Bernie Sanders

Free said:

There gets to be a point how much we value our one and only vote. I choose not to have to vote the lesser of two evils, especially inasmuch these two, the least popular in American history. I can't. And won't. vote for a person not interested at ALL at what the consensus, the people of this country want. But rather what their donars want.

^^^this

rgambs said:

pickupyourwill said:

Free said:

There gets to be a point how much we value our one and only vote. I choose not to have to vote the lesser of two evils, especially inasmuch these two, the least popular in American history. I can't. And won't. vote for a person not interested at ALL at what the consensus, the people of this country want. But rather what their donars want.

^^^this

I value my vote so highly that I won't waste it on a candidate who has ZERO chance of winning when there is a dangerous demagogue like Trump a heartbeat away from leading the free world.

I don't know how voting Hillary to bump Trump out is even possible. Those people on the Trump train are brainwashed clones who think they are part of some narrow-minded movement to not be so "politically correct" all the time. The ones voting for him that aren't Confederate flag friendly, are just honest, hard-working American-Republicans that are now forced to vote for him because they've waited 8 long years to get their turn.

I was just letting you all know what I'm voting--one tiny vote of idealism in a sea of some crazy election battle.

If someone could actually provide tons and tons of proof that if we all banded together with Clinton we could knock out Trump--I might consider the closer we get. But I also don't trust all the polls and b.s.--it seems so rigged. Why would I want to throw away my one and only vote to people that think it could happen--no one knows what will really happen.

mrussel1 said:

dot30 said:

How can he win the general when he can't win the primary?

I'm not even sure what Bernie's plan is for the general. The meme I posted is more related to the primary. If everyone who wanted him HAD voted for him in the primary, he may have been the nominee. I really liked Bernie's ideas early on, but didn't get to see a lot him without searching out his platform myself. What was fed to me by the media was that he was a kook that never had a chance because he was facing the almighty Clinton, and name recognition with her is what they were counting on to get people “not in the know politically” to vote for her. More people than you or I would like to know do not put much thought into who to vote for. They just wait to hear who looks like they are going to win as interpreted by the media and various polls and then vote that way. I know the media is not making an exception this election and that it has always been that way, but it needs to change. If there was a way to NOT release the results of ANY primary until after the last primary is held, that may encourage people to do at least a little research and vote for who they themselves support, whose ideas align with their own, and not let others' interpretation of who's in and who's out change their mind.

mrussel1 said:

You must be reading different media than me. The left leaning media like Huffpo, Rachel, etc, were absolutely pushing Bernie, starting right after NH. I always thought the media bias was a total myth perpetuated by the campaign team. Huffpo is one of the top sites on the Web and they were hard core Sanders.

If you held results to the end of the primary season, then you have two practical problems. One is money to campaign. Let's take the GOPfor example. The donor money would be split among 16 candidates. That's impractical for a 50 state campaign. Second, there would likely be no candidate with enough votes to clinch coming out of the primary. That means delegates would decide the candidate, rendering the primary useless.

Interesting you feel that way about Huffpost. I felt they have been more tilted towards Hillary this entire process. You can't go in Huffpost website without a Hillary ad smaking you in the face every five seconds. I'm with Her, Win dinner with Hillary! Ect ect.

Free said:

PJ_Soul said:

pickupyourwill said:

Free said:

There gets to be a point how much we value our one and only vote. I choose not to have to vote the lesser of two evils, especially inasmuch these two, the least popular in American history. I can't. And won't. vote for a person not interested at ALL at what the consensus, the people of this country want. But rather what their donars want.

^^^this

Yeah, I get it. It's just that people thinking like this just need to also acknowledge that this thinking could make Trump their next president. That's all well and good to vote on your conscience, although I do question that when the results of doing so hurts everyone and puts Trump in office. Sorry, not worth it IMO.

Nope, I am not afraid of the big bad Wolf, because he's not gonna win. How many times of I mentioned in these forms how not everyone voted in those primaries because not everyone is included. There are a huge growing number of people and third parties were not allowed to vote in primaries. Therefore the primary results do not reflect all of Americans. He's already on the downfall. I am not worried about Drumpf winning and will not be forced into voting for the lesser of two evils. They both suck.

I know all of this. But some will vote for him - more than you seem to think - and if enough people spoil ballots or vote for some fringe candidate Trump could win by default.

CH156378 said:

mrussel1 said:

You must be reading different media than me. The left leaning media like Huffpo, Rachel, etc, were absolutely pushing Bernie, starting right after NH. I always thought the media bias was a total myth perpetuated by the campaign team. Huffpo is one of the top sites on the Web and they were hard core Sanders.

If you held results to the end of the primary season, then you have two practical problems. One is money to campaign. Let's take the GOPfor example. The donor money would be split among 16 candidates. That's impractical for a 50 state campaign. Second, there would likely be no candidate with enough votes to clinch coming out of the primary. That means delegates would decide the candidate, rendering the primary useless.

Interesting you feel that way about Huffpost. I felt they have been more tilted towards Hillary this entire process. You can't go in Huffpost website without a Hillary ad smaking you in the face every five seconds. I'm with Her, Win dinner with Hillary! Ect ect.

That's paid advertising. I'm talking about the articles during the primary season.

Free said:

PJ_Soul said:

Free said:

PJ_Soul said:

pickupyourwill said:

Free said:

There gets to be a point how much we value our one and only vote. I choose not to have to vote the lesser of two evils, especially inasmuch these two, the least popular in American history. I can't. And won't. vote for a person not interested at ALL at what the consensus, the people of this country want. But rather what their donars want.

^^^this

Yeah, I get it. It's just that people thinking like this just need to also acknowledge that this thinking could make Trump their next president. That's all well and good to vote on your conscience, although I do question that when the results of doing so hurts everyone and puts Trump in office. Sorry, not worth it IMO.

Nope, I am not afraid of the big bad Wolf, because he's not gonna win. How many times of I mentioned in these forms how not everyone voted in those primaries because not everyone is included. There are a huge growing number of people and third parties were not allowed to vote in primaries. Therefore the primary results do not reflect all of Americans. He's already on the downfall. I am not worried about Drumpf winning and will not be forced into voting for the lesser of two evils. They both suck.

I know all of this. But some will vote for him - more than you seem to think - and if enough people spoil ballots or vote for some fringe candidate Trump could win by default.

This election is already rigged. And it's not rigged in his favor. Letting fear to dictate my vote isn't happening.

It's definitely rigged
Its a well known conspiracy by the Rothschilds and their friends in ZOG to rig the U.S. elections.

Or is it the illiuminati?
Or the nwo?

Hard to keep track

Free said:

Polls are BS and are used to persuade people to vote a certain way. They are used for nothing else.

Yeah, everyone knows that Nate Silver selects the winners, that's how he accurately predicts the outcomes of course.
He gets his orders from Nibiru.