Trump runs for POTUS/ Trumped Up! Part VII

cantonear1968 said:
Question for American voters: when you vote for President, do you vote for the Senate and Congress at the same time? On the same ballot?

And if so, how do you rate someone voting for the President of one party and Senate/Congress of a different party?

Common
50/50
Hardly ever

Thank you for answering.
Click to expand...

Since 1985 I have wandered into the voting booth fully willing to vote for a republican over a democrat. I've never actually done so. I was raised by a father who spit after saying "Nixon" or "Reagan" to "get the taste out."
 
Spindrift said:
At the national level, president, congress, senate, I'd say it's between 80%-90%.

If there are local elections at the same time, I'd say that ballot splitting is much more common.
Click to expand...

Only 10 states allow their ballot to have a mark for straight ticket voting. Are you saying 80-90 at the national level vote straight ticket? Because with 10 states allowing a special mark for it, that number seems really high. Maybe my personal incredulity is the problem; I have never voted a straight ticket. Although this year may make it close.
 
slyjoe said:
Only 10 states allow their ballot to have a mark for straight ticket voting. Are you saying 80-90 at the national level vote straight ticket? Because with 10 states allowing a special mark for it, that number seems really high. Maybe my personal incredulity is the problem; I have never voted a straight ticket. Although this year may make it close.
Click to expand...

What I meant is that if the only elections on the ballot were president, congress, senate, 80% of the people would vote for the same party. Perhaps 80% is too high, but it is a lot.
 
slyjoe said:
And the GOP is getting worse. But I can also remember when Democrats did run nuts against the sheriff and McCain. Back when McCain was partially reasonable.
Click to expand...

Those were the days. I had always had some respect for McCain, and I was giving him a fair chance in 2008, but he just started losing it. Picking Palin as his running mate was the nail in the coffin - no way was I gonna be ok with her next in line to be president if something happened to him.
 
Again all very interesting. We don't have anything like this in Canada. We don't vote for the number of service offices you do (law enforcement, judge) and we don't even vote for Prime Minister per se. Our Senate, such as it is, is appointed by ruling part, not vote. There is a movement to change this but still years off.

Edit: we also don't have votes on individual issues.
 
Last edited:
slyjoe said:
Only 10 states allow their ballot to have a mark for straight ticket voting. Are you saying 80-90 at the national level vote straight ticket? Because with 10 states allowing a special mark for it, that number seems really high. Maybe my personal incredulity is the problem; I have never voted a straight ticket. Although this year may make it close
Click to expand...

The parties are very polarized. It really makes no sense to vote for say a Democratic President and a Republican Senator. At least in most cases. It is possible that Donald Trump will increase split ticket voting this year because of how uniquely terrible he is.
 
Tony Stark said:
The parties are very polarized. It really makes no sense to vote for say a Democratic President and a Republican Senator. At least in most cases. It is possible that Donald Trump will increase split ticket voting this year because of how uniquely terrible he is.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I stopped splitting tickets in about '80 when the Reaganites completed the GOP's hard right turn. Before that you had pockets of sanity and individual Republicans you could vote for, particularly in NY. In fact, sometimes the Democrat's negatives were the telling issue for me. Now? Not when they've been selling their souls to the religious right for almost four decades.
 
Foolmewunz said:
Yeah, I stopped splitting tickets in about '80 when the Reaganites completed the GOP's hard right turn. Before that you had pockets of sanity and individual Republicans you could vote for, particularly in NY. In fact, sometimes the Democrat's negatives were the telling issue for me. Now? Not when they've been selling their souls to the religious right for almost four decades.
Click to expand...

Agree if you only look at national office. I think once you get farther down ballot straight ticket makes less sense. Politics being local and all. Although some of the down ballot people are ridiculous; e.g., having stances on border security, ACA, etc.
 
Argumemnon said:
... well, that certainly deals with the claim that he's a smart businessman.
Click to expand...

But a good crook. He set himself huge salaries in the casinos which other investors and lenders ended up forking over. His constant theme is to spend nothing of his own, taking any of his own capital out of projects asap, and paying debts, when he pays, using someone else's or charity money. His principle method seems to be stiffing suppliers and vendors, which is actually very easy to repeatedly do. I sure hope he is fully scrutinized by the law after the election. Hey, nothing, say, beyond the volume and scope of the investigations of the Clintons. Republicans ought to be fine with that, no?
 
Hlafordlaes said:
But a good crook. He set himself huge salaries in the casinos which other investors and lenders ended up forking over. His constant theme is to spend nothing of his own, taking any of his own capital out of projects asap, and paying debts, when he pays, using someone else's or charity money. His principle method seems to be stiffing suppliers and vendors, which is actually very easy to repeatedly do. I sure hope he is fully scrutinized by the law after the election. Hey, nothing, say, beyond the volume and scope of the investigations of the Clintons. Republicans ought to be fine with that, no?
Click to expand...
I hope his business and entire life is destroyed as a result of him running for president.
 
Hlafordlaes said:
But a good crook. He set himself huge salaries in the casinos which other investors and lenders ended up forking over. His constant theme is to spend nothing of his own, taking any of his own capital out of projects asap, and paying debts, when he pays, using someone else's or charity money. His principle method seems to be stiffing suppliers and vendors, which is actually very easy to repeatedly do. I sure hope he is fully scrutinized by the law after the election. Hey, nothing, say, beyond the volume and scope of the investigations of the Clintons. Republicans ought to be fine with that, no?
Click to expand...

Continuing this theme that is what one pundit on CNN surmised was what his entire Presidential run was all about or at least what it has become. The idea of setting up far right TumpTV using donor's money to do it.
 
Tony Stark said:
Maybe, but Palin didn't have a bunch of rich customers that she alienated.
Click to expand...

I agree. No universities or Wall St will be calling for a speech. And the average person in Pennsylvania will not be shelling out $100 to hear the Donald.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom