Would you vote for a Presidential candidate of the opposite party?

[Southern Delegate matthew27]

I've voted republican in 2004, 2008 and 2012.

Voted for Hillary in 2016.

So yes.

[user12345]

Yes- Charlie Baker and that's about it.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

I plan to in 2020 given my party's potential nominees and the unequivocal winning of the last two years.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Outside of a few liberal states or districts I don't think a decent human being can get through a Republican primary anymore, so it seems very unlikely.

I mean, this is a party that literally considers virtue to be a weakness and celebrates moral depravity. Add to that the fact that the party doesn't even have a coherent ideology or policy package anymore it's hard to see anything appealing left in it even if they were to occasionally stumble on a good policy (even that is rare since they're actively cartoon evil at this point).

There are plenty of Democrats to dislike but the distributions are so far apart there is almost no overlap anymore.

[jamestroll]

I supported Mitt Romney in 2012.

[RaphaelDLG]

Not in this age of party homogeneity, party polarization, and looming devastation from climate change.  Sorry.

[progressive85]

President Charles Duane Baker of Massachusetts with veto-proof Democratic majorities in both House and Senate would be fine.

[Lord Admirale]

And people wonder why polarization has gotten so bad....

[President of the great nation of 🏳️‍⚧️]

Only if the Democrat was really, really bad (as were all the third-parties).

[Coastal Elitist]

Unlike some hacks on here I consider every candidate who is running before I cast my vote. So yes I would

[RaphaelDLG]

If you are a voter who is frequently undecided ("swing voter"), you either have a very unlikely set of political views that are 50% republican, 50% democrat, or are (most people) a complete moron who votes off of vapid considerations like personality rather than policy and is low information

[TheElectoralBoobyPrize]

I actually think I would've voted Dem in 2008 if Huckabee had been the nominee. He was pretty left-wing on fiscal/economic issues back then and that annoyed me.

I thought about voting for Hillary over Trump, but just couldn't do it. I cast a write-in instead.

[Alabama_Indy10]

Unlike some hacks on here I consider every candidate who is running before I cast my vote. So yes I would

[Dr. Arch]

I haven't yet. And with the way things are looking, I probably never will.

Pretty much this, but as things stand, no. A Baker-like Republican, I'd consider, but that'd require an entirely different reality than the one in which we currently live.

[dead0man]

I almost went for Obama in 08 because I don't really like Barr, so yes, theoretically.

[Torie]

When deadOman runs.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Imagine being the sort of  who considers voting for the other party for no reason but to brag about how moderate you are.

[Rules for me, but not for thee]

I almost went for Obama in 08 because I don't really like Barr, so yes, theoretically.

I voted for Chuck Baldwin in that case.

Also these poll results really show the nature of the people of each side. Rs are more open-minded.

[Dr. Arch]

I almost went for Obama in 08 because I don't really like Barr, so yes, theoretically.

I voted for Chuck Baldwin in that case.

Also these poll results really show the nature of the people of each side. Rs are more open-minded.

In as much as the current president is a toxic and incompetent Republican, and Republicans have the benefit of envisioning any kind of Democrat they could vote for. You could expect opposite results if the positions were reversed.

[courts]

If you are a voter who is frequently undecided ("swing voter"), you either have a very unlikely set of political views that are 50% republican, 50% democrat, or are (most people) a complete moron who votes off of vapid considerations like personality rather than policy and is low information

most are a bit of both. i'd like to think i'm more the former though

[courts]

I actually think I would've voted Dem in 2008 if Huckabee had been the nominee. He was pretty left-wing on fiscal/economic issues back then and that annoyed me.

I thought about voting for Hillary over Trump, but just couldn't do it. I cast a write-in instead.

i have no idea why people keep saying this

[Chinggis]

Rs are more open-minded.

Maybe the Republicans on Atlas, but not the voting base of evangelicals. I see stuff like this pop up on Facebook from time to time:

[Rules for me, but not for thee]

OK, non-fundie Rs. Probably true for Ds too but the fundies on that side are the cultural or full-on Marxists.

[mvd10]

I would have voted Clinton in 2016 if I were American, so yeah. But other than Clinton and maybe LBJ in 1964 I probably wouldn't have voted for any other Democratic nominee. Maybe FDR in 1940 and 1944 considering the war, but that's it.

In the Netherlands we don't have presidential elections, but at this stage in general elections I'd always have voted VVD. The other parties don't fit the bill, they're all too left-wing on the economy. The VVD economic track record hasn't been great from a libertarianish perspective, but I blame the various coalition partners for that (PvdA, PVV). And the parties have other issues too. PVV and FvD want a Nexit which is a non-starter, D66 is too leftish on cultural issues and they enthusiastically backed the organ donation law (not a fan), the left isn't an option for obvious reasons, CU/SGP aren't options because I'm not particularly religious (and Catholic, they're Protestant parties) and CDA finally is too weak on free speech and not right-wing enough on economic issues (and I have to admit I loathe Buma's conscription plan, but I gave flawless beautiful Macron a pass for it so I guess I could overlook it lol). But why vote CDA when you can have the real deal anyway ?

[Hammy]

I'll vote for Trump if the Dems nominate a trash-tier candidate (Cuomo for example) if that counts, even though it'd be an act of giving up entirely on the country.