamic and already have pretty good name recognition since he would have just over three months to campaign. Huntsman doesn't fit that description, and I don't know of anyone one else who would. The GOP was supposed to have this incredibly deep bench and they have nobody. Absolutely nobody. Meanwhile, the Dems have Cory Booker waiting in the wings. If the GOP doesn't win the WH this year, they probably won't see it again for at least another 16 years.

Brokerd is a bad idea

 

[DawgMaticFan]

Cruz or Rubio could come out with the nomination in any scenario that might have the nomination go to anybody other than Trump.

As far as Cory Booker, most Americans have never heard of him, so he's far from any kind of front runner now. Also, it's completely impossible to predict the shifting tide of presidential politics out so far. In 91 many ''experts'' thought Reagan had secured the office for republicans for decades to come. Almost overnight Bill Clinton emerged, the economy tanked and it was a brand new day.

 

[Dawgman94]

Y'all do realize that a brokerd convention would be a bad idea. The shit storm it would cause.

 

[LumpLump]

The thing is, any candidate who came out of a brokered convention would have to be really dynamic and already have pretty good name recognition since he would have just over three months to campaign. Huntsman doesn't fit that description, and I don't know of anyone one else who would. The GOP was supposed to have this incredibly deep bench and they have nobody. Absolutely nobody. Meanwhile, the Dems have Cory Booker waiting in the wings. If the GOP doesn't win the WH this year, they probably won't see it again for at least another 16 years.

I think Huntsman IS dynamic. (but describing someone is a personal opinion for all of us) No, he doesn't have a fire and brimstone personality, but he doesn't need that. But you are right about name, although, it got out there to some degree in 2012. It would be HUGE news after the convention, would get weeks of publicity if for nothing else, how the GOP screwed their own voters. (to a point)

With the right sound bites, bumper stickers, ads,etc. he'd have a little over 3 mos to sell himself. Of course, talk radio would ruin him for sure as he would not be a disciple of Limbaugh, Beck, Levin, Savage, etc. BUT the Dems would be hard pressed to find something to diss him about. The independents would like him. The GOP base may be so angry about convention, they'd sit it out.

 

[LumpLump]

As far as Cory Booker, most Americans have never heard of him, so he's far from any kind of front runner now. Also, it's completely impossible to predict the shifting tide of presidential politics out so far. In 91 many ''experts'' thought Reagan had secured the office for republicans for decades to come. Almost overnight Bill Clinton emerged, the economy tanked and it was a brand new day.

You are right, but that's TODAY. 4 or 8 yrs with the next President in office, is a long time for the rest to catch up on who he is.

 

[LumpLump]

Y'all do realize that a brokerd convention would be a bad idea. The shit storm it would cause.

Pretty sure that's exactly what's going to happen. Heard Cruz say in soundbite yesterday that Trump would have to win by 50 percent in 8 states to get the nomination. Cruz is correct for the current rule, but the rules committee changes and votes on rules every convention. What rules go for one election year doesn't apply to the next. Cruz is being disingenuous saying that. There are powerful people who will force it because they don't want either of them.

 

[UgaTom]

Cruz or Rubio could come out with the nomination in any scenario that might have the nomination go to anybody other than Trump.

They are both heavily damaged candidates. If anyone besides Trump got the nomination, it would almost have to be someone he hadn't already waxed in the primary.

 

[UgaTom]

As far as Cory Booker, most Americans have never heard of him, so he's far from any kind of front runner now. Also, it's completely impossible to predict the shifting tide of presidential politics out so far. In 91 many ''experts'' thought Reagan had secured the office for republicans for decades to come. Almost overnight Bill Clinton emerged, the economy tanked and it was a brand new day.

Booker has 8 years to build his name recognition. He will almost certainly speak at the Dem convention this year and will get a lot of consideration for VP. He will be very well-known by 2024. As far as predictions go, there is a huge difference between the political landscape now and in 1980. Also, while the GOP may find a great candidate by then, that's what they were supposed to have this election cycle and they all flamed out. Booker is a much better bet right now than an unknown GOP candidate.