fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3415 ]

[ SECRET POST #3415 ]

⌈ Secret Post #3415 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 027 secrets from Secret Submission Post #488.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Yes. I hate when people refuse to vote because they couldn't get their first choice. Or people who claim there's no difference between the main two candidates because they've put all politicians in one box except for their single incredible exception.

they're like petulant children who couldn't have their preferred flavor of candy. except the stakes are so much higher.

Uh actually no, I'm not going to vote for her should it come to it because I'm in a deep blue state where it wouldn't matter and I'd like to give the Green party a vote.

This entire thread is a really dumb generalization and ignoring how the general election does not actually work like a swing state in a whole lot of decided red/blue states.

Oh I have no problem with third party voters. It's giving up on voting at all that bothers me.

Even if they do, again, in deep red/blue states it doesn't really matter. This OP assumes the whole US functions like a swing state when in reality most of it doesn't and plenty of people have very good reason to be disillusioned and pissed at the system for making them not matter.

Calling them petulant little children for it is dickish.

SA

For example: someone in Texas who loves Bernie is going Bernie or Bust and doesn't vote for Clinton in Texas. Is that person really helping Trump into the White House? No, because they never mattered. Texas is solid red. Mocking them for it and calling them childish is just so... completely out of touch with how things work.

It's ABSOLUTELY childish. how many people aren't voting because they think it won't matter? You have no damn right to complain if you don't vote, or if you intentionally throw away your vote by voting for a third party candidate.

It's ABSOLUTELY childish. how many people aren't voting because they think it won't matter?

A whole lot of people, according to the stats. Our voter turnout is ridiculously low.

You have no damn right to complain if you don't vote, or if you intentionally throw away your vote by voting for a third party candidate.

Complain about... what? Sorry. I don't know where your "complain" is coming from. That's a totally new addition to the conversation.

How do you square saying voter turnout is ridiculously low (which it is) with saying it literally doesn't matter if people choose not to vote??????

Turnout is low because for the most part people are correct in saying they do not matter and the parties dont care. How many of those 160000 ignored and disenfranchised democrats in New York do you think will show up again when they werent even counted the first time? After a lawsuit and a court decision? What *do* they matter?

I understand it and I wouldn't call them petulant children over it. But I still don't like it. Apathy gets to me like almost nothing else does.

I can understand that. I want everyone to vote too and I hate that so many people feel like they don't, or really actually don't, matter. The children comment was the one I replied to for that reason, that's where it went too far.

No, your reasoning is inherently stupid. Do you support masses of people who don't like Clinton go to third party because "fuck it it doesn't matter, she'll win anyway" - and then ultimately splinter the vote and cause the state to go red? Or are you the only special snowflake who gets to make a statement?

Your reasoning is based on the fact that you think deep blue or red states can suddenly swing and become non-deep red/blue states this year.

If California goes nuts and votes Trump, I'll donate to the Clinton Foundation.

First, states can swing, it has happened before. Second, you're pushing the responsibility onto other people, you're making them do something you don't want to do but you rely on them making that decision. You won't get your hands dirty, just so you can be so morally superior, but you still want everyone else to do it for you.

Yes, exactly. I do not want to vote for either Clinton or Trump, being ideologically opposed to them in different ways for different reasons, and I am conveniently located in a state where me doing neither of those is unlikely to change things.

If it magically does, then as I said, I'll take my share of the blame for it and you my scream all the "I told you so"s you wish. But the chances of that are so low I'm fine with that. If you're not fine with that, vote otherwise.

States really don't swing that dramatically or unexpectedly. If California is in serious danger of being competitive, we'll know about it in advance - more than long enough to get shit together and make sure people actually come out to the polls. Although, really, if California is in serious danger of being competitive, that probably means the rest of the election is completely fucked anyway.

And I think the second point you're making here is, frankly, completely stupid. The reality is that we do live in an electoral college system. It's ridiculous to talk about "not wanting to get your hands dirty" in relation to votes that realistically really do not matter.

You sound like you don't really understand politics. Especially with your second paragraph.

Electors (electoral college) are obligated to follow popular vote. Them challenging popular vote is EXTREMELY rare, would only affect races that are absurdly closely tied, and understandably very controversial. 99.99% of the time, they must follow popular vote. In most states this is written into law. What you are voting for is which candidate receives the electors, and yes, your vote DOES count.

You ARE relying on others to vote in a certain way you want to be too morally superior to do.

While I disagree with your reasoning, I had more in mind the "Bernie or bust" types who refuse to vote for Hillary solely out of spite. It's the spitefulness that I find childish, and the attitude of "well if I can't have it my way then the good of the nation be damned".

Edited 2016-05-11 01:46 (UTC)

Wrong. My state was supposedly solid blue, so I voted for some Green candidates in the last state election. Apparently every other liberal voter had the same idea.

Presidential elections and downballot elections are often very different

it behooves you to be aware of this stuff

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

[ SECRET POST #3415 ]

Re: Complaint Thread

Re: Complaint Thread

Re: Complaint Thread

Re: Complaint Thread

Re: Complaint Thread

Re: Complaint Thread

Re: Complaint Thread

Re: Complaint Thread

Re: Complaint Thread

Re: Complaint Thread

Re: Complaint Thread

Re: Complaint Thread

Re: Complaint Thread

Re: Complaint Thread

Re: Complaint Thread

Re: Complaint Thread

Re: Complaint Thread

Re: Complaint Thread

Re: Complaint Thread

Re: Complaint Thread

Re: Complaint Thread