Trump is winning so far.

honestly i would not for any of them

+1 to you HomeLess

Yes, that's exactly the attitude most countries had when histories worst dictators came to power

just as it is my right to vote it is also my right to abstain from voting. as for your point about dictators, please tell us which one of those candidates are potential dictators? I am so very curious

Apparently you did not pay very much attention to what I said. Why would I refer to history, you know? As in the past? If I was talking current presidential candidates? Anyway history has proven that historically bad leaders or dictators almost always come to power in a low turn out election. Even if the candidate isn't necessarily a bad guy, unpopular leaders come to power or reaffirm it when a portion of the public abstains from national politics because if a large portion of the public abstain, it usually means the other half doesn't pay as much attention for the same reason which is eithe non satisfaction or plain not caring. Obama is a good example. The 2012 election was Lower then more recent ones, and thus since a lot of moderate conservatives stayed home, it gave Obama an edge. Today, Obama has become almost as unpopular as Bush or Carter. Even fellow democrats don't want there names associated with much of the time.

you are citing low voter turnout as a cause for rise of dictatorships. so please tell me, if I and others don't bother to show up what? would there be a military coup? would Clinton or Trump or some other politican turn America into a totalitarian military state? and as for your point about Obama, you may have been too young to remember this but when he was elected to office in 08 there was a historic voter turnout.

I voted sanders as the poll said we were the same person.

Too young? and that is matters because?.......Actually that election is what started my intrest in politics. I did not say that every time an a future unpopular candidate was elected it would be that way. Obama did not win because of policy, he did not win because he was good at debating, he won because of four things...



1 he was a black guy. He took advantage of a conservative movement trying to wipe out an image democrats had been telling minorities for years, which is republicans are racist white guys. This made McCains position very hard, he had to be careful what he said about Obama. Obama also used his color to his advantage on polling out minority votes.


2 Sarah Palin was the worst political mistake as a VP in recent history, utterly a nightmare.


3 McCain is a bad debater, Obama actually is bad himself because he has a pattern of going on a propaganda raid in his time on stage and when Obama gets stumped, he looks like a deer about to be run over by a truck. Why did he beat McCain then? because McCain is even worse

4 Bush made his victory possible, both democrats and republicans can usually agree that anyone claiming to be nothing close to Bush had a better shot then Abraham Lincoln in that election year.

your still not paying attention to what I am saying? I am saying that if a large portion of the public does not vote, that's means that the chance increases that the guy they don't want gets in, simple. I only used the dictatorship example as a side show not the main point which is that a low turnout much of the time gets the guy the majority of the public ends up mad at.

Why? Because the lower the turnout for an election, the less attention is payed to the smarter, better fitted candidate, which in turn leads to the fact that it puts both candidates on an equal scale no matter if one is better then the other.

McCain was a bumbling two faced idiot, but out of the two I firmly believed he would have made a better president ( Under either of them, i still probably would have ended up screaming at the press secretaries like i do now XD )

Edited 1/31/2016 07:02:57

Btw I enjoy our debates very much homeless :) I don't always engage you because I am not always in the mood but I like debating you because you always make me think outside the box ( even though usually I end up rejecting your position, I will always consider it ) I hope I have that same affect on you lol

let me explain to you what I said in a simpler fashion.

in summary you are arguing that:
higher voter turnout = good
lower voter turnout= bad
Obama = bad

and I just told you that a historically high voter turnout in the US presidential election of 2008 led to Obama. so what I'm pointing out is that you are contradicting yourself here.

Edited 1/31/2016 07:02:34

plenty more of where that came from conservative. I usually don't like to engage in political debates but ahh well you have sparked a political shit storm on the forums recently so I may as well give my two cents.

I said that...actually let me be louder this time * Ahemm * * takes deep breath *




I SAID THAT IT DOES NOT WORK EVERY SINGLE TIME IN HISTORY JUST LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE!!!



* clears throat *


If your saying that if an idea has to work out every single time then technically nothing in this world makes sense because there will always be a time when an idea or historical pattern went different and failed. There is always an exception, always

Your idea of ' If failed once, it aint gonna work or is not true ' cannot be limited to just my point, it has to do with everything.

EDIT: Btw i was not angry when i used CAPS lol

Edited 1/31/2016 07:12:05

a piece of friendly advice in the future when you go to your debate club or model UN or whatever (you seem like the person who enjoys political discussions) don't mention two examples that directly contradict with one another even if you believe that they are an exception because you are basically slapping yourself in the mouth. just a tip for future reference if you want to come across as an intelligent and logical debator.

Edit: you could also try to steer clear on going off on wild tangents like you are doing now. hope you don't talk like this real life.

Edited 1/31/2016 07:13:15

Disguising an insult as advice in order to escape my point is not only funny but cute


EDIT: I really hate to say this but most of my debates with trolls end this way. The troll at this time attempts to makes himself feel superior by giving advice disguised as an insult in usually a superior manner in order to reassure his own supposed dominance. Not saying your a troll, jus saying this style of last tactic resorts looks strangely familiar

Edited 1/31/2016 07:19:33

Lol a 12 year old who thinks he can make other people vote for him, cute.

I was genuinely trying to help you. in the same post you argued that low voter turnout was bad and that Obama was bad. I pointed out that Obama got into the whitehouse though historically high voter turnout and out of kindness suggested that in the future you should not contradict yourself in the same breath. you then said I insulted you and avoided your original point.

Contradiction is when you have Said something that cancelled out your previous statement. Technically I never contradicted myself, I made a statement and then you found something that contradicted my statement, not Me saying two things one after another that cancelled each other out.

I explained your Obama point and why it does not matter a couple posts ago so I suggest you look back and counter my argument

There was so many things wrong with the Republican vote... one of which being that everyone who voted Trump was 1.Trolling or 2. Not American


(Not to mention Cruz tied Rubio when I last checked.)