2020 Presidential Election -- Biden v Trump: Sleepy Joe vs Dopey Don [Results begin on page 409]

[Texaspython 231]

15 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

Sure. This why I said the racism ha to be stamped out from conservative parties. Because you can’t get to issues until You get past that. And 92% of black people don’t think the same. Nor white people. Nor anyone else. 

Good luck with that. 

[Wulaw Horn 19147]

3 minutes ago, Texaspython said:

Good luck with that. 

Dude, if you noted from my post I said- so- not for a long time I’m afraid. 

[HRSchenker 2273]

For those of you who usually watch election coverage on TV, which station do you normally turn on? I'm an NBC guy. Just curious

https://www.strawpoll.me/20733539

[StassneyHorn 6635]

21 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Are you talking about her emails?

[Ghost of LL 15539]

39 minutes ago, StassneyHorn said:

The black vote as a monolith exists solely because of the actions of Republicans. They used to get 30% of the Black vote and then the Civil Rights movement happened followed up with the Southern Strategy.  It was deliberate, Republicans made a choice to not reach out and focus on racial politics in order to realign Southern Democrats. 
 

You will have a hard time having that block get over it when there are pictures, recordings, and videos of their past actions that will always exist. While they beat their chest about Lincoln freeing the slaves and being a Republican, you have voters today at Republican rallies waving Confederate flags and having rage reactions to confederate statues being removed. You cant circle that corner without fully addressing and admitting that mistake, and that comes at the cost of losing chunks of your base.

Not even talking about their voting behavior, Biden was right about the relative diversity of cultures and experiences.

Black people in America--with limited exception (as Biden noted)--have a shared experience.  They are descended from West Africans who were captured, forcibly transported to the Americas, held in slavery, and oppressed under Jim Crow.  

Hispanics in this country have a lot more diversity.  Hispanics generally don't have that same kind of shared experience.  Some are nearly full-blooded Iberian; a lot more are nearly full-blooded Native American.  A plurality is some blend.  Some come from countries that have had left-wing dictatorships (e.g., Cuba, Venezuela); others have had right-wing dictatorships (e.g., Argentina).  And some have been here before here was here--there are plenty of families in South Texas, New Mexico, and Southern California who have been in those locals going back to before the War with Mexico.  And, as one might expect from those divergent experiences, they have quite a lot more diversity in political opinion.

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11669]

1 minute ago, Ghost of LL said:

Not even talking about their voting behavior, Biden was right about the relative diversity of cultures and experiences.

Black people in America--with limited exception (as Biden noted)--have a shared experience.  They are descended from West Africans who were captured, forcibly transported to the Americas, held in slavery, and oppressed under Jim Crow.  

Hispanics in this country have a lot more diversity.  Hispanics generally don't have that same kind of shared experience.  Some are nearly full-blooded Iberian; a lot more are nearly full-blooded Native American.  A plurality is some blend.  Some come from countries that have had left-wing dictatorships (e.g., Cuba, Venezuela); others have had right-wing dictatorships (e.g., Argentina).  And some have been here before here was here--there are plenty of families in South Texas, New Mexico, and Southern California who have been in those locals going back to before the War with Mexico.  And, as one might expect from those divergent experiences, they have quite a lot more diversity in political opinion.

the left's equivalent of Dinesh D'Souza's Thighland defense.

[wildcat09 29377]

It will never not be hilarious seeing some idiots who haven't been here long call posters like GoLL part of the left.

[jimmyjazz 46111]

8 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

Not even talking about their voting behavior, Biden was right about the relative diversity of cultures and experiences.

Black people in America--with limited exception (as Biden noted)--have a shared experience.  They are descended from West Africans who were captured, forcibly transported to the Americas, held in slavery, and oppressed under Jim Crow.  

Hispanics in this country have a lot more diversity.  Hispanics generally don't have that same kind of shared experience.  Some are nearly full-blooded Iberian; a lot more are nearly full-blooded Native American.  A plurality is some blend.  Some come from countries that have had left-wing dictatorships (e.g., Cuba, Venezuela); others have had right-wing dictatorships (e.g., Argentina).  And some have been here before here was here--there are plenty of families in South Texas, New Mexico, and Southern California who have been in those locals going back to before the War with Mexico.  And, as one might expect from those divergent experiences, they have quite a lot more diversity in political opinion.

I think this is where we're supposed to call you a racist.

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11669]

*idiots who have been here for years, laughing at long known posters with long R bonafides who now support D candidates, who nonetheless are making stupid arguments.

[Ghost of LL 15539]

11 minutes ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

*idiots who have been here for years, laughing at long known posters with long R bonafides who now support D candidates, who nonetheless are making stupid arguments.

I'm not making an argument.  It's really a set of disjointed observations.

But regardless--what is "stupid" about what I wrote?

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11669]

Just now, Ghost of LL said:

I'm not making an argument.  It's really a set of disjointed observations.

But regardless--what is "stupid" about what I wrote?

doesn't seem worthy of argument whether 12% of the US population -- ancestrally arriving here in different centuries from different countries speaking different languages into different areas that treat them differently -- is sufficiently diverse.  the reason black appear monolithic is precisely because of their voting patterns, because one party treats them as garbage regardless of the diversity.

[Huckleberry 33080]

15 minutes ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

*idiots who have been here for years, laughing at long known posters with long R bonafides who now support D candidates, who nonetheless are making stupid arguments.

How is the argument stupid? 

I'm Hispanic and Latino, and he's right. My family heritage and history varies dramatically from other Latino American families. There is a much wider disparity in history for Latinos as a group versus Black Americans as a group. 

That is of course not to say that there aren't diverse backgrounds for Black Americans, only a relative statement. 

[tantric superman 4667]

8 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

I'm Hispanic and Latino, and he's right.

I read this and thought, is that like Country & Western?

 

[tantric superman 4667]

27 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Some are nearly full-blooded Iberian

As a dwarfish and swarthy mestizo, I hate these motherfuckers worse than cubans.

[Huckleberry 33080]

2 minutes ago, tantric superman said:

I read this and thought, is that like Country & Western?

 

It means my heritage is neither Brazilian nor Spanish. Well at least not recently Spanish. 

Edited August 7, 2020 by Huckleberry

[tantric superman 4667]

37 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

Hispanics in this country have a lot more diversity.  Hispanics generally don't have that same kind of shared experience.  Some are nearly full-blooded Iberian; a lot more are nearly full-blooded Native American.  A plurality is some blend.  Some come from countries that have had left-wing dictatorships (e.g., Cuba, Venezuela); others have had right-wing dictatorships (e.g., Argentina).  And some have been here before here was here--there are plenty of families in South Texas, New Mexico, and Southern California who have been in those locals going back to before the War with Mexico.  And, as one might expect from those divergent experiences, they have quite a lot more diversity in political opinion.

In essence, I think you're trying to say that every goddamn one of them (us) has their own El Guapo to deal with? 

[tantric superman 4667]

2 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

It means my heritage is neither Brazilian nor Spanish. Well at least not recently Spanish. 

Now I'm really confused.

[tantric superman 4667]

In any case, my only real beef with Biden is that he pronounces "Presidential" as "Preshedeshal".

[Gatorubet 30294]

As a dwarfish and swarthy mestizo, I hate these motherfuckers worse than cubans.

Not gonna lie.....I think Swarthy Mestizo is a much better username than Tantric Superman.

[Brandywine 1316]

2 hours ago, Ghost of LL said:

Not even talking about their voting behavior, Biden was right about the relative diversity of cultures and experiences.

Black people in America--with limited exception (as Biden noted)--have a shared experience.  They are descended from West Africans who were captured, forcibly transported to the Americas, held in slavery, and oppressed under Jim Crow.  

Hispanics in this country have a lot more diversity.  Hispanics generally don't have that same kind of shared experience.  Some are nearly full-blooded Iberian; a lot more are nearly full-blooded Native American.  A plurality is some blend.  Some come from countries that have had left-wing dictatorships (e.g., Cuba, Venezuela); others have had right-wing dictatorships (e.g., Argentina).  And some have been here before here was here--there are plenty of families in South Texas, New Mexico, and Southern California who have been in those locals going back to before the War with Mexico.  And, as one might expect from those divergent experiences, they have quite a lot more diversity in political opinion.

Now if we could just get Biden to say it like that, only simpler, without giving the Trump campaign fuel to use against him. 

[Anastasis 23481]

Good and thoughtful post Sydney, I'll try to respond.

2 hours ago, SydneyCarton said:

That's all well and good. But from your statement, even you agree that the house is one fire. So the question is do you attempt to put it out, or do you let it burn. It sounds like you're willing to let it burn. Well, ok, that's an ethos.

We should absolutely put it out.  When one of the parties nominates somebody who inspires me with their proposed solutions on how to do that, I'll vote for them. 

2 hours ago, SydneyCarton said:

I guess, what confuses me is why you're not basically presenting yourself as basically being an anarchist, or cheering for revolution. I believe I remember that you have children. What are your views on raising them in an environment like this? Are you concerned? Are you making plans to relocate elsewhere? If you want it to die, why aren't you actively working to hasten the fall of our systems? 

I would prefer a peaceful political revolution. As far as raising my children in this environment, the world is a challenging place. I try to teach them that, and provide them with the tools necessary to navigate it. No plans to relocate, but I would prefer a place in the hill country with some acreage and a pool right about now.

2 hours ago, SydneyCarton said:

Personal beliefs are personal beliefs. I'm not attacking or even criticizing them in this instance. I just don't understand an attitude of "You can't make me choose between bad choices." Yes, that's true. But some choices are clearly worse than others. But for an obviously intelligent individual, I fail to see what that is in this scenario other than a cop out.

Like I said, when one of the political candidates inspires me with their proposed solutions, I'll give them my vote. I thinking perpetuating a system that repeatedly forces two bad choices down our throat only encourages the behavior. If you think that's a cop out, I am fine with you feeling that way.

4 hours ago, SydneyCarton said:

Your standard move is to just shit on the system, and shit on both sides, and mock and imply stupidity to anyone who is trying, flailing maybe, but still trying to save something that at the very least, used to be a productive manner of governance. I think people here struggle with your stances and tactics at times because it's not really clear what you think in regards to any of the above questions in regards to family, ability to live a somewhat free life in the short and medium term, and if you're certain it's doomed, what are you doing about it for you and yours?

Both sides deserve to get shit on.  And I will grant you one side moreso than the other right now. I get the notion that "anybody other than Trump" appears to be less of a shit sandwich, but its still a shit sandwich. I think that the path to free living is a major overhaul of our domestic politics starting with the money, our foreign policy priorities, and our civil liberties.  I've shared my thoughts on those various topics many times. And given my thoughts on those topics, you should be able to understand quite easily why I give both sides shit. Show me the candidate who is aligned and actually demonstrates some conviction on those things, and they will most likely get my vote. I think that a functional political system should be based on voting for people who represent your worldview and will work to execute the policies that you believe are productive. I don't think that that is a reflection of personal integrity or whatever, I just think that that's how I will choose whether to vote for a candidate or not. 

[Pig Bellmont 8732]

1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

Both sides deserve to get shit on.

Time is a flat circle

[Voldemort86 2259]

The Trumpkins are having a fun day on predict-it. Most of the democrats advantages in swing state markets are dwindling. The comments are from idiotic Trump supporters clamoring for people to drag the markets down to 50/50!

is there something I’ve missed? We haven’t been given very many polls this week at all and those polls haven’t been bad for Biden. I see mainly Rasmussen polls which are Trump support polls or republican biased to boost his numbers, but that’s mainly it.

Edited August 7, 2020 by Voldemort86

[SydneyCarton 48154]

7 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Good and thoughtful post Sydney, I'll try to respond.

We should absolutely put it out.  When one of the parties nominates somebody who inspires me with their proposed solutions on how to do that, I'll vote for them. 

I would prefer a peaceful political revolution. As far as raising my children in this environment, the world is a challenging place. I try to teach them that, and provide them with the tools necessary to navigate it. No plans to relocate, but I would prefer a place in the hill country with some acreage and a pool right about now.

Like I said, when one of the political candidates inspires me with their proposed solutions, I'll give them my vote. I thinking perpetuating a system that repeatedly forces two bad choices down our throat only encourages the behavior. If you think that's a cop out, I am fine with you feeling that way.

Both sides deserve to get shit on.  And I will grant you one side moreso than the other right now. I get the notion that "anybody other than Trump" appears to be less of a shit sandwich, but its still a shit sandwich. I think that the path to free living is a major overhaul of our domestic politics starting with the money, our foreign policy priorities, and our civil liberties.  I've shared my thoughts on those various topics many times. And given my thoughts on those topics, you should be able to understand quite easily why I give both sides shit. Show me the candidate who is aligned and actually demonstrates some conviction on those things, and they will most likely get my vote. I think that a functional political system should be based on voting for people who represent your worldview and will work to execute the policies that you believe are productive. I don't think that that is a reflection of personal integrity or whatever, I just think that that's how I will choose whether to vote for a candidate or not. 

I appreciate that thoughtful response. And most of what you've said I generally agree with. I'm a relative newcomer to the Cloak Room, a few months. But here's where I think the disconnect still exists, even after your post. I agree with everything you've said. Your first post agrees that the fire should be put out. But the rest of your post a couple times basically says someone needs to Wow you to get a vote. Is it that we're talking about different fires? Because while I'm perfectly happy shitting on both sides, shitting on both parties, shitting on everyone that got us here, at the end of the day, there is an actual election upcoming and picking one versus the other is a choice between having a CHANCE to rebuild and live in a democracy, and the other the destruction of one. A vote for one side that might buy us time. Or allow for another politician that comes along and wows you. Or for younger people to step up and promote change while a bunch old voters die off and power shifts to allow for change. And one vote, or even a lack of a vote at all, works to eliminate all of those potential options. 

Outside of the day to day clear and present danger Trump represents (to what degree depends on how anyone feels about them personally), I suppose I view Biden as a chance for change TO happen. I suppose I don't view it as perpetuating a bad system, although I can see that viewpoint. In this instance, THIS INSTANCE alone, the choice to me seems much closer to all of us, not as much supporting a flawed system (it's so flawed) instead it's simple survival. I didn't vote in 2016 as a protest of the available candidates. I voted and left the top of the ticket blank. And again, if survival is something to which one is relatively indifferent, well, again, that's an ethos. But that doesn't sound like quite where you are either. 

[SydneyCarton 48154]

5 minutes ago, Voldemort86 said:

The Trumpkins are having a fun day on predict-it. Most of the democrats advantages in swing state markets are dwindling. The comments are from idiotic Trump supporters clamoring for people to drag the markets down to 50/50!

is there something I’ve missed? We haven’t been given very many polls this week at all and those polls haven’t been bad for Biden. I see mainly Rasmussen polls which are Trump support polls or republican biased to boost his numbers, but that’s mainly it.

Someone posted a link or an article somewhere on the Cloak Room today that basically said there's a sort of polling desert at this time of the year, and most of the polls that are released are all online or robo call and tend to lean GOP. 

[Anastasis 23481]

7 minutes ago, Voldemort86 said:

The Trumpkins are having a fun day on predict-it. Most of the democrats advantages in swing state markets are dwindling. The comments are from idiotic Trump supporters clamoring for people to drag the markets down to 50/50!

is there something I’ve missed? We haven’t been given very many polls this week at all and those polls haven’t been bad for Biden. I see mainly Rasmussen polls which are Trump support polls or republican biased to boost his numbers, but that’s mainly it.

Lots of easy money to be made off some of the people on predictit.  Worth the price of admission for the comment section. 

[Michael Knight 12994]

Biden is hopefully a return to normalcy . As flawed as that normalcy was it's fucking utopia compared to our current hellscape

[Brandywine 1316]

6 minutes ago, Voldemort86 said:

The Trumpkins are having a fun day on predict-it. Most of the democrats advantages in swing state markets are dwindling. The comments are from idiotic Trump supporters clamoring for people to drag the markets down to 50/50!

is there something I’ve missed? We haven’t been given very many polls this week at all and those polls haven’t been bad for Biden. I see mainly Rasmussen polls which are Trump support polls or republican biased to boost his numbers, but that’s mainly it.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/president/
 

Trump knows the only way he’s going to win is the EC. I can’t believe he will get the popular vote. Yet, he hasn’t grown voters beyond his base. I don’t understand his Campaign strategy beyond bullying and belittling. Plus, he has given no vision for a second term beyond same o, same o. 

[Biff Tannen 45715]

26 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

5 hours ago, SydneyCarton said:

 

We should absolutely put it out.  When one of the parties nominates somebody who inspires me with their proposed solutions on how to do that, I'll vote for them. 

[Wulaw Horn 19147]

34 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

 I think that a functional political system should be based on voting for people who represent your worldview and will work to execute the policies that you believe are productive. I don't think that that is a reflection of personal integrity or whatever, I just think that that's how I will choose whether to vote for a candidate or not. 

Yep. That’s really well said in my opinion. It’s why I’ve always vacillated between GOP, third party or no vote in every election I’ve been old enough to participate in. 
the Dems managed to nominate “Not Trump/Not Hillary”. Good for them. That’s a winning strategy I’m sure. But just because they managed to nominate “Not Trump/Hillary” doesn’t mean I or anyone else needs to vote for them. 
as for this childish and absurd belief that a “vote for someone other than trump is a vote for Trump” that’s nonsense. You could just as easily argue that’s a vote for Biden and be just as absurdly wrong, but yeah- the idea of as laid out by how you described it is how I conceptualize it as well. 

[jimmyjazz 46111]

If a patient presents to their cardiologist with significant blockage in 4 arteries, they are likely to be immediately taken to the operating room.  The doctor doesn't say "well,  what you need to do is improve your diet, get off your fat ass, and take these statin drugs and then we'll talk about surgery down the road" when it is likely that the patient will die in the near term.

Joe Biden is bypass surgery.  It carries all kinds of risks and negative consequences, too, but sometimes that's the only choice.

[The Dog 44133]

13 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

as for this childish and absurd belief that a “vote for someone other than trump is a vote for Trump” that’s nonsense. You could just as easily argue that’s a vote for Biden and be just as absurdly wrong, but yeah- the idea of as laid out by how you described it is how I conceptualize it as well. 

I've never understood that either. It's a blindly one-sided view.

It's only a vote for Trump if you otherwise would have voted for the Democratic candidate. If you normally would have voted for the Republican candidate then it's a vote for the Democratic candidate if you vote third party. 

 

[Wulaw Horn 19147]

4 minutes ago, The Dog said:

I've never understood that either. It's a blindly one-sided view.

It's only a vote for Trump if you otherwise would have voted for the Democratic candidate. If you normally would have voted for the Republican candidate then it's a vote for the Democratic candidate if you vote third party. 

 

Yessir. 

[totallynotabuttpirate 5403]

5 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

If a patient presents to their cardiologist with significant blockage in 4 arteries, they are likely to be immediately taken to the operating room.  The doctor doesn't say "well,  what you need to do is improve your diet, get off your fat ass, and take these statin drugs and then we'll talk about surgery down the road" when it is likely that the patient will die in the near term.

Joe Biden is bypass surgery.  It carries all kinds of risks and negative consequences, too, but sometimes that's the only choice.

Anastasis would probably decline surgery and wait for a new treatment to be invented. 

[workswithseed 2110]

1 hour ago, Pig Bellmont said:

Time is a flat circle

What if there's shit on it?

[Tuco 5077]

Yep. That’s really well said in my opinion. It’s why I’ve always vacillated between GOP, third party or no vote in every election I’ve been old enough to participate in. 
the Dems managed to nominate “Not Trump/Not Hillary”. Good for them. That’s a winning strategy I’m sure. But just because they managed to nominate “Not Trump/Hillary” doesn’t mean I or anyone else needs to vote for them. 
as for this childish and absurd belief that a “vote for someone other than trump is a vote for Trump” that’s nonsense. You could just as easily argue that’s a vote for Biden and be just as absurdly wrong, but yeah- the idea of as laid out by how you described it is how I conceptualize it as well. 

Not voting or voting 3rd party is being neutral after seeing 4 years of Trump’s presidency and being confronted with the possibility of another 4 years. Being neutral in that situation makes you a shitty person.

[Anastasis 23481]

55 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

If a patient presents to their cardiologist with significant blockage in 4 arteries, they are likely to be immediately taken to the operating room.  The doctor doesn't say "well,  what you need to do is improve your diet, get off your fat ass, and take these statin drugs and then we'll talk about surgery down the road" when it is likely that the patient will die in the near term.

Joe Biden is bypass surgery.  It carries all kinds of risks and negative consequences, too, but sometimes that's the only choice.

What if Joe Biden is the cardiologist that is being tasked to do the procedure?

"What the hell Jimmy, let's give this a shot once I figure out this mask!"

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

1 hour ago, workswithseed said:

What if there's shit on it?

Have you ever changed a diaper?

There's shit and then there's shit. Now Trump, he is a meconium poop and there's just no comparison really.

[workswithseed 2110]

19 minutes ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

Have you ever changed a diaper?

There's shit and then there's shit. Now Trump, he is a meconium poop and there's just no comparison really.

Thanks for the new word. I didn't know we actually had a word for shit in the beginning of life.

[JimmyJames 12271]

Anyone who doesn’t vote for Biden is effectively supporting trump and the destruction of this formerly great country and all the high minded posts on this board attempting to justify that decision is just a steaming pile of crap. 

[JimmyJames 12271]

2 hours ago, Pig Bellmont said:

Time is a flat circle

I will vote for a candidate when I am finally inspired, and not one minute before that. 

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

Yes! (and you're welcome). Parenting is not something everyone chooses, but if one does, there will be poop.

Edited August 7, 2020 by Mrs Whiggins
Oops, sorry-replying to @workswithseed

[Superhero 8834]

11 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

I will vote for a candidate when I am finally inspired, and not one minute before that. 

I'm not particularly excited about Joe, but at this point, he's the lesser of two weevils.

 

[formermav43 4606]

36 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

Anyone who doesn’t vote for Biden is effectively supporting trump and the destruction of this formerly great country and all the high minded posts on this board attempting to justify that decision is just a steaming pile of crap. 

Well I’m sure that original argument will persuade them.

[Grade of D as in David 13253]

2 hours ago, Wulaw Horn said:

Yep. That’s really well said in my opinion. It’s why I’ve always vacillated between GOP, third party or no vote in every election I’ve been old enough to participate in. 
the Dems managed to nominate “Not Trump/Not Hillary”. Good for them. That’s a winning strategy I’m sure. But just because they managed to nominate “Not Trump/Hillary” doesn’t mean I or anyone else needs to vote for them. 
as for this childish and absurd belief that a “vote for someone other than trump is a vote for Trump” that’s nonsense. You could just as easily argue that’s a vote for Biden and be just as absurdly wrong, but yeah- the idea of as laid out by how you described it is how I conceptualize it as well. 

 

2 hours ago, The Dog said:

I've never understood that either. It's a blindly one-sided view.

It's only a vote for Trump if you otherwise would have voted for the Democratic candidate. If you normally would have voted for the Republican candidate then it's a vote for the Democratic candidate if you vote third party. 

 

 

2 hours ago, Wulaw Horn said:

Yessir. 

You guys would root for Tulsa late in the season when we need OSU to beat ou so the Horns could backdoor into the big 12 championship game.

 

[JimmyJames 12271]

5 minutes ago, formermav43 said:

Well I’m sure that original argument will persuade them.

I’m not trying to persuade anyone who would ever consider helping trump win this election. They can go to hell. And if trump wins and therefore the country goes to shit they can look in the mirror.

[Dahobbs 17676]

2 hours ago, Tuco said:

Not voting or voting 3rd party is being neutral after seeing 4 years of Trump’s presidency and being confronted with the possibility of another 4 years. Being neutral in that situation makes you a shitty person.

In the past, I would have agreed with @Anastasis. In fact, I'll admit to expressing some of the same opinions. Not this time, not this election. 

[SilasCoade 2622]

3 hours ago, The Dog said:

I've never understood that either. It's a blindly one-sided view.

It's only a vote for Trump if you otherwise would have voted for the Democratic candidate. If you normally would have voted for the Republican candidate then it's a vote for the Democratic candidate if you vote third party. 

 

No matter how many names end up on the official ballot, there are only two possible outcomes in this election. Trump will win or Biden will win. No other possibilities have even the most remote chance of occurring. 

You can therefore frame the decision as a choice between change or no change. Voting for a third option is a vote for no change because that option can never happen. You either vote for change or more of the same. 

[pantone159 719]

4 minutes ago, Llogg said:

Voting for a third option is a vote for no change because that option can never happen. You either vote for change or more of the same. 

Voting for a third party is the same effect as just not voting at all. It isn't a vote against anyone. Yes, in this election, third party means that you are not voting AGAINST Trump but it isnt like you are voting FOR him.

[SilasCoade 2622]

2 minutes ago, pantone159 said:

Voting for a third party is the same effect as just not voting at all. It isn't a vote against anyone. Yes, in this election, third party means that you are not voting AGAINST Trump but it isnt like you are voting FOR him.

You're actively choosing not to support him, implying dissatisfaction with the status quo. Any action other than voting for Biden supports maintain the status quo. Not voting or citing for a throw away candidate is doing nothing to effect change. If you choose not to decide you still have made a choice.