Don't vote for Gary Johnson

Deleted

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Danimal

This is how I feel too. Then when Obama is out then we can focus for the next four years to break the two party system. We just need to do it at the right time. We all know that there is no way that a third party candidate will be elected for this election, there is too much radical division and there is too much emotion evolved in the election for the Libertarian party to win. If we can agree on that, then we can work on breaking the two party system and fixing our education system with Romney in office instead of the much worse alternative. Either way the same work needs to be done to fix the country, it will be significantly easier if there is a Republican in office instead of a Communist.

---

Agreed. I personally would like to see Allen West in office. Granted he may not be completely third party, but I think he is closer than a lot of other candidates that we have seen. He seems to care about his people, want freedom, and has not problem saying how he feels.

I share this:
http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mb...qfqo1_1280.png

What good is extra time going to do if everyone keeps starting threads like this, and keeps voting the party line no matter what? EXTRA TIME DOES NO GOOD IF NOTHING CHANGES.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Irving

What good is extra time going to do if everyone keeps starting threads like this, and keeps voting the party line no matter what? EXTRA TIME DOES NO GOOD IF NOTHING CHANGES.

---

Oh, I agree with you my friend. However, the extra time is that the republican party is destroying this nation at a slower rate than the democrats, which are destroying the country at a slower rate that Obama and his communists. So the buying of extra time is making sure Obama is out of office.

I keep telling you how the Libertarian party can achieve thier goals and I just dont think the Libertarians get it-
First- get local officials elected running as Libertarians- this means Mayors, Governors, etc.
Second- Get Congressmen elected AS LIBERTARIANS, NOT runnign as Republicans and caucusing as Republicans, but actually get a decent percentage of Libertarians elected and sitting in Congress.
Third- Then you eye the White House, and can do something with it if you actually manage to get a guy elected.

What, exactly, do you think Johnson could accomplish? Nothing, thats what. Republicans will only work with him when it fits their agenda, and the same with Democrats. So what exactly does any votes for Johnson accomplish? Not much. Although, I do get that if he can get 5% of the popular vote the Liberatarians get federal funding for the next election cycle, buuuuut again, where does that lead you?

Here is why Libertarians make no sense-

You want to reduce Federal powers on infringement on percieved personal liberties, yet the way you answer the questions as to how and why are almost Party Line-
Q"What happens if you do actually shut down say, the Department of Homeland Security?"
Typical A "A private company would step in and since profit is involved, do a better job, just look at the private contractors currently being used in the Middle East"
Response- "Ok, I get that private sector often does a lot better job than the government, but who would oversee these private companies? This sort of thing in the past has often lead to abuse of power without fear of reprisal, how exactly would such a thing be regulated and more importantly, who would pay them?"
Typical Answer- "Some funding would obviously have to come from taxpayer monies, other funding would come from corporations and other business, such as shipping companies, airports, etc. that required the security"
Response- "Huh, so still use taxpayer money with less oversight and the ability to setup what is essentially a protection racket and extort businesses?"
Typical Answer- "Thats not what I said"
Response- "Hmmmmm"


Ok so lets move on to the drug issue-

LN- "All drugs should be legalized, the war on drugs is a drain on the economy, that money can be better spent elsewhere. The prisons are full of decent people who got put there on drug charges and its ruined thier lives. People should have the personal choice of what they do with their body"

Response- "Ahhhh ok, so it should be perfectly legal for some nutjob to sell drugs on the corner and hook my kid on crack?"

LN- "No of course not, there would be an age limit and drugs would have to be sold through approved outlets. Once the drugs are legal the drug dealers will go away because anyone can just go down to the local drug shop and get what they want when they want it and so crime etc. will drop, plus we can tax those drugs and use that money to help anyone who becomes addicted"

Response- "Huh, so why has that not happened in the states where drugs are legal? I mean teens still buy from drug dealers because they cant buy legally, and crimes such as theft has not appreciably dropped. Also, what happens to the drugs that are absolutely addictive and habit forming, to the point they deprive people of the ability to actually make a choice because its a physical need?"

LN- "Well obviously if you choose to do heroin or crack and get addicted it can affect your life, but the taxes accrued by the legal drug sales will help pay for their care."

Response- " Cant happen, because the taxes taken in on the drug sales will never be enough to pay for the resulting addiction, victims of drug related violence, etc. additional regulation to ensure the proper licensing and enforcement, etc."

I could go on, but you get the drift. In the 60's everyone was looking for Utopia, it did not exist then and it doesnt exist now. As much as I generically agree with a lot of what a Libertarian has to say, they generically are not realistic about much of anything.

if you truly want a third party candidate to win, they have to get votes from both parties obviously. as such, in my opinion, it will be easier to get a third party member in while there is a republican incumbent versus and democrat one. its not a holier than thou type of thing but frankly i think conservatives are much easier to convince to go for third party than democrats. for whatever reason liberals are extremely cohesive when it comes to their candidates, especially ones in office. look at obama. what the heck can they point to as a reason he needs four more years? its all emotional. if we have romney in, and country can limp along a bit longer, and the democrats put forth a "meh" candidate in the next election, there is a good chance we could get a third party candidate in. convincing conservatives to vote for someone less mainstream than romney won't be hard. a good number of people voting for him openly state they will vote for him mostly because they figure he won't be as bad as obama, not because they love and adore him or think hes a great candidate. right now its useless voting third party. he will win a tiny amount of the votes since pretty much no liberals will vote for him. you can then pat yourself on the back and watch another four years of obama. but hey, at least you voted third party.

Feel free to disagree, but right now is not the time to start the campaign of trying to change people's minds... The country will fall apart at the seams if Obummer gets reelected, mark my words, mark them well... It won't if Romney is elected (well not just yet- or not as quickly). Once Obama is defeated, THAT is the time to start trying to sway popular opinion out of the Red corner and Blue corner. I agree 100% that we need to get out of this 2 party system, but not with the election just a few weeks away, it won't work... (oh dear, is the CD scratched, there's that same line getting repeated again). And you won't gain any support for your cause by instigating with that same BS line "You are part of the problem then!" No, I see the world as it is, you see it as you wish it were... Take off the amber colored glasses and notice that you won't change even 12% of the population to vote for a 3rd party this year. That will take a few years (we may not even garner enough numbers for the 2016 election). And, what's been said over and over again- start small! Get a libertarian/green/whatever candidate elected locally first, like in state legislature, then congress, THEN president... this could take some time, but patience is a virtue...

The one thing I do agree with the doom-and-gloom guys about is that Obama's administration is one of, if not the worst in our history. I don't think he's going to send us all to re-education camps or anything so melodramatic, but I am worried about impending monetary collapse if something isn't changed drastically, and very soon. He needs to go, but it doesn't matter if we're just going to end up with someone else in office who will continue to make things worse. It's not like Bush handed Obama a country in wonderful shape, and Obama broke it; he just continued down a similar, counter-productive path. How divergent is the current Republican platform from the one in place while Dubya Bush was in office?

If you guys could somehow convince me that Mitt wouldn't have done the major things Obama has done, or the things George Bush did, I think I'd be willing to vote R just to get the current administration out. I just don't see it though. Mitt agrees with Obama on most of the important issues, most of with which I disagree. Mitt is talking about increasing spending and the size of government in every sector, and yet also proposing a massive tax cut. I have to agree with Biden on this one: that's not mathematically possible, unless there is something Mitt plans to save money on that he hasn't told us about.

Also, is Mitt going to repeal the Patriot Act? I've never heard any American say he supports the Patriot Act, and yet there it is. And you guys think we'll be represented better by having another Republican back in office? If you base your decision on the record of the last few sitting Presidents, you have to conclude our liberties and economy will continue to circle the drain as long as a Republican or a Democrat is in the White House. If voting R for the win doesn't produce a more desirable proposition, why the hell would I do it? I'd rather add to the vote percentage the Libertarians will get in order to increase their funding for next cycle.

A few of you have made good arguments and convinced me that the Libertarian party should focus more on getting (L) leaders elected to Congress. Congress is probably a bigger issue than POTUS right now; these career legislators spending a large portion of their lives passing laws for their corporate sponsors are what is really killing us. I think term limits for legislators would fix a lot of our problems, but it would take several years before it made any impact.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Danimal

My goal here is to put forth an argument against anyone thinking of voting for anyone other than Romney-Ryan. It is proper form for a discussion to put forth the arguments of those that oppose your views prior to throwing your views into the faces of others. Otherwise you are just preaching and not acknowledging the argument.

Reasons to vote for Gary Johnson:

1) He is in general a better person, has a stronger record and is intelligent enough to lead our country in a positive direction. If he has his way he will fix most of our countries problems.

2) He is not a member of the back stabbing two party system. With 5% votes next election cycle the Libertarian party is guaranteed equal funding and representation.

3) He has a genuine interest in improving our country, thereby is not in the pocket of big government, lobbyists, or major corporations.

Addressing # 1:

I would agree with all of this. No really I think that he is morally superior in just about every way. He has strong ethical and moral values and should he institute all of his plans our country would certainly be better off. However presidents do not get anything done if they do not have support of at least one of the major bi-partisan groups, plus some swing voters from the other side of the isle. Literally nothing that he says he would accomplish would get passed unless we also replaced half of congress and the senate with people willing to agree with and support him. So far not one single seated congressman or senator has come forward to my knowledge to endorse or show support for Gary Johnson over Romney-Ryan. If it were even possible to get him elected he would at best fight with the legislative and judicial branches effectively changing 1 out of every 10 things he wants. Worst case, nothing he wants because they resent him for not being a party member, or because the lobbyists and special interest groups will pit their elected officials against him on issue after issue.

Addressing #2:

He is most certainly an outsider, and is in no way swayed by the corrupt 2 party system. I agree, and lets look at this from two different angles. First off, if he is able to net 5% of the American vote, the libertarian party gets the same federal funding as the two current political parties. Currently he is poling around 6% on some poles. This would be a huge step in breaking the two party system, four years from now. And guess where that puts us, a three party system with the same political influence, money and eventually corruption as the two party system. There is no magical number of parties that will fix the problem of political corruption. Making a third funded party is not going to fix this, we need political reform that will take power away from the current political system. If you think that Gary Johnson is going to be able to fix this, please re-read #1. We as a nation need to stand up and demand action, and this can be done with or without Gary Johnson in office. Secondly, we can look at this from the perspective that he would be able to obtain an electable majority and beat both Obama and Romney. Again this puts us back at the problem identified in #1.

Addressing #3:

He is completely funded by hard working American people. There are not many corporations backing him, and he seems to have a genuine interest in improving the lives and economic standing of everyone in our country. Again this is correct, but is lacks one key element: current support. He seems to think that there is an easy answer to all of our nations problems at the federal level. This is not true, and it is due to the complex net woven intentionally by past and present administrations to protect the interest of those who financially support them. It is a giant knot of bureaucratic bullshit that can only be solved with the support of a knowledgeable and caring electorate and constituent population that can work together to solve problems and overcome hardship. You know as well as I that this is not the case. There are 47% of people out there that are going to vote on getting more welfare and don't give a damn who pays for it because they do not have the economic, educational, or motivational means to better their situation. Do you think that they are going to be able to work together or understand what they need to do in order to fix our nation? Will they find another way to make ends meet over just getting free money? No, the vast majority will not. All that they care about is watching Mtv and collecting their check. We have to fix our culture before any real government changes can occur.

The big point that I am trying to push here is that we all know that there are better options for president than the two we are forced to choose from. In fact I would guarantee that there are 20 million people out there that would do a better job than any of the current elected Executive, Legislative, or Judicial branch representatives. And that is where the true problem lies, we literally elected these dumb ass people. That is because there is a large population out there that either doesn't care, or vote on emotion as opposed to using logic and applying it to our ethical and moral standards before making a decision. We have to fix this problem first before we have any hope of maintaining a reasonable, intelligent government. We need to focus on this now, not in four years or more importantly not in the 20 years that it would take to get enough support to actually elect a third party president. The third party outsider as smart as he may be, is not the answer. The real answer is standing up to the current and future administration and let them know that collectively as a nation we will not accept their failure anymore. Take Holder out and publicly trial him for accessory to murder, take his pension and put him in prison. We need to look realistically at the logical possibilities and decide what is the lesser of two evils, then when the counting is done stand up as a nation and make them fix our nation or wish they were never elected. We have been sitting here and taking it for the last four years. Complaining about what is going on, but who is acting? Who is doing something about it? These are the questions we need to answer and come election time we need to make a decision based on logic not emotion or we are no better than the liberals that vote for Obama.

---

Goldman Sachs 2012