- Joined
- Jan 28, 2013
- Messages
- 94,823
- Reaction score
- 28,342
- Location
- Williamsburg, Virginia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
If a person normally votes libertarian there is nothing really wrong with doing so now.A vote for Hillary would be disreputable. A vote for Trump would be dishonorable. Do I agree with the Libertarians on everything? No. But I can vote for Johnson and Weld with a clear conscience.He doesn't need big donors, and taking donor funds is corrupt, and he's said he's wealthy enough to fund his campaign
But not voting for the party you normally do because you do not like the candidate and instead voting for a non-electable third party is asinine, as it takes away votes from getting your normal party elected.
That doesn't change the gist of what I said.I am not loyal to a party. I am loyal to my ideals. If my party chooses a candidate that does not reflect my ideals, they are not my party anymore.
I will not be party to electing either of the two apparent nominees. I might vote down ticket, or I might stay home and drink. the latter I think I am currently leaning toward.
A vote for Hillary would be disreputable. A vote for Trump would be dishonorable. Do I agree with the Libertarians on everything? No. But I can vote for Johnson and Weld with a clear conscience.
Gary Johnson-Bill Weld 2016 Libertarian ticket offers 'third way' in ...
johnson-bill-weld-2016-li...
The Libertarian Party put forward Sunday the strongest presidential ticket in its history, throwing down the gauntlet in an election that has the two major parties poised to nominate divisive candidates with soaring unfavorability ratings.
Delegates to the Libertarian National Convention chose in separate votes a pair of former Republican governors — New Mexico’s Gary Johnson and Massachusetts’ William Weld — despite objections from party loyalists who booed them as “failed Republicans” and questioned their commitment to party principles.
Mr. Johnson won the party’s presidential nomination on the second ballot with 55.8 percent of the delegate vote, giving him a second shot at the presidency after winning about 1.72 million votes as the party’s candidate in 2012.
While Mr. Johnson’s nomination was all but assured, much less certain was whether the delegation would warm up to Mr. Weld, who joined the party two weeks ago and had been denounced by critics as “Libertarian lite.”
After squeaking onto the ticket with 50.8 percent on the second ballot, Mr. Weld assured the crowd that he would adhere to Libertarian principles while running a race that he said would appeal to both Republican and Democratic voters unhappy with their parties’ nominees.
Libertarian vice presidential candidate Bill Weld (right) speaks with Joe Hunter, communications ... more >
“This is a national ticket,” Mr. Weld told the crowd at the Rosen Centre Hotel in Orlando, Florida.
If a person normally votes libertarian there is nothing really wrong with doing so now.
But not voting for the party you normally do because you do not like the candidate and instead voting for a non-electable third party is asinine, as it takes away votes from getting your normal party elected.
With that said ...
There is not one thing dishonorable in voting for Trump.
Even if a person doesn't like Trump, he still represents the best chance to get an appropriate SCOTUS nominee from the conservative/Republican perspective, if not more than one.
The same will hold for the liberal/Democrat nominee.
So if you actually care the way this country is influenced by the SCt, you should vote for the candidate from the main parties that can win and will get the chance to appoint to the Supreme Court.
Not a third party who has no chance at winning.
A vote for Hillary would be disreputable. A vote for Trump would be dishonorable. Do I agree with the Libertarians on everything? No. But I can vote for Johnson and Weld with a clear conscience.
Gary Johnson-Bill Weld 2016 Libertarian ticket offers 'third way' in ...
johnson-bill-weld-2016-li...
The Libertarian Party put forward Sunday the strongest presidential ticket in its history, throwing down the gauntlet in an election that has the two major parties poised to nominate divisive candidates with soaring unfavorability ratings.
Delegates to the Libertarian National Convention chose in separate votes a pair of former Republican governors — New Mexico’s Gary Johnson and Massachusetts’ William Weld — despite objections from party loyalists who booed them as “failed Republicans” and questioned their commitment to party principles.
Mr. Johnson won the party’s presidential nomination on the second ballot with 55.8 percent of the delegate vote, giving him a second shot at the presidency after winning about 1.72 million votes as the party’s candidate in 2012.
While Mr. Johnson’s nomination was all but assured, much less certain was whether the delegation would warm up to Mr. Weld, who joined the party two weeks ago and had been denounced by critics as “Libertarian lite.”
After squeaking onto the ticket with 50.8 percent on the second ballot, Mr. Weld assured the crowd that he would adhere to Libertarian principles while running a race that he said would appeal to both Republican and Democratic voters unhappy with their parties’ nominees.
Libertarian vice presidential candidate Bill Weld (right) speaks with Joe Hunter, communications ... more >
“This is a national ticket,” Mr. Weld told the crowd at the Rosen Centre Hotel in Orlando, Florida.
Liberaltarianism is an insane position.
as opposed to the "burn Jews at the stake and crucify homosexuals" Position? He who is without extremism shall cast the first stone
SCOTUS appointment is far more important to this nation than those other things.There are other issues beyond the SCOTUS. I do not believe in mass deportations, a wall or a religious test to enter the US. I believe in free trade, strengthening our alliances and limiting the proliferation of nuclear weapons.
SCOTUS appointment is far more important to this nation than those other things.
Regardless, what I said even applies to someone like you.
A third party candidate has no chance at winning.
To make your vote count you should vote for the person who is most likely to win who is closest to your beliefs.
That way the person who is furthest away form your views isn't given a boost by not voting for their opponent.
You are more than welcome to throw your vote away on someone who has absolutely no chance at winning.I find Clinton and Trump equally abhorrent. I will not lower myself to vote for either one.
You are more than welcome to throw your vote away on someone who has absolutely no chance at winning.
And by doing so all you are saying is that you don't care who the SCt appointee will be.
I find that abhorrent.
The SCt nomination is more important.My goals are modest. I aim to retain my self-respect.
The SCt nomination is more important.
Flawed thinking.Not to me.
Flawed thinking.
Really? Ok then; I wish you to vote for the Republican nominee.As you wish.
SCOTUS appointment is far more important to this nation than those other things.
Regardless, what I said even applies to someone like you.
A third party candidate has no chance at winning.
To make your vote count you should vote for the person who is closest to your beliefs and has the better chance at winning.
That way the person who is furthest away form your views isn't given a boost by not voting for their opponent.
My goals are modest. I aim to retain my self-respect.
Really? Ok then; I wish you to vote for the Republican nominee.
Unless Kasich is Trump's VP ?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?