kwc Posted January 23, 2016 at 09:36 PM Share Posted January 23, 2016 at 09:36 PM Trump just announced: "I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn't lose any voters," Donald Trump said on Saturday. http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/donald-trump-shooting-vote-218145 That'll sit well with the Brady Bunch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GTX63 Posted January 23, 2016 at 09:37 PM Share Posted January 23, 2016 at 09:37 PM Bill could have said the same thing, and so could Hillary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cls74 Posted January 23, 2016 at 11:33 PM Share Posted January 23, 2016 at 11:33 PM Sounds like Bloomberg is considering a 3rd party run. Billion dollar campaign run Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWBH Posted January 23, 2016 at 11:37 PM Share Posted January 23, 2016 at 11:37 PM Well here's a quandry for us all...The candidates for the 2016 election are: R - Donald Trump D - Hillary Clinton Who would you vote for?? LOL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lou Posted January 23, 2016 at 11:42 PM Share Posted January 23, 2016 at 11:42 PM Well here's a quandry for us all...The candidates for the 2016 election are: R - Donald Trump D - Hillary Clinton Who would you vote for?? LOL!. ABC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWBH Posted January 23, 2016 at 11:44 PM Share Posted January 23, 2016 at 11:44 PM Well here's a quandry for us all...The candidates for the 2016 election are: R - Donald Trump D - Hillary Clinton Who would you vote for?? LOL!. ABC LOL!! I'd have to go with a write in - some guy named "Lou"... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barryware Posted January 24, 2016 at 03:02 AM Share Posted January 24, 2016 at 03:02 AM Well here's a quandry for us all...The candidates for the 2016 election are: R - Donald Trump D - Hillary Clinton Who would you vote for?? LOL!Hillary 2016! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gLockedandLoaded Posted January 24, 2016 at 03:02 AM Share Posted January 24, 2016 at 03:02 AM Sounds like Bloomberg is considering a 3rd party run. Billion dollar campaign runBloomberg is the one man I could see really pushing for confiscation of almost all firearms. I really don't think he cares about the effects of such a move either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cls74 Posted January 24, 2016 at 03:11 AM Share Posted January 24, 2016 at 03:11 AM Sounds like Bloomberg is considering a 3rd party run. Billion dollar campaign runBloomberg is the one man I could see really pushing for confiscation of almost all firearms. I really don't think he cares about the effects of such a move either.Without a doubt, but it could have as big an impact to the D voting as a Trump third party campaign would be for the R's. Could you umagine the panic buys if he announces and gains steam? In a sense I would love to see the D party suffer what the intial Trump announcement meant for the R. But that is only if Bloomberg would be guaranteed a loss. It's a scary thought seeing someone with that much money sitting on the sidelines, now knowing what key points to hit on to sway the votes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoverGunner Posted January 24, 2016 at 05:00 AM Share Posted January 24, 2016 at 05:00 AM Sounds like Bloomberg is considering a 3rd party run.Billion dollar campaign runBloomberg is the one man I could see really pushing for confiscation of almost all firearms. I really don't think he cares about the effects of such a move either. I would comply only from " My cold Dead Hands" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoadyRunner Posted January 24, 2016 at 06:35 AM Share Posted January 24, 2016 at 06:35 AM Well here's a quandry for us all... The candidates for the 2016 election are: R - Donald Trump D - Hillary Clinton Who would you vote for?? LOL! Molly B. (Write-in) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiliconSorcerer Posted January 24, 2016 at 02:24 PM Share Posted January 24, 2016 at 02:24 PM I like Cruz, but he would be able to do a lot of good work for a much longer time on the Supreme Court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiskeyRebel Posted January 24, 2016 at 02:36 PM Share Posted January 24, 2016 at 02:36 PM Well here's a quandry for us all...The candidates for the 2016 election are: R - Donald Trump D - Hillary Clinton Who would you vote for?? LOL! Libertarian or Green Party, depending on which candidate I prefer. I voted Jill Stein last time because she kept getting arrested protesting for her campaign, she was even arrested for trying to break into one of the Obama & Romney debates demanding 3rd parties to be allowed on stage. Plus I'm a huge environmentalist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cope Posted January 25, 2016 at 05:38 AM Share Posted January 25, 2016 at 05:38 AM Im thoroughly in favor of everyone having their own special candidate they want to see win...... but when election day comes if Trump is on the ® ticket then I will vote for him without blinking this is the reason we have our current mess...... dems dont have any problem voting dem regardless of whos name is on the ballot..... those with 'principles' will do write-ins, vote 3rd party, or just stay at home if Trump is the candidate then any vote thats not for Trump or staying at home and not voting at all is the equivalent of a vote for gun control seems silly that anyone who supports the 2A could have any other thoughts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yyyz Posted January 25, 2016 at 10:03 AM Share Posted January 25, 2016 at 10:03 AM Im thoroughly in favor of everyone having their own special candidate they want to see win...... but when election day comes if Trump is on the ® ticket then I will vote for him without blinking this is the reason we have our current mess...... dems dont have any problem voting dem regardless of whos name is on the ballot..... those with 'principles' will do write-ins, vote 3rd party, or just stay at home if Trump is the candidate then any vote thats not for Trump or staying at home and not voting at all is the equivalent of a vote for gun control seems silly that anyone who supports the 2A could have any other thoughts 100% Agree! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gLockedandLoaded Posted January 25, 2016 at 11:52 AM Share Posted January 25, 2016 at 11:52 AM Some wisdom from Thomas Sowell, a man worth listening to. http://townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/2016/01/22/do-emotions-trump-facts-n2108178Here's Molyneux' rebuttalhttps://youtu.be/-yyoauXmzjg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vito Posted January 25, 2016 at 01:02 PM Author Share Posted January 25, 2016 at 01:02 PM It takes so little effort to vote. Here in Illinois we have early voting for weeks before the official election day. Someone has to be totally lazy or apathetic to not vote. But some will be lazy and try to justify not voting with statements like "it doesn't matter, both parties are the same", or "my candidate lost in the primaries and I just can't stand xxxxx" or whatever. Add those to the eligible voters who throw their vote away on third or fourth party candidates, and you have a greater chance for Hilary, or Bernie to win and advance the agenda of gun control, among other ills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Rat Posted January 25, 2016 at 01:32 PM Share Posted January 25, 2016 at 01:32 PM It takes so little effort to vote. Here in Illinois we have early voting for weeks before the official election day. Someone has to be totally lazy or apathetic to not vote. But some will be lazy and try to justify not voting with statements like "it doesn't matter, both parties are the same", or "my candidate lost in the primaries and I just can't stand xxxxx" or whatever. Add those to the eligible voters who throw their vote away on third or fourth party candidates, and you have a greater chance for Hilary, or Bernie to win and advance the agenda of gun control, among other ills. That's true in some states, but Illinois is so solidly Democrat that our votes in the Presidential election really don't make a difference. I vote for the President as a matter of principle, but it's with the understanding that it's only in the undercard elections where my vote might actually mean something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vito Posted January 25, 2016 at 01:39 PM Author Share Posted January 25, 2016 at 01:39 PM There have been presidential elections where IL went for the Republican, even if not lately. Don't assume the worst. Voting for the Republican cannot hurt, and it just might help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
defaultdotxbe Posted January 25, 2016 at 01:51 PM Share Posted January 25, 2016 at 01:51 PM There have been presidential elections where IL went for the Republican, even if not lately. Don't assume the worst. Voting for the Republican cannot hurt, and it just might help. The defeatism is part of the reason IL goes for the dems so reliably Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrTriple Posted January 25, 2016 at 01:56 PM Share Posted January 25, 2016 at 01:56 PM It takes so little effort to vote. Here in Illinois we have early voting for weeks before the official election day. Someone has to be totally lazy or apathetic to not vote. But some will be lazy and try to justify not voting with statements like "it doesn't matter, both parties are the same", or "my candidate lost in the primaries and I just can't stand xxxxx" or whatever. Add those to the eligible voters who throw their vote away on third or fourth party candidates, and you have a greater chance for Hilary, or Bernie to win and advance the agenda of gun control, among other ills. Well, remember that when there's low turnout, the republicans tend to do very well for themselves. As for Bloomberg, he's basically a male Hillary, and that'll split the democratic vote. So having him run might actually work in our favor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StogieRob Posted January 25, 2016 at 02:31 PM Share Posted January 25, 2016 at 02:31 PM Illinois' electoral college votes were all republican from 1968 to 1988. It's been all democrat since. Prior to 1968, it was D for two votes, R for two voted and then D from '48 back to '32. It's been 6 elections worth of Dems getting the votes after 6 elections of Republicans getting the votes. Illinois "voting Republican" clearly can happen... CZ vz. 70... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Rat Posted January 25, 2016 at 02:44 PM Share Posted January 25, 2016 at 02:44 PM There have been presidential elections where IL went for the Republican, even if not lately. Don't assume the worst. Voting for the Republican cannot hurt, and it just might help. The defeatism is part of the reason IL goes for the dems so reliably Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk It's not defeatism - it's realism. It's not even close anymore in this state. That said, there will be a lot of other contests on the same ballot where individual votes may matter. So while you're voting for those, you may as well choose the lesser of whichever two evils are running for president and cast your vote for them as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
defaultdotxbe Posted January 25, 2016 at 02:51 PM Share Posted January 25, 2016 at 02:51 PM There have been presidential elections where IL went for the Republican, even if not lately. Don't assume the worst. Voting for the Republican cannot hurt, and it just might help. The defeatism is part of the reason IL goes for the dems so reliably Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk It's not defeatism - it's realism. It's not even close anymore in this state. That said, there will be a lot of other contests on the same ballot where individual votes may matter. So while you're voting for those, you may as well choose the lesser of whichever two evils are running for president and cast your vote for them as well. It's not close because so many people stay home or write in a vote because they've already decided the dems winning is reality Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GTX63 Posted January 25, 2016 at 02:52 PM Share Posted January 25, 2016 at 02:52 PM Voting as a secondary action is also a public show that there are still like minded individuals all around who share a similar belief system. Landslide elections can tempt the victors to sometimes overstep their reach based on what they believe the public will tolerate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Rat Posted January 25, 2016 at 03:02 PM Share Posted January 25, 2016 at 03:02 PM There have been presidential elections where IL went for the Republican, even if not lately. Don't assume the worst. Voting for the Republican cannot hurt, and it just might help. The defeatism is part of the reason IL goes for the dems so reliablySent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk It's not defeatism - it's realism. It's not even close anymore in this state. That said, there will be a lot of other contests on the same ballot where individual votes may matter. So while you're voting for those, you may as well choose the lesser of whichever two evils are running for president and cast your vote for them as well.It's not close because so many people stay home or write in a vote because they've already decided the dems winning is reality Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk That might explain a couple percent, not the 10% - 25% differential there's been for the past 20-30 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GTX63 Posted January 25, 2016 at 03:13 PM Share Posted January 25, 2016 at 03:13 PM The percentage of Republican and Independent voters in November will settle the mystery of what mainstream really is. I will say though, that when it comes to the popularity of Cruz and Trump and the utter shock of the establishment/corporate/big tent crowd, they have to this point, proven to many potential voters that they were not alone in their beliefs and values, they have just been misled to believe they were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
defaultdotxbe Posted January 25, 2016 at 03:20 PM Share Posted January 25, 2016 at 03:20 PM Voting as a secondary action is also a public show that there are still like minded individuals all around who share a similar belief system. Landslide elections can tempt the victors to sometimes overstep their reach based on what they believe the public will tolerate. I know a surprisingly large number of people who vote Democrat only because they think the dem will win, and they'd rather have voted for the winner than the loser. In the end it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tkroenlein Posted January 25, 2016 at 03:25 PM Share Posted January 25, 2016 at 03:25 PM There have been presidential elections where IL went for the Republican, even if not lately. Don't assume the worst. Voting for the Republican cannot hurt, and it just might help. The defeatism is part of the reason IL goes for the dems so reliably Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk That, and massive voter fraud, specifically in cook county. The same neighborhoods that shoot each other all weekend turn into patriots on election Tuesday, clocking 75-85% voter turnout when the rest of the state can't hit 35%. It's enough to swing all but the most ridiculous of landslide victories, like Rauner experienced. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
defaultdotxbe Posted January 25, 2016 at 03:34 PM Share Posted January 25, 2016 at 03:34 PM There have been presidential elections where IL went for the Republican, even if not lately. Don't assume the worst. Voting for the Republican cannot hurt, and it just might help. The defeatism is part of the reason IL goes for the dems so reliablySent from my SM-G920P using TapatalkThat, and massive voter fraud, specifically in cook county. The same neighborhoods that shoot each other all weekend turn into patriots on election Tuesday, clocking 75-85% voter turnout when the rest of the state can't hit 35%. It's enough to swing all but the most ridiculous of landslide victories, like Rauner experienced. Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkSo what do you suppose would happen if the rest of the state managed to hit 60% (the national average for presidential elections) Curious that it's 25% fewer people voting than the average, and the dems win by a 25% margin... Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.