Did you really want Hillary to win?

Please explain.

 

During 2016, I repeatedly asked our LW posters why I should vote FOR Hilla. All I ever got was "She Haz Vagina", and "She's not Trump." What I mean is, I never got a reason why anyone should vote for her but rather all I got was reasons to vote against Trump. So I suppose that's as far as you'll get in this thread from those who voted Hilla - they didn't want Hilla to win so much as they wanted Trump to lose.

 

Thanks Stuart, let's see if Lee Atwood and the like respond.

 

I asked my liberal friends the same thing and it was mainly the same thing, having a female president and/or they just wanted anyone but Trump.

I also asked in Hillary's 30 plus years in politics what had she accomplished? Couldn't give me a straight answer, imagine that...

 

I absolutely held my nose voting for Trump. Now I am glad I did.

 

I couldn't bring myself to do it in 2016, but I will this time.

 

I didn't actually vote for Trump as much as I did against Hilla. I still don't actually like him and my opinion hasn't changed since 2016: He has little class, less restraint, zero maturity, and desperately needs his cell phone/Twitter typer hidden.

Nevertheless, he's still better than Biden, Sanders, and Warren and no one on the left - certainly no one on this board - has actually made a reasoned argument as to why I should vote FOR any of the three either. In many ways, the argument has remained unchanged: I've seen no reason to vote FOR any of the three of them but rather the LW has only given me reasons to vote AGAINST Trump. That's not enough for me.

I quit the GOP when W was prez and I have no reason or desire to go back - but the LW has given me even less reason to join the Dems. Actually, they've all but gone out of their way to make me loathe the idea of joining them.

 

I couldn’t bring myself to vote in ‘16. Part of me wanted Hillary to win. I figured 4 years of her may bring a lot of people to their senses. Maybe even tear things up enough we could start over and rebuild the foundations that have been crumbling. I’m not sure about November. Waiting to see if the Dems nominate a “tear it down” type or a bumbling fool type.

 

For me no, but the will of the majority should be followed. That's how democracy works.

 

This isn't a democracy. Its a constitutionally limited representative democracy. Hillary didn't win the Electoral College as was the agreed upon electoral process since the Constituional Convention of 1787 otherwise known as 'The Great Compromise' or 'The Connecticut Compromise' in which many of the smaller states (Connecticut, Rhode Island, Delaware, etc) refused to join a Union in which their (at the time) smaller populations gave them a disproportionately small voice in Federal affairs.

A nullification of the EC process would qualify as a 'breach of contract' situation between FedGov and the states, legitimizing secession. Which may not be the worst thing in the world as imo this Union could do with a divorce..

But suffice to say, the tyranny of the majority has always been a concern in these great United States. Even democracy has its limits.

 

At this point, a tree stump would make a better potus than trump.

 

If a ham sandwich ran as a democrat there are people who would vote for the ham sandwich. They vote for a democrat no matter what. Sorta like being brainwashed.

 

First they are going to 'splain how all of the open corruption that the Clintons routinely wallow in are merely things taken out of context by their enemies and that therefore none of it -- including boatloads of proof -- are real. So we are talking about a total reality reset here before the 'discussion' even starts. Then we shall get lectured on how the Constitution is a bogus and meaningless document because Hillary won the popular vote in a vote packing districts scheme -- applying to a couple of entire states -- that the Electoral College solution was designed to thwart. So that would be the second reality re-set.

Then they will list Hillary's qualifications ignoring the fact that first, she was corrupt as a Secretary Of State and also inept. Then they will 'splain how her basket of deplorables comment did not mean what it actually meant. Then they will claim that the only reason she became Senator was NOT because her husband was once president; and on and on and on. Finally they will point out her true qualifications -- she was female at a time when the collective Mainstream Media upon order of the DNC discovered that 2016 was the Year of the Woman (vagina power) and that cheating her way to the top of the corrupt to the core DNC's candidate list showcased her innate leadership skills.

Finally . . . after all of that . . . some very few of them will admit that nobody actually likes or admires her but also that the fact that she wasn't Donald Trump was all that really mattered.

 

At this rate a dead tortoise would be a better choice than anything with a D after its name.

 

Trump and Hillary were equally toxic. Neither should have been the nominee of their party. But that does not excuse Trump’s actions.

 

Please - roses do not grow from Republican asses when it comes to voting for anything with an R attached. Look at how many people said they held their nose and voted for Trump. Personally, I kept to my morals and voted for neither of the toxic candidates.

 

I didn't care a whit. My overall impression was that it was embarrassing to me that the U.S. couldn't come up with better candidates. I definitely underestimated Trump, as it turned out.

 

I was explaining how/why some people voted for Hillary. That is the subject of the post. No need to explain to me anything about republicans.

 

Daniel, if you could select the next President, who would it be?

 

What the majority says is right would eventually become right, we are not ISA or Independent States of America and that what makes the difference, it's either because of the toils of the civil war in which battles were won and some did lost transforms what we are today. The majority always rules and if the majority says we will make a charter change then of course we will make a charter change, if not and the decision became government centralized then we are no longer a democratic but an autocratic.

 

Hillary has won a yuge portion of the Trumpette's mind...

 

At this point, a tree stump would make a better potus than trump.


Really? I didn't know a tree stump could revitalize our military, lower taxes for the working man, make out country safer, bring back manufacturing jobs, get NATO to stop mooching off of us, tear up that stupid ass Iran deal.........need I go on and on............Yay TreeSTump!!

 

She has also lost an election. Give her a cookie if you really want to.

 

Not necessarily. Some issues are so important to the minority that they'll fight to the death for them. If those issues are eqaually important to the majority, then there will be a war. If not, its more likely the majority will relent, if the minority is sizeable enough for the issue to not be worth the trouble. Thus the Second Amendment.

As an extreme example, consider collectivism. All things being equal, a supportive majority could simply force a dissenting minority to participate. However, when that minority is is still numerous, armed and willing to fight to the death in opposition, its far easier to simply allow them to opt out via secession than try to fight them into submission.

 

Looks like "She's not Trump" turned out to be a pretty good reason.

Three years later we know Trump is a proven criminal, dishonest, a liar, incompetent, a cheater, inhumane, unpatriotic, ignorant, ...

Not-Trump sounds better and better every day this guy's is in power.