Seriously, my fellow lefties...

[JerryArkansas]

I see it as that voting for Hillary is SUCH a small sacrifice (you lose like what, ten minutes of your time? And a few seconds if you're voting anyway) that there is simply no rational reason to not do it. It's a Spock way of thinking obviously, but that's not a bad thing.

At this point I and you should just stop trying to convince them.  In my experiance most seem to be moderately  to pretty rich white liberals who think they won't be affected by Trump.  Just shame them and move on.  Let them be.

[JerryArkansas]

I see it as that voting for Hillary is SUCH a small sacrifice (you lose like what, ten minutes of your time? And a few seconds if you're voting anyway) that there is simply no rational reason to not do it. It's a Spock way of thinking obviously, but that's not a bad thing.

People voting for candidates they actively disbelieve in involves a sacrifice of more than just time.

I see it as that voting for Hillary is SUCH a small sacrifice (you lose like what, ten minutes of your time? And a few seconds if you're voting anyway) that there is simply no rational reason to not do it. It's a Spock way of thinking obviously, but that's not a bad thing.

At this point I and you should just stop trying to convince them.  In my experiance most seem to be moderately  to pretty rich white liberals who think they won't be affected by Trump.  Just shame them and move on.  Let them be.

Oh, I'll be plenty affected by Trump, am deeply worried about that, and am actively trying to militate against Trump and convince other people not to vote for him, but TRUMP IS NOT GOING TO WIN MY STATE.

Does it matter if he isn't going to win your state?  No, a vote not for Hillary is a vote for him.  I don't really give a sh**t what your feelings are like.  When you could have a man who could murder millions you don't try and parce words. 

[JerryArkansas]

Does it matter if he isn't going to win your state?

...yes?

And if many think just like you special snowflake they can swing the election, just like 2000.  So again, it doesn't matter.

[JerryArkansas]

special snowflake

1.

I also like how feeling immensely dissatisfied with both of these candidates and wanting to find ways out of having to vote for even the one one hates less (which, yes, for the record, is, for me, Clinton in a walk) keeps being derided as being a 'special snowflake' when poll after poll shows it's a very, very common position in this election.

Seriously, there are far more apropos terms of abuse to use here.
2. I can't control how other people vote. The only vote I'm a custodian of is my own.
3. I'm sort of confused as to why everybody is attacking me for this when Averroes, who unlike me is actively voting for a candidate other than Hillary, is right here in this thread saying similar things to what I'm saying. Is it because maroon avatars are perceived as having more responsibilities to the Democratic Party or whatever than green avatars? Is it because among my many, many reasons for not liking Hillary one is that I think she's unacceptably comfortable with very high abortion rates and that opinion doesn't sit right with people? Is it because Averroes has a better personality than me and people just like him better to begin with? Is it just because I'm taking the bait and engaging you more?

Again, what I say goes for anyone.  You just want to respond.  Can't help you on that.

[JerryArkansas]

I'm a bit distasted with the way some are trying to shame posters such as Nathan or Averroes for the fact they're uncomfortable about voting for Hillary. Hey, I'm pretty sure many of our ardent Hillary fan would've find it uncomfortable to vote for Sanders had he won the nod.

But we would have done it anyways.  Not bitch and moan that we had too.

[JerryArkansas]

Not bitch and moan that we had too.

Even if she ends up with my vote, Hillary is not somehow entitled to my enthusiasm and neither are you. Jesus Christ.

Where in that did I say that I want your enthusiasm.  All I said is not to bitch about it.  Please try and read what was posted.

[JerryArkansas]

Not bitch and moan that we had too.

Even if she ends up with my vote, Hillary is not somehow entitled to my enthusiasm and neither are you. Jesus Christ.

Where in that did I say that I want your enthusiasm.  All I said is not to bitch about it.  Please try and read what was posted.

I read it. I don't understand how my 'bitching about it'--i.e. expressing that I'm unenthusiastic about this candidacy rather than shutting up and saying three Hail Cecile Richardses or whatever it is you think I should do instead--concerns you in any way.

It doesn't, but you wanted to insert yourself into the conversation, which you were not apart of.  Don't insert yourself if you don't want others to talk about your motivations.

[JerryArkansas]

Not bitch and moan that we had too.

Even if she ends up with my vote, Hillary is not somehow entitled to my enthusiasm and neither are you. Jesus Christ.

Where in that did I say that I want your enthusiasm.  All I said is not to bitch about it.  Please try and read what was posted.

I read it. I don't understand how my 'bitching about it'--i.e. expressing that I'm unenthusiastic about this candidacy rather than shutting up and saying three Hail Cecile Richardses or whatever it is you think I should do instead--concerns you in any way.

It doesn't, but you wanted to insert yourself into the conversation, which you were not apart of.  Don't insert yourself if you don't want others to talk about your motivations.

Uh, I posted in this thread way before you did, buster. If anybody needs to butt out of this conversation here, it's you.

Saying that somebody is 'bitching and moaning' is not 'talking about their motivations'. It's just being miffed that we're not saying our requisite Pater NSAters. The neoliberal future is already so bright you've gotta wear shades; why the hell do you need us to make it brighter? You're lucky that your candidate's opponent is so horrendous that we're even considering her.

Dude, the post you wanted to give your opponent on did not include you.  Had nothing to due with you.  Yet you decided to respond to it.  How is that not putting yourself into a conversation.  Get off your damn high horse.  It gets so tiring to read this from you.

[JerryArkansas]

Enjoying acting like a dildo, Jerry?

So me asking someone why they are getting into a conversation with me which didn't involve them, and then them getting mad because I don't think and don't believe what they are doing is good for the country is being a dick.  When I never explicitly call them out at that point, and put whatever argument we have had in the past, something I thought they had done as well.  That is being a dick?

[JerryArkansas]

Let me add on a final point  Yes I find voting third party, even if just flirting when you have a man who will allow the murders of millions, thorough outright extermination or through wars started over petty squabbles shameful.  That is how I feel.  If this isn't the way others feel, ok.  But I will and have shamed many in my personal life will continue to do so.  A mad man is running amok right now.  I want to make sure he doesn't screw up and destroy everything.   Sorry if you don't like it, but I will keep doing it.

[JerryArkansas]

Let me add on a final point  Yes I find voting third party, even if just flirting when you have a man who will allow the murders of millions, thorough outright extermination or through wars started over petty squabbles shameful.  That is how I feel.  If this isn't the way others feel, ok.  But I will and have shamed many in my personal life will continue to do so.  A mad man is running amok right now.  I want to make sure he doesn't screw up and destroy everything.   Sorry if you don't like it, but I will keep doing it.

Since you feel such a need to compensate online, enjoy yourself

If that is what you think I'm doing, go ahead thinking that.

[JerryArkansas]

Not bitch and moan that we had too.

Even if she ends up with my vote, Hillary is not somehow entitled to my enthusiasm and neither are you. Jesus Christ.

Where in that did I say that I want your enthusiasm.  All I said is not to bitch about it.  Please try and read what was posted.

I read it. I don't understand how my 'bitching about it'--i.e. expressing that I'm unenthusiastic about this candidacy rather than shutting up and saying three Hail Cecile Richardses or whatever it is you think I should do instead--concerns you in any way.

It doesn't, but you wanted to insert yourself into the conversation, which you were not apart of.  Don't insert yourself if you don't want others to talk about your motivations.

Uh, I posted in this thread way before you did, buster. If anybody needs to butt out of this conversation here, it's you.

Saying that somebody is 'bitching and moaning' is not 'talking about their motivations'. It's just being miffed that we're not saying our requisite Pater NSAters. The neoliberal future is already so bright you've gotta wear shades; why the hell do you need us to make it brighter? You're lucky that your candidate's opponent is so horrendous that we're even considering her.

Dude, the post you wanted to give your opponent on did not include you.  Had nothing to due with you.  Yet you decided to respond to it.  How is that not putting yourself into a conversation.  Get off your damn high horse.  It gets so tiring to read this from you.

I have literally no clue what you're talking about. Kalwejt's post, to which you responded, mentioned me, and Averroes, by name as people he thought you and your cobelligerents should stop being such pontificating jackasses to. You responded, saying, in effect, that you saw no reason to stop being a pontificating jackass because we were 'bitching and moaning' by not being sufficiently enthusiastic about your candidate. I responded, because I was one of the subjects of the discussion. Am I missing something here, or are you just talking out of your ass?

I wasn't responding to that part, which is why I asked if you read that post or not.  So please keeping responding and not putting this behind you like you said you were.

I'm a bit distasted with the way some are trying to shame posters such as Nathan or Averroes for the fact they're uncomfortable about voting for Hillary. Hey, I'm pretty sure many of our ardent Hillary fan would've find it uncomfortable to vote for Sanders had he won the nod.

The part I was responding to since you can't tell what I was trying to say.

[JerryArkansas]

Not bitch and moan that we had too.

Even if she ends up with my vote, Hillary is not somehow entitled to my enthusiasm and neither are you. Jesus Christ.

Where in that did I say that I want your enthusiasm.  All I said is not to bitch about it.  Please try and read what was posted.

I read it. I don't understand how my 'bitching about it'--i.e. expressing that I'm unenthusiastic about this candidacy rather than shutting up and saying three Hail Cecile Richardses or whatever it is you think I should do instead--concerns you in any way.

It doesn't, but you wanted to insert yourself into the conversation, which you were not apart of.  Don't insert yourself if you don't want others to talk about your motivations.

Uh, I posted in this thread way before you did, buster. If anybody needs to butt out of this conversation here, it's you.

Saying that somebody is 'bitching and moaning' is not 'talking about their motivations'. It's just being miffed that we're not saying our requisite Pater NSAters. The neoliberal future is already so bright you've gotta wear shades; why the hell do you need us to make it brighter? You're lucky that your candidate's opponent is so horrendous that we're even considering her.

Dude, the post you wanted to give your opponent on did not include you.  Had nothing to due with you.  Yet you decided to respond to it.  How is that not putting yourself into a conversation.  Get off your damn high horse.  It gets so tiring to read this from you.

I have literally no clue what you're talking about. Kalwejt's post, to which you responded, mentioned me, and Averroes, by name as people he thought you and your cobelligerents should stop being such pontificating jackasses to. You responded, saying, in effect, that you saw no reason to stop being a pontificating jackass because we were 'bitching and moaning' by not being sufficiently enthusiastic about your candidate. I responded, because I was one of the subjects of the discussion. Am I missing something here, or are you just talking out of your ass?

I wasn't responding to that part, which is why I asked if you read that post or not.  So please keeping responding and not putting this behind you like you said you were.

I'm a bit distasted with the way some are trying to shame posters such as Nathan or Averroes for the fact they're uncomfortable about voting for Hillary. Hey, I'm pretty sure many of our ardent Hillary fan would've find it uncomfortable to vote for Sanders had he won the nod.

The part I was responding to since you can't tell what I was trying to say.

No, sorry. You don't get to treat the two sentences of that post as if they're two entirely independent clauses, as if your response to the sentence you've bolded has absolutely nothing to do with your opinion of the people named in the one you haven't. Your response wasn't written that way. If you intended for it to be taken that way, you failed massively.

I would have put this behind me if you'd admitted that you were being a prick.

Yeah I can separate the two, if you or others can't not my problem.  So again, lets move on, because I'm tired of trying to make you see what I'm trying to get at.