- Joined
- Apr 28, 2011
- Messages
- 34,159
- Reaction score
- 37,645
- Location
- With Yo Mama
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Former New Mexico Republican Governor Gary Johnson is running as the Libertarian candidate for President, and in some polls, is running as high as 9-12 percent in a four way race, with Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate, gaining about 3 percent in most polls.This is due to the disillusionment of many Americans with the choices for President of the two major political parties—Donald Trump for the Republicans and Hillary Clinton for the Democrats. But the question is whether Gary Johnson, and his running mate for Vice President, former Massachusetts Republican Governor William Weld, could actually do as well as the polls indicate, and whether that would end up causing a constitutional crisis in November, when the election results are in.
The various polls which decide who should compete in the upcoming three Presidential debates and one Vice Presidential debate could allow Johnson and Weld to participate, with the threshold being 15 percent in a group of polls by a certain date in September, as was allowed for John Anderson in 1980 and H. Ross Perot in 1992. If that occurred, that could have a major impact on the race. And the news from Johnson that Mitt Romney, the 2012 Republican Presidential nominee, is considering an endorsement of him, opens up the possibility that other recalcitrant Republicans who refuse to endorse Donald Trump, might just endorse the Johnson-Weld team and give them more legitimacy, and the potential to do better than anyone would imagine at the present.
When most people are barely able to stomach the thought of voting for Trump or Clinton the following scenario perhaps becomes more possible.
Source[/FONT][/COLOR]
When most people are barely able to stomach the thought of voting for Trump or Clinton the following scenario perhaps becomes more possible.
Source[/FONT][/COLOR]
When most people are barely able to stomach the thought of voting for Trump or Clinton the following scenario perhaps becomes more possible.
Source[/FONT][/COLOR]
When most people are barely able to stomach the thought of voting for Trump or Clinton the following scenario perhaps becomes more possible.
Source[/FONT][/COLOR]
I hope he gets into the debates, I really do and challenges the other two on their nonsense.
More voices at the table is not always so bad, we need someone talking more about ending the war on drugs, about ending foreign interventions that aren't necessary, about criminal justice reform and honestly probably a stronger voice for womens reproductive rights than Hillary herself.
I mean... He is still a libertarian so clueless on economics and taxation... But I really like the guy, was watching some interviews last night and Gary seems like a good guy.
When most people are barely able to stomach the thought of voting for Trump or Clinton the following scenario perhaps becomes more possible.
Source[/FONT][/COLOR]
There lacks to be any kind of constitutional crisis in your story. Your thread title is incredibly dishonest.
When most people are barely able to stomach the thought of voting for Trump or Clinton the following scenario perhaps becomes more possible.
Source[/FONT][/COLOR]
Soooo, just how does this long shot candidacy ignite a "constitutional crisis" in November?
The article points out that even in the (unlikely) event that Johnson takes enough electoral votes to prevent either Hillary or Trump from getting 270; it will be up to the House of Representatives.
That is fully in keeping with the Constitution. Therefore, no crisis. :coffeepap:
I have a feeling that on the national stage he's going to bomb. I watched his libertarian debate performance and I thought that of the three he was able to power on through because of his credentials as NM governor. McAfee gave the best responses but seemed to be tweeking and then there was that other guy who just came off as too young and inexperienced. Johnson won because he was a big fish in a small pond and didn't blow away his contenders.I hope he gets into the debates, I really do and challenges the other two on their nonsense.
More voices at the table is not always so bad, we need someone talking more about ending the war on drugs, about ending foreign interventions that aren't necessary, about criminal justice reform and honestly probably a stronger voice for womens reproductive rights than Hillary herself.
I mean... He is still a libertarian so clueless on economics and taxation... But I really like the guy, was watching some interviews last night and Gary seems like a good guy.
When most people are barely able to stomach the thought of voting for Trump or Clinton the following scenario perhaps becomes more possible.
Source[/FONT][/COLOR]
I hope he gets into the debates, I really do and challenges the other two on their nonsense.
More voices at the table is not always so bad, we need someone talking more about ending the war on drugs, about ending foreign interventions that aren't necessary, about criminal justice reform and honestly probably a stronger voice for womens reproductive rights than Hillary herself.
I mean... He is still a libertarian so clueless on economics and taxation... But I really like the guy, was watching some interviews last night and Gary seems like a good guy.
There lacks to be any kind of constitutional crisis in your story. Your thread title is incredibly dishonest.
It makes YOU look bad when you pick at people. Would you feel better if he changed the word to "challenge"? One could consider it a crisis when a very possible outcome is that Trump gets inaugurated in spite of losing both the popular and electoral vote. So tell me, having carefully hedged everything I said with "possible", "one could consider", have I successfully completed your verbal obstacle course?
There is no "challenge". The process for selecting a president and vice president is spelled out in the constitution. That process would be followed. No crisis involved.
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?