Voting this year?

[Jessie-Jess]

Voting this year? Something to consider:

"Intemperate persons should not by vote of the people be placed in positions of trust. Their influence corrupts others, and grave responsibilities are involved. With brain and nerve narcotized by tobacco and stimulus they make a law of their nature, and when the immediate influence is gone there is a collapse. Frequently human life is hanging in the balance; on the decision of those in these positions of trust depends life and liberty, or bondage and despair. How necessary that all who take part in these transactions should be those who are proved, those of self-culture, those of honesty and truth, of staunch integrity, who will spurn a bribe, who will not allow their judgment or convictions of right to be swerved by partiality or prejudice.

...

Only men and women of strict temperance and integrity should be admitted to our legislative halls and chosen to preside in our courts of justice. Property, reputation, and even life itself are insecure when left to the judgment of those who are intemperate and immoral. How many innocent persons have been condemned to death, how many more have been robbed of all their earthly possessions, by the injustice of drinking jurors, lawyers, witnesses, and even judges!" -Ellen G. White, The Signs of the Times, February 11, 1886.

[phkrause]

I guess there's no one to vote for!!

[CoAspen]

Will the first perfect person step up!!!

[CoAspen]

Yep, I will vote as usual....regardless of the above. None of the 12 apostles would be 'correct' to vote for, if alive today. Certainly not David!

[fccool]

I wouldn't fault people for voting, since it's a complex moral issue.  If someone would ask you that you must decide which part of the body the shooter will shoot at a child... a head or the foot,  it's not a simple answer, especially if the condition is such that the choice may be passed on to a homicidal maniac to choose head.   In that context you could choose "foot", but it would only validate the idea that shooting a child is something that should be done in the first place.

I honestly don't think that Christians or Adventists should vote (unless the candidate reflects Christian behavior... regardless of their faith).  Of course it's a personal opinion.   I think that the concept is that of being independent of morality that currently dictates certain order and not allowing one to suck you into a debate between which evil is the better one.   It simply validates certain ideals and it doesn't really solve any problems.   There are always more than two ways to solve problems, and US elections frame a false-dilemma when they make people choose between the turd sandwich and a goat pellet soup.   Yes, turd sandwich is more nutritious, but it has a turd in it.   I don't think "no food is perfect" augment works in these instances.   I think there should be some limits set by personal preferences, and it shouldn't be any different as to how we pick what's edible. 

I really don't think that either candidate in this election would make a "healthy food choice".   My mom would always say, it's better to go hungry for a day than eat [censored].

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

I vote.  If you don't vote, you've no right as a citizen to complain about the government or politicians, imho.

[Robert]

A vote for Hilary is a vote for more liberal agenda.

A vote for Trump is a vote for...who knows?

[fccool]

30 minutes ago, rudywoofs (Pam) said:

I vote.  If you don't vote, you've no right as a citizen to complain about the government or politicians, imho.

Nah, that's just poor logic.

If you choose, then you have no right to complain because your choice is responsible for whatever screw-up that's behind the complain.    If you don't vote because you disagree, then you have every right to complain, because the complaint is about the person you didn't choose or voted in.    If you don't see as either as good candidates, then you have right to abstain from voting and complain about both.

For example,  if I say "vote between guy X or guy Y making the rules", and someone would say "I don't think either of them should be doing this, because they lack qualification".   People who vote for either person have no right to complain about their screw ups.

So, let's stop repeating this meaningless phrase, because it's only made to stop people from thinking that there are more choices than voting. 

[fccool]

8 minutes ago, Robert said:

A vote for Hilary is a vote for more liberal agenda.

A vote for Trump is a vote for...who knows?

A vote for Trump is a vote for ignorance.   So it's basically ignorance vs ignorance

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

7 minutes ago, fccool said:

Nah, that's just poor logic.

If you choose, then you have no right to complain because your choice is responsible for whatever screw-up that's behind the complain.    If you don't vote because you disagree, then you have every right to complain, because the complaint is about the person you didn't choose or voted in.    If you don't see as either as good candidates, then you have right to abstain from voting and complain about both.

For example,  if I say "vote between guy X or guy Y making the rules", and someone would say "I don't think either of them should be doing this, because they lack qualification".   People who vote for either person have no right to complain about their screw ups.

So, let's stop repeating this meaningless phrase, because it's only made to stop people from thinking that there are more choices than voting. 

lol.... not voting, then complaining about the people who were voted in, is illogical.  As a voter, you can complain about the candidates, but not voting for any candidate makes you just... a complainer.  If you don't like the candidates on the ballot, then write one in.  Not voting is to give up a hard-fought fight on the part of many who have gone before us.

[fccool]

Just now, rudywoofs (Pam) said:

lol.... not voting, then complaining about the people who were voted in, is illogical.  As a voter, you can complain about the candidates, but not voting for any candidate makes you just... a complainer.  If you don't like the candidates on the ballot, then write one in.  Not voting is to give up a hard-fought fight on the part of many who have gone before us.

First of all, complaining is not necessarily a negative concept when it exist in proper context.

You present it as "just a complainer", when complaint is defined as a statement that a situation is unsatisfactory or unacceptable.  That's a complaint is.  If you find something unacceptable or unsatisfactory... then you are a complainer.    Complaining can be valid or invalid.

With that out of the way, you seem to imply that people who don't find either of the candidates unsatisfactory have no right to continue to find them unsatisfactory.   Hence it's a terrible logic.

[fccool]

25 minutes ago, rudywoofs (Pam) said:

Not voting is to give up a hard-fought fight on the part of many who have gone before us.

Again, you seem to be repeating things that are generally repeated in this context.

People didn't fight so we can merely vote.  There was voting in Sadam's Iraq and there was voting in the former USSR.  Voting doesn't mean much if the candidates are unacceptable when it comes to the ideals that this country is built on, or the individual ideals that a person may hold.

What would you vote for... a rape or a murder :).   The correct answer is... neither.   It's a fairly simple concept. 

[Gail]

I agree with fccool. I thought I was the only one that thought that way. It's to not vote due to principle.

[Gail]

But of course I won't vote in this election as I am not an American citizen. So that excludes me automatically.

But, yes- what do you do when you don't favour either candidate? What other options do you have that show displeasure with what the choices are?

[CoAspen]

Some like to use 'logic' as a reason for not voting....however I find that illogical! 

I go with Pam.  We all have our own opinions, so do what you wish.....but not doing anything because we don't like either candidate and then to continue complaining from the sidelines....really? As I said, who is perfect? Christianity should stay out of it all? Yup, sit on the sidelines, look pious and then tell God, its not my fault! Christ picked all types of person for his 12. Were any of them ever perfect at any time? 

(my opinion, works for me)

 

[Outta Here]

I've never been one to complain. ::shrugs::

[CoAspen]

I will vote for HC. Has the experience. Understands the world of politics. Emails.....really...just side tracking. Benghazi, everyone is a Monday morning quarterback. Making money with speeches.....jealousy by others for the money she made, thats what politicians do. It takes obscene amounts of money to run for office these days and she obviously had a plan in place for a long time. She is strong headed, not someone who will act like a rug, but will make compromises as needed because this country is not alone in the world. To me, its not about 'liking' someone, but can they do the job. If you try to run a business just based on having people you 'like', it is limited in its success. Everyone has their definition of 'honesty', and not always wanting it applied to themselves. To say I would agree with everything she may or may not do, past, present or future, really? Anyone else running have any experience, please standup and lets compare. Is the Donald a comparison? 

(my opinion, works for me)

 

[fccool]

16 minutes ago, CoAspen said:

Some like to use 'logic' as a reason for not voting....however I find that illogical! 

I go with Pam.  We all have our own opinions, so do what you wish.....but not doing anything because we don't like either candidate and then to continue complaining from the sidelines....really? As I said, who is perfect? Christianity should stay out of it all? Yup, sit on the sidelines, look pious and then tell God, its not my fault! Christ picked all types of person for his 12. Were any of them ever perfect at any time? 

(my opinion, works for me)

 

Again,  you are using complain in a colloquial sense of "unreasonable criticism".   Complaint is simply a form of voiced disagreement that points to some unsatisfactory deficiency.   It's not that people don't want to do anything.   They simply don't think that giving any of the people their approval to go ahead and decide and rule would be a moral thing to do.

There are times when not voting is immoral.   There are times when voting is immoral.   A vote between Hitler and Stalin would be an immoral vote IMO. 

[LifeHiscost]

15 minutes ago, CoAspen said:

Some like to use 'logic' as a reason for not voting....however I find that illogical! 

I go with Pam.  We all have our own opinions, so do what you wish.....but not doing anything because we don't like either candidate and then to continue complaining from the sidelines....really? As I said, who is perfect? Christianity should stay out of it all? Yup, sit on the sidelines, look pious and then tell God, its not my fault! Christ picked all types of person for his 12. Were any of them ever perfect at any time? 

(my opinion, works for me)

 

Sounds rather judgemental to me, all the while accepting no responsibility. (just my opinion)

God is Love!~Jesus saves! 

 

[phkrause]

31 minutes ago, LifeHiscost said:

Sounds rather judgemental to me, all the while accepting no responsibility. (just my opinion)

I don't see anything judgmental at all in what CoAspen said.

[Tom Wetmore]

The right (freedom) to do something inherently allows for not doing it.  To vote or not.  To speak (complain) or not.  But not speaking actually says something too.  Not voting is a vote.

But maybe we are just looking at those choices too narrowly.  And confusing them as simply an "either/or" choice.  And it is silly just to say if you vote or not you lose your right to speak (complain) or not. Really?!?!  

That said,  I am more disturbed by the lack of involvement or complete apathy for either.  Those who don't vote by not affirmative choice, but rather out of a complete lack of interest or sense of caring about even that there is something to vote about, oblivious to what is happening.  Just drifting through life.  No sense of others or community.  Just stumbling blindly along unaware of what is going on around them.  Terminally oblivious.  Willfully ignorant.  Sadly it seems that is the majority.  Barely 30% of those with a right to vote actually do so.  Ever.  By most polls, the overwhelming majority lack even basic knowledge about current events, history, or much of anything, really.  Ignorance and apathy abound.  A lethal combination IMHO. 

 

Be passionate about something.  Live fully.   Get involved.  

[Outta Here]

Really? Some don't vote for OTHER reasons...they're not just drifting through life with no sense of others or community, stumbling blindly along, etc, etc, etc...

Life life fully: Walk a mile in someone else's shoes before judging them. Keep in mind there are 16+ million children in America alone whose families struggle to even keep shoes on their feet in the first place. When people are more worried about where they are going to get their next meal, they really couldn't give a flip as to whether or not they're going to vote.

/out

[CoAspen]

The other side of the coin is, who you vote for could make a difference where the next meal is coming from! 

[Robert]

8 hours ago, CoAspen said:

The other side of the coin is, who you vote for could make a difference where the next meal is coming from! 

But that's just it..it is a gamble.  Most politicians (if not all) are bought out.  

Here's my suggestion: the politicians should try attire like this:

 

 

[CoAspen]

Life is a gamble, make of it the best you can!!!