Who do you want to vote for and why, for the next president of 2020 (United States)

  • Thread starter Deleted member 34673
  • Start date
D

Deleted member 34673

Guest
Please do not flame anyone for who they want to vote for and the reasoning why. Please keep this as positive and supportive/friendly as possible.

I'm voting for Bernie Sanders. Why: Well he's actually the first person running for president that I seem to really like and actually agree with about only 100 percent of the things he has said and done over the years. He has a really good down to earth character about him that i really like. I think it would be awesome to have medicare for all. He genuinely seems to care about our earth and everyone in it. Meant to put this in mature topics my apologies.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

RedPandaDL

Est. Contributor
Messages
279
Role
Diaper Lover
I imagine I will vote for Trump, because I support the republican views on most topics. I don’t really like Trump and am a bit embarrassed that the Republican Party selected him in the primary. If the Democrats have a really good candidate that is close to the middle, I could possibly be persuaded to vote for them.

One thing that Americans need to do better is supporting whoever is elected President. They are the leader of our country and deserve our respect. Granted Trump is making that difficult by offending so many people. But in general we should back our President after elected.
 

PCPilot

Contributor
Messages
221
Role
Diaper Lover
One thing that Americans need to do better is supporting whoever is elected President. They are the leader of our country and deserve our respect. Granted Trump is making that difficult by offending so many people. But in general we should back our President after elected.
That ship sailed after Obama was elected - and Trump was one of the very worst offenders in that regard.

Treat people how you want to be treated. By and large Trump has been treated FAR better than he has treated others. I look forward to him ending his term the same way he started - fired with enthusiasm!
 

Cottontail

Sailing, sailing, ...
Est. Contributor
Messages
4,627
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover, Sissy
I'm center to left on most issues, and will be glad to see Trump's presidency in the rear view mirror, however that's accomplished (hopefully it doesn't require waiting another four years). That said, as it was with the last election, I'm not exactly thrilled with my non-Trump choices at the moment. I like Bernie's directness, but some of his views are a bit extreme for my liking, plus the guy looks like he could kick off at any moment. His physical appearance doesn't inspire a lot of confidence. Warren... Ugh. She's already playing the long game to such an extent that she can't give a direct answer to a question, plus there's the Native American thing that honestly still gives me the creeps. Those kinds of integrity nits irritate me to no end, because I'm left to wonder, "What else is this person lying about?" Biden still strikes me as the most "presidential" of the group, but reading his list of pass misstatements and gaffes evokes memories of Dan Quayle.

One of my biggest fears going into Trump's presidency was that he'd lower the bar to such an extent that many people who wouldn't have previously been considered viable opponents would end up challenging him in the next election. I feel sorta like that's happening.

So there's my non-answer. I haven't picked anybody yet.
 
D

Deleted member 34673

Guest
" Biden still strikes me as the most "presidential" of the group, but reading his list of pass misstatements and gaffes evokes memories of Dan Quayle.
Joe Biden had a brain aneurysm, which in my opinion is worse than Bernie's minor heart attack. Just putting that out there.
 

egor

Est. Contributor
Messages
4,469
Role
Diaper Lover
I have not decided yet.

Edited: for got the why.

I am still looking for the magic statesman that will work for us and not the party against them that I keep hearing.
 
Last edited:

dogboy

Est. Contributor
Messages
19,877
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover
I tend to be a somewhat centrist Democrat which means that the Democratic candidates I've been most impressed by haven't a snowball's chance in hell in being nominated.....sigh.
 

Janvier

Est. Contributor
Messages
295
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover
Gonna vote Republican. For the supreme court mostly. I don’t particularly like Trump. He isn’t presidential. I think it is funny that he knows how to troll and is really good at distracting the media and making them eat their own shit. He makes a lot of blunders though and his turnover rate for his cabinet is atrocious. He is definitely better than Clinton would have been and he has done significantly less damage than she would have.

The candidates the dems are fielding are hilariously bad. Trump is going to eat them alive. Biden with his creepy hair touching and senility. Elizabeth Warren with her fake native american schtick and her personality comes across almost as fake as Clinton’s. Bernie just had a heart attack, he was infatuated with communism and was a couch surfing bum for the first half of his life. Wang is a meme candidate and I can’t get behind the UBI thing because I know it will be coming out of my pocket, shit like this always does. Same with Warren’s big plan, we know who will be paying for it, because she won’t even answer.

The only decent democrat candidate is Tulsi Gabbard and they are torpedoing her campaign with laughable Russian spy allegations. I’d maybe even consider voting for her if she changed her positions on a few things, particularly the 2nd amendment.

The dems really need to find better candidates, this is going to be a massacre. I guess it is a little late for that though.
 

Cottontail

Sailing, sailing, ...
Est. Contributor
Messages
4,627
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover, Sissy
For the supreme court mostly.
I know what you mean. It seems likely that our hopes for the court's political leanings differ significantly, though we can likely agree that politicizing of the court is...an unfortunate reality. Our founding fathers get credit for far more clairvoyance than they actually possessed. One can reasonably assume, I think, that had they truly grasped the complexity of an American (and global) society in 2020, they'd have penned some less ambiguous laws. *shrug* What to do but endlessly reinterpret them now? :-/
 

Janvier

Est. Contributor
Messages
295
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover
I know what you mean. It seems likely that our hopes for the court's political leanings differ significantly, though we can likely agree that politicizing of the court is...an unfortunate reality. Our founding fathers get credit for far more clairvoyance than they actually possessed. One can reasonably assume, I think, that had they truly grasped the complexity of an American (and global) society in 2020, they'd have penned some less ambiguous laws. *shrug* What to do but endlessly reinterpret them now? :-/
Ya it is sad wrt the supreme court. I would prefer fair non-political justices too. What really irks me is the lower federal courts, some random federal activist judge can pretty much veto anything the president does. Seems like a major abuse. The entire judicial system seems to have way power than they should right now.

As for the founding fathers, it is hard to predict the future. And really we have been chipping away at everything they stood for, for quite a while now. It isn’t their fault. Power will always corrupt and it will corrupt everything.
 

PCPilot

Contributor
Messages
221
Role
Diaper Lover
What really irks me is the lower federal courts, some random federal activist judge can pretty much veto anything the president does. Seems like a major abuse. The entire judicial system seems to have way power than they should right now.
They don't get a veto. It gets appealed and decided eventually at a national level. Because America is a nation where the law reigns, not the ruler. It's a very important distinction/

There are plenty of countries where the President can do whatever he wants, no matter what the law says. Perhaps you would enjoy living in one of them? I rather enjoy being protected by the law and the judges, rather than an authoritarian and any mindless supporters.
 

Janvier

Est. Contributor
Messages
295
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover
They don't get a veto. It gets appealed and decided eventually at a national level. Because America is a nation where the law reigns, not the ruler. It's a very important distinction/

There are plenty of countries where the President can do whatever he wants, no matter what the law says. Perhaps you would enjoy living in one of them? I rather enjoy being protected by the law and the judges, rather than an authoritarian and any mindless supporters.
I guess you prefer politicians having appointed judges in pocket to obstruct a democratically elected leader?

So much better Mr. Smug. Bet you were just fine when messiah Obama was pushing executive orders left and right.
 
Last edited:

PCPilot

Contributor
Messages
221
Role
Diaper Lover
I guess you prefer politicians having appointed judges in pocket to obstruct a democratically elected leader?
Democratically elected??? He lost the popular vote - he is in the White House only because the law provides for an Electoral College, not a popular vote. The law was respected, because the law is supreme.

Have you no sense of irony, or no idea of how contradictory your own statements are?
 

Janvier

Est. Contributor
Messages
295
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover
Warning for violating MT standards
Democratically elected??? He lost the popular vote - he is in the White House only because the law provides for an Electoral College, not a popular vote. The law was respected, because the law is supreme.

Have you no sense of irony, or no idea of how contradictory your own statements are?
“Hurr durr, I win at chess because I captured the most pawns!”

Are you really this exceptional?

He is the democratically elected leader because he won our election by following the rules. If we were playing for popular vote, both campaigns would be run differently.

Regardless your point makes no sense. Presidents do abuse executive orders and current ones, use way too many. But there are legitimate uses for executive orders.

The question is: Should a single judge, one of several hundred appointed to the federal bench, have the power to decide a question of momentous weight for the entire country?

I say no. I think it is an abuse by the lower courts and is currently being abused by judges appointed by democrats. Will you be alright with this when your guy is in the whitehouse?
 

PCPilot

Contributor
Messages
221
Role
Diaper Lover
Regardless your point makes no sense. Presidents do abuse executive orders and current ones, use way too many. But there are legitimate uses for executive orders.
And legitimate Executive Orders are sustained, illegitimate ones are not. Obama had some struck down.

The question is: Should a single judge, one of several hundred appointed to the federal bench, have the power to decide a question of momentous weight for the entire country?
The answer is no. You're asking whether something that does not exist should not exist? Of course it shouldn't - and it doesn't! A federal judge's ruling can and often is appealed to a district court, then can be appealed to the Supreme Court.

I say no. I think it is an abuse by the lower courts and is currently being abused by judges appointed by democrats. Will you be alright with this when your guy is in the whitehouse?
Obama had adverse rulings in federal court too. Several federal judges considered Obamacare unconstitutional and were overruled by the district and Supreme Court. The system worked then, and it works now.
 

Janvier

Est. Contributor
Messages
295
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover
And legitimate Executive Orders are sustained, illegitimate ones are not. Obama had some struck down.
You are very naive if you think all is working well in the judiciary and appeals court.

The answer is no. You're asking whether something that does not exist should not exist? Of course it shouldn't - and it doesn't! A federal judge's ruling can and often is appealed to a district court, then can be appealed to the Supreme Court.
Omg, you are exceptional. I’m sorry, I should have realized sooner.

You know, it would go a long way if you were charitable in debate. You know I meant these challenges shouldn’t be happening in so low of a court. And the abuse is that they can strike it down for any dumb reason and the appeals process takes a long time. Even if there is no merit, there is no sanctions or consequences for an activist judge doing it.



Obama had adverse rulings in federal court too. Several federal judges considered Obamacare unconstitutional and were overruled by the district and Supreme Court. The system worked then, and it works now.
Didn’t work then, doesn’t work now.
 

Jeremiah

Est. Contributor
Messages
1,151
Role
Diaper Lover
I will be voting for Trump in a state that will go Democrat. I like Trump’s military policy, diplomatic policies, and economic policies. The Democrats turned me off by trying to out-gun-control each other. If this is how they see the Second Amendment, I do not want to see their understanding of the First Amendment.
 
Top