How Do You Decide Whom To Support ?

[my2¢]

As far as presidents go, 2nd terms are a disaster. After that I shy away from what candidates say during the campaign. Instead, I look back at their voting record to see where they actually stood on issues.

Now, if I don't care for either party's candidate (which isn't a rare occasion), I used to look at the list of candidates that were qualified by the state and see if there was somebody I could support. But after 40+ years of disappointment with that, starting with the 2020 election it came down to yelling out to the wife and asking who I should vote for?

 

[g5000]

To me the question is not who is the better candidate but instead who is the worst and vote for the other person.

How's that "lesser of two evils" bullshit working for America?

 

[Stryder50]

How's that "lesser of two evils" bullshit working for America?

Better than voting for the "greater of the two evils"; Clinton, Obama, Biden ...

 

[Oddball]

To me the question is not who is the better candidate but instead who is the worst and vote for the other person. Much as I dislike Trump, I cannot in good conscience vote for any democrat because IMHO their policies are disastrous for this country. If the day ever comes where they control the White House and the Senate with enough votes to abolish the filibuster, that is the day that democracy dies in this country and we will become a one-party gov't. Some things can be undone by the other party in the future, but that ain't one of them.

Might as well vote democrat, if you're going to get on board with a controlled opposition slug like Haley or Christie.

 

[task0778]

Might as well vote democrat, if you're going to get on board with a controlled opposition slug like Haley or Christie.

I don't see either of them being the GOP nominee. These days, it's tough to find an actually conservative republican, but even a RINO is better than a democrat IMHO. And I don't see them caving in to the Dems and allowing them to do as they please like Biden or any other democrat would.

 

[Oddball]

I don't see either of them being the GOP nominee. These days, it's tough to find an actually conservative republican, but even a RINO is better than a democrat IMHO. And I don't see them caving in to the Dems and allowing them to do as they please like Biden or any other democrat would.

I heard that same crap about Chimpy Bush....That one didn't shake out worth a fuck....We couldn't have done worse with Algore.

 

[task0778]

I heard that same crap about Chimpy Bush....That one didn't shake out worth a fuck....We couldn't have done worse with Algore.

Bush was certainly no bargain, but Gore? Mr 'we gotta save the planet' Gore? You'd have to do some serious convincing to get me to believe he woulda been better than Bush, which I know is not high bar to beat.

 

[Oddball]

Bush was certainly no bargain, but Gore? Mr 'we gotta save the planet' Gore? You'd have to do some serious convincing to get me to believe he woulda been better than Bush, which I know is not high bar to beat.

GOP controlled both houses...He would've gone nowhere....Instead, they enabled Chimpola to spend and grow The State faster than Bubba did....Some "better alternative".

 

[Natural Citizen]

In looking at the Nikki Haley thread, I started to wonder (again...for the 100th time) how I would compare them.

In tabular form.

How do you decide whom to support using analytics ?

Looking for key categories.

I go by a liberty score based on a short list of critical policy areas.

But there are no statesmen running anyway, so not worth the bother. For me anyway.

A good idea for this board would be to dedicate a subforum for vetting all candidates with a specific/universal chart type listing of their score on policy and to score them in like a 1-5 or an A-F per each critical area of policy.

But important areas of policy. Not a bunch of dumb stuff.

As an example...

(Thread)...

Campaign Evaluation: Donald Trump (POTUS)​

Candidate Name: Donald Trump
Office Sought: President of the United States
Website: https://www.donaldjtrump.com
Social Media:
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump
Donald J. Trump

Candidate Profile: On the Issues
Civil Liberties: F
Constitutional Issues: F
Economic Issues: C
Foreign Policy: D
Social Issues: C
Overall Issues Rating: D

Of course, that kind of thing would have to exist in a Zone 1 environment and maintained strictly as such.

 

[Stryder50]

I go by a liberty score based on a short list of critical policy areas.

But there are no statesmen running anyway, so not worth the bother. For me anyway.

A good adea for this board would be to dedicate a subforum for vetting all candidates to be listed with a specific/universal chart type listing of their score on policy and to score them in like a 1-5 or an A-F per each area of policy.

But important areas of policy. Not a bunch of dumb stuff.

As an example...

(Thread)...

Campaign Evaluation: Donald Trump (POTUS)​

Candidate Name: Donald Trump
Office Sought: President of the United States
Website: https://www.donaldjtrump.com
Social Media:
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump
Donald J. Trump

Candidate Profile: On the Issues
Civil Liberties: F
Constitutional Issues: F
Economic Issues: C
Foreign Policy: D
Social Issues: C
Overall Issues Rating: F

Of course, that kind of thing would have to exist in a Zone 1 environment and maintained strictly as such.

Highly subjective and leftwing focused evaluation you have there.
Were I to apply your standards to current POTUS, Groper-molester Joe B. would be way down on minus F; Down about N, O, P, or lower.

 

[whitehall]

It's how I would compare.

Still trying to put one together for a local mayors race.

		Biden	Trump	Haley
Demented		Yes	Maybe	No
Convict		No	No	No
Conservative		No	No	Yes
Good Historical Knowledge		No	No	Yes

Do the first two represent the democrat base?

 

[Natural Citizen]

Highly subjective and leftwing focused evaluation you have there.
Were I to apply your standards to current POTUS, Groper-molester Joe B. would be way down on minus F; Down about N, O, P, or lower.

They're the most critical and meaningful of policy areas. In my view anyway.

I don't really do that ''winger'' stuff, sorry. The terms ''left'' and ''right'' are, in my view, just a couple of lazy catch phrases that get invoked routinely, almost reactionary, in what seems to serve as an escape from the expectation of discussing anything in any kind of meaningful, principle based way.

It's so much easier, it seems, just to call someone a left winger or a right winger and move along to escape the expectation. Heck, you may as well just put on a bunch of red hemets and blue helmets and throw a football out there to try to chase around and hump.

Anyway. It was just an example.

 

[Stryder50]

They're the most critical and meaningful of policy areas. In my view anyway.

I don't really do that ''winger'' stuff, sorry. The terms ''left'' and ''right'' are, in my view, just a couple of lazy catch phrases that get invoked routinely, almost reactionary, in what seems to serve as an escape from the expectation of discussing anything in any kind of meaningful, principle based way.

It's so much easier, it seems, just to call someone a left winger or a right winger and move along to escape the expectation. Heck, you may as well just put on a bunch of red hemets and blue helmets and throw a football out there to try to chase around and hump.

Anyway. It was just an example.

Typically those whom hold extremist views such as yours will claim such bullshit.

One basic qualifier is where they are on the scale of Wealth Creation versus Wealth Redistribution.

Your three favorites, Clinton(both), Obama(both), and Biden(Joe at least) all jumped into guv'mint jobs and elected posts right out of college and chose the career track of receiving end of Wealth Redistribution, along with anything they could do to further that goal. Barry Obama's "Fundamental Change" for USA was to rewrite the Constitution and move further toward another failed socialist state. The Clinton's and Biden's fit a similar profile.

Trump at least understood the Free Market and Wealth Creation track. The "Fs" YOU gave him on "Civil Liberties" and "Constitutional Issues" fit the bogus claims of the diehard Leftists/Democrats/Socialists in the opposition to Trump and his policies so you positioned on the profile typical of the Left leaning politicals. Had you done a similar scale on all the POTUS's from Reagan to Biden we'd have a more realistic gauge on your political leanings, but if you did such honestly it likely would reveal too much of your socialist inclinations.

My main point was your grading system is like many others, highly subjective and depends on whom is doing it for it reveal anything.

FWIW, were I doing such, the Clinton's -Bill and SHillary, the Obama's-both, and the Biden's -both, would all score F minus+minus across the board. And that's being rather mild since I'd like to bring a couple of them up on charges of Treason.

Using you non-objective and bogus system, I'd rate Trump;
Candidate Profile: On the Issues
Civil Liberties: B+
Constitutional Issues: B+
Economic Issues: A+
Foreign Policy: A
Social Issues: B
Overall Issues Rating: B+ ~ A-

NOTE: Every POTUS is limited by the Nature of Congress they deal with when it comes to their position on an issue versus what Congress will assist them in.
..............

BTW, this sort of BS when trying to look at a poster's Profile is typical to most Leftist-Socialist-Commies posting here (first clue they can't be honest and want to hide something);

Oops! We ran into some problems.
This member limits who may view their full profile.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Typically those whom hold extremist views such as yours will claim such bullshit.

One basic qualifier is where they are on the scale of Wealth Creation versus Wealth Redistribution.

Your three favorites, Clinton(both), Obama(both), and Biden(Joe at least) all jumped into guv'mint jobs and elected posts right out of college and chose the career track of receiving end of Wealth Redistribution, along with anything they could do to further that goal. Barry Obama's "Fundamental Change" for USA was to rewrite the Constitution and move further toward another failed socialist state. The Clinton's and Biden's fit a similar profile.

Trump at least understood the Free Market and Wealth Creation track. The "Fs" YOU gave him on "Civil Liberties" and "Constitutional Issues" fit the bogus claims of the diehard Leftists/Democrats/Socialists in the opposition to Trump and his policies so you positioned on the profile typical of the Left leaning politicals. Had you done a similar scale on all the POTUS's from Reagan to Biden we'd have a more realistic gauge on your political leanings, but if you did such honestly it likely would reveal too much of your socialist inclinations.

My main point was your grading system is like many others, highly subjective and depends on whom is doing it for it reveal anything.

FWIW, were I doing such, the Clinton's -Bill and SHillary, the Obama's-both, and the Biden's -both, would all score F minus+minus across the board. And that's being rather mild since I'd like to bring a couple of them up on charges of Treason.

Using you non-objective and bogus system, I'd rate Trump;
Candidate Profile: On the Issues
Civil Liberties: B+
Constitutional Issues: B+
Economic Issues: A+
Foreign Policy: A
Social Issues: B
Overall Issues Rating: B+ ~ A-

NOTE: Every POTUS is limited by the Nature of Congress they deal with when it comes to their position on an issue versus what Congress will assist them in.

Actually, I always wrote-in Ron Paul. And nobody you've mentioned in your model can compare. They're not even close.

And I'm rather confident that nobody around here would buy your charge of me being a socialist. lol. That's actually rather humorous. But whatever. If it makes you feel good.

I'm equally confident that nobody around here would buy your charge of both Clintons, Obama and Biden being my favorites. Heh heh heh.

What kind of Mickey Mouse nonsense is that anyway? You're just proving my point. Stop trying to sound smart. lol.

Anyway. I'll stick to my own principles when measuring the worth of a prospective candidate, thanks. With regard to the scope of the terms of controversy, the Framers are on my side in doing so.

You're free to do you however you want...

 

[Natural Citizen]

By the way. Be thankful I saw no value in providing bullet points for why I gave those grades and settled for sharing a basic template in response to the OP's question.

You'd have every Trump supporter on the board pissed off at you for getting me started on it. I tend to be very, very thorough. lolol...

That said, if such a model existed around here, certainly justification for grades would necessarily be expected and therefore provided. That's a given. We do not need you to tell us that. Duh...

 

[HikerGuy83]

I think your two "yes" for Haley is really stretching it.

She has no concept of American history and proved it when the bitch did away with the Confederate flag in SC.

She isn't a Conservative. She is a RINO. A GW Bush with tits.

O.K. Sorry.....

That was just an example of what a table might look like.

I should have used fictitious names instead of real ones.

 

[Stryder50]

Actually, I always wrote-in Ron Paul. And nobody you've mentioned in your model can compare. They're not even close.

And I'm rather confident that nobody around here would buy your charge of me being a socialist. lol. That's actually rather humorous. But whatever. If it makes you feel good.

I'm equally confident that nobody around here would buy your charge of both Clintons, Obama and Biden being my favorites. Heh heh heh.

What kind of Mickey Mouse nonsense is that anyway? You're just proving my point. Stop trying to sound smart. lol.

Anyway. I'll stick to my own principles when measuring the worth of a prospective candidate, thanks. With regard to the scope of the terms of controversy, the Framers are on my side in doing so.

You're free to do you however you want...

 

[luiza]

Whatever Wanker favours, I take the exact opposite and have unbroken success without having to waste time thinking .
Easy Peasy .

 

[initforme]

I'm seriously thinking of writing in our church janitor. He has more integrity, honesty, and morals than our nation's office holders combined. Plus he's not wealthy. All the more reason.

 

[Whodatsaywhodat.]

In looking at the Nikki Haley thread, I started to wonder (again...for the 100th time) how I would compare them.

In tabular form.

How do you decide whom to support using analytics ?

Looking for key categories.

Are you an American or are you a Democrat?