Comments on: Jill Stein supporter, Hear me Hillary Clinton.

By: Andrea Wood

Andrea Wood — Fri, 26 Aug 2016 20:52:42 +0000

Why do you assume that anyone voting for Hillary is just voting for the lesser of two evils…
Also, you can’t prove a negative…”For me, this means I cannot vote for any politician whom I know has voted for war.” Since Jill Stein hasn’t held a political office, it’s pretty hard to accept that this statement isn’t just comparing apples to oranges…who really knows how she would vote if in a position to have a say…
eh.. there is just so much wrong with this missive on a general level.. however, I certainly respect your right to feel however you feel on a personal level…but seriously, you wind it all up with such a self serving statement (“But don’t hurt yourself, your idealistic third-party friends, and the future, by fighting with people who have overcome their fears, found their center, and chosen a path to try to help the country and the world.”)…pffft… like you have a corner on the idealism market…

By: SteveC

SteveC — Fri, 26 Aug 2016 15:20:47 +0000

As long as the majority of voters think that voting 3rd party is throwing your vote away we will remain trapped in the 2 party system.
The problem is that historically the D’s and R’s are for the most part behold-ant to lobbyists and big donors that allow them to write laws that we pay for. We need laws that benefit the people and the country as a whole, not those supporting an oligarchy.

By: TAR

TAR — Fri, 26 Aug 2016 14:46:39 +0000

You can not respect the office of the President of the USA and vote for Hillary Clinton. Her past actions demonstrate that she is consistently dishonest. Are we now at a point in the USA where we are being asked to vote for a lying, self serving, dishonest person?? Just say no! We will not be forces vote for a person we do not respect. Vote Green party.

By: DougW

DougW — Fri, 26 Aug 2016 14:28:10 +0000

To me, this is what you are missing:

Imagine you are in a room with 10 other friends, and you are deciding how to handle another group of people who have been harassing you. You agree to vote and live by the outcome. there are three choices:

1) Take it to the other guys. Attack them first, as it seems clear they will attack eventually.
2) Be vigilant… prepare for an attack by the other group and be ready to hit back hard if they attack!
3) Remain peaceful. Do not fight under ANY circumstances. rely on the rule of law and rest of society to help you inf the others do attack.

The rules state that in the case of a tie, the choice with the lowest vote will be removed and a re-vote will occur.

Now I fully understand that you can be SOLIDLY in the camp of choice 3. I get it. I lean that way myself.

But imagine the vote is open, and you are the VERY LAST person to cast a ballot. When your turn comes, Choice 1 has 5 votes, choice 2 has 4 votes, and your choice…. choice 3 has one vote. WHAT DO YOU DO?

By the arguments you put forward here, you vote for choice 3, knowing that will result in choice 1 winning. Voting for choice 2 would of course result in a tie, and then a runoff under which choice 2 would clearly win… but instead you choose to vote ‘your conscience’ knowing that it ends with the MOST aggressive outcome… the outcome you like LEAST.

So what I’d like for you to acknowledge… is that there are clearly SOME situations where voting for your ‘second best choice’ is a BETTER strategy than voting for your ‘first choice’. Once you have admitted that, we can perhaps have a serious discussion about whether or not THIS is one of those times…. until then, any such discussion is pointless, as you are arguing from an incorrect premise.

By: mitch myrick

mitch myrick — Fri, 26 Aug 2016 10:06:59 +0000

Did you seriously publish that you’re being oppressed when a friend calls you out for acting like an idiot.