President Joe Biden

[FogBlueInSanFran]

if your own views of what is best for you are not aligned with those in Blue would you vote for them because you don't like who is leading the other party.

That depends on who’s leading the other party. In 2016 and 2020 the answer was an unqualified “yes”. And note I voted for Romney in 2012, despite liking Obama.

Trump was uniquely bad; those of us fundamentally opposed to him and seeing him for who he was were right all along and everyone who wasn’t was wrong, as January 6th proved and as evidence about January 6th continues to prove, daily.

You didn’t/couldn’t recogniz(s)e the danger despite the signs based on the “I wouldn’t have voted for either” comment.

 

[mancity1]

That depends on who’s leading the other party. In 2016 and 2020 the answer was an unqualified “yes”. And note I voted for Romney in 2012, despite liking Obama.

Trump was uniquely bad; those of us fundamentally opposed to him and seeing him for who he was were right all along and everyone who wasn’t was wrong, as January 6th proved and as evidence about January 6th continues to prove, daily.

You didn’t/couldn’t recogniz(s)e the danger despite the signs based on the “I wouldn’t have voted for either” comment.

A no vote in my book was not a vote for Trump , it is a reflection that Trump is not worth a vote and of course unlike the US here in Oz voting is compulsory in the sense that you get fined if you do not cast a vote albeit the system is "somewhat" different to what you are used to albeit no matter who you vote for in the upper house preferences translate the vote in the end to one of the major two parties candidate in the electorate.

Trump wasn't uniquely bad he was just bad.

In saying that there are more checks and balances to reign in a sociopath like Trump than say a Putin.

I trust in the end you preferred Romney based on policy platform and the likelihood that policy could be made into law and implemented.

if you admired Obama based on his character alone then I feel a little sorry for you but in saying that some of the Democrat policy particularly when it came to internal matters was IMO good for the nation as a whole during the Obama presidency.

 

[FogBlueInSanFran]

Trump wasn't uniquely bad he was just bad.

Ok. Who was worse? Nixon? Harding? Buchanan? Fucking Millard Fillmore?

UNIQUELY bad. A hill I will die on, supported by evidence.

 

[JRockBlues]

When there are no good candidates I usually go by the old maxim: If you can't find anyone to vote for then find someone to vote against.

 

[BlueMoonAcrossThePond]

It was purely an observation and it had no design to win anyone over but again its a fair stretch for you to talk about all supporters of one individual as being of like mind of that individual however you define him.

Not everyone who supports an " evil politician " is evil similarly not everyone who supports a politician who is not racist are not necessary cut from the same cloth.

I disagree with your argument.

Let's make this simple.

Suppose you have a neighbor who likes ice cream. Further suppose that there are 2 candidates currently running for office:

Candidate 1 - is pro ice cream - but waffles on murder - it's clear that this candidate won't act to curb murder as murderers support him;
Candidate 2 - is anti ice cream (bad for your health) - and is strongly anti murder.

Your neighbor decides to support candidate 1. Knowing that this will lead to more murders.

Is your neighbor evil.

You fucking better bet so!

 

[mancity1]

Ok. Who was worse? Nixon? Harding? Buchanan? Fucking Millard Fillmore?

UNIQUELY bad. A hill I will die on, supported by evidence.

Their is nothing unique about an unhinged , unpredictable , narcissistic sociopath with no moral compass where power and status as opposed to strength in office mean one and the same.

I am confident you have come across some personally in your life that probably haven't been voted into The White House and if you are smart you will give them a wide birth.

 

[BlueMoonAcrossThePond]

Ok. Who was worse? Nixon? Harding? Buchanan? Fucking Millard Fillmore?

UNIQUELY bad. A hill I will die on, supported by evidence.

As a tangential aside - Nixon was brilliant. His diplomacy lead to a huge breakthrough in our relationship with China. And he acted to end the Vietnam war - my sense is that this was against his original instincts but he acted to achieve this end nonetheless.

Too, Nixon was an intellectual - articulate and charismatic.

His undoing was his drive to remain in power - and his neurosis that numerous others were out to get him. And this led him over the line in his attempt to remain in power.

Compared to what Trump has done - on record - and clear for all to see - Nixon was a saint.

 

[mancity1]

I disagree with your argument.

Let's make this simple.

Suppose you have a neighbor who likes ice cream. Further suppose that there are 2 candidates currently running for office:

Candidate 1 - is pro ice cream - but waffles on murder - it's clear that this candidate won't act to curb murder as murderers support him;
Candidate 2 - is anti ice cream (bad for your health) - and is strongly anti murder.

Your neighbor decides to support candidate 1. Knowing that this will lead to more murders.

Is your neighbor evil.

You fucking better bet so!

I wouldn't vote for a candidate that supports the murder of citizens and has the power to make it an unpunishable offense for example but I dare say in the USA for example not many would.

When it comes to voting most vote for who they think is best placed to fulfil their needs and in most democratic societies it revolves around the family , the cost of living and the wider issues that are important to them like health , education , security , the environment and being the best citizen they can be which most aspire to.

 

[BlueMoonAcrossThePond]

I wouldn't vote for a candidate that supports the murder of citizens and has the power to make it an unpunishable offense for example but I dare say in the USA for example not many would.

When it comes to voting most vote for who they think is best placed to fulfil their needs and in most democratic societies it revolves around the family , the cost of living and the wider issues that are important to them like health , education , security , the environment and being the best citizen they can be which most aspire to.

So, you wouldn't vote for someone waffling on murder.

But judging from you comments, you are A-OK with those who vote for fascist Trump?

You know - that guy who gypped gullible Americans with Trump University until that was shut down; who sexually assaulted numerous women and paid them off when their legal recourse rose to the level of inconvenience; who, on tape, pressured Ukraine to come up with (code word here - it means make up lies) - evidence against Hunter Biden in order to threaten his perceived next political rival - and threatened to withhold military aid if such "evidence" was not forthcoming - that guy who gave Putin a pass on election interference and on putting a bounty on US military personnel; the same Donald Trump who lied about election fraud and illegally pressured numerous officials to back his position - that Trump who instigated the January 6th invasion of the US capitol - the draft dodging Trump who got a doctor to lie about his medical condition in order to avoid serving in the army; and so on and on and on and on.

You're OK with voters for that bastion of moral fortitude, Donald Trump, knowing all of the above and more?

Anyone voting for Trump in spite of knowing the above is evil! And those who don't know that the above is true are gullible, or are living in a self-imposed echo-chamber of ridiculous, anti-factual, alternative "facts."

 

[mancity1]

So, you wouldn't vote for someone waffling on murder.

But judging from you comments,

You are A-OK voting for fascist Trump?

I wouldn't vote for Trump and if you had read my posts and in fact you have commented as such in the past you wouldn't have to ask that question.

What I have said is that a person who votes for someone you think is fascist does not a fascist make or is pro fascism.

My turn for once for you , JFK was a sociopathic , drug addicted , playboy who loved to cheat on his wife.

I would have voted for him despite this and being none of the above but you wouldn't unless you are either a sociopath , drug loving playboy who likes to commit adultery as you phrase it or having these qualities is of no consequence to you when it comes to what you look for in a president.

Would you vote for JFK?