Who is voting in Super Tuesday?

hoffse

I am!

I have decided to vote in the Republican primaries just so I can vote against Trump.  I'm worried about Bernie too, but I think the southern Democrats will take him out of the running.  He's too liberal for many of the democrats down here.  Trump is a bigger threat.

I live in Alabama, so my vote isn't going to count in the general election anyway.  I figure the primaries are the only time my vote might make a difference.

Anybody else?

smerka

I don't vote until later in March

short+sassy

Louisiana votes on Sat., March 5th instead of Super Tuesday.  But I am non-partisan and cannot vote in the primaries.  However, there are local and state offices up for election on that day also(though the majority are unopposed).  And, to an extent, those are the folks I think much more directly affect me than whoever is President.  Not in the "broad strokes", but in the "day to day".

labro

I'm still going back and forth. I've honestly thought about doing the same as you and voting in the Republican primaries just to bump up someone's percentage other than Donald Trump. I live in Georgia so my vote in the general election won't matter anyway, this is practically the only way it will count.

catsareniice1

Hopefully, as much as I am not a Bernie fan, I pray Hillary doesn't win. The fact that she exposed our national security as SOS and lied to us about why Bengazi happened is absolutely TERRIFYING!! A president's main responsibility is to keep us safe. That will not happen under a Hillary administration. And, having Bill in the White House again.....I don't even want to go there. He's nasty!

nkjacobsma

If it is Trump vs. Hillary-who will you vote for an why?

I just cannot see myself ever being able to check the box for Trump. However, I haven't been following the Dem side as much and my entire extended family is very loud Republicans so all I hear are the bad things about her. She does have a lot of supporters so logically either 1) she does have some things to say that people like or 2) everyone that supports her is just anti-Republican and anti-Bernie.

So I'm undecided on if I will vote Hillary or just not vote in the general election.

labro

nkjacobsma said:

If it is Trump vs. Hillary-who will you vote for an why?

I just cannot see myself ever being able to check the box for Trump. However, I haven't been following the Dem side as much and my entire extended family is very loud Republicans so all I hear are the bad things about her. She does have a lot of supporters so logically either 1) she does have some things to say that people like or 2) everyone that supports her is just anti-Republican and anti-Bernie.

So I'm undecided on if I will vote Hillary or just not vote in the general election.

I'll probably vote for Gary Johnson. Some of his beliefs I don't agree with or think are very sustainable but I strongly believe that independent parties should receive more recognition and acknowledgement in presidential elections. I voted for him in 2012 as well. I live in Georgia but I'm pretty liberal so I feel like my vote matters more somehow this way rather than just voting for whoever happens to be on the Democratic party ticket.

smerka

If the Senate does not let Obama's SC nomination go to a vote, I will vote Democratic. I also plan to vote for the Democratic Senate candidate in my state but I decided on that before the SC vacancy came up. Our current Senator had a stroke and hasn't accomplished much since then. And I didn't vote for him originally. I strongly dislike HRC, but I think she is the most qualified candidate on either side. So despite my dislike for her personally, I will probably vote for her. And will hold my nose while doing it.

vlagrl29

They are saying Hilary could easily be the D nom in 2 weeks.  I'm kinda thinking you can't stop the Clinton machine. lol.  I'm undecided on if I should vote or not during our primary later in March.  I'm really not feeling anyone still to this day.  I guess Rubio would be the safest R choice. Can't stand Cruz.

short+sassy

smerka said:

If the Senate does not let Obama's SC nomination go to a vote, I will vote Democratic. I also plan to vote for the Democratic Senate candidate in my state but I decided on that before the SC vacancy came up. Our current Senator had a stroke and hasn't accomplished much since then. And I didn't vote for him originally. I strongly dislike HRC, but I think she is the most qualified candidate on either side. So despite my dislike for her personally, I will probably vote for her. And will hold my nose while doing it.

So, when I first read this, for about 20 seconds I thought "SC" stood for South Carolina and was really confused, lol.

Yes, I am also pi**ed off when I read a comment that any Obama SC candidate is going to be voted down automatically.  How silly of me to expect a Senator of the United States to NOT act like a 3-year-old child, throwing a fit on the ground, because they could not get an ice cream cone.

Legitimately considering Obama's choice and then voting against it is one thing.  That is part of their job as Senators.  But to just make a unilateral statement they won't ratify any Obama choice is a gross dereliction of their job duties. 

MommyLiberty5013

Yes, I am voting on Super Tuesday here in MN.

hoffse

short+sassy said

So, when I first read this, for about 20 seconds I thought "SC" stood for South Carolina and was really confused, lol.

Yes, I am also pi**ed off when I read a comment that any Obama SC candidate is going to be voted down automatically.  How silly of me to expect a Senator of the United States to NOT act like a 3-year-old child, throwing a fit on the ground, because they could not get an ice cream cone.

Legitimately considering Obama's choice and then voting against it is one thing.  That is part of their job as Senators.  But to just make a unilateral statement they won't ratify any Obama choice is a gross dereliction of their job duties. 

******SIB***********

Agreed.  I know I sound like a broken record with this, but the SCOTUS decisions/opinions do NOT unilaterally line up along party lines.  Any judge who is legitimately competent to serve on the Supreme Court understands the gravity of their job and that it needs to transcend personal political beliefs.

Most opinions are unanimous.  They have gotten increasingly unanimous in recent years.  I understand the political fight over appointees, I really do... but let's give the SCOTUS judges a little credit here.  They are not going to join an opinion simply because on Election Day they vote democrat or republican.  

I think it's ultimately going to be somebody from the DC circuit.  Their clerks all got called in on President's Day for an emergency meeting, pretty much to tell them to mind their p's and q's when drafting opinions. They are being seriously vetted. I know somebody who is a clerk there right now.

I hope it's Srinivasan.  He has represented clients on both ends of the political spectrum, and he clerked for O'Connor.

csuave

I'm over a month after Super Tuesday

Super Tuesday will probably decide how I register for my primary.  If, by some chance, the R presidential nominee is still not clearly decided I will vote as a registered R because I want to vote against Trump.  But if it is no contest after that I'll need to register D because there is a local democratic candidate I want to get me vote.  Not happy with being in a closed primary this year.

short+sassy

hoffse said:

short+sassy said

So, when I first read this, for about 20 seconds I thought "SC" stood for South Carolina and was really confused, lol.

Yes, I am also pi**ed off when I read a comment that any Obama SC candidate is going to be voted down automatically.  How silly of me to expect a Senator of the United States to NOT act like a 3-year-old child, throwing a fit on the ground, because they could not get an ice cream cone.

Legitimately considering Obama's choice and then voting against it is one thing.  That is part of their job as Senators.  But to just make a unilateral statement they won't ratify any Obama choice is a gross dereliction of their job duties. 

******SIB***********

Agreed.  I know I sound like a broken record with this, but the SCOTUS decisions/opinions do NOT unilaterally line up along party lines.  Any judge who is legitimately competent to serve on the Supreme Court understands the gravity of their job and that it needs to transcend personal political beliefs.

Most opinions are unanimous.  They have gotten increasingly unanimous in recent years.  I understand the political fight over appointees, I really do... but let's give the SCOTUS judges a little credit here.  They are not going to join an opinion simply because on Election Day they vote democrat or republican.  

I think it's ultimately going to be somebody from the DC circuit.  Their clerks all got called in on President's Day for an emergency meeting, pretty much to tell them to mind their p's and q's when drafting opinions. They are being seriously vetted. I know somebody who is a clerk there right now.

I hope it's Srinivasan.  He has represented clients on both ends of the political spectrum, and he clerked for O'Connor.

That's what I find ridiculous about it also.  I just don't picture anyone being considered for the SC as some wild fruitcake, politically or otherwise.  They are all going to be some of our country's finest legal scholars and have decades of experience. 

labro

How silly is this? This is my first ever Super Tuesday that I'm actually voting in. All the others I was out of the state for college and didn't care enough to send in an absentee ballot. I had to review and look up the rules on Georgia's primary because my dad was convinced that I would have had to register as a Democrat or a Republican prior to voting day. Luckily it's an open primary but I still have no idea what to expect later today when I stop by our polling place.

hoffse

labro said:

How silly is this? This is my first ever Super Tuesday that I'm actually voting in. All the others I was out of the state for college and didn't care enough to send in an absentee ballot. I had to review and look up the rules on Georgia's primary because my dad was convinced that I would have had to register as a Democrat or a Republican prior to voting day. Luckily it's an open primary but I still have no idea what to expect later today when I stop by our polling place.

Alabama is an open primary too.  I voted this morning and just had to tell them which ballot I wanted when I got there.

Funny thing is, I saw a few people I KNOW are democrats take republican ballots.  One of them is a coworker of mine and she was like, "Gotta vote against Trump."  She felt strongly enough that he should not be an option that she crossed over when she got to the polls.

I do kind of wonder how Hillary is going to fare if enough democrats do that.  The Bernie supporters aren't going to cross over, but Hillary's supporters just might.

short+sassy

Huh!  I didn't know open primaries were a thing.  I'll have to check that out.  I just always assumed I had to be registered Dem. or Rep.

At least that is how it was in CA...um, 20 years ago when I lived there (hiding face in shame, realizing I may have been totally mistaken this whole time).

Ugh, I swear I'm terrible at googling.  Couldn't find a definitive answer.  Apparently we are one of only four states that has "jungle primaries", where all candidates for state positions are listed together (not by party) and...if no one gets a 50% majority...then there is a later election with a run-off of the top two.  So all the links I found were too focused on "look at Louisiana's weirdo primary system," to actually answer the question I was asking, lol.

Apparently there were landmark Supreme Court decisions that forced Louisiana (and the other states) to shuffle around how they do these elections...which often result in an "extra" election...specifically in regards to dates/timing.

Funny enough, one of the other few states is CA...the only other place I've voted...so no wonder all that runoff stuff seemed normal to me, lol.

vlagrl29

Yeah I think all these Ds voting R is going to backfire on them.

labro

short+sassy said:

Huh!  I didn't know open primaries were a thing.  I'll have to check that out.  I just always assumed I had to be registered Dem. or Rep.

At least that is how it was in CA...um, 20 years ago when I lived there (hiding face in shame, realizing I may have been totally mistaken this whole time).

Ugh, I swear I'm terrible at googling.  Couldn't find a definitive answer.  Apparently we are one of only four states that has "jungle primaries", where all candidates for state positions are listed together (not by party) and...if no one gets a 50% majority...then there is a later election with a run-off of the top two.  So all the links I found were too focused on "look at Louisiana's weirdo primary system," to actually answer the question I was asking, lol.

Apparently there were landmark Supreme Court decisions that forced Louisiana (and the other states) to shuffle around how they do these elections...which often result in an "extra" election...specifically in regards to dates/timing.

Funny enough, one of the other few states is CA...the only other place I've voted...so no wonder all that runoff stuff seemed normal to me, lol.

Confession I LOVE how Louisiana votes. I wish more states were like that. I had a tough time choosing a ballot today because I'm still unsure in regards to the General Election in November. I honestly believe that putting all the candidates in the same pot (locally anyway) forces those candidates to attempt to reach across the aisle so they can appeal to all voters and not extreme minority-majorities.

short+sassy

labro said:

short+sassy said:

Huh!  I didn't know open primaries were a thing.  I'll have to check that out.  I just always assumed I had to be registered Dem. or Rep.

At least that is how it was in CA...um, 20 years ago when I lived there (hiding face in shame, realizing I may have been totally mistaken this whole time).

Ugh, I swear I'm terrible at googling.  Couldn't find a definitive answer.  Apparently we are one of only four states that has "jungle primaries", where all candidates for state positions are listed together (not by party) and...if no one gets a 50% majority...then there is a later election with a run-off of the top two.  So all the links I found were too focused on "look at Louisiana's weirdo primary system," to actually answer the question I was asking, lol.

Apparently there were landmark Supreme Court decisions that forced Louisiana (and the other states) to shuffle around how they do these elections...which often result in an "extra" election...specifically in regards to dates/timing.

Funny enough, one of the other few states is CA...the only other place I've voted...so no wonder all that runoff stuff seemed normal to me, lol.

Confession I LOVE how Louisiana votes. I wish more states were like that. I had a tough time choosing a ballot today because I'm still unsure in regards to the General Election in November. I honestly believe that putting all the candidates in the same pot (locally anyway) forces those candidates to attempt to reach across the aisle so they can appeal to all voters and not extreme minority-majorities.

That's a good point and you'll see that here.  We are actually a very extreme state.  NOLA is extremely Dem. and the rest of the state is extremely GOP.  Yet, in local and state elections, you'll often see voters voting for who they think the best candidate is (what a concept), even if that means voting against their party lines.  As such, although we always go red for presidential elections, we've often had Democratic governors and other Democrats holding offices.

We're also one of 18 states who vote separately for the Governor and Lieutenant Governor.  So it can be interesting when those two people are from different parties.