Neocons looking to support Hillary in a Hillary vs Trump race

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

It's pretty shocking that the Democratic frontrunner has a much worse foreign policy than the Republican frontrunner.

http://nationalinterest.org/feature/why-trump-panicking-robert-kagan-15329

[Ljube]

It's pretty shocking that the Democratic frontrunner has a much worse foreign policy than the Republican frontrunner.

http://nationalinterest.org/feature/why-trump-panicking-robert-kagan-15329

It's reson enough to support TRUMP in the general.

[Lyin' Steve]

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

This election is a giant clusterf[inks] for someone in my position.

[Ljube]

This election is a giant clusterf[inks] for someone in my position.

LibRep, just consider your options without passion and you will reach the same conclusion all of us have already reached: TRUMP is the answer.

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

This election is a giant clusterf[inks] for someone in my position.

LibRep, just consider your options without passion and you will reach the same conclusion all of us have already reached: TRUMP is the answer.

My options would be for Gary Johnson or any of the LP candidates for President. Trump is a non-starter with the bigotry and hatred he has started and perpetuating for the last half-year, we've been over this multiple times.

[NHI]

It's pretty shocking that the Democratic frontrunner has a much worse foreign policy than the Republican frontrunner.

http://nationalinterest.org/feature/why-trump-panicking-robert-kagan-15329

It's reson enough to support TRUMP in the general.

[Brittain33]

My greatest unhappiness with Clinton, who doesn't seem to have learned from the mistakes of the last 15 years which she took an active part in.

[Landslide Lyndon]

I guess jfern is right on this one.
Let's throw our support to TRUMP who just got the endorsements of David Duke and Jean-Marie LePen.

[jaichind]

I look forward to being on the opposite side of Neocons then.  I wanted to be on the opposite side of    
Neocons in 2008 and 2012 but was too negative on Obama to do so.  Now I will get my wish.

[Mr. Morden]

Kagan is the only neocon to have actually said that he'll vote for Clinton (assuming Trump is the Republican nominee).  Bill Kristol and others have said that they won't vote for Trump, but haven't said that they're going to vote for Clinton either.  They may just vote third party or not vote for president at all.

[MT Treasurer]

It's pretty shocking that the Democratic frontrunner has a much worse foreign policy than the Republican frontrunner.

http://nationalinterest.org/feature/why-trump-panicking-robert-kagan-15329

It's reson enough to support TRUMP in the general.

[Higgs]

This election is a giant clusterf[inks] for someone in my position.

LibRep, just consider your options without passion and you will reach the same conclusion all of us have already reached: TRUMP is the answer.

My options would be for Gary Johnson or any of the LP candidates for President. Trump is a non-starter with the bigotry and hatred he has started and perpetuating for the last half-year, we've been over this multiple times.

Voting for Johnson is a cop out though. Unless you actually believe he'll win, you should pick Trump or Clinton. There has to be a lesser of two evils, you need to find that out for yourself.

[MT Treasurer]

Voting for Johnson is a cop out though. Unless you actually believe he'll win, you should pick Trump or Clinton. There has to be a lesser of two evils, you need to find that out for yourself.

Not really. If both candidates are unacceptable, why not vote for the candidate you most agree with?

[Higgs]

Voting for Johnson is a cop out though. Unless you actually believe he'll win, you should pick Trump or Clinton. There has to be a lesser of two evils, you need to find that out for yourself.

Not really. If both candidates are unacceptable, why not vote for the candidate you most agree with?

You should pick one of the two if you actually care about influencing who will win other than just voting who you agree with. There is zero chance that anyone other than Trump or Clinton wins if they are the nominees. Unless you disagree with them 100% equally then there has to be a lesser of two evils. Might as well pick the lesser one than waste your vote on some obscure candidate.

[justfollowingtheelections]

Voting for Johnson is a cop out though. Unless you actually believe he'll win, you should pick Trump or Clinton. There has to be a lesser of two evils, you need to find that out for yourself.

Not really. If both candidates are unacceptable, why not vote for the candidate you most agree with?

You should pick one of the two if you actually care about influencing who will win other than just voting who you agree with. There is zero chance that anyone other than Trump or Clinton wins if they are the nominees. Unless you disagree with them 100% equally then there has to be a lesser of two evils. Might as well pick the lesser one than waste your vote on some obscure candidate.

Influencing who will win?  LMAO
You think 1 vote will influence who will win?  You just vote for whoever you like.  In 99.9999% of elections your vote won't make a difference.

[DrScholl]

Seems as if we know who jfern is voting for.

[Comrade Funk]

She's a status quo candidate. Won't rock the boat with Saudi Arabia/Israel. Continue the same disastrous and contradictory policies that continue the screw us up in the Middle East. Btw, it was Al Qaeda who attacked us on 9/11, and ISIS (and other Sunni extremists) who continue to wage war on us and our allies, not Iran or Assad. Won't stop the neocon establishment from pushing us to get Assad out.

[ProudModerate2]

This election is a giant clusterf[inks] for someone in my position.

LibRep, just consider your options without passion and you will reach the same conclusion all of us have already reached: TRUMP is the answer Loser.

[ProudModerate2]

Voting for Johnson is a cop out though. Unless you actually believe he'll win, you should pick Trump or Clinton. There has to be a lesser of two evils, you need to find that out for yourself.

Not really. If both candidates are unacceptable, why not vote for the candidate you most agree with?

You should pick one of the two if you actually care about influencing who will win other than just voting who you agree with. There is zero chance that anyone other than Trump or Clinton wins if they are the nominees. Unless you disagree with them 100% equally then there has to be a lesser of two evils. Might as well pick the lesser one than waste your vote on some obscure candidate.

Influencing who will win?  LMAO
You think 1 vote will influence who will win?  You just vote for whoever you like.  In 99.9999% of elections your vote won't make a difference.

Don't "LMAO" too hard.
Don't forget the election of 2000 in Florida.
The Presidential Election was decided by only a difference of 537 votes (out of approx. 6 million votes).
So every vote counts. Don't waste it.

[justfollowingtheelections]

Voting for Johnson is a cop out though. Unless you actually believe he'll win, you should pick Trump or Clinton. There has to be a lesser of two evils, you need to find that out for yourself.

Not really. If both candidates are unacceptable, why not vote for the candidate you most agree with?

You should pick one of the two if you actually care about influencing who will win other than just voting who you agree with. There is zero chance that anyone other than Trump or Clinton wins if they are the nominees. Unless you disagree with them 100% equally then there has to be a lesser of two evils. Might as well pick the lesser one than waste your vote on some obscure candidate.

Influencing who will win?  LMAO
You think 1 vote will influence who will win?  You just vote for whoever you like.  In 99.9999% of elections your vote won't make a difference.

Don't "LMAO" too hard.
Don't forget the election of 2000 in Florida.
The Presidential Election was decided by only a difference of 537 votes (out of approx. 6 million votes).
So every vote counts. Don't waste it.

537 votes is not 1 vote.  Try again.

[Adam Griffin]

Voting for Johnson is a cop out though. Unless you actually believe he'll win, you should pick Trump or Clinton. There has to be a lesser of two evils, you need to find that out for yourself.

Not really. If both candidates are unacceptable, why not vote for the candidate you most agree with?

You should pick one of the two if you actually care about influencing who will win other than just voting who you agree with. There is zero chance that anyone other than Trump or Clinton wins if they are the nominees. Unless you disagree with them 100% equally then there has to be a lesser of two evils. Might as well pick the lesser one than waste your vote on some obscure candidate.

Influencing who will win?  LMAO
You think 1 vote will influence who will win?  You just vote for whoever you like.  In 99.9999% of elections your vote won't make a difference.

Don't "LMAO" too hard.
Don't forget the election of 2000 in Florida.
The Presidential Election was decided by only a difference of 537 votes (out of approx. 6 million votes).
So every vote counts. Don't waste it.

537 votes is not 1 vote.  Try again.

But it's never just one dips[inks]t who thinks "1 vote doesn't matter". It's a diseased mindset that propagates en relative masse, and produces far more upsets than people realize (if not through voting third-party, then not voting at all). That's the problem and that's the point.

[Virginiá]

537 votes is not 1 vote.  Try again.

Your logic here is ridiculous. If everyone thought like this, their "my vote doesn't matter, so *@#*( it"-based decision would dramatically change the election results when you put all them together.

Everyone's useless 1 vote all gets put together to make a useful result. I thought that would be obvious in races where the winner is chosen based on the addition of all those useless 1 votes.

[andrew_c]

Under a FPTP voting system, every vote counts because all it takes for a candidate to win is one more vote than the second place candidate.

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

Voting for Johnson is a cop out though. Unless you actually believe he'll win, you should pick Trump or Clinton. There has to be a lesser of two evils, you need to find that out for yourself.

Not really. If both candidates are unacceptable, why not vote for the candidate you most agree with?

You should pick one of the two if you actually care about influencing who will win other than just voting who you agree with. There is zero chance that anyone other than Trump or Clinton wins if they are the nominees. Unless you disagree with them 100% equally then there has to be a lesser of two evils. Might as well pick the lesser one than waste your vote on some obscure candidate.

It's not wasting your vote if you feel comfortable voting for them, I am not comfortable voting for either, therefore I am voting for the LP candidate, it's this arrogant attitude that continues to allow the two-party system to flourish. So you do you and don't try to continue to perpetuate the two-party system.