I don't believe there would be any realistic scenario where I would vote for trump.

I'd take a flaming bag of turds over trump.

�If a fat guy falls in the woods and there is no one around to see it, do the trees laugh?

Iraq war supporters are disqualified. Since we don't seem comfortable sending them to the Hague, it's the least I can do.

I would be honored to vote for Sanders or Warren. Are we counting Buttigieg as a real contender at this point? I don't know if I'd vote for him in a general election. I doubt it, but I suppose anything can happen in ten months.

______________________________

"Walleye, a lot of things are going to go wrong in your life that technically aren't your fault. Always remember that this doesn't make you any less of an idiot"

--Walleye's Dad

Bennet
Biden
Bloomberg
Buttigieg
Delaney
Gabbard
Klobuchar
Patrick
Sanders
Steyer
Warren
Yang

are you picking trump over any of these?

I live in DC. I'm not picking Trump over anybody. I'm just not filling out the top of the ballot if Sanders or Warren isn't there.

______________________________

"Walleye, a lot of things are going to go wrong in your life that technically aren't your fault. Always remember that this doesn't make you any less of an idiot"

--Walleye's Dad

I'm still gonna vote for attorney general, the city council seat for my ward, city council chairperson, shadow senate/house reps, school board, etc.

President of the United States will get a pass, unless Warren or Sanders are there.

______________________________

"Walleye, a lot of things are going to go wrong in your life that technically aren't your fault. Always remember that this doesn't make you any less of an idiot"

--Walleye's Dad

down ballot is its own thing

>I live in DC. I'm not picking Trump over anybody. I'm just
>not filling out the top of the ballot if Sanders or Warren
>isn't there.
>


If you lived in a purple state where the electoral college votes were much more uncertain than D.C., would you still have this stance?

"Sean sparks like John Starks, nah, Sean ball like John Wall" - Rest In Power Forever Sean Price.

I think that anybody who acted, in their decision-making capacity, to support the Iraq War deserves to be banished from political life. The only way to have done that at the time was to be amoral or deeply, deeply stupid. And the only way to keep a viable political career since that horrifying and destructive crime is to minimize its impact and rely on our weird talent for insulating politicians from the effects of their decisions. That included Clinton in the last election and Biden in this one. Nobody who said "yes" to that at the time deserves to be taken seriously about anything important ever again.

But the rest of the field is off the hook on that, so if I were in a purple state or even a hard red one where voting for a centrist melt like Buttigieg would still feel like a "fuck you" to fascism, then I'd probably be open to voting for them. I lived in Tennessee from 2009 to summer 2012 and being a Democrat of any stripe felt pretty radical at the time.

______________________________

"Walleye, a lot of things are going to go wrong in your life that technically aren't your fault. Always remember that this doesn't make you any less of an idiot"

--Walleye's Dad

And they can't imagine why somebody would dare not vote for somebody like Biden, likely because they don't have to face the direct consequences of the bi-partisan war machine tearing up the world.

But talk to a refugee from the MidEast (who is now a U.S. citizen) - and come with that "you better vote for Biden who enthusiastically advocated for the destruction of your country or else!" - and watch the blind privilege shine through.

Voting for the Iraq War and continuing to support mindless militarism is absolutely disqualifying, and I'm glad you're adamant about that.

But of course, you have to really make a decision when it comes to Biden or Trump as to who would be the far worse actor in the region. As bad as Biden is (and he's abysmal on foreign policy) - Trump is the far greater evil.

-->

I get it. If your options are to either 1). vote for Trump or 2) vote for someone else (who is not named Sanders or Warren), you will be unhappy either way.

But is your degree of unhappiness equivalent? Would you just as upset having Trump from 2021-2025 as you would having a non-Sanders/Warren 2021-2025?

Is the reasoning strictly principled? You said you live in DC, so ultimately your vote for president isn't likely to swing things. But lets say you lived a state like Wisconsin where margins could be razor thin. Would you be more pragmatic (assuming you have an extremely strong distaste for Trump and less so for others)?

Would you encourage others to vote like you?

_______________________________________

The United States, as a relationship between people, has been failing for several decades now. Just like Rome wasn't built in a day, it didn't fall in one either. An election isn't going to change the fact that whatever relationship was being described by "The United States of America" is effectively finished, but it can be a useful way of cushioning the landing so that the people who live here (citizens or not) can support each other and live more freely.

If my vote is marginalized by wherever I'm living, then I don't see any good reason to support somebody who's going to continue slapping duct-tape on the deadly project of American capitalism.

If my vote might actually mean something, then the principle of protecting the people who live here wins.

______________________________

"Walleye, a lot of things are going to go wrong in your life that technically aren't your fault. Always remember that this doesn't make you any less of an idiot"

--Walleye's Dad

There is no perfect candidate...

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

“So back we go to these questions — friendship, character… ethics.”

He asked about my happiness, and though I disagree with that fellow often - he doesn't really seem to ask questions in bad faith. So I answered it.

And, as I've said, living in DC means my vote is meaningless. I commute to Northern Virginia, so it would be a more useful political act to slap a bumper sticker on my car exhorting folks to vote for the Democratic nominee, but (and correct me if I'm wrong) I don't imagine you'd be cranky about me refusing to do that.

______________________________

"Walleye, a lot of things are going to go wrong in your life that technically aren't your fault. Always remember that this doesn't make you any less of an idiot"

--Walleye's Dad

Anti-gentrification, cheap alcohol & trying to look pretty in our twilight posting years (c) Big Reg

¨Your mother is Colin Powell¨ - Lurkmode

www.Tupreme.com

We don't have a voting representative in congress. Weed is legal but you're not allowed to buy it because a Republican congressman in Maryland thinks it's a bad idea.

But Republicans rarely break 10% in the District of Columbia, and Trump barely scraped half that. You could limit Democrat votes to "people who realistically expect to work for the next administration" and the Democratic candidate would probably still beat Trump.

So, my vote is purely symbolic. And I'm treating it that way. Honestly, I'd rather have my vote be meaningful and have to actually think about it. But it doesn't quite track to insist that I acknowledge the reality of the two party system in America but to get pissy when I point out that political reality has different practical implications from state to state. And particularly for those of us who don't live in states.

______________________________

"Walleye, a lot of things are going to go wrong in your life that technically aren't your fault. Always remember that this doesn't make you any less of an idiot"

--Walleye's Dad

being in D.C., you’re familiar with how federal jobs work right?

right before the election in 2016, i certed and was selected for a civil service position at the VA in New Orleans.

at the time i had 15 years in service and was looking to relocate to a bigger city with a more chill position so i can go ahead and retire

Trump takes office and the first thing he did was put a hold on all federal hiring. nothing specific or you know, any official direction, just a vague ass letter about what he *kinda* wanted

with no official instruction, the idiot heads of departments, in an effort to not piss him off, started canceling jobs, announcements, and, contracts. and just like that, the job i thought i had, i didnt. and the president i thought wasnt going to directly effect me, directly effected me.

just saying.

That sucks. A similar-ish thing happened to my dad during the Clinton administration.

But the electoral college doesn't treat me as an equal voter here. Trump got destroyed in the DC vote in 2016. He's going to get destroyed in the DC vote in 2020 no matter who he's running against.

My vote - which is what this poll/question was about - won't have any impact on who becomes president, and it therefore won't have any impact on the decisions (hiring included) that president make.

That's mostly shitty and I hate it. Pretty much the only upside is that I'm free to vote my conscience. So I'm going to do that.

edit: or, to put it another way, I'm not saying that the President doesn't have any effect me. I'm saying that my vote doesn't have any effect on the President.

______________________________

"Walleye, a lot of things are going to go wrong in your life that technically aren't your fault. Always remember that this doesn't make you any less of an idiot"

--Walleye's Dad

peace.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Even if it's one of the two that I don't particularly like (Biden & Mayor Pete)

I live in North California, so Democratic candidate NEEDS my vote, but I'll give it to him/her anyway. I voted for both HRC and Kerry, and both of them ran shitty campaigns.

-----------------

www.albumism.com

Checkin' Our Style, Return To Zero:

https://www.mixcloud.com/returntozero/

Gonna wait until the general election and vote for whatever Dem wins, most-likely.

you either vote Blue or Putin gets another 4 years to undermine not just us, but the entire world.

The seriousness of the Russian invasion of this country (and the U.K.) can not be overstated

Everyone get all your shit out during the primary, then do the right thing in November.

This is bigger than trump. He's a pawn in an international crime syndicate.

i really need folks to educate themselves.

Listen to Gaslit Nation podcast.
Read Proof of Conspiracy.
Google Lev Parnas & Dimitry Firtash.

Do any one of those 3 things.

d

I intend to get the folks I know off the couch.

WE GOTTA WIN.

“So back we go to these questions — friendship, character… ethics.”

you used to scare me with some of your views on trump a while ago lol.

>The seriousness of the Russian invasion of this country (and
>the U.K.) can not be overstated



-->

>>The seriousness of the Russian invasion of this country

Donald Trump is an Russian asset. + FaceBook secretly allowed Cambridge Analytica to run a massive targeted disinformation campaign on their platform, then tried to lie about it when they got caught. These are tactics that Putin "piloted" during his invasion of Ukraine (and is still actively employing)

(and
>>the U.K.)

Brexit. see above for Kremlin disinformation tactics. Destabalizing the EU by getting the UK to leave was a huge win for Russia

Putin/Kremlin has figured out how to infiltrate and undermine sovereign superpowers without firing one weapon. There is no such thing as an ex-KGB agent. they've had a hard on for the US since the cold war.

MBS, Netanyahu, Assad and others all stand to gain from all this. The Putin/MBS dap-up told volumes

If any of this information is new to you, I sincerely suggest you catch up and research. No shade or snark at all cuz honestly we are all fucked if we don't put a stop to this in the only way we can.

the rest of the world is truly looking to us

d

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

>Donald Trump is an Russian asset. + FaceBook secretly allowed
>Cambridge Analytica to run a massive targeted disinformation
>campaign on their platform, then tried to lie about it when
>they got caught. These are tactics that Putin "piloted" during
>his invasion of Ukraine (and is still actively employing)

Very familiar with the Cambridge Analytica debacle. But Putin and Russia has been running disinformation campaigns for decades, as have other countries (namely China & Israel) to intervene and meddle in our elections. Alike, we have meddled in countless elections, installed authoritarian governments, and have worked to influence elections on every continent. So I think in order to have a broader conversation on this we need to acknowledge this is unfortunately what world governments do in the current paradigm.

>Putin/Kremlin has figured out how to infiltrate and undermine
>sovereign superpowers without firing one weapon. There is no
>such thing as an ex-KGB agent. they've had a hard on for the
>US since the cold war.

For sure. Russia (and Putin in particular) have become adept at cyber warfare and psychological manipulation, and their disinformation campaigns have been effective. They are certainly a problem - but I side more with Obama on this than those who are calling for a renewed Cold War and nuclear escalation:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1409sXBleg&t=12s

Obama understood that Russia's economy is disastrous, that it's largely an isolated state, and that its containment is relatively easy to achieve in the region -- and that building up a new Cold War narrative only empowers Russia and weakens our ability to exert diplomacy and build coalitions in the region both neutralize and isolate Russia.

Also - if Trump is a "Russian agent" or whatever the hot phrase is now - then he's not a very effective one. He has gone after Russia's soft allies (Iran and China) - and despite his false claims that he was "getting out of Syria" - he has done anything but, continuing the long-standing U.S. policy of intervention in an effort to topple Assad (a Putin ally) by directly and indirectly supporting Sunni extremist militias like ISIS and Al-Qaeda.

>MBS, Netanyahu, Assad and others all stand to gain from all
>this. The Putin/MBS dap-up told volumes

What Putin/MBS relationship are you referring to? MBS is waging war in Yemen and Syria (with our backing) and seeks to obliterate Iran from the region (a nation with close business/diplomatic ties with Russia) - so I'm not sure what you're referring to with the Putin/MBS connection.


-->

>Very familiar with the Cambridge Analytica debacle. But Putin
>and Russia has been running disinformation campaigns for
>decades, as have other countries (namely China & Israel) to
>intervene and meddle in our elections. Alike, we have meddled
>in countless elections, installed authoritarian governments,
>and have worked to influence elections on every continent. So
>I think in order to have a broader conversation on this we
>need to acknowledge this is unfortunately what world
>governments do in the current paradigm.

saying "whatever its what they do" does not change at all the danger that we face. I don't even understand what one has to do with the other. that's like me telling you someone is one the way to kill me and i'm scared and you say "oh well he's on the way to kill a bunch of other people too and people have tried to kill him too"

just say you don't care, and it will be much quicker.


>For sure. Russia (and Putin in particular) have become adept
>at cyber warfare and psychological manipulation, and their
>disinformation campaigns have been effective. They are
>certainly a problem - but I side more with Obama on this than
>those who are calling for a renewed Cold War and nuclear
>escalation:

i'm not watching a youtube video

>Obama understood that Russia's economy is disastrous, that
>it's largely an isolated state, and that its containment is
>relatively easy to achieve in the region -- and that building
>up a new Cold War narrative only empowers Russia and weakens
>our ability to exert diplomacy and build coalitions in the
>region both neutralize and isolate Russia.

You've contradicted yourself in the space of 2 paragraphs. if it was known that Putin is adept at cyber warfare and information manipulation, than Obama thinking he can be "contained" simply by isolating their economy was extremely naive and shortsighted, in hindsight. U.S. was arrogant to take their eye off Putin's interference and focus it solely on an feather-in-the-cap Iran nuclear deal.

while we weren't "looking", Putin was able to spend years laying the groundwork here and abroad for Trump's presidency and Brexit...

>Also - if Trump is a "Russian agent" or whatever the hot
>phrase is now - then he's not a very effective one.

then you're not paying enough attention. He's been VERY effective.

After Russia attacked and annexed a part of Ukraine (and was found to have interfered in our elections), Obama's admin levied heavy sanctions on Russia diplomats and oligarchs, kicked Russia out of the G8 and committed heavily to supporting Ukraine (and any other European country that might be threatened by Russia) with free money and weapons.

Those 3 things were devastating blows to Putin and Russia. Trump's job has been to undo those things and he's accomplished alot so far.

In fact, what he's been impeached for is directly related to him trying to undermine the safety and security of Ukraine, for his own gain yes, but to also deliver for Putin. a weak Ukraine at war with Russia is ideal.

Trump has tried several times to gut the spending bill that has money set aside to help Ukraine defend itself against Russia

He's argued for Russia to be let back into the G7

He has cirucumvented diplomatic sanctions. He has closed door, unrecorded meetings with Putin and allowed Oligarchs into the oval office at key intervals

Putin's long game is undermining and controlling US foreign policy. He's patient and its starting to work


He has
>gone after Russia's soft allies (Iran and China) - and despite
>his false claims that he was "getting out of Syria" - he has
>done anything but, continuing the long-standing U.S. policy of
>intervention in an effort to topple Assad (a Putin ally) by
>directly and indirectly supporting Sunni extremist militias
>like ISIS and Al-Qaeda.

i'd argue that military leaders are doing those things more than Trump is.


>What Putin/MBS relationship are you referring to?

I was specifically referring to the way they greeted each other in person..that's why i said "dap up"

MBS is
>waging war in Yemen and Syria (with our backing) and seeks to
>obliterate Iran from the region (a nation with close
>business/diplomatic ties with Russia)

Putin doesn't have allies or practice diplomacy in any real way. He's purely self serving around whatever keeps him rich and in control. He uses chaos in other places to get access to what he needs.