Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Evan McMullin Is Happy with Hillary as President
In a recent interview, Evan McMullin outlined his strategy for victory. He then stated that if he could not force the issue to the House by stopping both candidate from getting 270, he would be happy to have stopped Trump from being elected. According to the candidate himself, voting for Clinton or McMullin will lead to the happy outcome of a Clinton win.
Published in GeneralMcMullin Admits Preventing Trump From Winning is Goal pic.twitter.com/Batqj3iZTv
— MicroSpookyLeaks™ (@WDFx2EU7) October 23, 2016
2016 is an unusual year. The Republicans nominated a Leftist New York Democrat named Donald Trump. Need evidence? Trump donated to Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign and publicly praised Hillary Clinton too. In 2009, in an interview on the Fox Business Channel, Trump praised President Obama and praised Obama’s economic stimulus plan. In 2010, Trump donated to Harry Reid’s US Senate campaign. In the 1st Republican presidential debate in 2015, Trump said that socialized medicine works “incredibly well” in Scotland and in Canada. This year, Trump has endorsed expanding Medicaid.
So, this year the Republican primary voters mistakenly nominated a New York Leftist Democrat. In this unusual circumstance, voting for neither Clinton nor Trump is correct.
Quite frankly, It’s not at all clear to me that a Trump victory is preferable to a Hillary victory. For more reasons than I care to list right now, I think Trump would be a terrible president, and a terrible leader for the Republicans. If he is terrible, what will I do about that? Vote for Democrats? No. Thus, I would have no acceptable means to oppose a President Trump. Some have suggested that we can primary Trump in 2020. Okay, but when I oppose Trump now, people say I must love Hillary. How will it be different if I oppose President Trump in the next election? It is very difficult to take the nomination from an incumbent president, and doing so weakens the party’s chances of winning in the general (think Carter/Ted Kennedy and Bush I/Pat Buchanan). Trump’s nomination is a gift to the Democrats. I can’t stop that. The only thing I have any control over is the form that gift takes. The gift can either be to concede the 2016 election to Hillary, or the gift can be a disastrous Republican presidency that would quickly return power to the Democrats.
If you think there’s a serious chance that Trump could be a decent president, you should vote for him. I think the chances Trump would be at all decent are about 10%, and if we’re going to have a terrible president, I’d rather it be a Democrat.
I didn’t say anything about McMullin in #62. I’m just guessing he’s thinking along the same lines that I am.
I agree 100 percent. This is essentially what Tom Nichols wrote about, calling it the Hamilton principle. Alexander Hamilton hated both John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, but voted for Jefferson because, “If we are to have an enemy at the seat of government, let it be one whom we are not responsible for.”
On real Planet Earth, as opposed to Libertarian Fantasy Land, one or the other, Hillary or Trump will be president. You are helping ensure Hillary is president. Therefor, you are for Hillary.
That’s ridiculous
Hillary was elected when Trump was nominated and by now everyone should have come to terms with that. He is barely running a campaign, has no ground game in swing states, pays his family millions from campaign funds, invariably drowns out Hillary controversies with nonsense he starts, can’t be bothered to learn anything about policy, is spending time during the final weeks of the election going to Trump properties ribbon cuttings….it goes on and on. He isn’t even trying and people still want to blame the Never Trump or McMullin. Freaking hilarious.
McMullin gives me someone to vote for that isn’t one of the corrupt, egomaniacal major party candidates and that’s not nothing.
Look, you’re not going to shame me or guilt me or ostracize me or whatever the hell you’re trying do. I reject this binary choice crap that people are always pushing
If things are going to hell, they can do it without me. Yeah, it sucks that Hillary Clinton is going to be president. I tried to push for an alternative, but nobody listened.
And not for nothing, you’re living a fantasy land of your own if you think Trump has a shot at being president.
It is not a binary choice.
It is most definitely a binary result.
And, Je Suis Yogi ….
Math.
I just provided the 12th upvote on the basis of this comment alone. Brilliant.
The last sentence does not logically follow. The penultimate is true. Since I vote in Florida, where it could matter, I will be voting Trump. But let’s try to be real. A vote for Johnson may assist Hillary (if I would otherwise vote for Trump) or Trump (if I would otherwise vote for Hillary), but is being for either of them.
Lots of picking around choices of words here. All I would say to all is figure out who benefits from your vote. If we get to be a one party system, the races will not offer binary choices.
Johnny has one Jolly Rancher, and Mary and Sam have none. If Johnny decides to leave his Jolly Rancher in his pocket, how many do Mary and Sam have?
So, yes, math.
Based on what evidence?
Exactly.
I love this. Very clever.
He doesn’t need to work hard to make it happen. Trump supporters and their candidate have seen to that.
How dare you not take Mike LaRoche seriously!
Huh?
Use of the term “authoritarian” is inevitably tainted by the specious work of Adorno and the influence of the Frankfurt School.
If McMullin’s presence causes Utah to go to Hillary and that was the difference, you have a point. If Trump wouldn’t have won with Utah, what does it matter?
If one uses the Universal Monster Analogy I recently posted, HC = Dracula (or perhaps Dracula’s Daughter) and DT is Frankenstein’s Monster and EMM is trying to play Van Helsing, but probably in vain.
I’m sick and tired of the “if you’re not for Trump, you’re for Hillary” claim. Now we have the “if you’re for McMullin, you’re for Hillary” claim. These are ways for supporters of Trump, who accepted without question his ability to steamroll over Rodham with his awesomeness, to have their cake and eat it, too. When their candidate doesn’t win, they can blame it on #NeverTrump. But he was supposed to be such a winner, he wouldn’t need the support of NeverTrumpers!
As a wise person once said, they are both crap sandwiches – one on white and the other on wheat – and I wouldn’t care for either, thank you very much. It almost literally kills me that Rodham will be president. However, I happen to believe – as another wise person analogized – that Rodham as president is like having your arm cut off and Trump is like having your head cut off. He would do irreparable damage to conservatism. Why can’t Trump supporters accept that NeverTrumpers sincerely believe this, and that it doesn’t imply “support” for Rodham?
It is clear to me that Trump is as big a liar as is Rodham. I do hear him say things with which I agree, but then I hear yet another example of his mendacity, corruption, depravity, or malignant narcissism, and I say to myself that it is better not to have an alleged “conservative” – a true RINO – of such poor character tarnish conservatism.
Very well put. Trump fanboys are dancing around the obvious. This has become the most irrelevant election of my lifetime. Georgia is in play for Clinton, Georgia! The man is an epic failure, period. But I guess it gives his fans something to blame after the slaughter. This place should be fun then.
And Texas. Texas!
continued from #84:
It is better to leave the battlefield to the enemy in 2016 to regroup and fight another day under more favorable circumstances. To further this analogy, conservatism is George Washington and the Continental Army, the 2016 election is the Battle of Brooklyn, and McMullin is the Maryland 400 at the Old Stone House.
Would Trump supporters say that George Washington’s “vote” for retreat under the support of the outnumbered Marylanders amounted to “support” for the British?
I can accept that you believe it. I just think you’re wrong. I think you see 2016 as a skirmish when some of us see it as the Last Battle.
You also wildly overstate what “Trump supporters” believe about his ability to compete with Clinton. NeverTrumpers seem to want their cake and to eat it too. We Trump general election voters are told we are “supporting” him because of the practical reality of our voting (which we claim is in opposition to Clinton). But, you who would usually vote for the Republican nominee, but won’t because he’s Trump, take no responsibility for the practical reality of denying opposing votes to Clinton as helping her get elected.
Double standard much?
Jager,
I gather the subject of this post is McMullen and not “neverTrumpers” and “neverHillarys” and all the other mythical beasts.
Apparently, the word “spoiler” has ceased to be part of the English language. I felt the word was succinct and utterly clear in its meaning. It means someone who is running for the express purpose of damaging another candidate’s chances.
McMullen is a spoiler.
Regards,
Jim
It’s not really discussed here that McMullin is ex-CIA and admits to 10 years with the agency. I’m fine with the agency’s work overall, but IMO it’s rather folly to accept his rationalizations for running at face value. Just on general principles.