Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Subscriber Suzianne
    Misfit Queen
    03 Mar '16 10:02
    Welcome to the Unofficial RHP Voting Poll.

    I'm asking for Americans to respond here with their choice for President. Democrat or Republican, doesn't matter. Let's try to keep the voting to people who are still in the race. I'm only asking for Americans to vote, since hey, let's face it, if you're not an American citizen, you're not going to be voting in an American election. I'm just trying to get some numbers among likely American voters among RHP members, just for grins and just to satisfy my own curiosity.

    So let's try to keep this to the likely American voters. I realize no party has yet made their choice for nominees, so let's also keep this open to any candidate still in the race for the White House. Let's also try to not let this devolve into a bunch of bickering over political football issues, I just wanna know who you'd vote for were the election today, and perhaps your reasons why.

    Right now, at this particular moment in time, who is your choice for President of the US, among candidates still in the race? Who would you vote for, if the election were today?

    I'll go first. As a registered Democrat, my vote has to go to Bernie Sanders, yes, even over Hillary Clinton. I'm a Liberal, and a strong one at that. Bernie has been pushing for many of my pet issues, including higher taxation of the 1% and free college education for all, as well as single-payer healthcare. I cannot, in all conscience, choose Hillary over Bernie, even though before Bernie entered the race, I was a Hillary supporter. I have to go with my gut, and so my vote goes to Bernie Sanders.
  2. Subscriber Suzianne
    Misfit Queen
    03 Mar '16 10:40
    And yes, yes, I know, Bernie doesn't seem to be doing as well as I'd hoped, but he did say a day or so ago that he was in it 'til the end, which I assume means the convention. We'll see. If he does drop out, of course I would support the Democratic nominee, and yeah, that means Hillary. There's too much at stake in this election (a Supreme Court vacancy is just one issue) to go jumping parties now, and I'm also convinced that any vote for another liberal party is a wasted vote (I learned this lesson voting for Ralph Nader and the Green Party in 2000).
  3. 03 Mar '16 11:34
    TRUMP
  4. Subscriber Sleepyguy
    Reepy Rastardly Guy
    03 Mar '16 11:45
    Cruz
  5. 03 Mar '16 12:26
    Of the 5 or so still standing (or is it 2, realistically?) whichever Democrat is nominated. We need an adult.

    The Republicans are screwing themselves.
  6. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    03 Mar '16 13:14 / 1 edit
    Kasich, though I'll vote for Rubio (if he's still in it when NY votes) because Kasich has no chance to win.
  7. 03 Mar '16 13:55 / 1 edit
    Cruz.

    I think Trump was sent to stop Cruz. Trump knows, as all Progressives know, there is a very anti-establishment sentiment after the 8 years of lies from Obama and a pandering press propping him up. They know they have lost all credibility. This is perfect for Cruz because he has spent a life time of standing up to the establishment, in fact, often standing alone to do so.

    So now Trump comes in and pretends to be anti-establishment, even though as recently as 2012 he was singing the praises of Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State and said he wished she would run for President.

    Shrug, it worked. People really believe that the press and establishment oppose Trump.

    However, notice at each debate Trump was front and center. The press talks about him 24/7 and in each debate ignore pretty much everyone else. Trump brings them ratings and he has all progressive policies, except maybe building a wall which the Pope says he is going to hell for.

    If the truth be known, this is how the press treats those whom they hate. They just ignore you like they did Ron Paul last election.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtDJ6Ay4QMw
  8. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    It's only business
    03 Mar '16 15:22
    Sanders or Clinton either one
  9. 03 Mar '16 15:32
    Originally posted by whodey
    However, notice at each debate Trump was front and center. The press talks about him 24/7 and in each debate ignore pretty much everyone else.
    A nasty side effect of a media system that thrives on negatives is that the worst people are some of the best known. Osama Bin Laden is probably one of the best known names globally. Even Obama would not be known nearly so well if it wasn't for the fact that so many republicans hate him. His name would hardly ever come up in this forum if it wasn't for the fact that whodey feels the compulsive need to mention his name at every opportunity and in between opportunities.

    A nasty side effect of a culture based on the media is that merely getting media coverage gets you votes. I know next to nothing about Rubio or Cruz. I know Clinton is the wife of Bill Clinton and that she had an email server once, but other than that I don't know a lot about her. The candidates I know best are Trump and Bernie.

    Of course if I was a voter I would actually do a bit of research before going out and voting, but my impressions from the media would probably still have a strong effect.

    How could this be solved?
    1. Proportional representation would make the individual at the top less important.
    2. Voting more on policies and less focus on personalities would have a big effect.
  10. Standard member vivify
    rain
    03 Mar '16 16:15
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    A nasty side effect of a media system that thrives on negatives is that the worst people are some of the best known. Osama Bin Laden is probably one of the best known names globally. Even Obama would not be known nearly so well if it wasn't for the fact that so many republicans hate him. His name would hardly ever come up in this forum if it wasn't for t ...[text shortened]... important.
    2. Voting more on policies and less focus on personalities would have a big effect.
    Media is all about ratings. The media doesn't determine who or what gets the most air time, the interests of the people do. Controversy, mud-slinging and other such stupidity getting the most coverage is a reflection of the American people. If the media decided to start responsibly covering elections, ratings would drop and media outlets would lose business.

    Electing a competent official requires investigation, rationale discussion of issues, and other things that bore Americans. This is why elections being a media circus will never change, and why someone like Trump can be a top contender for the highest office in the U.S.
  11. Donation mwmiller
    RHP Member No.16
    03 Mar '16 16:20
    Reagan. I know, he's dead, but even dead he looks better than anything I see being offered for this one!

    Sorry, the devil made me do that.
  12. 03 Mar '16 16:26
    Originally posted by whodey
    Cruz.

    I think Trump was sent to stop Cruz. Trump knows, as all Progressives know, there is a very anti-establishment sentiment after the 8 years of lies from Obama and a pandering press propping him up. They know they have lost all credibility. This is perfect for Cruz because he has spent a life time of standing up to the establishment, in fact, often ...[text shortened]... ignore you like they did Ron Paul last election.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtDJ6Ay4QMw
    Yeah, Cruz spent a lifetime standing up to the GOP establishment, like when he joined the GWB campaign in 1999.
  13. 03 Mar '16 16:28
    Originally posted by vivify
    Media is all about ratings. The media doesn't determine who or what gets the most air time, the interests of the people do. Controversy, mud-slinging and other such stupidity getting the most coverage is a reflection of the American people. If the media decided to start responsibly covering elections, ratings would drop and media outlets would lose business.
    I assume that you mean that if some outlets but not others started covering elections responsibly.

    I am however not convinced. I strongly suspect that there is an issue of perceived interest and media culture going on. ie the media decides what they think people want to watch but it often does not reflect what they do want to watch. Quite often what people do want to watch simply isn't available. Here in SA for example there isn't a whole lot of choice. And when I have had access to satellite TV with a variety of channels they have almost all been pretty much rubbish. If you measure which channel I watched the most it really wouldn't reflect my interests.

    The election is very similar in that you are given at this stage maybe 5 or six viable candidates from two viable parties. Most people choose the person they dislike the least. But if you think that the people who vote for Clinton actually think she is the best possible president then you are way off the mark.

    This is why elections being a media circus will never change, and why someone like Trump can be a top contender for the highest office in the U.S.
    Yet other countries seem to do much better. It seems to me that part of the problem is the ingrained believe common in the US that they cannot ever change. I suspect that Bernie would have a lot more supporters if it wasn't for the fact that so many people simply assume that becoming more European like is impossible for the US so they give up before even trying.
  14. 03 Mar '16 16:30
    I actually stopped watching TV about three years ago and got rid of my TV two years ago. YouTube and other internet sources give me a much wider range of content, but even that does not match my tastes exactly. Certainly any claims that TV is tailored to what I want to watch is absolute nonsense.
  15. 03 Mar '16 19:23
    Originally posted by whodey
    Cruz.

    I think Trump was sent to stop Cruz. Trump knows, as all Progressives know, there is a very anti-establishment sentiment after the 8 years of lies from Obama and a pandering press propping him up. They know they have lost all credibility. This is perfect for Cruz because he has spent a life time of standing up to the establishment, in fact, often ...[text shortened]... ignore you like they did Ron Paul last election.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtDJ6Ay4QMw
    " there is a very anti-establishment sentiment after the 8 years of lies from Obama "

    Your Obamaphobia is slanting how you see things. The primary reason for the anti-establishment movement in the GOP is about lies, but it is the lies of Republicans -- claims by Republican establishment types about what about they will do when elected, compared to what they've accomplished.Now Trump comes in and promises to build a wall paid for by Mexico and deport 11 million people. AND THEY BELIEVE IT.