For NeverTrumpers: An appeal to not vote Hillary over Trump

[Guest MormonGator]

5 minutes ago, LeSellers said:

Please re-read this:

Happy about it, no. But they knew the odds. Every sophisticated investor knows that some opportunities will not work out. They build that into their interest rates and other calculations.

Lehi

Of course, the re-read. Perhaps I was just making a different point and I understood yours fully. Like I've mentioned before online, if you always are telling people to re-read or that they "missed the point" maybe it's because you weren't clear. (Again, universal usage. Not you meaning LeSellers) 

I've been in the investment field for a long time. It's how my father made his living, it's partially how I make mine. While most investors "know the odds" and "know some opportunities won't work out" they aren't thrilled when someone who uses their money goes bankrupt.  

[askandanswer]

On 17/04/2016 at 2:15 PM, mirkwood said:

Maybe God will smite us in October and we don't have to worry about the election.

Maybe God IS smiting with you this election  

[LeSellers]

11 hours ago, MormonGator said:

Perhaps I was just making a different point and I understood yours fully.

So master 'gator, what was that elusive point?

Lehi

[Guest MormonGator]

5 hours ago, LeSellers said:

So master 'gator, what was that elusive point?

Lehi

Sir, Papi, Amir, Your Majesty or Boss are all appropriate titles for this Gator. 

My point is two fold. One, success in the real estate/business world doesn't equal success in politics and two, even the savviest investor who accepts risk doesn't like to be stiff armed when a client declares bankruptcy, so it's not anything to try to brush off. Bankruptcy is slightly different in business than a personal one is (I'm from the old school and I think personal bankruptcy  should be avoided at all costs) but it's ill very serious and not sometime to make light of. 

 

[LeSellers]

1 hour ago, MormonGator said:

My point is two fold. One, success in the real estate/business world doesn't equal success in politics and two, even the savviest investor who accepts risk doesn't like to be stiff armed when a client declares bankruptcy, so it's not anything to try to brush off. Bankruptcy is slightly different in business than a personal one is (I'm from the old school and I think personal bankruptcy  should be avoided at all costs) but it's ill very serious and not sometime to make light of.

Yes, all these are good points, but success in the real estate/business world doesn't negate success in politics, either.

And while no one, savvy or not, likes his investments to go bad, any good investor knows that part of his portfolio will go bad (or he is not taking advantage of enough good opportunities). Again, they build it into the interest rate.

No one makes light of bankruptcy, but recognizing it as a normal risk of investment, and part of business is foundational to day-to-day operations. Not a welcome part, but integral to it nonetheless.

Lehi

Edited May 8, 2016 by LeSellers

[Guest MormonGator]

3 minutes ago, LeSellers said:

Yes, all these are good points, but success in the real estate/business world doesn't negate success in politics, either.

And while no one, savvy or not, likes his investments to go bad, any good investor knows that part of his portfolio will go bad (or he is not taking advantage of enough good opportunities). Again, they build it into the interest rate.

No one makes light of bankruptcy, but recognizing it as a normal risk of investment, and part of business is foundaotinal to day-to-day operations. Not a welcome part, but integral to it nonetheless.

Lehi

Right, I did say that they can be interchangeable but they often times are not. It's a different skill set that is needed. 

Yes, any good investor knows that something in his portfolio will not work. 

[prisonchaplain]

On ‎5‎/‎6‎/‎2016 at 2:34 PM, yjacket said:

Well he definitely exposed the hypocrisy in the pro-life movement. He originally came out in support of punishment if a woman has an abortion; the backlash from the pro-life movement was swift and harsh.

I actually think its the only moral position to take, if one believes abortion is murder, then both the doctor and the woman are committing murder.  It's pretty simple.

You use of "hypocrisy" and your imposition of the necessity to punish mothers upon the pro-life movement conveniently forces us into a position that will never gain traction.  You might genuinely believe we have to take these positions, but we don't.  We want to win over the public to a perspective is moral and life-saving. That means we must show compassion for the mother and the baby, by attempting to place restrictions on medical providers.

 

[Guest MormonGator]

2 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

 

PC-

You are pro life. You probably believe in God, right? Do you think God is pro-life? 

When you die, maybe God will ask you "What did you do for the pro-life cause?" You'll answer "A lot, God. I stayed home and didn't vote for Trump. Instead, Hillary won."
God might say, "How did that help the pro-life side?" 

You'll say "Well, we didn't know Trump wouldn't do the same." 

God might say, "Oh. So you choose to do not to fight 100% evil because you were 50% sure that Trump would do the same?" 

That is NOT an insult to you or God. Just a way of looking at it.

[Guest MormonGator]

I know I've said it before, but I'm still torn. I do not want to be associated with NeverTrumpers, Trumpers, Trump, Hillary. I need to take my own advice and remember that we can't always get what we want in politics-but swallowing the Trump pill is darn near impossible. Trumpers make it very hard. 

[prisonchaplain]

MG, at this point the one reason I may end up voting for Trump is that he might place pro-life nominees for SCOTUS. HRC has stated she will not.

[Guest MormonGator]

14 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

MG, at this point the one reason I may end up voting for Trump is that he might place pro-life nominees for SCOTUS. HRC has stated she will not.

Yup. For me replace "pro-life" with "pro-gun". 

[LeSellers]

4 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

14 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

MG, at this point the one reason I may end up voting for Trump is that he might place pro-life nominees for SCOTUS. HRC has stated she will not.

Yup. For me replace "pro-life" with "pro-gun". 

They're not mutually exclusive.

Lehi

[Guest MormonGator]

1 minute ago, LeSellers said:

They're not mutually exclusive.

Lehi

I know, didn't say they were. 

[Vort]

On 5/6/2016 at 1:43 PM, Vort said:

What makes you think that Trump would appoint significantly better (or less awful) justices than Clinton? I admit that some chance is better than no chance, but in his own way, Trump is as much of a corrupt liar as Clinton. I have no confidence in him at all. He is certainly not a conservative or even a Constitutionalist.

How very, very wrong I was. In fact, rereading this thread reminds me of just how prejudiced and media-influenced my own opinion was. I'm still no Trumpster, but I do maintain that, all things considered, he was our best and most effective president since Bush, maybe since Clinton (I dare not bring Saint Ronald into the conversation).

I believe that Trump will win the Repub nomination, even though I would prefer another. And when he does win the nomination, I will certainly vote for him in the general election, barring a believable revelation with proof that Trump was actually behind the January 6 foolishness or otherwise acted in a seditious manner beyond his puerile whining about election rigging (which I don't entirely disbelieve, btw).

Edited November 21, 2023 by Vort

[NeuroTypical]

Consider me a much less happy version of Vort.  I'm so mad at Desantis I could just scream.

"I like most of Trump's policies, and I as president I'll continue to forward them and fight for them.  Just without all the despicable blather and personal attacks, and no repeat of Jan 6.  Plus, I'm 30 years younger."

That's all he had to say.   

Now I'm stuck with having to vote for a guy who is a weird blend of the best president ever, and the biggest ego-driven threat to the sacredness of our institutions and offices I've ever seen in my life.  

I'm not looking forward to the coming constitutional crisis as Trump takes office and his first act is to grant himself a full pardon for anything he might get convicted of, if indictments are still ongoing.  

Edited November 21, 2023 by NeuroTypical

[LDSGator]

1 hour ago, Vort said:

How very, very wrong I was

Almost all of us were wrong in 2016, so don’t worry about it. I thought Trump would get crushed. 

[estradling75]

2 hours ago, Vort said:

 whining about election rigging (which I don't entirely disbelieve, btw).

I think anyone with eyes to see...  Sees complaints about election rigging continuing to happen.  (Agree or disagree it doesn't matter complaints going to continue)  So why aren't we working to secure the vote and build up confidence that our votes are counted and fair?  After all it is one thing to simply say someone is a sore loser (which they very well may be) but its a much better to be able to prove it.

So why haven't we taken the time between elections to create a voting system that can prove the accuracy of the vote to the voters rather then forcing use to assume it to be accurate?

[NeuroTypical]

1 hour ago, LDSGator said:

Almost all of us were wrong in 2016, so don’t worry about it. I thought Trump would get crushed. 

I scared myself at how right I was.  My 2016 joke prediction became more true than I wanted it to, and stayed true until 2020.  

Quote

Little something in here to offend everybody:

Donald Trump will win the presidency, despite the fact that almost every single American voter actively campaigns against him (on Facebook at least).

President Trump will do a bunch of stuff that you'll hate and I'll like. He'll do a bunch of stuff that you'll like and I'll hate. And then he'll do one or two things that the entire world hates. People will cross aisles and form new alliances in order to stop it, but some of it will happen anyway.

People will start drawing analogies with Nixon. Some folks will try to make the best of it, and you'll hear the old phrase resurrected "Yeah, he's a [beep], but he's our [beep]." In Washington, Pro Trump liberals will suddenly remember things like Nixon ending the war in VietNam. Anti Trump conservatives will openly rebel in every way feasible, from impeachment, to attempting a constitutional convention.

I predict the Trump presidency will end it's second term early, but whether by resignation, impeachment, or natural-death-conspiracy-fodder I can't tell. The event will mark a rare coming-together of Americans and the world in a unified shout of "Good riddance". Then our collective attnetion will swing to Lady Gaga's televised live birth - a genderfluid child born pregnant, having won it's first Oscar in-utero, and the world will not speak the name Trump for two decades. Our grandchildren will eventually figure out that he actually saved us all despite all our best efforts to stop him. If we hadn't banded together against him, we never would have been ready for the evil space emperor and his gelatinous armies.

 

[JohnsonJones]

15 hours ago, estradling75 said:

I think anyone with eyes to see...  Sees complaints about election rigging continuing to happen.  (Agree or disagree it doesn't matter complaints going to continue)  So why aren't we working to secure the vote and build up confidence that our votes are counted and fair?  After all it is one thing to simply say someone is a sore loser (which they very well may be) but its a much better to be able to prove it.

So why haven't we taken the time between elections to create a voting system that can prove the accuracy of the vote to the voters rather then forcing use to assume it to be accurate?

Because almost every lawsuit that has tried to show this has actually lost when evidence has been shown the contrary.  There have been one or two which fraud WAS shown, BUT ironically, it was from the Republicans (one which just resulted in a wife being convicted of 52 counts of it if I've heard correctly).

By all the evidence that has been provided, our election system last time WAS secure, but one BIG reason was that they didn't corrupt the officials.  This time things are being put into place to do what they attempted last time. 

If Trump wins this next election I give it a 50/50 chance he may actually be the Anti-Christ.  Looking at how well he has many of the religious conservatives in his palm (despite having broken just about every commandment there is), and other checkmarks...it would also match the beast dying and rising again.

For all of DeSantis's faults, at least from what I can see currently (and that could all be an illusion cast by him) he is, overall, a more moral individual than Trump who loves his family and cares deeply for them.

[estradling75]

1 hour ago, JohnsonJones said:

Because almost every lawsuit that has tried to show this has actually lost when evidence has been shown the contrary.  There have been one or two which fraud WAS shown, BUT ironically, it was from the Republicans (one which just resulted in a wife being convicted of 52 counts of it if I've heard correctly).

By all the evidence that has been provided, our election system last time WAS secure, but one BIG reason was that they didn't corrupt the officials.  This time things are being put into place to do what they attempted last time. 

 

Wow... just wow...  You are so full of... something.... that you can't see that contradict yourself in the same paragraph... and then ignore your own data point to live in your own fantasy.

Lets recap what you say...  A lot of election fraud lawsuits were dismissed... this is a good thing I agree.  But then you point out that not all of them were.  Some evidence of fraud was found.  It does not matter which party did the deed but in your desire to stick it to the Republicans, you proved the point.  The vote and therefore the election was not secure.  End of line you proved it.

By your own words fraud occurred in the last election (it does not matter the party).  Knowing that this will be a challenge vector to the next election, wisdom dictates pulling the teeth to that challenge now.... before there is any possibility of partisan bias

 

[Carborendum]

18 hours ago, estradling75 said:

I think anyone with eyes to see...  Sees complaints about election rigging continuing to happen.  (Agree or disagree it doesn't matter complaints going to continue)  So why aren't we working to secure the vote and build up confidence that our votes are counted and fair?  After all it is one thing to simply say someone is a sore loser (which they very well may be) but its a much better to be able to prove it.

So why haven't we taken the time between elections to create a voting system that can prove the accuracy of the vote to the voters rather then forcing use to assume it to be accurate?

The pattern I see in society in general (which includes politics):

• Make an accusation (usually a lie) about some evil happening.
• Do some of that evil to make sure it happens at least somewhere.
• Debunk it by saying it only happens in isolated instances.
• Increase the evil in scope and intensity.
• Accuse others of being alarmists because "we've already been through this" and it's not that big of a deal.
• Increase the evil on one side to where it is rampant and continue to deny it exists, while accusing the other side of doing it rampantly whether that is true or not.

[NeuroTypical]

5 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

If Trump wins this next election I give it a 50/50 chance he may actually be the Anti-Christ.

I'm as melodrama-and-conspiracy-resistant at the next guy, but I'm forced to admit that if I believe the scriptures, there is a non-zero percentage chance of something like this being true.  (It would mean @Vort is wrong about being wrong, which I believe is more likely than him actually just being wrong.)

I spent half a decade assuming this picture was just bad photoshopping by Trump critics, until I drove past the thing one day:

If you gonna lucifer it up, do it in style baby.

[Vort]

22 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

"I like most of Trump's policies, and I as president I'll continue to forward them and fight for them.  Just without all the despicable blather and personal attacks, and no repeat of Jan 6.  Plus, I'm 30 years younger."

That's all he had to say.

Honestly, with the exception of failing to address fiscal irresponsibility, that's probably all that any Republican candidate needs to say. "It'll be like when Trump was president, only Trump won't be president." Sounds pretty not awful, especially compared with our experiences under Uncle Joe and WonderKamala. I still class Trump as much more Morianton than king Noah. Biden, or for that matter any Democrat at the national level, is flat-out Noah.

[Grunt]

I miss Tess

[JohnsonJones]

4 hours ago, estradling75 said:

Wow... just wow...  You are so full of... something.... that you can't see that contradict yourself in the same paragraph... and then ignore your own data point to live in your own fantasy.

Lets recap what you say...  A lot of election fraud lawsuits were dismissed... this is a good thing I agree.  But then you point out that not all of them were.  Some evidence of fraud was found.  It does not matter which party did the deed but in your desire to stick it to the Republicans, you proved the point.  The vote and therefore the election was not secure.  End of line you proved it.

By your own words fraud occurred in the last election (it does not matter the party).  Knowing that this will be a challenge vector to the next election, wisdom dictates pulling the teeth to that challenge now.... before there is any possibility of partisan bias

 

 

I don't see the contradictions, but we can agree to disagree.

There's a REASON why I said almost all, instead of all.  The cases have shown that the election overall was correct in how it ended and who the winner was.

The IRONY is that the cases that seem to be intent on trying to corrupt the election thus far that have resulted in actual evidence and convictions have been on Republicans.  (For example, the most recent has to do with a Republican's wife in Iowa who's husband still lost the congressional race in 2020, she has 52 counts - with 26 of false information, 3 of fraudulent registration, and 23 of fraudulent voting - against her, it was focused primarily on helping her husband win the race).

We will see if Trump is ALSO guilty of encouraging this type of stuff or not.  I have to admit BEFORE the 2020 election I would have NEVER thought that Trump or a conservative would lose in Georgia.  After what Trump tried to do though..., we'll see how the court goes on this. 

I doubt a conviction will convince his cult of followers to stop supporting him though.  I will admit I like DeSantis a LOT more than Trump.  A LOT of what I look at in politicians is how Morale they are.  It can be hard to determine that.  Sometimes you can get fooled.  Looking at DeSantis though, he APPEARS to be one of the more Morale politicians out there.  I may not agree with many of his positions, but he seems sincere in his opinions and how he acts.  That's far more important to me at times than agreeing with every political point.

That's why I don't like or support Trump.  He seems to be a very immoral person and a very immoral character.  If we allow ourselves to be ruled by the immoral, ultimately it is a reflection of our society (ESPECIALLY in a democracy or in a democratic type government such as a Federal Democratic Republic such as what the US is).

Immoral leaders are something that I just really feel we shouldn't be promoting.

The OTHER irony is that I'm NOT a democrat, I'm not even really liberal (though I tend to be painted as one on these boards).