The 2016 Presidential Election Trainwreck

[Northwestcoug]

I don't watch many political endorsements. Still, Pence's 'endorsement' of Cruz is weird.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=7vEquAdjp5o

[BlueK]

I would ask, isn't by your thinking my one vote for someone other than the two isn't going to change the two party system.

So like you asked, why will I vote for one. I have perhaps the illogical thought that possibly between the two, it might be close in Utah. My one vote could be the difference.

Another reason may just be that I am still so ticked at Hannity suggested the protest vote and some evangelical types wouldn't vote for Romney to prove a center right can't win and the republicans need to run a far rightie. Because of this I have a very unhealthy attitude about protest voting.

Voting FOR someone because it's who you like is not a protest vote. It's just a vote.

On the other hand, Trump IS the ultimate classic protest vote of the century. I guess you get equally annoyed whenever a Trump supporter speaks and says something like they don't agree with half the stuff he says and they know he's a nut but they will vote for him anyway because they're mad at the system. The idea of the protest vote is the ONLY reason Trump is even in the running. I guess you'll have to go with Hillary. You're welcome for my help in clearing this up for you.

And you're right that my vote outside of the two-party system isn't enough to change it. But I'm not the one arguing that jumping on the winning bandwagon or trying to join the popular crowd is what voting is about. Uh, that's to a large degree how we got Obama. He was cool and hip while McCain and Romney were boring old white guys. I don't vote what's popular just for the sake of it nor do I vote in an effort to try to be on the winning team. I save that mentality for my March Madness bracket. If you really like the candidate one of the major parties puts out there, then by all means vote that way. Don't do it just because you hate them, but hey, they have a chance to win at least. That's mind-numbingly irrational to me: I don't like him but at least I was part of helping him get elected!

[I.J. Reilly]

I don't watch many political endorsements. Still, Pence's 'endorsement' of Cruz is weird.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=7vEquAdjp5o

"I love Donald Trump. I will be voting for Ted Cruz."

[BlueK]

"I love Donald Trump. I will be voting for Ted Cruz."

does that qualify as a protest vote or not?

[byu71]

Voting FOR someone because it's who you like is not a protest vote. It's just a vote.

On the other hand, Trump IS the ultimate classic protest vote of the century. I guess you get equally annoyed whenever a Trump supporter speaks and says something like they don't agree with half the stuff he says and they know he's a nut but they will vote for him anyway because they're mad at the system. The idea of the protest vote is the ONLY reason Trump is even in the running. I guess you'll have to go with Hillary. You're welcome for my help in clearing this up for you.

And you're right that my vote outside of the two-party system isn't enough to change it. But I'm not the one arguing that jumping on the winning bandwagon or trying to join the popular crowd is what voting is about. Uh, that's to a large degree how we got Obama. He was cool and hip while McCain and Romney were boring old white guys. I don't vote what's popular just for the sake of it nor do I vote in an effort to try to be on the winning team. I save that mentality for my March Madness bracket. If you really like the candidate one of the major parties puts out there, then by all means vote that way. Don't do it just because you hate them, but hey, they have a chance to win at least. That's mind-numbingly irrational to me: I don't like him but at least I was part of helping him get elected!

Perhaps you are more lucky or smart than I. I have more than once had to make a choice between two cons

[BlueK]

Perhaps you are more lucky or smart than I. I have more than once had to make a choice between two cons

So has everyone. In politics though, even as screwed up as it is this time it's not necessary. People vote their values. Yours is the two-party system. Enjoy.

[Uncle Ted]

"I love Donald Trump. I will be voting for Ted Cruz."

Seems like he is a politician... imagine that.

[Uncle Ted]

Perhaps you are more lucky or smart than I. I have more than once had to make a choice between two cons

It doesn't matter if you vote for Trump or Hillary... it is like voting for the same person. You should just take one of your young grandkids with you and let them vote for you.

[Northwestcoug]

We've had enough intraparty fighting. Now's the time to stitch together a winning coalition,” said Jon Huntsman, the former governor of Utah. “And it's been clear almost from the beginning that Donald Trump has the ability to assemble a nontraditional bloc of supporters. … The ability to cut across traditional party boundaries — like '80, '92 and 2008 — will be key, and Trump is much better positioned to achieve that.'

Something tells me that the 'non-traditional block of supporters' Huntsman hopes Trump can stitch together are mostly already Republicans, or at least lean that way.

[YOhio]

Something tells me that the 'non-traditional block of supporters' Huntsman hopes Trump can stitch together are mostly already Republicans, or at least lean that way.

Holy cow Huntsman is such a douche.

[Moliere]

252236_10153937924440962_2458931871817925062_n.jpg

[SeattleUte]

Let's give the full quote:



SU, take note.

I would say, rather, that anything private enterprise is willing to do , it would do better than government--unquestionably, if there is a competitive profit motivated enviornment. But there are some infrastructure and services that the public requires or that hold the prospect of improving the public good that are not conducive to a market environment at any point in time either because the horizon is too long and uncertain for private enterprise to be able to undertake (e.g., the Interet, many other federally funded research project at universities, etc.) or that require pervasive, monolithic infrastructure (e.g., electric utilities), or that are tantamount to a fundamental right and essential to the public interest (public education, the military, mass transit, roadways) and require government control or intervention. Often, though, these undertakings provide object lessons in why private enterprise inevitably does better what it can do.

We also require some regulation because there are bad people who cheat at private enterprise or elevat their own interests over the public in criminal ways.

I am for a graduated tax, unlike the majority of "progressives" in my state. To me this is a litmus test of liberal hypocrisy.

[frank ryan]

I would say, rather, that anything private enterprise is willing to do , it would do better than government--unquestionably, if there is a competitive profit motivated enviornment. But there are some infrastructure and services that the public requires or that hold the prospect of improving the public good that are not conducive to a market environment at any point in time either because the horizon is too long and uncertain for private enterprise to be able to undertake (e.g., the Interet, many other federally funded research project at universities, etc.) or that require pervasive, monolithic infrastructure (e.g., electric utilities), or that are tantamount to a fundamental right and essential to the public interest (public education, the military, mass transit, roadways) and require government control or intervention. Often, though, these undertakings provide object lessons in why private enterprise inevitably does better what it can do.

We also require some regulation because there are bad people who cheat at private enterprise or elevat their own interests over the public in criminal ways.

I am for a graduated tax, unlike the majority of "progressives" in my state. To me this is a litmus test of liberal hypocrisy.

How do you feel about privatized prisons?

[SeattleUte]

How do you feel about privatized prisons?

This seems to work as well as otherwise if not better in a lot of places. Of course the Constitution and the criminal codes are fully applicable and must be enforced. Why is this different than government contracting out following an RFP or bidding process the construction of a road?

[frank ryan]

This seems to work as well as otherwise if not better in a lot of places. Of course the Constitution and the criminal codes are fully applicable and must be enforced. Why is this different than government contracting out following an RFP or bidding process the construction of a road?

Privatized prisons are disaster. They have incentives to keep people in prison longer. I'm super surprised you are ok with them.