The thumbnail image for this video has been updated - thumbnail added by eric3579.

Protest vote *promote!

I'm with her! .....No, not that her.

The young lady in the video, her.

Promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Tuesday, October 25th, 2016 8:37pm PDT - promote requested by eric3579.

*controversy

Adding video to channels (Controversy) - requested by MrFisk.

These things seem to continue to ignore Jill Stein.

And in doing so, they miss an important point: Johnson is the "spoiler candidate" for TRUMP. In other words, the chances of votes for Johnson swinging the plurality of votes in a hotly contested state in favor of Clinton are massively higher than swinging such a state into favoring Trump.

Stein is the spoiler candidate for Clinton. But die-hard Democrats should be pleased with her poll numbers being low, which suggests that fewer usually-Democrat voters are looking for an alternative option than usually-Republican voters. In other words, the Democrat party is currently more unified than the Republican party.

...But before patting themselves on the back too hard, they should remember that perhaps the only reason that their historically disliked candidate is more unifying than the GOP option is that he is even MORE historically disliked. A dubious distinction at best.

I think I'll stick with my protest vote (for Stein), thank you very much.

I don't think this video has anything to do with Johnson or Stein. It's about any vote that's not for the two major parties. They could have just as easily used Stein, but i don't think that it matters at all. It's about a '"protest vote", that's it. Whatever else you want to make of it has nothing to do with what the video is about (imo) At least that';s what i took from it.

Oh, and my protest vote will be going to Stein also

I'm in California, and i think dans in Thailand. California Is a Clinton state. If i was in a swing state i'd be more inclined to vote for that p.o.s. Clinton. I'm lucky i get to vote my conscious. I fucking hate Clinton but as horrible as i think she is shes still the only real option.

Thailand by way of Kansas. Just sent in my absentee ballot a couple days ago.

I agree that the idea of the video is to suggest that "protest votes" are either A) entirely counterproductive always, or B) particularly counterproductive in this election. And they chose to focus on Johnson because he fits their narrative of suggesting that policy-wise he is very different from Bernie Sanders, and they make the unspoken assumption that many people considering "protest votes" are Sanders fans that are disgruntled with Clinton.

I'm still very comfortable with my 3rd-party vote, and fully aware that there is a chance that it could "spoil" things for one of the main 2 candidates. Although realistically, since my vote will be counted in Kansas (very red track record, polling 47/36/17 Trump/Clinton/Undecided at the moment) that is incredibly unlikely to happen either way.

I understand people that would feel motivated to "hold their nose" and choose the lesser of two evils (whoever they determine that to be) if they were in a swing/tossup state, but personally I would stick with my vote even if I was in such a state.

If the election is "spoiled" one way or the other by 3rd party votes, it would send a pretty clear message to both parties: give us better choices, or face the consequences. Then again, maybe I'm being overly optimistic about the parties actually getting that message... Democrats should have been highly motivated to push for getting rid of the electoral college and/or considering a push for ranked-choice voting when Gore "lost" in 2000, but failed to do either.

Good old liberal fear mongering Bullshit.

Christ, I got this speech from my parents and younger brother back in August while we were on vacation. Fortunately I live in Minnesota and that bluish hue isn't just due to the fact that we're freezing our balls off. So I'll happily vote for Stein or write in Sanders.

Uhm so what is that clip supposed to tell us? That all liberal voters are hypocrites? Idiots? Manipulative scum? What is Aleppo?
Because I dont see anything else.

How can they have a child and he not know where her Nader tattoo is?

I think it's just poking fun at a small vocal group of people who are spouting this. Nothing more or less.

If they think that people are starting to lose interest in the main parties, they will spend the next 4 years highlighting war, terrorism, uncertainty and scarcity so that people are less likely to take any kind of risk. They will also highlight the uncertainty of voting for anyone else - i.e. these third parties are inexperienced, they don't understand, they are weak and/or sympathetic towards our enemy.

It's basically what they've done with Corbyn over here. "They" control the press so they also control the national will.

I think the only way we progress beyond this profit for the few, managed decline for the rest phase is to destroy the stranglehold that the media moguls like Murdoch, Barclays (the brothers, not the bank), etc. have over mainstream media.

They are literally peddling falsehoods and distractions so that people will target anyone other than those responsible.

Anybody who says they are a Sanders person and votes for anyone other than Clinton is a damn fool.

You think Sanders is so great? You think he is a progressive and our best hope?

THEN FUCKING VOTE FOR CLINTON. Sanders knows how politics works. He knows that there has been progress made on progressive issues. And he has explicitly stated that if you want progressive values to hold sway in this country, YOU MUST VOTE FOR CLINTON.

So do what you say -- vote your conscience. And vote for Clinton.

Because if Trump wins? I swear, I WILL come to your house and personally beat the crap out of you. And take your weed.

*length=3:42

The duration of this video has been updated from unknown to 3:42 - length declared by bareboards2.

I've really enjoyed the discussions you start and participate in, but when you presume to tell me my conscience and how to vote it, you can GTFO.

Clinton will cement the hold of the 1% on this country, while not doing a damned thing for those of us who don't have our own lobbyists and deep pockets. So will Trump.

So unless you're offering to boost me into those tax brackets, I'll take a pass on either of them.

@Stormsinger If you trust Bernie, then follow Bernie. That is just a cold stone truth.

If you don't trust Bernie, then don't follow Bernie.

Bernie is closer to the reality of the situation then you or I will ever be. He has worked with Clinton. He knows her weaknesses and her strengths and her basic trustworthiness.

So yeah. IF IF IF you think Bernie was the only good choice for President because of his basic integrity and his desire to work towards progressive goals, and Bernie says vote for Clinton to protect progressive gains? Then you either trust him or you don't. He either has integrity or he doesn't.

I call that voting your conscience. You don't like my choice of words. But you know what? Voting your conscience means you do the hard thing sometimes. Not the easy thing. Voting for Clinton is a hard thing to do, when you want Bernie.

It is the right thing to do though. Stopping Trump is of paramount importance. Bernie, Mr Integrity himself, knows that. You think it is easy for him to fight so hard for the Presidential nomination and then say vote for Clinton? No, it isn't. But it is the right thing to do. And he has the integrity to say so.

Of course, if you don't admire Bernie, if you don't think he is smart enough to make an intelligent choice, then of course, vote your "conscience."

If you do admire him, then there is no other choice but to vote for Clinton. You either trust him or you don't.

Wow...talk about setting up false binary choices. I'd hate to live the way you describe, in fact, it would be absolutely impossible. I trust many people who have differing opinions. Following any one of them in lockstep would directly counter others.

I trust Bernie to work for things he values. I trust Clinton to work for things -she- values. Both have made their values clear...and they're utterly different. You may choose to abrogate your responsibility to make choices for yourself, I will not. I wouldn't have pegged you for an authoritarian, but clearly I missed some signs.

@Stormsinger

I do have more authoritarian impulses than do you, obviously. Not the word I would have chosen -- I would have said -- I trust people with deep knowledge of a situation and am willing to follow their lead.

I disagree that I am setting up a false binary choice.

Although that is the basic difference between our positions -- you see a binary choice. I see a threat to our democracy the likes of which I have never seen in my lifetime, plus a big threat to the gains made towards progressive values that we have been inching towards.

My proof? There are floods of thoughtful reasonable conservative thinkers who are appalled by the man and see clearly the threat that Trump poses. They are patriots enough to turn their back on their own party. I have never ever seen this in my lifetime.

This isn't a false binary choice. It isn't binary at all. There is no equivalency between Trump and Clinton.

Trump must not become president. It is imperative.

However, you don't see that. You have company in not seeing that.

If Trump wins, please remember this convo. It will be a disaster if he is president.

You said, "If you do admire him, then there is no other choice but to vote for Clinton. You either trust him or you don't". I believe that is a perfect example of a binary choice. You said it, not me. I believe there -are- other choices, such as voting -for- someone, rather than against.

As for remembering my stance if Trump should win, I'll say the same to you. When the debtor's prisons are raping the remnants of the once-middle class while Hillary only focuses on feeding the MIC with more wars, remember who put her in the position to do that. Because it for damned sure won't have been me.

If I haven't been clear enough, neither of the major candidates is worth my vote. I actually believe that Clinton is slightly more dangerous, due to the combination of competence and utter rapaciousness. Trump's total incompetence limits the damage he can do. The fact that these are the only two candidates with any real chance of victory is a complete damnation of our system. We're fucked.

But -DON'T- try to tell me what my conscience says, or how I have to respond. You haven't come anywhere near earning that right. Nobody in this universe has.

@Stormsinger

We'll have to agree to disagree.

I get the feeling you still don't understand my outrage. I don't give a fuck if we disagree about Trump and Clinton. I'm pissed off solely because you have the audacity to set yourself up as if you were in a position to make my decisions for me.

Notice, not once did I tell you who to vote for. I'll thank you to have the decency to do the same.

@Stormsinger

I know how pissed you are.

You don't know how pissed I am. And you don't care how pissed I am.

Hence, we'll have to agree to disagree on many points.

Whoosh...yet again.

If you're pissed, it has to be that you simply don't like that I disagree with your "logic". That's qualitatively different than being pissed over someone trying to force "the one true way" down your throat. It's similar to the difference between "locker room talk" and sexual assault.