Biden, a ‘bad candidate’? Polls say so

[kyzr]

So, if it was Hitler vs Stalin, you'd dutifully pick one?

Sorry, but that's insane. Please don't vote. You're doing it wrong.

Hitler or Stalin would not win the R or D nomination via the primary vetting process.

Your 3rd or 4th party candidate could easily be Hitler or Stalin.

 

[dblack]

Hitler or Stalin would not win the R or D nomination via the primary vetting process.

That wasn't the question. I'm trying to figure out just how brainwashed you are by this lesser-of-two-evils con. How far down will you take us? If they did nominate Hitler and Stalin, would finally say no?

Your 3rd or 4th party candidate could easily be Hitler or Stalin.

Mine? Which one? No doubt some of them are horrible. I wouldn't vote for a candidate like that. The question is, would you?

 

[j-mac]

That wasn't the question. I'm trying to figure out just how brainwashed you are by this lesser-of-two-evils con. How far down will you take us? If they did nominate Hitler and Stalin, would finally say no?

Mine? Which one? No doubt some of them are horrible. I wouldn't vote for them if the were that bad. The question is, would you?

It does no good to attack from within...All that does is divide, and allow the decline to happen unabated....You and I have agreed on much in here dblack, but on this I have to say no...Sitting this out is not an option...Think of it as not necessarily the man running, as it is the ideology, and agenda of the party that is likely to be promoted when either of the men running are elected.

The easiest way to give Joe Biden another 4 years to "Finish the Job" is to sit home pouting about the lack of perfection in the candidates.

 

[dblack]

Think of it as not necessarily the man running, as it is the ideology, and agenda of the party that is likely to be promoted when either of the men running are elected.

Trump has no ******* ideology. And the only agenda either party has is to gain more power.

The easiest way to give Joe Biden another 4 years to "Finish the Job" is to sit home pouting about the lack of perfection in the candidates.

LOL - pouting, yeah. You can keep your attempts to insult or frighten me. I'm not voting for a bad candidate on purpose. That "strategy" is killing the country and I won't be a part of it.

The bottom line is, both candidates are below any sane minimum standards for the office. I think that's painfully obvious, but if you don't, if the other lo2e voters don't, then I'm just asking - how bad would it if have to get for you to finally say no? Is there ANY point where you'd reject both the Ds and Rs?

 

[kyzr]

That wasn't the question. I'm trying to figure out just how brainwashed you are by this lesser-of-two-evils con. How far down will you take us? If they did nominate Hitler and Stalin, would finally say no?

Mine? Which one? No doubt some of them are horrible. I wouldn't vote for a candidate like that. The question is, would you?

1. Your question is a non-starter. What part of "reality" don't you understand? The primary process weeds out bad candidates.
2. I have no clue how 3rd or 4th party candidates get nominated. If you look thru past elections, I see George Wallace as one example, Ross Perot, Strom Thurmond, etc. Here is a list of 3rd party candidates. None had any chance of winning, so why waste your vote?

List of third-party and independent performances in United States presidential elections - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[dblack]

1. Your question is a non-starter. What part of reality don't you understand? The primary process weeds out bad candidates.

What's clear is that you're afraid to answer it. You can't just say, "If they nominated HItler and Stalin I wouldn't play the lesser-of-two-evils game. I wouldn't vote for either." That's not a controversial statement. But you're so dedicated to the lesser-of-two-evils death spiral that you can't say it.

And that's disturbing.

 

[Blaster]

Only in America can a senile old man be considered a viable candidate for President.

 

[kyzr]

What's clear is that you're afraid to answer it. You can't just say, "If they nominated Hitler and Stalin I wouldn't play the lesser-of-two-evils game. I wouldn't vote for either." That's not a controversial statement. But you're so dedicated to the lesser-of-two-evils death spiral that you can't say it.
That's disturbing.

I'm a realist. You're not a realist.
Elections are too important to waste your vote on a candidate that has zero chance of winning.

 

[dblack]

I'm a realist. You're not a realist.
Elections are too important to waste your vote on a candidate that has zero chance of winning.

They're too important to vote for a shitty candidate deliberately. That's insane.

 

[kyzr]

They're too important to vote for a shitty candidate deliberately. That's insane.

You're assuming that a 3rd party candidate is better than the major party candidates.

Need I remind you that to run the Federal government requires hundreds of people to fill key positions, not just a president.

You need to look at the "administration" not just one man.
3rd party candidates do not have a deep bench of experienced people to fill out the Federal government.
Voting for 3rd part candidates/administrations is insane.

 

[dblack]

You're assuming that a 3rd party candidate is better than the major party candidates.

No. I'm not..

Voting for 3rd part candidates/administrations is insane.

I haven't even mentioned third parties. That's your fixation. I'm just saying that it's insane to vote for bad candidates on purpose. Not voting would be better.

 

[jotathought]

Depends on your view .. is he a bad candidate because of continued decline in polling .. or is he a great candidate because of continued decline in polling.

He's perfect in my book as we are 4-ish months into the election ...

 

[j-mac]

Trump has no ******* ideology. And the only agenda either party has is to gain more power.

LOL - pouting, yeah. You can keep your attempts to insult or frighten me. I'm not voting for a bad candidate on purpose. That "strategy" is killing the country and I won't be a part of it.

The bottom line is, both candidates are below any sane minimum standards for the office. I think that's painfully obvious, but if you don't, if the other lo2e voters don't, then I'm just asking - how bad would it if have to get for you to finally say no? Is there ANY point where you'd reject both the Ds and Rs?

I don’t have some red line where I’d quit voting for the freedoms we enjoy, or just sit out…But, I do understand your disgust in what we see happening to the country.

If you feel you can’t participate in the Presidential elections that’s your choice, but I hope that you at least vote in the down ballot. That’s what directly affects you.

And I use the term “pouting” because that’s what it is. Flipping the game board over, and stomping out, because you don’t like the rules. So, cast your vote for one of the candidates that has no chance, or sit home, and let things happen to you, I don’t care…But, tell us if you did vote, or STFU about national affairs, because you decided not to lend your voice.

 

[dblack]

I don’t have some red line where I’d quit voting for the freedoms we enjoy, or just sit out…But, I do understand your disgust in what we see happening to the country.

If you feel you can’t participate in the Presidential elections that’s your choice, but I hope that you at least vote in the down ballot. That’s what directly affects you.

I'll vote regardless. I'll write someone in if I have to. But I won't fall for the fear mongering. It's dragging us into a hole.

And I use the term “pouting” because that’s what it is. Flipping the game board over, and stomping out, because you don’t like the rules. So, cast your vote for one of the candidates that has no chance, or sit home, and let things happen to you, I don’t care…But, tell us if you did vote, or STFU about national affairs, because you decided not to lend your voice.

Uh... No, I won't be shutting the **** up. I'll be here to point out just how irrational and destructive the shit your selling really is.

If your precious party wants my vote, they'll have to pull their head out of their asses and nominate someone decent. Sorry, if you think that's pouting. I think anyone following your advice is a traitor to their nation.

Here's the thing, when pushed, most people dishing the lo2e line don't really think that their candidate is bad. Do you? I think both Biden and Trump will be bad for the country. That they'll each, in different ways, leave the country worse than they found it. Is that how you see it?

Probably not. You probably think that Trump, despite his flaws, will improve things for the country. And, in fact, you wouldn't actually vote for him if you thought he would make things worse. That's fine. I can respect that, even though I disagree. But then you must realize that your asking the rest of us to do something you wouldn't - to vote for a candidate we genuinely think will be bad for the country.

If that's not how you see it - if, instead, you really think Trump will be bad for the country, but you're going to vote for him anyway, then I don't think we have enough common ground for discussion. That's indefensible and irrational.

 

[j-mac]

I'll vote regardless. I'll write someone in if I have to. But I won't fall for the fear mongering. It's dragging us into a hole.

Good for you, I'm not giving you fear mongering....All one has to do is take a look at the state of the country under Biden, and the choice is clear.

Uh... No, I won't be shutting the **** up. I'll be here to point out just how irrational and destructive the shit your selling really is.

I'm not "selling" anything brother....This is you lashing out because people won't believe as you do....BTW, you know who else does that sort of thing? Dems.

If your precious party wants my vote, they'll have to pull their head out of their asses and nominate someone decent. Sorry, if you think that's pouting. I think anyone following your advice is a traitor to their nation.

Like I said, knocking over the chessboard because you don't like the result of the process...

Here's the thing, when pushed, most people dishing the lo2e line don't really think that their candidate is bad. Do you? I think both Biden and Trump will be bad for the country. That they'll each, in different ways, leave the country worse than they found it. Is that how you see it?

Don't know what "lo2e" is...but, a rational look at the Trump Presidency from 2016 to 2020 as compared to the Biden Presidency from 2020 to now, clearly shows that people in the US were better off in nearly every objective metric...So, what is it that you think Trump will do to make the country worse off than what we have now?

Probably not. You probably think that Trump, despite his flaws, will improve things for the country. And, in fact, you wouldn't actually vote for him if you thought he would make things worse. That's fine. I can respect that, even though I disagree. But then you must realize that your asking the rest of us to do something you wouldn't - to vote for a candidate we genuinely think will be bad for the country.

The vote is a personal thing, and your vote is yours, not anyone elses...So, why are you worried about who I vote for? Do you brother...

If that's not how you see it - if, instead, you really think Trump will be bad for the country, but you're going to vote for him anyway, then I don't think we have enough common ground for discussion. That's indefensible and irrational.

I think Trump would be good for America, that's why I am voting for him....

 

[BluesLegend]

Look Biden COVETED the presidency for decades. This guy has drooled over the prospect of wielding presidential power. Then ate buckets of Obama's shit for 8 years as VP paying his dues. The endured the embarrassment of being passed over for Hillary. No way he gives up that power, not happening.

 

[dblack]

Good for you, I'm not giving you fear mongering....All one has to do is take a look at the state of the country under Biden, and the choice is clear.

If the best you got is, Biden is scary bad, that's fear mongering, and you've lost my vote.

Like I said, knocking over the chessboard because you don't like the result of the process...

There's nothing about the rules or the process that requires us to vote the way you suggest. Strategic voting is a perversion of the process. It's dishonest voting. It undermines democracy and elects worse and worse candidates every cycle. It's an obvious failure, yet partisans cling to it.

And I'm the one ruining the game.

I think Trump would be good for America, that's why I am voting for him....

Fine. I don't, and that's why I'm not.

The bottom line is, if you want me to vote for your candidate, you need to convince me they'll be a good leader. If the best you can say is, "the other guy is worse", you've lost me. If you want to try to scare me, or insult me, or accuse me of whatever ill intent, all because I won't vote for a bad candidate on purpose, it won't work.

 

[DGS49]

There have been many, many elections in recent years when Democrats have nominated and run the most awful candidates in history. In Pennsylvania two years ago, "we" elected a dead guy and a Senator who literally could not complete a coherent sentence, with no reason to expect improvement in the foreseeable future*.

The fact is that at least 45% of the population will vote for ANYONE carrying the Democrat banner. They don't care if he is competent, sane, or intelligent. There is nothing wrong with Biden as a candidate. He is clearly just as good as anyone they might designate to replace him.

_____________________________
* In all candor, that Senator has turned out to be a very good Democrat, to the extent that such a person is even conceivable.