Hypothetical: Cruz v Sanders (with Trump not running third party)
Who would you vote for?
http://strawpoll.me/7376935
>>71016324
>no vote for a third party option
Do you know where you are, Redditor?
>>71016372
Voting for a third party is functionally equivalent to voting against your preferred candidate in a first-past-the-post election system, anon.
>>71016423
I don't have any preference between Bernie or Cruz, if I had to pick one it'd be Bernie because he at least got his nomination democratically.
In any circumstance I'll be voting for Trump even if he doesn't run third party.
>>71016423
What if my preferred candidate is part of a third party?
You seem to be under the notion that there is only reason to vote for one of two candidates.
I understand that the current rules mean that there only be two parties eventually.
However, neither of the two current parties are worth voting for.
Thus, they deserve to be voted against, and hopefully, fail.
>>71016643
What's what I mean anon, that if your preferred candidate is at all similar to one of the other candidates, then voting for them is voting against them.
The only way to be neutral is to either note vote, or vote third party when either totally dislike both candidates. In either case, you can't vote 'against' the two parties, as it is a zero sum game.
>>71016324
Cruz, solely because of the Supreme Court.
Didn't Cruz copy some of Trump's proposals? If he's solid about immigration, medicare, taxes and jobs i don't see why would you guys choose the commie over him
>>71016324
Can Cruz even win against the commie?
Is /pol/ so quick to forget?
Weirdly enough I would vote for Bernie because I think he's an incompetent loon that wouldn't be able to get anything done, and would just make the democrats look bad.
Cruz would be another cuckservative like Bush and probably turn an entirely new generation of kids overwhelmingly liberal again. Though I would still consider voting for him were he facing Hillary, because I think she's the absolute scariest politician I've ever seen in my entire life.
Cruz all the way.
He is a corrupt liar that no one likes, but his policies are very close to Trump's.
Sander is a dangerous socialist who could do a lot of damage. Free colleges alone is a scary thing. It's free indoctrination. The tax payer would pay for kids to get fucked up in the head on feminist studies and pro-communist propaganda. If every kid in US had to go trough college the entire country would collapse within 30 years.
>>71019003
Bernie wouldn't be able to get anything done, and he's at least "Trustworthy" and consistent in his crazy ideas. With Cruz I don't trust him to do any of the things he said.
The only worry you have with Bernie is he can still nominate justices, but at least he's not super anti-gun like Hillary, so that would be a slight relief.
>>71016423
America isn't first past the post. First past the post means whoever receives the plurality of votes wins the election, even if that is below 50% of the vote.
In America, it doesn't matter if you get more delegates than your opponent if you don't get a majority. If the vote is split 45/35/20 then the person who wins 45% doesn't become president, whereas they would under the first past the post system.
If no candidate gets past 50% of delegates, then congress chooses the president and vice president (House chooses president, senate chooses VP)
>>71019319
yeah i get the feeling that Cruz is decent enough but he just isnt a leader. He hasnt come up with any ideas on his own.
I guess the muslim patrols idea came from him, but i dont see how that would help much
>>71016324
Sanders wins by 10 points in a Trumpless scenario. Personally I hope we have two contested conventions and wind up with four major candidates. Everything else this year has been to create chaos in the national political arena. This would be a first in 103 years
Refuse to vote also means Gary Johnson
I'd rather shoot myself before voting for either the kike or rato.
>>71016324
>http://strawpoll.me/7376935
Not voting for a booger-eater
>>71018800
your constant use of anon causes me alarm.
You wish to pidgeonhole democracy into a contest of the lesser evil.
This is something which you must not do.
A dictator who would kill and everyone, and one who would kill everyone save for you are equally as terrible for the country.
You wish to feed this terrible system rather than rejecting it.
A candidate who is for something which I vehemently oppose is not my candidate, and never will be.
I will not vote for someone who does not support even the slight majority of my interests.
To do so would only encourage their movement to move further down a dangerous path.
In short, no u.
