Who are you voting for (or would vote for if you could)?

[Nathan Fielder]

i stand corrected

...on what? that was aimed at roy

 

[Specific Neptune]

i stand corrected

...on what? that was aimed at roy

bit of a meta example, but i said that "nowhere in the bible does it say you have to hate homosexuality" in the post above yours

it's not so much a verse about hating homosexuality, but it certainly implies it, which is where a lot of people would get confused

 

[Nabber]

Neptune, the Bible says the earth is six thousand years old, not two thousand.

 

[Specific Neptune]

Neptune, the Bible says the earth is six thousand years old, not two thousand.

typo pls don't sue

 

[Nabber]

im calling my lawyers as im typing this

 

[Nate Jacobs]

To be blunt, Roy, I think you're starting to act more like a Saturday Night Live parody of a Christian than an actual Christian.

 

[banjonator1]

i'm just going to reply to the op (because fuck whatever is going on up there lol) and bring up that i'm not voting this year, and i hate to admit it. i'm too terrified of making the wrong decision. growing up in a very super right wing household, voting left just makes me uncomfortable and none of the republican candidates are really appealing to me. maybe i'll end up voting third party like libertarian or green, but because of the way the system is set up and knowing it won't count for anything it's just demotivating to me

i hope the choices won't be so shitty in four years

 

[Time Turner]

i'm just going to reply to the op (because fuck whatever is going on up there lol) and bring up that i'm not voting this year, and i hate to admit it. i'm too terrified of making the wrong decision. growing up in a very super right wing household, voting left just makes me uncomfortable and none of the republican candidates are really appealing to me. maybe i'll end up voting third party like libertarian or green, but because of the way the system is set up and knowing it won't count for anything it's just demotivating to me

i hope the choices won't be so shitty in four years

One of my teachers talked about how he always voted for a third party (usually the green party iirc) even if he didn't believe in it. As he put it, he was proving to the main two that there's at least one person who disagrees with them. I can't really say I disagree with my teacher; if you stay silent, nobody will know what you're thinking, but if you vote, you're actively speaking up and potentially laying the groundwork for others to do the same.

 

[Ray Trace]

A lot of people died and struggled for the right to vote, it's for their voice in politics. I think the right to vote who you want as a leader and stuff is a very great privilege to have, and you should take part in it. Every vote counts.

Though I do agree that I pretty much hate all candidates except Bernie Sanders, but even if it's Trump vs Clinton, I really don't want Trump winning so I'll just grudgingly vote for Clinton. Ideally, third party candidates sound better but in reality they have next to no chance of winning thanks to many people just blindly voting whoever they recognize the most (hell I think it's the reason Clinton is beating Sanders)

 

[Time Turner]

I'm not sure I agree with the idea of voting for the lesser of two evils, so to speak. Somehow, your vote's going to be noticed by someone, somewhere, so I'd rather see it get placed with someone you truly believe in instead of someone you begrudgingly settle on.

 

[Time Turner]

If everyone's up shit creek, the only thing we can do is paddle.

 

[Ray Trace]

I'm not sure I agree with the idea of voting for the lesser of two evils, so to speak. Somehow, your vote's going to be noticed by someone, somewhere, so I'd rather see it get placed with someone you truly believe in instead of someone you begrudgingly settle on.

Yeah but say that I really really don't like this one particular guy and this one particular guy makes me shudder to think of him in power, much more, the freaking POTUS

 

[Specific Neptune]

it's actually scary the amount of people on funnyjunk that legitimately support donald trump

at first i thought they were joking

then i got scared

 

[RandomYoshi]

friendly reminder that if you don't vote, you can't complain about the results

 

[Raiko Horikawa]

friendly reminder that if you don't vote, you can't complain about the results

this so much

if the candidates scare you, at least show that by voting third party

it becomes a lot easier for people you don't like to win when you don't bother voting against them

everyone should vote if they can, it's incredibly important

 

[Hobbes]

Exactly, and don't nullify your vote, that's basically the same as not voting, no one cares how many null votes there were and it's not going to accomplish anything.

I'd vote Gary Johnson if it came to be Trump vs Sanders.

 

[Andymii]

I'd vote Gary Johnson if it came to be Trump vs Sanders.

I didn't even know this dude was running until just now

 

[Hobbes]

oh right, I forgot there's this ridiculous system where the candidate who has the most votes can actually lose. When I was talking about null votes I was mostly talking from personal experience here, but it's not the same, then.

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

the one thing that i do not agree on, which is to say that i'm not entirely convinced by, is evolution

i agree that it is a plausible theory, i'm just not entirely convinced by it

I probably won't be able to sway you, but evolution has an extremely strong backing with evidence from several fields of science (forensics, substantial fossil record, heritability, common descent, genetic code, molecular similarities, vestigial parts, radioactive decay, genomes) and has actually been documented in action by Richard Lenski, and computer programmers have successfully simulated evolution to produce complex AI. True, in science, nothing is 100% certain, and some phenomena cannot be explained by mere observation, but just like forensics, you can gather a lot of evidence that's consistent with the theory. There is a reason evolution is called a theory in science: it's the best explanation we have and all the other alternate explanations are inferior due to the lack of evidence or cannot be qualified as a theory (qualifications such as falsifiability, supported by substantial independent sources, consistency, and others are also well-defined and well-reasoned). For this theory to be wrong, there must be plenty of evidence that not only contradicts it, but spectacularly contradicts it AND has to successfully challenge other fields of science like geology and molecular biology. If there is evidence that contradicts this theory, it is more likely that scientists will explore and make adjustments to the theory rather than throw it out. And besides, even if the theory is dead wrong, it's still not a case for creationism or any alternate explanations. They must stand on their own. Creationism, since it's based on unfalsifiable claims, cannot.

There is no debate on the existence of evolution among scientists. Project Steve is intended to be a joke addressing how creationists argue how there are substantial dissidents on evolution but to illustrate how deceptive those arguments are.

If you're still unsure about evolution's existence, I can point to you this page. It has good responses for frequent questions on evolution.

oh right, I forgot there's this ridiculous system where the candidate who has the most votes can actually lose. When I was talking about null votes I was mostly talking from personal experience here, but it's not the same, then.

You also need to know that our elections are based on an "all-or-nothing" system as well, which is another problem with voting for third parties.

 

[Random Blue]

i swear in the general election with this system the only way your vote can count is perhaps if you live in a swing state

 

[Dr. Javelin]

It's not that we Christians hate gay people, it's that we hate homosexuality. I think you're misunderstanding it there.

im christian and i dont hate them.

i personally think the bible is pretty outdated for contemporary times, because there are things like homosexuality, wearing jewelry, eating fish, divorce, etc. that happen around the world and is seen as a common occurrence.

I find it odd when people start talking about the Old Testament stuff to try and justify something. It's pretty clear that Jesus was making some changes to the laws when he showed up in the New Testament. He specifically mentions that you shouldn't divorce anymore, even though you were allowed to under the law of Moses.

Also, Peter was told that he was allowed to eat unclean foods in the New Testament:

Honestly people who use the Bible to justify negative things should just calm the heck down. The Bible says love everyone. People should stop using it to promote hate.

Jesus does say to love your neighbor as yourself, and pray for those who persecute you, but he was also pretty specific that his teachings were going to cause strife:

Bernie Sanders isn't legitimately bad, and I think he genuinely has very good intentions in what he wants to do. I feel the same way with John Kasich, to be honest. I thoroughly liked Kasich when he entered the race and got the first taste of him during the first debate. He seems a little more agreeable and not as anger-hungry. I don't know what he's been like in Ohio the last few years but he just seems to be the lesser of evils, along with Bernie. It's the problem that I don't think there is any legitimate chance for either one to win the nomination for their parties.

If it comes down to Trump/Cruz on the GOP and Clinton for the Dems, I'd probably vote for whoever the frick comes out of the Libertarian race, assuming it's probably Gary Johnson.

Basically agree with this.

Also, this is where I get to play my hipster card, because I was talking about Gary Johnson back in 2012. Hooray!

 

[Sabre]

do you realise that voting against your state has zero impact on the outcome of a presidential election? i don't mean approximately zero. i mean precisely zero. if you vote for a republican in massachusetts, or a democrat in oklahoma, or an independent in any state... you accomplish exactly as much by staying home and taking a nap

States can change over time, though. And it starts with people voting against an established "red" state or "blue" state. My home state voted Republican in every single presidential election until 2004, but Democratic voters overcame this long history and won in 2008 and 2012.

"Precisely zero" means that you can multiply it by 2 million and it would still amount to zero. But my state proved that wrong and I'm proud to have been part of it.

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

That's true, surprising color shifts can happen. But in status quo times, our "winner takes all" system does mean that the losing votes mean squat. So, I still think the 0% impact is technically true.

 

[Time Turner]

Technically true isn't literally true. It's perhaps idealistic, but I do think that a single vote with the proper knowledge and the proper intentions behind it can make all the difference in the world.

 

[PrinceLarryKoopa88]

I'm voting for Sarah Palin, she's running right.

... No.

Sarah Palin is a very intellectual and intelligent person. I'm voting for her anyways.

bwahahahaha

I'm really ashamed to share the first name with her, but at least no one made fun of me for it...

On the record, I was being sarcastic. I'm purely a liberal.