Suspicions Confirmed: Trump’s Campaign Was A Pre-Planned Con Job

[RoosGirl]

It is a tough one. No doubt. Here is where I am on this most difficult question.

I live in a state that will vote republican. No problem, the republican will win this state. Therefore, I know that I don't have to vote republican, but I can vote for Constitution Party, as I have in the last who know how many elections. This allows my state to go Republican, and yet my vote will hopefully continue to support a 3rd party.

For those people that don't live in a state that will go Republican. Well, that is a tough call. I certainly cannot fault anyone for voting their conscience. God will give is our leaders. We have to do our due diligence and vote, and let God determine what our fate may be. More judgement sent down on us, a reprieve from His judgement, or possibly the start of reformation - His call. I just live here at His good service.

If I lived in a swing state, well, in this case I would probably vote for Trump. I am absolutely deeply afraid of Hillary. I thought Obama would have been more like Bill Clinton, so in swing states I may have voted Constitution Party, but now I cannot believe the damage that Obama has done (and yes, with a complicit republican congress.) And I am absolutely certain that Hillary will far, far worse than Obama. I firmly believe this country will not be able to survive a Hillary presidency, I do believe we be able to survive a Trump presidency. I believe that Trump will break the current corruption hold by both parties; and yes, he may bring in a new corruption, but maybe not, we really don't know. But we definitely know the evil that Hillary has and will bring.

And, I could all be wrong, with all of this. But this is where I am.

I understand the thought process.  I have an extreme disagreement with voting for someone based on who someone else will vote for, and that is essentially what you are suggesting for people (whom I am one of) that live in a swing state.

[Smokin Joe]

It is a tough one. No doubt. Here is where I am on this most difficult question.

I live in a state that will vote republican. No problem, the republican will win this state. Therefore, I know that I don't have to vote republican, but I can vote for Constitution Party, as I have in the last who know how many elections. This allows my state to go Republican, and yet my vote will hopefully continue to support a 3rd party.

For those people that don't live in a state that will go Republican. Well, that is a tough call. I certainly cannot fault anyone for voting their conscience. God will give is our leaders. We have to do our due diligence and vote, and let God determine what our fate may be. More judgement sent down on us, a reprieve from His judgement, or possibly the start of reformation - His call. I just live here at His good service.

If I lived in a swing state, well, in this case I would probably vote for Trump. I am absolutely deeply afraid of Hillary. I thought Obama would have been more like Bill Clinton, so in swing states I may have voted Constitution Party, but now I cannot believe the damage that Obama has done (and yes, with a complicit republican congress.) And I am absolutely certain that Hillary will far, far worse than Obama. I firmly believe this country will not be able to survive a Hillary presidency, I do believe we be able to survive a Trump presidency. I believe that Trump will break the current corruption hold by both parties; and yes, he may bring in a new corruption, but maybe not, we really don't know. But we definitely know the evil that Hillary has and will bring.

And, I could all be wrong, with all of this. But this is where I am.

By the same token, someone who lives in a State which will definitely go Democrat, could vote third party (I, too, prefer the Constitution Party at this point), without qualm. It will not affect the current electoral result, but will help bring the Constitution Party into the limelight.

[unknown]

I understand the thought process.  I have an extreme disagreement with voting for someone based on who someone else will vote for, and that is essentially what you are suggesting for people (whom I am one of) that live in a swing state.

I understand. I can accept your honest position on that.

I also have looked at the positions that Trump has stated during this election process. I am creating a specific time window for his defined policies as being since he declared his candidacy and not before. Just looking at his polices in over that last year, they look pretty good and mostly solid conservative.

Now, if you look at the man delivering those policies during the last year, he obviously has some serious flaws.

This is what I see. So, this is another reason why I believe in a swing I could vote for him. If others decide that his character flaws are too great for them to vote for him, I fully respect that position.

[Jazzhead]

A voter in a swing state doesn't have the same luxury to vote third party and avoid a distasteful "lesser of two evils" vote.

The swing state voter not only has to directly confront the "lesser of two evils" choice, but also, more fundamentally, decide what is right and moral when one of those evils is worse than other.  The easy response is to decline to vote for "evil",  whether lesser or greater.   But if one is convinced, as I am, that one of these evils is significantly worse than the other,  is it irresponsible to decline to vote to affirmatively defeat that evil?  Clearly,  a vote for Clinton is a more effective means of stopping Trumpism than a vote for Gary Johnson.



 

 

[unknown]

By the same token, someone who lives in a State which will definitely go Democrat, could vote third party (I, too, prefer the Constitution Party at this point), without qualm. It will not affect the current electoral result, but will help bring the Constitution Party into the limelight.

Yes. For me, if it will truly go Democrat, I would agree with this position.

For me, if there was any indication that maybe this state would swing for the first time to Republican, then I would reconsider and possibly vote Trump.

But I would respect the position that anyone has with their voting thought process; as long as they work it through thoughtfully and prayerfully. God will give us who He wants us to have, but I believe we do need to vote.

[unknown]

A voter in a swing state doesn't have the same luxury to vote third party and avoid a distasteful "lesser of two evils" vote.

The swing state voter not only has to directly confront the "lesser of two evils" choice, but also, more fundamentally, decide what is right and moral when one of those evils is worse than other.  The easy response is to decline to vote for "evil",  whether lesser or greater.   But if one is convinced, as I am, that one of these evils is significantly worse than the other,  is it irresponsible to decline to vote to affirmatively defeat that evil?  Clearly,  a vote for Clinton is a more effective means of stopping Trumpism than a vote for Gary Johnson.

I don't believe Trump to be "evil."
I do believe Clinton to be "evil."

This is where I can in good conscience deliver a vote to Trump, if I felt it necessary.

If I did believe Trump to be "evil," then there is no way I could vote Trump.

[musiclady]

A voter in a swing state doesn't have the same luxury to vote third party and avoid a distasteful "lesser of two evils" vote.

The swing state voter not only has to directly confront the "lesser of two evils" choice, but also, more fundamentally, decide what is right and moral when one of those evils is worse than other.  The easy response is to decline to vote for "evil",  whether lesser or greater.   But if one is convinced, as I am, that one of these evils is significantly worse than the other,  is it irresponsible to decline to vote to affirmatively defeat that evil?  Clearly,  a vote for Clinton is a more effective means of stopping Trumpism than a vote for Gary Johnson.



 

 

I understand your point @Jazzhead, but disagree with your conclusion.  I'm in a swing state, and I view both candidates as equally evil (though Trump is less predictable, and potentially more dangerous).   But I have come to the conclusion that, regardless of my location, I need to vote in a manner that keeps my conscience clear, and that means not voting either for Trump or Hillary.

As a pro-lifer, I don't see any way to vote for Johnson, though I wish I could, so I am most likely to either leave the top spot blank, or vote Castle if he makes it on the Ohio ballot.

As I see it, voting against my conscience because of my location is a form of "situation" ethics, and I can't do it.

[libertybele]

My thought has been this for several election cycles;  why should I vote for someone I don't like and why should I vote for someone who I think won't benefit this country? I don't like Hillary and I don't think she will be beneficial to this country, therefore I will not vote for her.  I don't like Trump, nor do I think he will be beneficial to this country, therefore I will not vote for him either.  I like Cruz, I know that he would be beneficial to this country, therefore I will write him in.  This notion of voting for the lesser of two evils, or voting for one so the other doesn't get in is really ridiculous and frankly illogical. To me there is no logic in voting for someone you can't stand and/or who you feel will be destructive to the country.

[Smokin Joe]

A voter in a swing state doesn't have the same luxury to vote third party and avoid a distasteful "lesser of two evils" vote.

The swing state voter not only has to directly confront the "lesser of two evils" choice, but also, more fundamentally, decide what is right and moral when one of those evils is worse than other.  The easy response is to decline to vote for "evil",  whether lesser or greater.   But if one is convinced, as I am, that one of these evils is significantly worse than the other,  is it irresponsible to decline to vote to affirmatively defeat that evil?  Clearly,  a vote for Clinton is a more effective means of stopping Trumpism than a vote for Gary Johnson.



 

 

True to a point, but as we have been repeatedly  assured, not voting for Trump  isa vote for Clinton.

Might as well vote for Johnson or Castle (Constitution Party, my personal preference) at the same time.

[wolfcreek]

Balderdash! The ONLY reason Trump is the republican nominee is that the media gave him anything he wanted until he was nominated and millions of  crossover democrats voted for him in republican primaries!

So what? [if it happens to be true] If they vote for him in the general all the better. That means they hate Hillary. :0


Also remember all those disenfranchised and first time voters. They don't show up in polls... only likely voters.

[wolfcreek]

I don't believe Trump to be "evil."
I do believe Clinton to be "evil."

This is where I can in good conscience deliver a vote to Trump, if I felt it necessary.

If I did believe Trump to be "evil," then there is no way I could vote Trump.

He's the same as Hillary. Just ask any of these Nevers.

[Smokin Joe]

So what? [if it happens to be true] If they vote for him in the general all the better. That means they hate Hillary. :0

Crossover voters? And if they don't, a whole chunk of his apparent primary voters laugh all the way to the polls to vote for Hillary (or Johnson).

Also remember all those disenfranchised and first time voters. They don't show up in polls... only likely voters.

And many of them are freshly influenced by college professors who are almost universally Liberals. If they can't have the Bern, they'll go for the next most Communist thing.

[Jazzhead]

He's the same as Hillary. Just ask any of these Nevers.

No.  His unpredictability makes him worse because his unpredictability makes him more dangerous.     

[Cripplecreek]

No.  His unpredictability makes him worse because his unpredictability makes him more dangerous.   

Combine that with the fact that there is absolutely nothing his fans won't condone or encourage.

[libertybele]

It's not a matter of Trump being more dangerous or less dangerous than Hillary or the lesser of two evils.  The point IS, his entire campaign was a pre-planned CON job.  He deliberately hijacked the conservative movement and the GOP in order to hand the White House to Hillary period. At this point in time, according to the polls, the MSM, etc., Trump is losing. He never had any intention of beating Hillary.

By all means vote your conscience, but most importantly VOTE DOWN BALLOT!

[musiclady]

It's not a matter of Trump being more dangerous or less dangerous than Hillary or the lesser of two evils.  The point IS, his entire campaign was a pre-planned CON job.  He deliberately hijacked the conservative movement and the GOP in order to hand the White House to Hillary period. At this point in time, according to the polls, the MSM, etc., Trump is losing. He never had any intention of beating Hillary.

By all means vote your conscience, but most importantly VOTE DOWN BALLOT!

Well said, and worth repeating.

[Smokin Joe]

It's not a matter of Trump being more dangerous or less dangerous than Hillary or the lesser of two evils.  The point IS, his entire campaign was a pre-planned CON job.  He deliberately hijacked the conservative movement and the GOP in order to hand the White House to Hillary period. At this point in time, according to the polls, the MSM, etc., Trump is losing. He never had any intention of beating Hillary.

By all means vote your conscience, but most importantly VOTE DOWN BALLOT!

[libertybele]

Well said, and worth repeating.

Hopefully Trump supporters will begin opening their eyes.  It's still hard to believe that six months ago the GOP had everything going for them. I was so wrong. I was confident that the GOP would actually win this election and we would have a president who would be a decent leader for our country; and instead we wound up with Clinton/Trump!

[Oceander]

Hopefully Trump supporters will begin opening their eyes.  It's still hard to believe that six months ago the GOP had everything going for them. I was so wrong. I was confident that the GOP would actually win this election and we would have a president who would be a decent leader for our country; and instead we wound up with Clinton/Trump!

[Bigun]

Hopefully Trump supporters will begin opening their eyes.  It's still hard to believe that six months ago the GOP had everything going for them. I was so wrong. I was confident that the GOP would actually win this election and we would have a president who would be a decent leader for our country; and instead we wound up with Clinton/Trump!

They were/are MUCH more afraid of the REAL outsider than they are of losing to Hillary!

They have sown the wind and will now reap the whirlwind!

[libertybele]

They were/are MUCH more afraid of the REAL outsider than they are of losing to Hillary!

They have sown the wind and will now reap the whirlwind!

**Bump**  I think it's important to keep this circulating; Trump is a con, a liberal and a fraud.

[roamer_1]

The media hates him, the Democrats hate him and the GOPe hates him.

And so does everybody else, so what's your point?

[roamer_1]

A voter in a swing state doesn't have the same luxury to vote third party and avoid a distasteful "lesser of two evils" vote.

The swing state voter not only has to directly confront the "lesser of two evils" choice, but also, more fundamentally, decide what is right and moral when one of those evils is worse than other.  The easy response is to decline to vote for "evil",  whether lesser or greater.   But if one is convinced, as I am, that one of these evils is significantly worse than the other,  is it irresponsible to decline to vote to affirmatively defeat that evil?  Clearly,  a vote for Clinton is a more effective means of stopping Trumpism than a vote for Gary Johnson.

Meh. Too much strategery.
Vote your conscience. It is the tool our founders expected you to rely upon. then let the chips fall where they may

[Cripplecreek]

Meh. Too much strategery.
Vote your conscience. It is the tool our founders expected you to rely upon. then let the chips fall where they may

Labor to keep alive in your breast that little spark of celestial fire, called conscience. -George Washington

[The_Reader_David]

As a pro-lifer, I don't see any way to vote for Johnson, though I wish I could, so I am most likely to either leave the top spot blank, or vote Castle if he makes it on the Ohio ballot.

See the article from NRO I posted an excerpt of to the Libertarian Campaign thread.  It argues that under present circumstances, because he supports returning the matter to the states and regards Roe v. Wade as wrongly decided, and objects to Federal funding of abortions, Gary Johnson, despite his personal policy view in favor of easy access to abortion is the optimal choice for pro-life conservatives.