Mulling my primary vote

[Ombligo]

pdq wrote:
I generally agree - vote your conscience. But if your choice doesn't end up as the nominee, please don't sulk and stay home in the general.

Unless your in the GOP (jk... if you don't vote, then don't complain)

[$tevie]

I'm voting for Sanders. I do NOT believe that if he is nominated the GOP will win. And if he's not nominated, I can certainly live with Clinton. But hopefully it will be a Clinton who just squeaked through and has to consider what that means for her as she plans her first term goals.

[SteveG]

Ted King wrote:
Mulling my primary vote

If your candidate loses, I hope we won't have to listen to some 'mulled whine'.



(Sorry, I really am sorry...but it had to be said, ya'know?)

[Onamuji]

Ted King wrote:
I think what H. Clinton wants to do is get to what is functionally universal health care by means of expanding the ACA. Of course, that still leaves a large chunk of money for health care flowing through private health care insurers.

Clinton is a status quo candidate.

What she wants is her own presidential library.

She's better than any of the republican candidates, but there's no hope for any positive change under a Hillary regime. Look at her record: She's a solidly good manager, not an innovator. She surrounds herself with competent people, not exceptional ones.

[vision63]

Onamuji wrote:
[quote=Ted King]
I think what H. Clinton wants to do is get to what is functionally universal health care by means of expanding the ACA. Of course, that still leaves a large chunk of money for health care flowing through private health care insurers.

Clinton is a status quo candidate.

What she wants is her own presidential library.

She's better than any of the republican candidates, but there's no hope for any positive change under a Hillary regime. Look at her record: She's a solidly good manager, not an innovator. She surrounds herself with competent people, not exceptional ones.
She's never been president before. I personally know exceptional people that has worked for her in the White House and as part of her Senate staff. I would think the jury is out for her to distinguish herself.

[Pam]

I think congress will treat Hillary as badly as they did Obama which means nothing gets done. With Bernie, I see more possibilities.

[Onamuji]

vision63 wrote: I personally know exceptional people that has worked for her in the White House and as part of her Senate staff. I would think the jury is out for her to distinguish herself.

Look at her State Department record. A real leadership position. First weeks, she cleaned house of most of the lifers in the top echelons and replaced them with political allies. Her major initiative in the State Department was promoting civilian paramilitary forces not subject to the rules of war and she pushed for NGOs to replace government aid in disaster-relief as a cost-saving measure. She fired people for reading their own memos on Wikileaks and refused to allow any of her senior appointees to be punished for Benghazi mistakes (not saying she was responsible for the deaths) because "We fixed it at the assistant secretary level."

On the plus side, she increased diversity hires, the State Department opened up to more women and she made inroads in Iran which later resulted in the nuclear/sanctions deal.

Basically, she's not a finisher and her initiatives were a net drag.

[Speedy]

Right now I plan to caucus for Mr. Trump. But if Mr. Trump seems to be running away with things, I may back Sen. Cruz. In the general election I'll vote for whomever the Democratic Party nominates.

[(vikm)]

Onamuji wrote:
[quote=Ted King]
I think what H. Clinton wants to do is get to what is functionally universal health care by means of expanding the ACA. Of course, that still leaves a large chunk of money for health care flowing through private health care insurers.

Clinton is a status quo candidate.

What she wants is her own presidential library.

She's better than any of the republican candidates, but there's no hope for any positive change under a Hillary regime. Look at her record: She's a solidly good manager, not an innovator. She surrounds herself with competent people, not exceptional ones.

This pretty much sums it up for me. And what Pam added as well. Acknowledging that things have certainly improved over the last eight years comparing day one to now, I do not want more of the same as far as how things get done. I'm tired of the banks and the too big to fail nonsense. I do not like that Hillary was all too willing to send troops off to Iraq to die and no one seems to care anymore about it. I do not want anymore of Congress saying no to everything. You think it was bad under Obama? Wait to see how much more combative and defiant they become under ANOTHER Clinton Presidency. We as a country can't afford it. I couldn't bring myself to be a part of it all on principle alone if she gets the Dem nomination. Of course those like myself will be told we wasted our vote if we go third party or that it was our fault if Trump or another R wins against her when in fact it will be the fault of those that voted for her knowing that it will light a fire under the Republican base and they will turn out en masse. My refusal to vote for her won't be due to sulking... it will be due to conscience and abhor the "must vote to support the party no matter what" concept. I just hope there are enough that really have a concern for all others like I think Sanders does.

[deckeda]

(vikm) I understand the logic but can't agree with the ideology. The pragmatic in me knows GWB for an example was a huge mistake, and if any of the R's get in, much of that insanity could return. I'll take another D president who's continually attacked and another do-nothing Congress over that. I don't think it's "your duty" to pull a lever anymore than I'd assume each person that does votes with the same level of eagerness.