Are There Any Conservative Hawks Like Me, Thinking of Voting For Hillary?

[gallantwarrior]

I'm wondering; I feel quite alone, at this point.

You're definitely not alone. I imagine that about 60% of the Republican party will be voting for Hillary Clinton. We know already that half of Republican women will not cast a vote for Donald Trump, and are millions of Republican men that will not swallow the Trump bait. We even have top Republican legislators that are refusing to endorse Donald Trump, even though he is the imminent nominee. G.W Bush, Mitt Romney and many others won't even be going to the Republican National convention this year. Paul Ryan may not even be there, and he is supposed to lead the convention, but stated if Trump doesn't want him there, he'll be happy to step aside.

Here's some good articles for you.
Poll: Nearly half of Republican women wouldn't vote for Trump
I’ll Take Hillary Clinton Over Donald Trump
Election 2016: Top Republicans may skip GOP convention - CNNPolitics.com
Mac Stipanovich: An open letter to my fellow Republicans

Are you sure they aren't just going to sit this one out? I mean, whether you like or would vote for Trump, what self-respecting humanoid or any stripe would vote for the certifiably incompetent, un-qualified, cankle-infested, criminal, lying, sack-of-shit, c**t, Hildebeest?
And I confess, if the polls are correct about women voting for Hillary, maybe it's time to take the vote away from them again because they are obviously incapable of sane, reasoned consideration of the realities of competence and qualifications.

 

[Blackrook]

The OP is right, Hillary Clinton will continue the wars, and expand them, she lacks the imagination to do anything else.

What we need in the next President is a new approach, a willingness to rethink all our assumptions, and question everything we've been doing since 9/11.

Donald Trump may be that President. However, I will not vote for him, because of his promise to murder families of terrorists. I can't be morally responsible for voting for a man who would do that, or even put that out there as an idea.

I won't be voting for Hillary either. She is morally bankrupt, plagued with scandals, and would probably be impeached or forced to resign.

 

[Tresha91203]

I entertained the idea for a long time. I can't vote for someone for POTUS who I don't trust with security clearance. Her own words convinced me that she cannot be trusted with classified information.

It is a shit choice this cycle, but I will vote against laissez-faire attitudes about our national security, against foreign nations' influencing our election process, and against paid protesters disrupting a presidential candidate's campaign rallies to provoke violence and/or keep Americans from participating due to fear of violence.

 

[Noitartst]

Noitartust 14224699

Don't worry, Obama's neo-appeasement's bad enough--I congratulate you on the failure of Bernie, too; there's hope for you all, yet.

What Obama appeasements are you referring to?

Syria; I've got a whole board about it, up on Pinterest, talking about it; I'd link to it, but I'm not up to 15 posts, yet.

Look--the Russian reset made sense, once; didn't work. I used to be quite sympathetic to Putin, but well, he's clearly a bully, now. We're whistling past the graveyard when we say we're not in a new cold war, or something like; that dishonesty galls me.

Irony is, I'm not voting Trump, but at the same time, with some of his ideas, like boosting minimum wage, make sense, to me; I'm no Randian economic purist.

Foreign affairs are key to me, and that's why I'm shifting. Were it just Trump 'n Bernie, I'd really be in a quandary.

 

[Blackrook]

I was once a hawk, and supported our invasion of both Afghanistan and Iraq, but now I realize that our country's incompetence in Vietnam was not a one-off. Democracies just aren't very good at fighting wars. The struggle of competing factions and special interests keep us from winning decisively. The interests of large corporations making money keep us in wars long after it's obvious that victory is impossible.

The only reason we won World War II decisively was because the Communists in our government convinced FDR to declare "Unconditional Surrender" as the goal of the war. But that turned out to be a mistake, because the complete collapse of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan led to a power vacuum that the Communists used to take over Eastern Europe, and big parts of Asia.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

I'm as conservative as they come and I'd rather die a death of a thousand paper cuts than ever vote for that corrupt old bitch

Just hopin you knew where EconChick went. You are two peas in a pod.



So you will vote for the Drumpf who dumped on McCain for getting taken POW. He said McCain was not a hero. Drumpf likes heroes that don't get captured.

You like Drumpf informing you that Bush lied about WMD to invade Iraq and make that big mistake?

Been trying to tell you that truth for years.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Syria;

Obama is killing terrorists in Syria not appeasing then. What are you talking about.

Assad gave up his Chem weapons. That was not appeasement by Obama.

 

[BlueGin]

I'm as conservative as they come and I'd rather die a death of a thousand paper cuts than ever vote for that corrupt old bitch

Good we don't want you to bring shame to the Democratic Party. Has Daesh taken over Route Irish yet?

What the fuck is it with you daffy left loons and this Route Irish bullshit? Wait....you are Fake Jake? Did you just out yourself? LMAO

Probably

 

[cereal_killer]

are there any clan members out there looking for a black or jewish wife?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

The OP is right, Hillary Clinton will continue the wars, and expand them, she lacks the imagination to do anything else.

What we need in the next President is a new approach, a willingness to rethink all our assumptions, and question everything we've been doing since 9/11.

Donald Trump may be that President. However, I will not vote for him, because of his promise to murder families of terrorists. I can't be morally responsible for voting for a man who would do that, or even put that out there as an idea.

I won't be voting for Hillary either. She is morally bankrupt, plagued with scandals, and would probably be impeached or forced to resign.

Good. Don't vote. Clinton wins.

 

[Noitartst]

Look--the lessons of our war errors is long, and worthy of many books, but to throw in the towel is wrong. Some have said all we need to do is sow chaos in the Middle East is what out foreign policy needs to be, and I can see why, but that 's not moral.

The error in Libya was to leave Libya prematurely; in reality, we were recapitulating the errors of Afghanistan after a fashion, and we did so with a lot of political support from the victorious rebels. Should've leveraged that into new order, and all we had done to enter that position was to send jets (officially).

We had in a way, a lot more to work with, than when got started in Afghanistan, in 2001, really; and that is the opportunity we have, in the Middle East: to midwife into the world new democracies, and a new order. As is, it is both a duty, and a privilege; let us neither shirk, nor otherwise prove unworthy.

As to Hill, it is good that her foreign policy isn't much discussed, I now realize; the mood isn't right, but then again, articulate leadership does a lot, and just leadership, even if wrong, has big impact. Post September, there's been a pro-Russia shift in the country, and I doubt Obama imagined that happening, but that's what he's done.

Scares me, actually; she's capable of learning from them, and she like to hang with fellas like Gates 'n Petraeus, so it's all to the good in my book.

 

[Noitartst]

No response, here? Disappointing.

 

[Little-Acorn]

If you're thinking of voting for Hillary, you're definitely not conservative.

That would be like thinking of voting for a fox to guard the henhouse, when you're one of the hens.

 

[Flopper]

If you're thinking of voting for Hillary, you're definitely not conservative.

That would be like thinking of voting for a fox to guard the henhouse, when you're one of the hens.

There is no conservative candidate in the race. Republicans rejected them in the primaries.

 

[easyt65]

No.

You may not like Trump'S arrogance, but he is a helluva lot better than Hillary.

 

[Little-Acorn]

If you're thinking of voting for Hillary, you're definitely not conservative.
That would be like thinking of voting for a fox to guard the henhouse, when you're one of the hens.

There is no conservative candidate in the race. Republicans rejected them in the primaries.

My statement stands.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I'm wondering; I feel quite alone, at this point.

Your problem isn’t whom to vote for but that you’re a warmongering conservative.

We can hope that in time you’ll have no one to vote for, the Nation having rejected the right’s propensity for war – particularly given the Bush debacle in Iraq and Afghanistan.

And it is indeed the right’s propensity for war that renders it vital to keep a republican out of the WH come 2017.

 

[Two Thumbs]

I'm wondering; I feel quite alone, at this point.

No, b/c no conservative hawk can find anything to like about hillary.

she's to the left of liberalism

not that there are many liberals to be left of anymore

 

[xband]

Even the Mayor of Paris has come out against Trump. When will it end? November 8, 2016 when Trump wins and the Mayor of Paris suffers a mental breakdown.

 

[Two Thumbs]

I'm wondering; I feel quite alone, at this point.

Your problem isn’t whom to vote for but that you’re a warmongering conservative.

We can hope that in time you’ll have no one to vote for, the Nation having rejected the right’s propensity for war – particularly given the Bush debacle in Iraq and Afghanistan.

And it is indeed the right’s propensity for war that renders it vital to keep a republican out of the WH come 2017.

WW1 (D)
WW2 (D)
Korea (D)
VN (D)
Bay of Pigs (D)
Iran hostage save attempt (D)

history does not support you.