Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

BillZBubb

(10,650 posts)
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 10:45 AM Mar 2016

My answer to those who say they will vote according to their "progressive principles"

Good for you. We actually need people to act based on progressive principles.

Let your judgment and conscience determine your vote. If the lesser of two evils is your choice, go for it. If a third party alternative is your choice, go for it. If staying home is your choice, I would hope you consider down ballot candidates before doing so, but again it is your choice.

45 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
My answer to those who say they will vote according to their "progressive principles" (Original Post) BillZBubb Mar 2016 OP
Thanks! astrophuss42 Mar 2016 #1
Thank You For An Honest Perspective cantbeserious Mar 2016 #2
If you choose is to help Trump become president by voting third party, you are not a progressive. DanTex Mar 2016 #3
That's a big leap in logic to make the "help Trump" claim. BillZBubb Mar 2016 #5
It's very simple. "You can't be neutral on a moving train" --Howard Zinn. DanTex Mar 2016 #7
Insisiting people vote for a DLCer... Buddyblazon Mar 2016 #10
Anyone who doesn't vote for the Dem nominee is not a progressive. Not even close. DanTex Mar 2016 #14
If you're willing to vote for a DLCer... Buddyblazon Mar 2016 #16
If you can't tell the difference between Hillary and Trump, and see that Hillary is better DanTex Mar 2016 #20
You're willing to vote for a DLCer... Buddyblazon Mar 2016 #23
This is not simple. That's your problem. BillZBubb Mar 2016 #24
It's a winner-take-all two party system, not a proportional allocation system. DanTex Mar 2016 #26
You totally dismiss the solid red/solid blue state scenario. BillZBubb Mar 2016 #30
I hope you'll edit your OP to make sure that readers understand that unless they live in a DanTex Mar 2016 #32
I disagree with what you said here. BillZBubb Mar 2016 #43
Bullshit SheenaR Mar 2016 #17
Yes, you're supposed to vote for someone to keep someone else from winning. DanTex Mar 2016 #22
Apples and oranges SheenaR Mar 2016 #28
In terms of outcomes, it's identical. DanTex Mar 2016 #29
When you get elected SheenaR Mar 2016 #33
If you choose to help Trump become president by voting for Clinton, you are not rhett o rick Mar 2016 #35
I don't agree. I am want our government to be more progressive. upaloopa Mar 2016 #4
Voting for the lesser of two evils also does nothing to forward the cause. BillZBubb Mar 2016 #8
Yeah? Buddyblazon Mar 2016 #15
So you would tell the frog in the pot with the temperature increasing to just sit rhett o rick Mar 2016 #36
I honestly don't see how staying home and disengaging can fall under progressive principles. Gidney N Cloyd Mar 2016 #6
Vote for what though? BillZBubb Mar 2016 #9
It also may not be viewed as a protest by those not voting in that one case. revbones Mar 2016 #13
To those observing you, not voting at all is indistinguishable from not caring enough to bother. Gidney N Cloyd Mar 2016 #34
Good point. BillZBubb Mar 2016 #42
There is a solution. VulgarPoet Mar 2016 #11
Agreed. nt revbones Mar 2016 #12
Millions of people in this country can't vote or are discouraged by voter suppression laws or rhett o rick Mar 2016 #37
"I'll show those crooks! I'm going to BURN my money so they can't steal it from me!" Gidney N Cloyd Mar 2016 #40
Kicked and effing Rec'd n/t SheenaR Mar 2016 #18
Appreciate the respectful tone of the post. EndElectoral Mar 2016 #19
Many millennials I know will vote Jill Stein if Bernie isn't the nominee because of climate change riderinthestorm Mar 2016 #21
If climate change is your highest priority, neither major party is offering much to you. BillZBubb Mar 2016 #25
I know. riderinthestorm Mar 2016 #31
My grandson (21) is adamant that he will not vote for Hillary. djean111 Mar 2016 #27
Question: Why are non-Democrats even allowed to be here on **Democratic** Underground? Liberal_Stalwart71 Mar 2016 #38
I changed my registration to Dem to vote for Bernie Arazi Mar 2016 #41
I think (and hope) you are mistaken. BillZBubb Mar 2016 #44
Those standing in line that never get to vote would point out that getting rhett o rick Mar 2016 #39
Agree with you. Thanks. closeupready Mar 2016 #45

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
3. If you choose is to help Trump become president by voting third party, you are not a progressive.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 10:51 AM
Mar 2016

Nor are you principled.

BillZBubb

(10,650 posts)
5. That's a big leap in logic to make the "help Trump" claim.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 10:55 AM
Mar 2016

But nice try with the fear mongering Danny.

 

Buddyblazon

(3,014 posts)
10. Insisiting people vote for a DLCer...
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 11:00 AM
Mar 2016

makes them not progressives. And I don't take political advice from non-progressives.

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
14. Anyone who doesn't vote for the Dem nominee is not a progressive. Not even close.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 11:04 AM
Mar 2016

They are Donald Trump enablers, pure and simpler.

 

Buddyblazon

(3,014 posts)
16. If you're willing to vote for a DLCer...
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 11:06 AM
Mar 2016

You're not a progressive. You may be a democrat. But you aren't a progressive.

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
20. If you can't tell the difference between Hillary and Trump, and see that Hillary is better
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 11:08 AM
Mar 2016

by miles, then you are not a progressive.

 

Buddyblazon

(3,014 posts)
23. You're willing to vote for a DLCer...
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 11:11 AM
Mar 2016

You are a democrat. You are not a progressive. Learn the difference. I'm a progressive. You are a democrat. You go vote for your democratic candidate and I'll go vote for my progressive candidate.

BillZBubb

(10,650 posts)
24. This is not simple. That's your problem.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 11:15 AM
Mar 2016

A progressive should have no problem policy wise voting to support Jill Stein. Does that mean the progressive is supporting Trump? Do you really believe that?

Also, if you live in a solid blue or solid red state, not voting for Hillary isn't going to make any difference in the outcome. So, all the fear, fear, fear guilt tripping is just not credible or particularly appealing.

Progressives have options on how to use there right to vote and should do so as they see fit without being browbeaten by supporters of any particular candidate. It's called freedom.

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
26. It's a winner-take-all two party system, not a proportional allocation system.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 11:19 AM
Mar 2016

Any vote other than D or R is wasted. In a parliamentary system, I'd say go for it. But there are only two choices.

BillZBubb

(10,650 posts)
30. You totally dismiss the solid red/solid blue state scenario.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 11:24 AM
Mar 2016

We have a winner take all electoral vote system by state (with a few exceptions). We have a number of states that are guaranteed to go for either the Democratic or republican candidate.

In those cases a vote other than D or R is not wasted at all. It can be put to good use supporting a more progressive candidate.

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
32. I hope you'll edit your OP to make sure that readers understand that unless they live in a
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 11:26 AM
Mar 2016

state where the outcome is a foregone conclusion, doing anything but voting D is utter right-wing enabling idiocy.

BillZBubb

(10,650 posts)
43. I disagree with what you said here.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 02:27 PM
Mar 2016

I merely pointed out you totally ignored one major scenario. Glad we agree on at least that.

SheenaR

(2,052 posts)
17. Bullshit
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 11:06 AM
Mar 2016

I am supposed to vote for someone to keep someone else from winning? That's where we are at in our Republic? Eff that. If the potential nominee was worth anything, nobody would even be discussing voting for the "progressive" candidates.

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
22. Yes, you're supposed to vote for someone to keep someone else from winning.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 11:10 AM
Mar 2016

Because if you don't, then the other person wins, and bad things happen.

If there were a ballot proposition saying "12 million people will be deported" would you vote, yes, no, or abstain?

SheenaR

(2,052 posts)
28. Apples and oranges
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 11:22 AM
Mar 2016

I would vote no on that proposition

If my choices were 1) Bad, 2) Bad, 3) In line with my views but may not win. I am voting for #3 every time. I am not compromising my views so that I can keep #1 or #2 from winning.

I'm sorry. I vote FOR something. Not against something. If your candidate was as glorious as you all claim, I'd be on board and so would all of the others like me. Other than social issues (which she just came around to), she is John Kasich. I'm not with that at all. You wouldn't need to worry about Trump winning if she was as unbelievable as you all claim. She would win easily.

She's not though. And now you all will spend 7 months trying to guilt us or scare us into voting for her.

- Lifelong Democrat with a Captial D

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
29. In terms of outcomes, it's identical.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 11:23 AM
Mar 2016

There are only two choices: D or R. Any other choice is effectively a non-vote.

SheenaR

(2,052 posts)
33. When you get elected
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 11:31 AM
Mar 2016

to the position of "Supreme Commander of Who People Can Vote For", I'll take your position more seriously.

We will get what we deserve in this election.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
35. If you choose to help Trump become president by voting for Clinton, you are not
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 11:36 AM
Mar 2016

a progressive. But I guess if you support Clinton you are not a progressive. If you support the Ruling Class you aren't a progressive. If you support continued wars, fracking, the TPP, ending Prisons For Profits, etc., you are not a progressive.

upaloopa

(11,417 posts)
4. I don't agree. I am want our government to be more progressive.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 10:54 AM
Mar 2016

It takes people being pro active to get there. If we sit out an election because the candidates are not progressive enough we let the other side get a deeper hold thus putting us back.

Sitting on your principles does nothing to forward the cause.

BillZBubb

(10,650 posts)
8. Voting for the lesser of two evils also does nothing to forward the cause.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 10:57 AM
Mar 2016

But as I said, each individual has to make their own decision. Your point is valid to you and many others and I respect that. However, I disagree.

 

Buddyblazon

(3,014 posts)
15. Yeah?
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 11:05 AM
Mar 2016

I feel like helping putting someone in office that I would have to hold my nose to vote for is perpetuating crap candidates. I'd rather deal with an asshole in office for four years so my party finally gets it that we don't want milquetoast candidates. We want progress. Not this same old rehashed crap.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
36. So you would tell the frog in the pot with the temperature increasing to just sit
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 11:46 AM
Mar 2016

it out. Suffer the status quo until your boiled. Pretend that the status quo isn't literally killing people, not rich people, but troops that The Ruling Class send into battle (Iraq) for profits for the Ruling Class, 6 children out of every 1,000 live births die from lack of proper health care in the status quo USofA. 16 million American children living in poverty and another 16 million living in low income homes that we are to ignore and vote for The Ruling Class.

We most likely have passed the tipping point of returning our democracy and/or having healthy working and middle classes, but we will not go into the night, as you suggest, without a fight.

And another thing. Look at what's happening in AZ and they are not the only state. Millions of people in this country are not allowed to vote or forced to go thru terrible hoops to vote because of the status quo that you support.

It takes a lot of nerve to demand that people participate in a process that is rigged.

Gidney N Cloyd

(19,781 posts)
6. I honestly don't see how staying home and disengaging can fall under progressive principles.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 10:56 AM
Mar 2016

In my opinion being progressive means actively seeking solutions and the minimum you can do in that regard is get off your duff and vote.

 

revbones

(3,660 posts)
13. It also may not be viewed as a protest by those not voting in that one case.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 11:04 AM
Mar 2016

Some may just view both possibilities as so distasteful, that they cannot participate in such a choice.

I think most people that are saying they'd have issues with Hillary in the general, are still planning on voting for downticket races. At least that's the impression I got.

Gidney N Cloyd

(19,781 posts)
34. To those observing you, not voting at all is indistinguishable from not caring enough to bother.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 11:34 AM
Mar 2016

If you at least show up and vote in down ticket races your undervote tells party heads "my vote and I were right there in the polling place. You could have had it but you didn't earn it." Staying home tells them there's probably nothing they could have done to get you to vote so they'll focus on the people who CAN be stirred to vote.

VulgarPoet

(2,872 posts)
11. There is a solution.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 11:00 AM
Mar 2016

Just seems a large contingent of this site either operates off fear or the need to browbeat their common man.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
37. Millions of people in this country can't vote or are discouraged by voter suppression laws or
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 11:48 AM
Mar 2016

disenfranchisement and you think the problem is staying home. The whole voting process is horrible and rigged by the same Ruling Class that Clinton supports.

 

riderinthestorm

(23,272 posts)
21. Many millennials I know will vote Jill Stein if Bernie isn't the nominee because of climate change
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 11:09 AM
Mar 2016

They feel so strongly that the fate of the planet is in its 11th hour. They can't in good conscience vote for any candidate with tepid proposals.

In 10 years they want to say they tried.

Honestly its probably the most pure progressive stance I've encountered and I have no counter,

BillZBubb

(10,650 posts)
25. If climate change is your highest priority, neither major party is offering much to you.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 11:18 AM
Mar 2016

The Democrats should be, but the tentacles of big energy enwrap them as well.

 

riderinthestorm

(23,272 posts)
31. I know.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 11:25 AM
Mar 2016

My daughter said it won't matter in 10.years whose on the Supreme Court if fracking has destroyed our aquifer and we have no water.

She did vote for Bernie in the primary but her compelling issue is climate change and will vote for Stein in the GE.

 

djean111

(14,255 posts)
27. My grandson (21) is adamant that he will not vote for Hillary.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 11:21 AM
Mar 2016

He will not be complicit in war and fracking, etc. He did agree that the down-ticket races are important, so he will vote in them.

 

Liberal_Stalwart71

(20,450 posts)
38. Question: Why are non-Democrats even allowed to be here on **Democratic** Underground?
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 11:51 AM
Mar 2016

Any so-called Democrat vowing to stay home or vote Third Party should not be allowed to participate on a forum devoted to Democrats. That is a clear violation of the TOS. Or, am I mistaken after all these years of being here?

BillZBubb

(10,650 posts)
44. I think (and hope) you are mistaken.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 02:34 PM
Mar 2016

For instance if someone here decides not to vote for the Democrat at the top of the ticket but will vote for all the down ticket Democrats, should that person be banned?

I think anyone actively backing a republican candidate should be excluded, but that's about the limit.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
39. Those standing in line that never get to vote would point out that getting
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 11:52 AM
Mar 2016

people to the polls is a small part of the problem.

I would point out that even getting to the polls where the votes are counted by machines controlled by the Wealthy Ruling Class, is only pretending we have a democracy.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»My answer to those who sa...