Gary Johnson: On the Issues: Would you vote for him?

[Ikari]

Johnson did well for New Mexico when he was governor.

Indeed. He has the experience, the platform, and the isolation from Corporate Donors that this Republic needs to really start to get government out of control.

Interesting you commented on the Republican side of things but nothing regarding the Democratic party.:mrgreen:

Actually I didn’t. I refer to them as the aggregate Republocrat party.

It would be interesting to see how Congress worked with a third party candidate.

They wouldn’t, not at all. If, by some miracle, a third party candidate was elected, the Republocrats would require their failure. They have set up a rather precarious system of power that revolves around the exclusion of all political competition. In that way they can just point fingers at the other side, claim they are the devil, and run on their power teeter-totter. All the while, both sides strive for larger and more intrusive government.

Political competition threatens that system, that balance they made to remove themselves from the control of the People. It’s why we normally don’t hear peep one, and even why now with Johnson polling at around 10%, we still don’t hear too much about it. Not from the Republocrats nor the press they control. They cannot have it. They cannot have the People understanding, knowing, being aware of another choice than them. And if those choices start to poll high, then it’s even worse. Worse yet, a candidate makes it in. So if one did make it in, the Republocrats would try with all their might to make them fail, regardless of consequence since a successful Third Party candidate who makes things better and improves the lot of the Republic would be a direct and considerable threat to their power and money base.

 

[Henrin]

No I'm a Republican. Why would I vote Libertarian?

Also Trump and Clinton are both horrible choices. Johnson is no better.

That's stupid. Trump is a complete moron, Clinton is corrupt, incompetent and only believes in gun control and her own power, while Johnson on the other hand is a solid candidate that while not perfect as a libertarian candidate by a long shot isn't terrible.

 

[ludin]

Some of this policies bother me legalizing drugs doesn't reduce crime.
he is about 50/50.

 

[Vox]

He's just a more toxic form of Republican.

Legalize drugs? Big deal. Drug dealers will still be selling cheap black market drugs just like they sell cigarettes and liquor now......only it will be worse.

He doesn't want to increase taxes on the rich......so where will the money come from?

Of course, tax the rest of us more and take away from the poor, let inner cities fall into greater dysfunction and violence.

Just a more toxic variety of Republican.

 

[blackjack50]

If to you Gary Johnson is an authoritarian, every other American politician alive must be essentially Hitler to you.

And yes, I probably will vote for him.

Um? Trump. Not Gary Johnson.


Sent from my grapefruit using smoke signals.

 

[blackjack50]

Some of this policies bother me legalizing drugs doesn't reduce crime.
he is about 50/50.

Not true. It has been shown to actually do just that. Maybe not straight legalize, but what it DOES do is destroys the revenue for major ganglands. That is a GOOD thing. That is how we killed the mob by the way. We hit them in the wallet.


Sent from my grapefruit using smoke signals.

 

[blackjack50]

He's just a more toxic form of Republican.

Legalize drugs? Big deal. Drug dealers will still be selling cheap black market drugs just like they sell cigarettes and liquor now......only it will be worse.

He doesn't want to increase taxes on the rich......so where will the money come from?

Of course, tax the rest of us more and take away from the poor, let inner cities fall into greater dysfunction and violence.

Just a more toxic variety of Republican.

What? Your position is all over the place politically. You want to continue the drug war? But you don't like republicans? I mean never mind that we have a classic historical example of the destruction of the violence and gangs related to alcohol distribution after the prohibition.

If we cut out the drug laws they will cripple the gangland financially. There won't be much money in the drug trade...given that convenience and lack danger will make it way easier to decide who to buy from.


Sent from my grapefruit using smoke signals.

 

[tres borrachos]

I've already decided to vote for Johnson. I don't agree with everything in his agenda but I've never fully agreed with anyone I voted for. I think he's a good man and I actually like Weld a lot, and remember him when he was the governor of MA.

You simply couldn't pay me to vote for either Trump or Clinton. Not in a million years.

 

[rocket88]

I've already decided to vote for Johnson. I don't agree with everything in his agenda but I've never fully agreed with anyone I voted for. I think he's a good man and I actually like Weld a lot, and remember him when he was the governor of MA.

You simply couldn't pay me to vote for either Trump or Clinton. Not in a million years.

I've already decided for Johnson too. I also voted for him in 2012.

 

[rocket88]

No, I would not.

Ironic that a "libertarian" won't vote for the Libertarian candidate.

 

[Henrin]

Ironic that a "libertarian" won't vote for the Libertarian candidate.

You will find that to be pretty common among libertarians.

 

[Ikari]

Ironic that a "libertarian" won't vote for the Libertarian candidate.

For many, libertarian is code word for republican.

 

[Henrin]

Some of this policies bother me legalizing drugs doesn't reduce crime.
he is about 50/50.

Having less things that are illegal generally means that people have less probability to break the law. It follows then that it would be expected that if you legalize something that you will likely see a decrease in crime. Not arresting people for drugs will obviously lead to less people being arrested and less people going to prison.

 

[blackjack50]

For many, libertarian is code word for republican.

It is the only way to keep democrats from stoning us for having an opinion they don't like.


Sent from my grapefruit using smoke signals.

 

[Ikari]

It is the only way to keep democrats from stoning us for having an opinion they don't like.


Sent from my grapefruit using smoke signals.

It's because the word "libertarian" became hip and people thought themselves cool if they used it, but in then end most are just republicans trying to make it seem like they aren't part of the sheeple contributing to the same corrupt system.

 

[pinqy]

It's because the word "libertarian" became hip and people thought themselves cool if they used it, but in then end most are just republicans trying to make it seem like they aren't part of the sheeple contributing to the same corrupt system.

Honestly I think it's mostly the other way around: weaker libertarians, or those who were more socially conservative, tended to identify or at least vote, Republican due to the weakness of the Libertarian party.

 

[Henrin]

For many, libertarian is code word for republican.

That's has nothing do with the reason most libertarians don't vote for the libertarian party.

 

[Ikari]

That's has nothing do with the reason most libertarians don't vote for the libertarian party.

Hmmm. I think that's the reason why some Republicans try to recast themselves as "libertarian".

 

[Vox]

What? Your position is all over the place politically. You want to continue the drug war? But you don't like republicans? I mean never mind that we have a classic historical example of the destruction of the violence and gangs related to alcohol distribution after the prohibition.

If we cut out the drug laws they will cripple the gangland financially. There won't be much money in the drug trade...given that convenience and lack danger will make it way easier to decide who to buy from.


Sent from my grapefruit using smoke signals.

Correct political positions have to be all over the map because the map is faulty.

Think outside the map.

Legalize drugs and the legal drugs will be taxed heavily and expensive.

The thugs will grow or make their own and sell it to other thugs and crime in the ghetto infestations of America will go on unchecked.

The tax thing bothers me more. The guy seems to have no plan for taxing the people at the top.

That eliminates him as a serious candidate.

 

[Henrin]

Correct political positions have to be all over the map because the map is faulty.

Think outside the map.

Legalize drugs and the legal drugs will be taxed heavily and expensive.

The thugs will grow or make their own and sell it to other thugs and crime in the ghetto infestations of America will go on unchecked.

The tax thing bothers me more. The guy seems to have no plan for taxing the people at the top.

That eliminates him as a serious candidate.

The whole idea of legal markets using liberal ideals has always been flawed. Simply creating a legal market doesn't somehow eliminate the illegal market, but just offers it competition. The legal market will have to deal with regulatory costs, taxes and other legal issues that cost time and money, while the illegal market has none of those issues to deal with. What will happen is that government will cause the two markets to be working on two different rule sets and existing in two different economic realities.

 

[zimmer]

Gary Johnson on the Issues

Just wondering how many people would actually support him over the establishment candidates? Personally? I HATE Trump. As a republican, I just cannot bring myself to vote for him. He is a Democrat to me. And an authoritarian. Not something I want again in the presidency.

So I have posted this up with his record. Take a peak. Do you see yourself agreeing with him on his stances? Or do you have too much of a problem with his social or fiscal views? Or does he have to reach a certain amount in polls for you to consider him?


Sent from my grapefruit using smoke signals.

Vote for him? NO.

He's a Libertarian, grrrrrreat... but a vote for him is a vote for Hillary.

I'd rather walk through an ISIS controlled region wearing an American flag than give that criminal any shot at the White House.

 

[Henrin]

He's a Libertarian, grrrrrreat... but a vote for him is a vote for Hillary.

How does that logic even work? Voting for someone is voting of them. There is no bizarre connection to some vote for some other candidate going on.

 

[NoLeftNoRight]

Gary Johnson?
No. Never

If he were the ONLY candidate on the ballot....I would write in a fictitious name

 

[pinqy]

How does that logic even work? Voting for someone is voting of them. There is no bizarre connection to some vote for some other candidate going on.

The winner of the election requires a majority in the Electoral college, but only a plurality in the individual states to get its slate of electors. Therefore if the main candidates are D and R and someone whose second choice would be D votes for first choice of I, then that helps R get the plurality.

 

[Ikari]

How does that logic even work? Voting for someone is voting of them. There is no bizarre connection to some vote for some other candidate going on.

It's not logic, it's propaganda designed to try to bully you into staying within the same broken system that produced Trump and Hillary as candidates.