Elections Have Consequences

[FBG001]

Elections have consequences.jpg

Ruthie's next.

[DonBiase]

YES THEY DO.

[nfafan]

YES THEY DO.

Yep, Pennsyltucky Supreme Court springs to mind. Guess it was a great day to stay home and do fantasy football so as to make up for not watching it anymore, or, maybe to run to the mall for some jock-socks at say, Dick's maybe.

[Hodgie]

Sure remember that next time it's time to vote and you decide not to.

[eatmydust]

^^^What Hodgie said, so get out and VOTE RED THIS NOVEMBER 6TH!!^^^

[stainless]

Yep, Pennsyltucky Supreme Court springs to mind. Guess it was a great day to stay home and do fantasy football so as to make up for not watching it anymore, or, maybe to run to the mall for some jock-socks at say, Dick's maybe.

We still need a sarc emoji. Some here can't understand.

[Pilot321]

Constitutional oriented Supreme Court justices were the number one reason I voted for Trump. Yes, Obama, you arrogant ass. Elections do have consequences.

[GunLawyer001]

Just a reminder here, that the candidate who selects the next batch of judges and vetoes or signs Congressional bills, will NOT be "the guy who got the most votes if you add in all the 'message senders' who voted for some 3rd party to punish the party closest to him".

If the Democrats get 45% of the vote while the Republicans get 40% and the "not Democrats" get another 10, the Democrats will be putting Obama and Liz Warren on the Court for the next 40 years.

The time to send a message is when you get out your checkbook during the primaries. Only an idiot punishes the party that agrees with him 70% of the time by helping elect the party that agrees with him 5% of the time.

No candidate is going to obey your demands 100% of the time, no matter how much you stamp your feet and bang your head on the wall. The sane thing to do is to vote for the person closest to you WHO HAS A CHANCE OF WINNING. Nobody except a Democrat or a Republican has won the presidency since the last Whig won in 1848.

You have to look in the mirror and ask yourself, would I rather be ruled by Hillary or have Trump ease back the control? Would I rather see more of Trump until 2024 or let the Dems use the same moral guidance against us that they used against Kavanaugh?

Punishing Trump because he sided with the NRA and threw bump stocks under the bus is insane, when the alternative party wants to reinstate the 1994 AWB that they rammed through when they had power.

Don't be stupid. There were Germans whose "principles" required them to obey all laws, and they obediently allowed anti-Jew laws to go into effect, because they personally kept to their principles regarding "order". Don't be a good German. Use common sense. Help us to get and keep the best of the actual options, instead of "sending a message" by writing-in "John Moses Browning" (he's dead, but has the same chance as any Libertarian or Green party candidate), which helps us to the exact same extent as if you stayed home and listened to Streisand records.

[internet troll]

. The time to send a message is when you get out your checkbook during the primaries. Only an idiot punishes the party that agrees with him 70% of the time by helping elect the party that agrees with him 5% of the time.

Well put and one of the best things I’ve read regarding elections in a long time. I remember years ago I use to think “Hey, if they are not going to put in someone who I like all/most of the the time, they can get bent. I won’t vote for anyone until they put in a candidate I truly think is worthy. If they want my vote they better get their act together”

The feeling is still there about wanting the best candidate. But I quickly came to realize the time to worry about that is during the primaries, not the general election. A lot of times we vote for the lesser of two evils which sucks. But we need to remember not voting aids the greater of the two evils. As you said, better to have a candidate that goes with 70% of what you want than 5%.

If you want a candidate that votes with you 100%, run for election. Anything else, take care of as best you can in the primaries. If it does not work out in the primaries, don’t shoot yourself in the foot by taking your ball and going home because the candidate running is only 65% better than the other candidate.

[knight0334]

GL001 is absolutely correct.

Sure, the Dems and the Reps don't always "represent" you 100% of the time. But only one side has a track record of wanting to disarm you for the past 175 years, and wants to implement another AWB, and implement stricter laws on the guns that they cannot outright ban.

Rest assured they will be signing up more dead people to vote. They will be voting at multiple polling stations. They will be indoctrinating more of our youth to vote for them. They will be turning a blind eye to non-citizens voting(and are promoting it in several states right now).

If you think the bump stock thing is bad and believe Trump should be punished with a vote against him - just wait for what is to be banned should the Dems gain control.

No 3rd party has a chance in the foreseeable future. Until both the Reps and Dems are weakened sufficiently, a 3rd party vote is for the party that you are likely trying to vote against. In this last presidential election Johnson votes were votes for Hillary, Stein votes were votes for Trump.

If you eventually want a 3rd party in office, at least secure SCOTUS with Constitutional Jurists first. One or two more seats on that court would be ideal.