Ethicists - Voting Your Heart is Immoral

[PickelledEggs]

But just because someone convinced you that she has a better chance of defeating the antichrist Trump in the general.

Uhh. Well she is the only other major party candidate. "convincing" isn't the term that I would use to say what you're trying to say. I would say "observe". As in we observed the reality that we are in. lol


And on that note, if you can't calm yourself, I'd advise you take a breather. I mean.... you're spelling out the letters in lol as "el oh el".... in all caps. It's pretty obvious you're giving us emotional responses and not thought out, rational ones.

Anyway. #trump2016 #buildawall #chinachinachinachina #yourefired #unemployment2016 #makeamericahateagain2016

I gotta start prepping myself to worship our inevitable pumpkinfaced overlord.

[PickelledEggs]

Let's say "China"


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDrfE9I8_hs

[widdershins]

So can you explain to us how refusal to help make an effective vote against Trump is not selfish?

This is America. You have the right to be selfish if you want, but at least be self-aware.

Sent from your mom.

Yes I can explain that to you.  You won't like it, but I can explain it pretty well, I think.

When you go to the ballot box, do you think you're going to see a "Never Trump" box to check?  I can tell you, you are not.  The purpose of voting is to vote "for" someone.  That is the actual definition of voting.  This whole "make an effective vote against Trump" thing, that's YOUR goal.  You are playing the short game.  You have rolled over and accepted the broken system the way it is and decided to play by the rigged rules you have been handed.  MY goal is not to compromise my principles for short-term gratification.  If Trump is elected, that will suck...for me.  And a bit for my children.  But my grandchildren?  Great-grandchildren?  They won't know who he was.  I can pass on to them the defeatist attitude that the system is rigged and here's how you play or I can stick to my principles and hope that, long-term, there are enough of us left who haven't given up to eventually make a difference.  That will suck for me, and a little for my children.  But if it eventually works, my grandchildren and great-grandchildren will enjoy a more fair system.

Now, do you see what happens there?  Either way my "selfish" act sucks for ME, but is better for those who will come after me if the system is eventually changed because there were enough people like me who wouldn't play a rigged game that it eventually made a difference.  I get nothing out of this.  Do you?  You sure do!  You get short-term gratification.  "Yay!  We beat Trump and MY life is better for it!  I hope my great-grandchildren are as good at getting less fucked by the system as I am!"

I am idealistic, not "selfish".  And no, I am not making a difference, personally, but the same argument could be and has been made for the importance of one vote.  If one vote matters, so does one voice (so send your money now because money is speech!).  What you are saying is that my one VOTE matters, but my one VOICE does not.  Well, that's your opinion.  It's your opinion that it is more important to vote against Trump than it is to vote for someone I actually believe in because you've been suckered into thinking that this is the way the game is played.  And it is, but only because so many people like you accept it.  Tell me, if NOBODY thought like you, if NOBODY went to the polls to vote "against" someone, what do you think the chances of a third party candidate getting elected would be then?  I bet they would be quite a bit higher.  So what is it I am doing that is so selfish?  I'm refusing to play by the corrupt rules.  I'm refusing to accept the system as-is.  I'm refusing to accept the two terrible parties which have been taking turns forcibly butt sexing us my entire life.  But most importantly to you, I'm refusing to give YOU my vote.  Because THAT is what you're actually asking of me.  You are telling my that I am selfish because I won't give YOU my vote.  I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to call indoctrinated bullshit on that one.  You drank the Kool-Aid of political corruption and have accepted that there is no possibility of a better way where we, the people, actually have a voice.  I don't like that flavor, so I am going to continue to be "selfish" by routinely making my own life suck so that people I will not live to meet MIGHT have it better.

Voting is not only about the vote.  It's also your voice.  Bernie lost the primary.  The votes for him are dead and buried.  But the VOICE they left behind is still loud and strong.  Long after the vote no longer matters the voice can linger.  It is shortsighted to see only the vote and ignore the voice.  Right now people who think like you are in the vast majority, so your voices are drowning out people like me.  But eventually, if there are enough people like me who believe your VOICE matters at least as much as you vote (in some cases more), the system will change and the two parties will live to regret their decades of abuse of the system and the people.

So selfish?  Hardly.  Do you think I WANT Trump as a president?  Do you think I WANTED Joni Ernst?  It SUCKS for people who don't play by the shit rules most have come to accept.  We rarely get the instant gratification and short-term triumph of a win.  But I'm not voting to get what "I" want, and I'm sure as fuck not asking YOU to vote to get what "I" want.  I am diminishing the importance of my vote in exchange for a voice, saying "I do not accept this rigged system and I want something better", knowing full well I am unlikely to get it in my lifetime.  I am giving up what I actually COULD get to fight a, currently, losing battle for the future.  I am choosing to stick to my ideals because I would rather hope for a better system, a better future, than accept what I, personally, MIGHT be able to get right now.  It's not selfish, it's sacrifice.  What would be selfish is if I told you that you were somehow defective for not giving me your vote.

[widdershins]

Pickelled Eggs is correct when he says that no third party has a chance of winning the election.  (Or any POTUS election in the foreseeable future, for that matter)  And it has nothing to do with attitude.  The way elections in the US are structured hurts third parties and practically guarantees a two-party system.  For any third parties to be viable, there'd have to be structural changes in our electoral system first.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo

If NOBODY went to the polls with the idea, "no third party has a chance of winning the election", that would not be the case.  Part of the problem, my friend.

[Hydra009]

*sigh*

[PickelledEggs]

If NOBODY went to the polls with the idea, "no third party has a chance of winning the election", that would not be the case.  Part of the problem, my friend.

You and nonsensei have a lot of "if" in your logic. Making your intentions calculated on "if"s that will not happen.

When was the last time an independent won a general election? I'll make it easier for you.... When was the last time an independent did well during an election?

Oh. Right. Nader. When the votes got split, because even with the amount of votes he received, he could not compete against an almost completely unified Republican party. Which is what will happen this year. I don't know what independent you are picking, but that is also the other issue. Which one? The people that are still voting for independents are so diverse with their choice that it will. not. happen. they will. not. win. They will split the vote from the lesser evil that is Hillary.

I will say this every time it needs to be said:
An independent candidate will not win. There isn't a chance because of how the people voting for independents are going to be voting for different independents. An independent victory will not happen. You will be throwing your vote away... for what? to make a point?
Our first priority is making sure Trump isn't elected in to office.  Priority number 2 is voting out the current members of the House and Senate and voting in better ones. NOTHING. Absolutely NOTHING will get accomplished with even a good president in office. Even if Bernie Sanders was elected president, he would be fighting non-stop with the other 2/3 of the judicial system to get anything done. Almost none of it will. In order for anything to get done, we need to have the other 2/3 of this system work correctly and not like the current cluster-fuck of a system it is right now. We can't just pretend it away like trying to elect a new president will fix that. It wont. We need to vote in a new House and Senate for anything to get done, but right now, that is only priority number 2. Priority number one. Above anything else, is making sure that shit-lord of a man, Donald Trump is not elected president. I'm not happy the alternative is Hillary Clinton either, but you know what? It's better than having a fake nice person in office that doesn't currently publicly condone hate and a backwards agenda, than a person that openly endorses a backwards, hate-filled, racist, sexist agenda.

We cannot have Trump as president. Period.

It's your right to vote for whoever you want... even if it's a third party candidate... and it's even your right to not vote at all. It's not a duty or obligation. But do know that you are being lazily selfish and stubborn.

[PickelledEggs]

#trump2016

Get ready.

[PickelledEggs]

Btw. Voting for Hillary because we acknowledge that she is 1: a much better option than Trump and 2: has a better chance at beating Trump is not "rolling over and accepting the broken system". It's assessing the situation rationally.

Vote out senators. Vote out the House. Nothing significant in our system will change until then. Nothing.

[Sargon The Grape]

1: a much better option than Trump

It's still like saying that passing diarrhea is better than vomiting. Both are unpleasant, but given the option most folks would pick the one you don't have to taste.

[PickelledEggs]

It's still like saying that passing diarrhea is better than vomiting. Both are unpleasant, but given the option most folks would pick the one you don't have to taste.

lol yes. Exactly.

I guess a small few people are bulimic, though.

[widdershins]

You and nonsensei have a lot of "if" in your logic. Making your intentions calculated on "if"s that will not happen.

My intentions are not calculated on any "ifs".  My intentions are to have a voice in our government.  Do I actually believe the third party candidate will win?  Of course not.  There are too many people who think like you.  Do I think you're all going to suddenly become more idealistic and give that third party candidate a chance?  Of course not.  The "if" is not part of some master plan, it's simply pointing out what I see as the flaw in yours.

When was the last time an independent won a general election? I'll make it easier for you.... When was the last time an independent did well during an election?

You miss the point entirely.  It's not about winning the election.  It's about rejecting the corrupt system in the hopes that enough people will eventually do the same to make a difference.

Oh. Right. Nader. When the votes got split, because even with the amount of votes he received, he could not compete against an almost completely unified Republican party. Which is what will happen this year. I don't know what independent you are picking, but that is also the other issue. Which one? The people that are still voting for independents are so diverse with their choice that it will. not. happen. they will. not. win. They will split the vote from the lesser evil that is Hillary.

I actually never said I was picking any independent.  I did not indicate at all for whom I might vote in this particular election.  I'm not even talking specifically about "this election".  I am rejecting your basic premise that I have to vote for an asshole to make sure a dick doesn't get elected.

I suppose I will decide that when I find out who's running.  I know, it's very selfish and stupid of me to find out who's actually going to be on the ballot before deciding who I will vote for.  I guess I will just never learn that having all the information before coming to a conclusion only makes you stupid and selfish.

I will say this every time it needs to be said:
An independent candidate will not win. There isn't a chance because of how the people voting for independents are going to be voting for different independents. An independent victory will not happen. You will be throwing your vote away... for what? to make a point?

Again, you miss the point entirely because all you can see is the short term, this election, what I want NOW and for ME.  It's not about winning.  It's not about making a point.  It's about not accepting the corrupt system as it is.  It's about not rolling over and becoming part of the problem.  Because I think we ALL agree the system is fucked.

Do you think Rosa Parks was the first black person to refuse to give up her seat to a white person?  Because she wasn't.  (No, I am not saying what I am doing is even REMOTELY comparable to a rights icon like Parks, before I start taking that shit).  Parks is the one who started the movement, but she's not the one who started the protests.  One voice can matter, but dozens, hundreds, thousands, even millions of voices go unheard first.

If I were to vote for a third party candidate, I would not do it believing I had a chance to elect that person.  I would not do it to "make a point", which you only say because it sounds stupid.  I would do it because I truly believe that candidate is the best choice and I refuse to bow to a system where I have to choose between two pieces of shit for lunch when there's a sandwich right fucking there.  "But the fat guy isn't going to let you have the sandwich, so you HAVE TO choose which piece of shit you're going to eat!"  No, I fucking don't.  I'm not "making a point", I'm refusing to compromise my principles and play the rigged game.  That is not "throwing my vote away".  Yes, my vote is "wasted", if you want to look at it that way, but if enough of us do that, if enough voices speak loudly enough, eventually one of them might be heard.  If avid Bernie supporters write in Bernie (which I will not be doing because even I think that would be stupid) in large enough numbers to make a real difference in the election (I'm talking costing Hillary the election by a landslide), those votes won't get Bernie elected, but those voices WILL be heard.  Maybe it will lead to change, maybe it won't, but no doubt it would have ramifications outside of simply "the vote", which is all you are focusing on.

Our first priority is making sure Trump isn't elected in to office.

YOUR first priority is making sure Trump isn't elected and THAT is what is truly "selfish", when you project YOUR priority onto me and say that I am defective if that is not also my priority.  Seriously, you can't see the fundamentalism in that?

Priority number 2 is voting out the current members of the House and Senate and voting in better ones. NOTHING. Absolutely NOTHING will get accomplished with even a good president in office. Even if Bernie Sanders was elected president, he would be fighting non-stop with the other 2/3 of the judicial system to get anything done. Almost none of it will. In order for anything to get done, we need to have the other 2/3 of this system work correctly and not like the current cluster-fuck of a system it is right now. We can't just pretend it away like trying to elect a new president will fix that. It wont. We need to vote in a new House and Senate for anything to get done, but right now, that is only priority number 2. Priority number one. Above anything else, is making sure that shit-lord of a man, Donald Trump is not elected president. I'm not happy the alternative is Hillary Clinton either, but you know what? It's better than having a fake nice person in office that doesn't currently publicly condone hate and a backwards agenda, than a person that openly endorses a backwards, hate-filled, racist, sexist agenda.

We cannot have Trump as president. Period.

I certainly can't disagree with most of that.  I would love to see Obama withdraw his Supreme Court nomination the day after Hillary wins the election to make room for her to nominate the most uncompromising, liberal prick she can find and give those little pricks no alternative but to take it and like it.  I would laugh.  I would laugh a lot.  But all of that is short term.  I can't change the system at all, much less in my own lifetime.  I can only hope that the future will be better, with a more fair system and the money out of politics.  You know a lot of politicians who say that, but how many of those who actually have a chance of being elected will DO it?  Nobody ever changed anything by giving up and accepting the way things are.  So if I want real change the ONLY thing I can do is not give in to the "throwing your vote away" crowd and accept things the way they are.  I am very unlikely to personally make a difference with what I'm doing, but it's impossible for me to make a difference if I do nothing.

It's your right to vote for whoever you want... even if it's a third party candidate... and it's even your right to not vote at all. It's not a duty or obligation. But do know that you are being lazily selfish and stubborn.

And again, you miss the point throwing your selfish little "Do it my way or you're an asshole" tantrum.  Stubborn?  Because I won't give up and agree with you I'm stubborn?  Because I won't roll over and accept the system as-is I'm stubborn?  Because I disagree with you I'm stubborn?  And lazy, now?  You're the one who has rolled over and accepted how things are.  Making a stand is lazy, is it?  Waiting for all the information to come in, carefully examining that information AND THEN making an informed decision is lazy?  My months of upcoming learning and consideration is lazy compared to your "Well, Hillary got the nomination 2 minutes ago, so I know who I'm voting for"?  And we're back to selfish.  You're the one who's demanding that I vote the way YOU want, not the other way around.  You are the one calling me stubborn, selfish, lazy and, in not so many words, stupid because my opinion differs from yours.

And why, oh why, would your arguments not convince me?  Let's take a quick look.  What happened here?  Well, first of all, a claim was made.  But that claim is a little strange.  The claim was essentially "People who disagree with me are bad".  Really?  A part of the claim was actually to frame people who disagree with the claim negatively.  You see, that's how you know you've got a good, solid argument based in fact; that only bad people disagree with you.  So, what happened next?  Well, I started off selfish.  Then I obviously got stupid.  And somehow I also ended up lazy and stubborn.  I can't help but notice I was never "brave" or "true to my nature".  I was only ever bad things.  The longer I disagreed with you, the more bad things I became.  And, of course, if Trump wins it's my fault, personally.  I will apparently cast the deciding vote.  Forget that I never actually told you who I would be voting for and, more likely than not, it will be Hillary as I don't actually hate her.  I don't love her or anything, but most of the shit about her is actually of the "bull" variety.  But I AM waiting to see who's actually on the fucking ballot before definitively making up my mind.

So, you do realize you're a fundie, right?  Yeah, I'm an idealist and idealism is pretty much the polar opposite of realism.  I'll take the hit for that.  I want the system to change and I can tell you, either nothing happens, the system changes or the system changes you.  You DO NOT get to change the system by changing for the system.  Long term, decades from now, that's where my goal is.  But you, you only care about "right now" and if "right now" isn't the only thing that's important to me that shows some flaw in me, right?  Noting to do with a difference of opinion, nothing to do with what we hold as important individually, I'm either with your or I'm stupid, lazy, selfish and stubborn.  Okay.  So, I just have one question.  Can I call you Randy?

[PickelledEggs]

You're throwing marshmallows at a wall, hoping to demolish it.

Sent from your mom.

[PickelledEggs]

To clarify, you're stubborn because you think that voting for your third party candidate to "reject the system"  is going to do anything. You seem to think that even though Donald Trump is bad and much worse than Hillary, the fact that Hillary Clinton is still pretty bad and that is enough reason to bury your head in the sand.

Hate to break it to you, but the fundie is you.

Sent from your mom.

[PickelledEggs]

I actually never said I was picking any independent.  I did not indicate at all for whom I might vote in this particular election.  I'm not even talking specifically about "this election".  I am rejecting your basic premise that I have to vote for an asshole to make sure a dick doesn't get elected.

What are you even arguing about, then @widdershins . I can't have a discussion with someone that doesn't even have an idea of what they're talking about, moving from position to position.


Be clear with what you'r point is.

Is your reason for voting for an independent/not voting at all because you actually think the independent can win? or because you want to make a point?

If it's because you think they can win, I ask you to reevaluate the situation. If it's to make a point, I ask you to swallow your pride and reevaluate the situation.

If you want to change and reject the system, it's done by voting out the people in the house and the senate first. Unfortunately, we have this presidential election to deal with first.

[widdershins]

What are you even arguing about, then @widdershins . I can't have a discussion with someone that doesn't even have an idea of what they're talking about, moving from position to position.


Be clear with what you'r point is.

Is your reason for voting for an independent/not voting at all because you actually think the independent can win? or because you want to make a point?

If it's because you think they can win, I ask you to reevaluate the situation. If it's to make a point, I ask you to swallow your pride and reevaluate the situation.

If you want to change and reject the system, it's done by voting out the people in the house and the senate first. Unfortunately, we have this presidential election to deal with first.

My point is unchanged from the beginning, and it was never about "this election" specifically, it is a rejection of the "throwing your vote away" mentality, which I have said REPEATEDLY, starting with the second paragraph of my first post and repeated at least once or twice since.  Your inability to see my point has more to do with your fundamentalist rejection of that point than me changing anything.  Nothing has changed in all of my posts.  SHOW ME where I "moved from position to position".  I may get off the original topic from time to time as I respond to specific allegations, but my point has never changed.

So, I'm the fundamentalist then?  Okay.  You respond how?  You make a ridiculous analogy to further show why my position is bad in the first post.

In the second you again misrepresent what I am saying.  I actually never said Hillary was bad in any way.  At no point did I in any way insinuate that Hillary, personally, was bad.  In fact, in my last post I specifically stated that I kind of liked her and would likely be voting for her.  Once you told me what I think, then you said what I "seem to think", and what I seem to think is that Hillary is pretty bad.  So why, then, am I likely voting for her?  And finally in that post you throw my accusation back at me.  Yeah, that's some pretty rational responding right there.  Nothing at all like a fundie throwing a tantrum.

In your third post (I rate so many) you say I have no idea what I'm talking about (I'm stupid again), then add that I'm moving from position to position, a brand new "bad thing" I am.  Then I'm not clear, another brand new bad thing I am.  Then there's a false dichotomy.  The reason for voting for a third party is the reason I have given repeatedly, which is neither of those.  I'm not going to give it yet again.  You don't want to understand my point anyway.  Followed by another false dichotomy telling me what I think because it's easier than understanding a point of view you strongly disagree with.  And finally you tell me "how it is".

I will say it ONCE more, and that is it.  I will make it clear.

THE POINT I AM MAKING: What I take issue with is the "throwing your vote away" and "you are selfish if you don't do it my way" mentality.  They are one and the same and this mentality is why a third party candidate stands no chance.

MY PROBLEM WITH HILLARY: I have no problem with Hillary and she is who I will LIKELY vote for, though I believe it to be mildly retarded to make a definitive decision before I even know all the names which are going to be on the ballot.  I don't reject Hillary, nor do I think she is anywhere near as bad as Trump, nor do I think she's "still pretty bad", nor do I dislike her strongly, nor any of the other things you've made up for me, not one of which relates in the most remote way to anything I actually said ANYWHERE in ANY thread, threads like the one where I got torn a new asshole multiple times for DEFENDING her.

WHAT I HOPE TO ACCOMPLISH: To trade my one vote, which is greatly diminished in our current system anyway, for one voice, which is the only REAL way things are going to change.  Why?  Because when you match your one vote with the ten thousand fucking morons out there what does your vote really do?  People like you will keep spouting what I believe to be utter bullshit and part of the problem, the "throwing your vote away" nonsense, and I will continue calling it bullshit with what you see as nonsense from me.

HOW I SEE YOUR SIDE: I see you as looking only short, term, at each individual election, instead of actually working toward long-term change.  You say that the way to get this change is to do it your way.  How is that working out for you?  Dodd-Frank was passed...and then gutted.  There was too much money in politics...so money became speech, and we can't get enough speech in politics.  A handful of banks pulled a job on US and got away with it.  After 40 years we are STILL fighting the abortion fight.  After 50 years we are STILL fighting the civil rights fight.

WHAT I BELIEVE DOES NOT HELP: One election at a time doesn't do shit, big picture.  Let's say we get Hillary in the presidency AND we get a bunch of Democrats in office besides.  Will we get universal health care?  Will bankers be held accountable?  Will Citizens United get reversed?  Will Bush Jr. get charged, or even fucking investigated?  Will Pope Benedict's immunity get rescinded?  Will ANY of that happen?  What is this big fucking change I am supposed to expect if we JUST get Hillary and a bunch of Democrats elected?  What's more, what is there to stop Republicans from fucking it up in a decade or two?  7 1/2 years ago I voted for "change".  And we got our fucking health care!  A fucked up, piece of shit system which costs too much, STILL allows insurance companies to rape us, isn't controlling rates any more and is STILL not affordable for many struggling Americans, who now struggle EVEN MORE because they don't get a tax refund.  And we got gay marriage!   Obama finally finished "evolving" on the matter when it was done.

WHAT I BELIEVE WILL HELP: Enough people standing up and saying, "We are done being locked into a two party system.  An election can be competitive with three or more candidates."  Me changing my position to yours, that won't accomplish shit because it hasn't yet.  You changing your position to mine, that also won't do shit.  But a majority of people changing their position to mine, that has a chance of actually changing things.  Is that going to happen today or next week or within a decade?  I doubt it.  Will it help if I cave and do it your way?  In no way.

WHY I DON'T THINK MY POSITION IS SELFISH AND YOURS IS: That one's simple.  I'm not asking anything of you.  I'm not asking you to change.  I'm not telling you that my opinion is "right" and there is something wrong with you if you disagree.  You are the one asking for MY vote and stigmatizing anyone not willing to give it.  It's a dick move.  The conversation goes a little like this.  YOU: Give me your vote!  ME: No!  YOU: That makes you an asshole!