U.S Presidential Election 2016 Not Otherwise Specified

[BostonBad]

We need a smaller government and people should consider Johnson / Weld

[broncofan]

A strange reply, after all, what are political parties for?

Maybe one of the reasons it's easy to lose sight of this in America is that in a virtual two party system a candidate can define himself by being different from the alternative. So while parties are organized around certain principles and values, you can almost call yourself a Republican if you're not a Democrat and vice versa. Affiliation over time shows a commitment to what each party stands for, but the parties are not making it very clear what views are a sine qua non to membership. The parties end up representing more an ethos than a clear set of principles.

Ask a person what it means to be a Democrat and they should be able to say more than, "well you have to register as a Democrat and be affiliated with the party." But as you indicate, this has to at least be a requisite. So I agree.....party affiliation over time is an easy litmus test for whether someone is committed to what the party stands for. If the person has not identified as a Republican or Democrat for very long, there is probably a good reason for that.

[broncofan]

Or maybe Trump and Sanders are signs of a change taking place as voters become disaffected with 'business as usual' on both sides of the Atlantic...

Probably true. In order for such candidates to spawn a lasting movement, they would have to be rejected by their party for either not being orthodox enough or not being affiliated for long enough. Then we would see whether they could sustain a movement based on their ideas or whether it is whatever dubious personal appeal each man has that has resulted in his support.

[fred41]

Although there are conservative Republicans that I respect and whose policies I don't think would be as damaging as Trump's, it would be tough for a couple of reasons. I really am pretty far left....

I don't think anything you've posted seems all that far to the left , but that may be due to changes in my own way of thinking. Closer to urban centers, there are Republicans that aren't as socially conservative, but unfortunately the minute they run for higher office, it seems they always have an epiphany and become legally opposed to abortion, gay rights, etc.
It even seemed as if the 'abortion rights litmus test' was on it's way out...and then the Tea Party showed up. It seems a Republican moderate no longer has a snowball's chance in hell of running for president...at least for the time being.
The reality of course is during an election a nominee is lock step with both their party and what they believe a majority of their voters want. Once they're in office though, there's usually a lot of policy tweaking going on. Sometimes you can distinguish between what a candidate says and what you think they really believe.

I wouldn't vote for Bernie...he really is too far left for me. Pretty much his whole life was devoted to it.
But I wouldn't vote for Trump either...people keep saying that's not the real Trump, but he hasn't even tried to brush up on the learning process. If he's not even going to bother learning policy or even being able to control childish outbursts at this late stage of the game...then what's the point in even considering him?

[fred41]

Yes (giving the word ‘regardless’ a practical interpretation). ...

I wasn't going to give you a ridiculous choice or try to paint you into a moral corner...lol. I'm pretty sure you can come up with some interesting scenarios where your own personal principles would be put to the test.

But everyone has their own limits on where they would take a particular stand (whether or not the grounds for that stand are actual or in ones own head).

If it was between Mr. Sanders and Mr. Trump I would finally be forced to either abstain or give the two alternate parties a closer look.

I'm also not in love with Hillary, but I can vote for her...I believe she's moderate enough and has more common sense than the two mentioned. For the record, I also would prefer her to Biden.

The real question of course wouldn't be "would you vote for Bernie against any Republican"....but "would you vote for any Democrat against any Republican"....but again, we would wind up coming up with some silly examples.

...might be fun at a later time though.

[fred41]

and thank you both for answering the question honestly and thoughtfully.

[zerrrr]

To be completely fair and honest, both candidates represent this country very well.

On the right we have an intolerant bigot whose rise was fueled by soundbites and memes. So apropos for the uneducated right. The educated right is left wondering if people really are this stupid when it is a combination of stupidity and being tone-deaf to the wants and needs of their constituents.

On the left we have a one-percent narcissist whose only goal is to be the first woman President, no matter what. She will run the Oval Office as an arm of her charitable foundation with a for sale sign outside. So apropos for a party that pays lip service to the poor while hiding behind their tax shelters and charitable organizations. She will turn on you when a larger donation appears in her bank account because she believes that the rules do not apply to her.

They represent the country well. They are us in a nutshell.

As for the second place finishers.....

On the left you have someone who is fighting tooth and nail against a corrupt system as he has done his entire life. Kudos to him. I don't agree with his policies but I do respect him.

On the right you have someone whose views may be extreme but was elected to go into Washington and shake up the rotten establishment. He made more enemies in one term than a six term Senator. Quite a success for someone elected to do just that and in the end the party looked to him to save them from a bigot. Irony in a nutshell.

They all represent America oh so well.

[sukumvit boy]

[broncofan]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/22/us...cans.html?_r=0

Some of the predicaments faced by the Trump camp. Very poor campaign infrastructure, poor fundraising, and a recently fired campaign manager. I wonder whether he's going to want to use his own money for his campaign. First, it's not clear what's liquid, and it's also not clear that he has as much money as he says he has. So even if he can get several hundred million in cash together together for his campaign, does he leave himself able to fund the operating costs for his personal empire.

[broncofan]

https://www.thenation.com/article/th...orth-carolina/