Back to Spam

jill stein

cub
almost 9 years

so basically bernie is going to the convention to make hillary agree to adopt some policies, which is like giving a hungry fat guy a donut if he agrees not to eat it.

that means your black and white choices are richest guy to go bankrupt four times and satan

now, if we elected jill stein, the benefits are just too good to be true:

  1. shatter the two party system, and green is the most fitting color because it completes the three additive primaries

  2. get most people to stop b****ing about voting for women in future elections because v*gina

  3. basically the same policies as bernie sanders, so basically bernie sanders

  4. an actual doctor none of that dr seuss bullsh*t

vote'
9
green party
4
red party
1
blue party
Golbolco
almost 9 years

DrPeePee says


Golbolco says


PapaJacky says


The says


PapaJacky says

I supported jill stein and the green party before it was cool

also voting for 3rd party candidates is pointless unless you're in a swing state so "stealing votes" is a pointless metric unless those votes are from swing states. california/new york isn't gonna go red, and utah/mississipi aren't going to turn blue. ohio/florida? those states actually matter.




Yes, and that is another major reason why third party candidates just aren't electable at this point in time. We should vote for them so that they slowly bring down the bipartisan system, yes, but it's somewhat pointless to believe they have a remote chance of being elected.


sweaty 1992 would like to have a word with you.


Ross Perot ran as an independent, which itself poses little threat to the party binary.


Well Ross Perot had his own party he started, the Reform Party, but it fell apart because no one could agree on anything


He only started the party after the 1992 election though, so even then unless he could generate the same number of votes in 1996 it wouldn't have mattered.
deletedalmost 9 years

Golbolco says


PapaJacky says


The says


PapaJacky says

I supported jill stein and the green party before it was cool

also voting for 3rd party candidates is pointless unless you're in a swing state so "stealing votes" is a pointless metric unless those votes are from swing states. california/new york isn't gonna go red, and utah/mississipi aren't going to turn blue. ohio/florida? those states actually matter.




Yes, and that is another major reason why third party candidates just aren't electable at this point in time. We should vote for them so that they slowly bring down the bipartisan system, yes, but it's somewhat pointless to believe they have a remote chance of being elected.


sweaty 1992 would like to have a word with you.


Ross Perot ran as an independent, which itself poses little threat to the party binary.


Well Ross Perot had his own party he started, the Reform Party, but it fell apart because no one could agree on anything
cub
almost 9 years

The says


cub says

so its relevant when you say it and don't provide a link but irrelevant when i say it

i dont have enough interest or faith in this discussion anymore to google things for you


What are you referring to when you say I didn't provide a link?

And why is a Google search not returning your hypothetical poll?

And when I say it's irrelevant, I mean a hypothetical of Bernie in place of Jill is irrelevant. There is no clear indication that a third party similar to Sanders will obtain anywhere near his support.


i literally clicked on your google search, then clicked on the first result and its your own source
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_sanders-5565.html
sanders has +10

but you can have the last word now

you can say clinton isn't on that poll because your source doesnt have a trump v clinton v sanders poll specifically, but it does have these where sanders consistently has the highest margins
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/president/

you can also use the fact sanders crushes trump and combine that with trump in a statistical deadlock with clinton
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html
clinton has +1

electable
The
almost 9 years
So we agree, right? We both want to bring down the political binary, and voting third party is the best way to do that. It's just that I don't think anyone should expect a third party to actually win the office this year.
PapaJacky
almost 9 years
hey man, you do you, I me me. if you don't want to bring down the political binary, vote for blue or red, but I'm green to my chlorophyll core.
The
almost 9 years

PapaJacky says


The says


PapaJacky says

I supported jill stein and the green party before it was cool

also voting for 3rd party candidates is pointless unless you're in a swing state so "stealing votes" is a pointless metric unless those votes are from swing states. california/new york isn't gonna go red, and utah/mississipi aren't going to turn blue. ohio/florida? those states actually matter.




Yes, and that is another major reason why third party candidates just aren't electable at this point in time. We should vote for them so that they slowly bring down the bipartisan system, yes, but it's somewhat pointless to believe they have a remote chance of being elected.


sweaty 1992 would like to have a word with you.


If a third party only got 18% of the popular vote back then, it's even more unlikely now with the increase in political polarization
Golbolco
almost 9 years

PapaJacky says


The says


PapaJacky says

I supported jill stein and the green party before it was cool

also voting for 3rd party candidates is pointless unless you're in a swing state so "stealing votes" is a pointless metric unless those votes are from swing states. california/new york isn't gonna go red, and utah/mississipi aren't going to turn blue. ohio/florida? those states actually matter.




Yes, and that is another major reason why third party candidates just aren't electable at this point in time. We should vote for them so that they slowly bring down the bipartisan system, yes, but it's somewhat pointless to believe they have a remote chance of being elected.


sweaty 1992 would like to have a word with you.


Ross Perot ran as an independent, which itself poses little threat to the party binary.
PapaJacky
almost 9 years

The says


PapaJacky says

I supported jill stein and the green party before it was cool

also voting for 3rd party candidates is pointless unless you're in a swing state so "stealing votes" is a pointless metric unless those votes are from swing states. california/new york isn't gonna go red, and utah/mississipi aren't going to turn blue. ohio/florida? those states actually matter.




Yes, and that is another major reason why third party candidates just aren't electable at this point in time. We should vote for them so that they slowly bring down the bipartisan system, yes, but it's somewhat pointless to believe they have a remote chance of being elected.


sweaty 1992 would like to have a word with you.
The
almost 9 years

PapaJacky says

I supported jill stein and the green party before it was cool

also voting for 3rd party candidates is pointless unless you're in a swing state so "stealing votes" is a pointless metric unless those votes are from swing states. california/new york isn't gonna go red, and utah/mississipi aren't going to turn blue. ohio/florida? those states actually matter.




Yes, and that is another major reason why third party candidates just aren't electable at this point in time. We should vote for them so that they slowly bring down the bipartisan system, yes, but it's somewhat pointless to believe they have a remote chance of being elected.
PapaJacky
almost 9 years
I supported jill stein and the green party before it was cool

also voting for 3rd party candidates is pointless unless you're in a swing state so "stealing votes" is a pointless metric unless those votes are from swing states. california/new york isn't gonna go red, and utah/mississipi aren't going to turn blue. ohio/florida? those states actually matter.
The
almost 9 years

cub says

so its relevant when you say it and don't provide a link but irrelevant when i say it

i dont have enough interest or faith in this discussion anymore to google things for you


What are you referring to when you say I didn't provide a link?

And why is a Google search not returning your hypothetical poll?

And when I say it's irrelevant, I mean a hypothetical of Bernie in place of Jill is irrelevant. There is no clear indication that a third party similar to Sanders will obtain anywhere near his support.
cub
almost 9 years
so its relevant when you say it and don't provide a link but irrelevant when i say it

i dont have enough interest or faith in this discussion anymore to google things for you
The
almost 9 years

cub says


The says

In regards to Jill, she is practically identical to Bernie, and if Bernie wasn't able to beat out Hillary while under the support of the Democratic circlejerk, how can Jill, a lesser-known version of him, win as a third party? Even Jill and Bernie's combined poll votes wouldn't beat Hillary, ignoring the fact that Jill would be lucky to get even half of Bernie supporters.


and it's funny you link a hypothetical trump v clinton v johnson, because in a hypothetical trump v clinton v bernie poll, bernie wins



Kind of irrelevant, but link?
deletedalmost 9 years

cub says


The says

In regards to Jill, she is practically identical to Bernie, and if Bernie wasn't able to beat out Hillary while under the support of the Democratic circlejerk, how can Jill, a lesser-known version of him, win as a third party? Even Jill and Bernie's combined poll votes wouldn't beat Hillary, ignoring the fact that Jill would be lucky to get even half of Bernie supporters.


and it's funny you link a hypothetical trump v clinton v johnson, because in a hypothetical trump v clinton v bernie poll, bernie wins



Jill will get very few, if any, republican voters purely due to the nature of her policies, and I doubt anti-Trump republican voters would vote Hillary. That leaves the currently most popular third party candidate, Gary Johnson, to take in those votes.


jill won't be popular among republicans like gary won't be popular among democrats. it's true, a left winger won't get the majority of the right wing vote and a right winger won't get the majority of the left wing vote, shocking as it is


Actually, polls found Gary "steals" or takes away just as many votes if not more from Hillary than he does from Donald. The whole Bernie or Bust, Never Trump, and Hillary for Prison movements will do that to ya.

Lol ninja'd by Golb by 35 secs
Golbolco
almost 9 years

cub says

jill won't be popular among republicans like gary won't be popular among democrats. it's true, a left winger won't get the majority of the right wing vote and a right winger won't get the majority of the left wing vote, shocking as it is


Gary Johnson is actually pulling more from the Democrats than he is Republicans according to the poll that started the Libertarian hype this year:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/mar/24/libertarian-gary-johnson-double-digits-race-agains/
cub
almost 9 years

The says

In regards to Jill, she is practically identical to Bernie, and if Bernie wasn't able to beat out Hillary while under the support of the Democratic circlejerk, how can Jill, a lesser-known version of him, win as a third party? Even Jill and Bernie's combined poll votes wouldn't beat Hillary, ignoring the fact that Jill would be lucky to get even half of Bernie supporters.


and it's funny you link a hypothetical trump v clinton v johnson, because in a hypothetical trump v clinton v bernie poll, bernie wins



Jill will get very few, if any, republican voters purely due to the nature of her policies, and I doubt anti-Trump republican voters would vote Hillary. That leaves the currently most popular third party candidate, Gary Johnson, to take in those votes.


jill won't be popular among republicans like gary won't be popular among democrats. it's true, a left winger won't get the majority of the right wing vote and a right winger won't get the majority of the left wing vote, shocking as it is
deletedalmost 9 years

Nailpolishremover says

lol @ the libertarians . as if workign within the system that is broken will fix anything. u gotta destroy it completely if u want any change :/ #anarchy #bringbackthebartersystem

anyays maybe if the gov't wouldnt spend so much money on the military they could afford takign care of their citizens instead of terrorizing foreign innocent civilians all in the name of figthing terrorism


You do realize libertarians want to cut spending to the military and are isolationists right?
deletedalmost 9 years
so edgy, so sharp ! but i keep it real ;) sorry for teh realness golgolco
Golbolco
almost 9 years

Nailpolishremover says

lol @ the libertarians . as if workign within the system that is broken will fix anything. u gotta destroy it completely if u want any change :/ #anarchy #bringbackthebartersystem

anyays maybe if the gov't wouldnt spend so much money on the military they could afford takign care of their citizens instead of terrorizing innocent citizens all in the name of figthing terrorism


http://www.wikihow.com/Be-Edgy
deletedalmost 9 years
lol @ the libertarians . as if workign within the system that is broken will fix anything. u gotta destroy it completely if u want any change :/ #anarchy #bringbackthebartersystem

anyays maybe if the gov't wouldnt spend so much money on the military they could afford takign care of their citizens instead of terrorizing foreign innocent civilians all in the name of figthing terrorism
The
almost 9 years

cub says


theplok says

can you make a debate thread every day this is really entertaining


id like to debate capital punishment some time


That would actually be a fun one. You should make it.

In regards to Jill, she is practically identical to Bernie, and if Bernie wasn't able to beat out Hillary while under the support of the Democratic circlejerk, how can Jill, a lesser-known version of him, win as a third party? Even Jill and Bernie's combined poll votes wouldn't beat Hillary, ignoring the fact that Jill would be lucky to get even half of Bernie supporters.

Jill will get very few, if any, republican voters purely due to the nature of her policies, and I doubt anti-Trump republican voters would vote Hillary. That leaves the currently most popular third party candidate, Gary Johnson, to take in those votes.

Here's an interesting poll btw: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson-5949.html
cub
almost 9 years

theplok says

can you make a debate thread every day this is really entertaining


id like to debate capital punishment some time
theplok
almost 9 years
can you make a debate thread every day this is really entertaining
cub
almost 9 years
the republican and democratic candidates have the lowest approval ratings in history i believe

this is the ideal election for a third party candidate to win or gain party ground, which points to currently popular prospects gary johnson (right) and jill stein (left)

given that bernie sanders has the highest approval rating of donald trump, hillary clinton, and i think everyone else who ran on the republican side as well, favorability leans towards sanders' policies.

bernie sanders' policies are currently the most popular. ∵ jill stein adopts many of bernie sanders' policies. ∴ jill stein is likely the most electable third party candidate
The
almost 9 years
*cough* Still no statement from Cub on Jill Stein's electability *cough*