Have you ever hated both Presidential Candidates to the point where you just refuse to vote????

[jdbadboy]

I don't sit out presidential votes. Ever. I always think about Supreme Court and judicial court nominations the next president will get to make.

 

[TX-Beau]

Well take my comments within the context that I think pretty much the worst Democrats are better by a factor of 5 or 10 than the best Republicans. I don't hate her or even think she's a bad person or has "bad values" or anything. I just think she's always been a very big name who could have had a big impact on important votes, and so often I was disappointed seeing the way having to be led by some no-name while Hillary made a safe status quo vote. The Iraq War is one example, but it's not the only one. There's no equivalency in my mind between her and a Republican. I just think she will safely push along the edges of progress... not lead us into it.

She's always just on the edge of politely late to the big parties. I think Obama did things like hop on DOMA and Gitmo because it was the right thing to do. There was no overwhelming voter outcry for him to do either. He was attacked for both. I wish I felt like Hillary would be "that kind of President." If you do, then I'll just envy you and hope you're right. It's just not what I feel like I should logically expect from what I've seen of her over the past years.

That's kinda what I was trying to say. I don't think she ever had a problem with Gay marriage for example, but was attempting to be a politician about it - Obama is right in there with both Clintons about that, he was not supporting either in 2008 being a politician, just a better one, plus, I do also think that there is something to be said for politicians who listen to their constituents. There was no way in hell the Senator from New York was going to survive without being a hard ass after 9-11.

It didn't help that we were all being lied to.

She's not going to be an activist President, she will do a superb job of being an Executive however.

 

[Kabluey]

That's kinda what I was trying to say. I don't think she ever had a problem with Gay marriage for example, but was attempting to be a politician about it - Obama is right in there with both Clintons about that, he was not supporting either in 2008 being a politician, just a better one, plus, I do also think that there is something to be said for politicians who listen to their constituents. There was no way in hell the Senator from New York was going to survive without being a hard ass after 9-11.

It didn't help that we were all being lied to.

She's not going to be an activist President, she will do a superb job of being an Executive however.

That's my impression. If Clinton was the Republican candidate, they'd be using language like 'a safe pair of hands' and 'experience', while not being a revolutionary (they don't get middle America's votes), she does represent 'least likely to fail'.

I note that's been an angle of attack by her opposition (attempting to attack her competence), but it doesn't stick very well. It's like trying to paint Trump as boring.

The nerdy, awkward policy wonk that runs an information based leadership with a moderate liberal approach is far more comforting for global stability than the guy who tried to trademark 'you're fired'.

 

[eastofeden]

The Clintons are master politicians - no one disputes. I would just disagree that this suddenly became a "virtue" all of a sudden. Certainly it's a virtue over rank incompetence and being utterly unqualified as Trump undeniably is.

That some Bernie supporters were crazy zealots-- yup, but I wasn't one so I've never really answered for them.

I do want to address this though. The whole "misogyny" thing. Anyone who has a major problem with her because she's a woman is likely a Trump voter. I could have given anyone at any time the same explanation I just gave in this thread for why I wasn't excited for her, but instead my feed filled up with indictments of those who didn't support Hillary as being misogynists suffering from male privilege or whatever else. Given that the person I'd most want to be President of the country would be Elizabeth Warren, you can imagine the degree to which those kind of grasping accusations were resented. I'd say the most common thing I ever saw anyone discussing was her ties to big money and corporations. Her gender wasn't on the radar, except in the messaging coming out of her camp.

One thing that became clear to me is that some of the loudest Bernie supporters whose misogyny was apparent were never really Bernie supporters anyway. They were Hillary Clinton haters....and Trump supporters...and they helped create the divisive dialogue...

My main problem with some of the actual Bernie supporters...bottom line..was the bragging about being inspired to show up and then threatening everyone with their vote as if it were a weapon we all had to pay for...because at that moment..they became my enemy ...worse than the Republicans....because their never showing up before has left all of us paying already.....

It goes back to Reagan and all the people who hated the guy but didn't show up to vote. I was a bastard to them...I got really cranky and told them to shut the fuck up and don't complain about ANYTHING because when they had a chance to use their voice..they didn't...so it didn't matter what they said now....I really hate apathy....worse than I hate Republicans.....

I also told them if I had a piece of tape and could get away with putting it on every non voters mouth for the next four years...I would GRRRRRRRRRRRRRR....and I meant it...

...and then to hear the "it doesn't matter who we vote for..they are both the same" nonsense coming from the same people...uh...isn't that what left you so "uninspired" for so many years....the LIE that you tell yourself..that your vote doesn't matter? It is and always was a total lie....and no one else is responsible for that lie except for the person who tells it to themself.

I think that in the course of things unfolding...at least some people who may not truly be misogynist used arguments that were misogynist in the process in order to make their case. For instance..holding a woman to a much higher standard than any man...or classifying a woman as "power hungry" when the same quality is seen as normal or expected for a man in the same position. Things like that are the doorway to misogyny....

Her virtue is debatable. I already knew the course she took out of college and admired her for it....I took a good look at her when the Republicans started in on her in 1992 when she tried to implement Universal Heath Care and they tried to characterize her as the Devil. I do think her bottom line IS service..not power...and as for the campaign contributors....I see these as two way bridges...some better than others...some really horrible choice...but a coalition of any kind has a higher and lower nature...

 

[Kulindahr]

My suggestion is this: Trust your own judgment. When the general election arrives, handle your vote however you will. There is no need, even if you have it in your head that you believe you have such need, to run your thoughts by anyone. I share your distrust of both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. (Only, how I would articulate my distrust of them is not exactly the same as what you said of yours. But, in a way, we are on the same page. And their disapprovals are high.) So, if you do vote, whoever gets your vote should feel damn lucky to have received it. And that's because no candidate for office is entitled to anyone's vote.

Maybe we should require that anyone with greater than 33.3% disapproval rating be disqualified....