Who is your fifth choice for President?

[digamma]

We hear, read and post a lot about how divided we are between the two parties. There is certainly truth to that, but I think one thing different about this election is how much the other party's candidate is disliked. I thought it might be interesting to see not who your second choice is for President, but rather who your fifth choice is, including Johnson, Stein and the wunderkind McMullin.

[digamma]

For me, this is the first election since I've been able to vote (1996) that I wouldn't rank the other major party candidate a clear second choice.

[mckerney]

Hmm, I'm not sure if it would be Trump or Stein.

Not a fan of any after Hillary, McMullin would be my second choice though since he doesn't seem to be completely clueless like Gary Johnson.

[Jas_lov]

Hillary
McMullin
Johnson
Stein
Trump

[EagleFan]

Johnson easily top; throw the other 4 on a boat and sink it in the ocean.

[NobodyHere]

Johnson
McMullion
Clinton/Stein
Trump

[CrescentMoonie]

Johnson
McMullen
Clinton
Stein
Trump

[JonInMiddleGA]

There really isn't a fifth there, similar to what EF said. Stein & Clinton are equally worthless, Johnson is barely a tick better thanks possibly only to the stopped clock exception that could happen for anybody.

The question did make me realize that quite possibly I'd not rank Hilary dead last of the bunch at this point, simlar to my feelings in the primaries. She's merely outright evil, the others are both batshit crazy AND prone to evil.

[JPhillips]

Vermin Supreme>Trump

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Vermin Supreme=Trump

Fixed

[Chief Rum]

I picked Stein but it was really close between her and Trump. They're both nuts. I picked her because I figure even if Trump is nuts, at least he is likely tp be nuts in the general direction of a handful of values I hold, while I have absolutely nothing in common with Stein.

[BillJasper]

Clinton
McMullin
Johnson
Trump
Stein

[molson]

I figure with Trump there's a chance he basically just hands over the work of president and is content to spend his time assaulting women in and around the Oval Office.

Stein though, I think would be willing to try to blow it all up to push her values. I know that appeals to some people, but I don't think it would make the country better, even in the 20-30 year long run, and it would really suck in the short-term. I think she'd try to wield power from the executive branch in all kinds of never-before-seen ways.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by digamma

For me, this is the first election since I've been able to vote (1996) that I wouldn't rank the other major party candidate a clear second choice.

Honestly, I don't rank any of these candidates in first place. There is clearly one nightmare candidate. Then there are a bunch of other people I wouldn't vote for if I were paid money.

This election is like telling me I'm in charge of the college football playoff and that I must decide tonight who the top four are. The only catch is that I'm given a list of five teams to choose from and the list doesn't include Michigan, Clemson, Alabama, Washington or Ohio State. Instead I get to choose between Purdue, Stanford, Texas, Notre Dame and Florida State.

There is no #2 for me. I want a do over with candidates I actually have some semblance of respect for so I can rank them.

[flere-imsaho]

I look at this from a pragmatic point of view (also the point of view of a Clinton supporter who would be happy to see her continue to advance, even incrementally, progressive policies).

For starters, I doubt McMullin & Stein will have any idea what they're doing and their Administration will be a lot like when Carol Moseley Braun got into the Senate. This is probably doubly true for Stein, because there's no way any likely composition of Congress is going to work on her issues. So if I can't have Clinton I'd rather have 4 years of stagnation, basically.

Then it's tough between Johnson & Trump. In the end I pick Johnson because I think there's a decent likelihood that he'd find enough common cause with Congress to help them dismantle, at any cost, the federal government, while I think there's a 50/50 chance Trump wouldn't do anything besides continue to wage war on the GOP Establishment. But it's close.

[JPhillips]

I'd go

Hillary
McMullin
Johnson
Stein
Vermin Supreme

I figure McMullin is the only one after Hillary that isn't either nuts or completely uninformed. I'd disagree with him on almost every policy issue, but I doubt he'd do any real damage.

[panerd]

Maybe I am interpreting this thread a little too literally but I find the McMullin responses highly amusing. How in the world this guy isn't 5th on everyone's list is beyond me. Besides the lack of any experience whosoever (former Secretary of State/ US senator/First Lady/governors wife, two term governor/business owner, whether you like it or not highly successful businessman, Harvard graduate who is well versed on the issues) this guys is a former CIA operative/Goldman Sachs employee. Yet even after the bi-partisan outrage on the board over both banking and the wars he has no last place votes? Guess I'm glad this country doesn't use a ballot where you rank the candidates. And I'm being nice to stein only because of his inclusion on the list.

[SackAttack]

Trump would be my last choice only because I think he's the John the Baptist of an American fascist movement. If he were merely incompetent, I'd probably rank Stein and McMullin some variant of 4th/5th.

But any appearance of success for Trump, even in defeat, primes the pump for somebody more charismatic, with less baggage, to run his playbook and I don't see anything good coming from that.

Trump needs to go down in flames. McMullin, Johnson, and Stein are all characters I don't think would necessarily be good Presidents, but I don't see any of the three being a harbinger of doom the way I think Trump can be.

And, hell, I've said before that a BIG part of why I'm voting for Clinton is because fuck Mitch McConnell and his obstructionist bullshit. It's about not empowering that piece of worthless fuckery any more than absolutely necessary. Had he comported himself differently the last 8 years (and especially the last 8 months), I might not view a Republican/conservative candidate with such anathema.

But I don't want anybody in the White House who has the slightest sympathy towards McConnell's worldview as long as he wields the gavel.

Sorry.

[Kodos]

I guess the other candidates are merely not up to the challenge rather than an active threat to launch nuclear war, so I'll go with Trump as my fifth choice.

[albionmoonlight]

Clinton
Johnson
McMullin

[Large Gap]

Stein
Trump

[Kodos]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

Clinton
Johnson
McMullin

[Large Gap]

Stein
Trump

I might flip-flop Johnson and McMullin (don't know enough about McMullin to say for sure), but this is pretty close to how I'd go.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by panerd

Maybe I am interpreting this thread a little too literally but I find the McMullin responses highly amusing. How in the world this guy isn't 5th on everyone's list is beyond me. Besides the lack of any experience whosoever (former Secretary of State/ US senator/First Lady/governors wife, two term governor/business owner, whether you like it or not highly successful businessman, Harvard graduate who is well versed on the issues) this guys is a former CIA operative/Goldman Sachs employee. Yet even after the bi-partisan outrage on the board over both banking and the wars he has no last place votes? Guess I'm glad this country doesn't use a ballot where you rank the candidates. And I'm being nice to stein only because of his inclusion on the list.

His position on climate change, torture, Muslims, and immigration definitely puts him ahead of Trump for me. He also worked as a refugee resettlement officer in Jordan. Even if I held the few years McMullin worked for Goldman Sachs against him, there is literally nothing in Trump's business record that makes me think he'd be a good President.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Vermin Supreme>Trump

Don't blame me, I voted for John McAfee.

[Young Drachma]

My vote was half-troll, I actually ended up voting for Clinton because the ballot in Indiana only had Trump and Johnson on it and the only write-ins that count are "registered" write-ins and I had no idea who really fit that category here and I figured if I was gonna vote, I wanted to pick a Presidential candidate so I got subsumed by the machine.

Trump should probably be 5th tho.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

His position on climate change, torture, Muslims, and immigration definitely puts him ahead of Trump for me. He also worked as a refugee resettlement officer in Jordan.

Yep. All of this.

And I don't necessarily view working for the CIA or Goldman Sachs against someone, per se.