With national polling numbers hovering around 12%, the Libertarian ticket of Gary Johnson and William Weld has the potential to be a real spoiler in the presidential election. But whose candidacy are they most likely to spoil?Most people think of libertarianism as a kind of right-wing ideology, with its intellectual origins in the free-market economics of Milton Friedman and the unabashed egoism and anti-communism of Ayn Rand. And it's certainly true that for most of its existence, the Libertarian Party has drawn more heavily from the political right than from the political left.
But Gary Johnson is actually drawing just as much support from self-identified Democrats as he does from Republicans. And polls that include Johnson actuallyshow a slight decrease in Clinton's lead over Trump.
Libertarian ticket could spoil Clinton party (Opinion) - CNN.com
It's a little optimistic, I think, because I still doubt that Johnson will be allowed to participate in the debates. But he's polling around 12% and taking votes from both Hillary and Trump. If he were allowed to participate, I really do think that it would be a three-way race, he would be up there because in the end, no one really wants either Hillary or Trump.
At the same accord, he's the only realistic alternative to Hillary or Trump. I know we like the "throw away your vote" mantra, but that mantra is what has gotten us Trump v Clinton in the first place. The only way for third parties to win is to support the third parties. Johnson hasn't done a lot of exposure, he's not running ads all over the place, but he's polling at 12% regardless. That's also where we are at right now. And if he can get exposure, if the press will talk about him, if he's allowed to debate (yeah right), we'll see a lot higher than 12%.
In an election where the main party gave us a **** sandwich vs. a **** sandwich, I say vote for the turkey club with bacon, vote Johnson.
Libertarian ticket could spoil Clinton party (Opinion) - CNN.com
It's a little optimistic, I think, because I still doubt that Johnson will be allowed to participate in the debates. But he's polling around 12% and taking votes from both Hillary and Trump. If he were allowed to participate, I really do think that it would be a three-way race, he would be up there because in the end, no one really wants either Hillary or Trump.
At the same accord, he's the only realistic alternative to Hillary or Trump. I know we like the "throw away your vote" mantra, but that mantra is what has gotten us Trump v Clinton in the first place. The only way for third parties to win is to support the third parties. Johnson hasn't done a lot of exposure, he's not running ads all over the place, but he's polling at 12% regardless. That's also where we are at right now. And if he can get exposure, if the press will talk about him, if he's allowed to debate (yeah right), we'll see a lot higher than 12%.
In an election where the main party gave us a **** sandwich vs. a **** sandwich, I say vote for the turkey club with bacon, vote Johnson.
Libertarian ticket could spoil Clinton party (Opinion) - CNN.com
It's a little optimistic, I think, because I still doubt that Johnson will be allowed to participate in the debates. But he's polling around 12% and taking votes from both Hillary and Trump. If he were allowed to participate, I really do think that it would be a three-way race, he would be up there because in the end, no one really wants either Hillary or Trump.
At the same accord, he's the only realistic alternative to Hillary or Trump. I know we like the "throw away your vote" mantra, but that mantra is what has gotten us Trump v Clinton in the first place. The only way for third parties to win is to support the third parties. Johnson hasn't done a lot of exposure, he's not running ads all over the place, but he's polling at 12% regardless. That's also where we are at right now. And if he can get exposure, if the press will talk about him, if he's allowed to debate (yeah right), we'll see a lot higher than 12%.
In an election where the main party gave us a **** sandwich vs. a **** sandwich, I say vote for the turkey club with bacon, vote Johnson.
Judging by his platform, he is the best choice. His only deficiency is foreign and security affairs. That is grave, however.
There is certainly a better chance of a Johnson Presidency than the MSM would like us to believe. Perhaps this is the beginning of the media turning on the Republocrats.
When the Clinton News Network includes "spoil Clinton party" in one of their headline links, you know its about to get bad for her.
Reallybad
Being against incessant interventionist foreign policy is a deficiency? Wat?
Libertarian ticket could spoil Clinton party (Opinion) - CNN.com
It's a little optimistic, I think, because I still doubt that Johnson will be allowed to participate in the debates. But he's polling around 12% and taking votes from both Hillary and Trump. If he were allowed to participate, I really do think that it would be a three-way race, he would be up there because in the end, no one really wants either Hillary or Trump.
At the same accord, he's the only realistic alternative to Hillary or Trump. I know we like the "throw away your vote" mantra, but that mantra is what has gotten us Trump v Clinton in the first place. The only way for third parties to win is to support the third parties. Johnson hasn't done a lot of exposure, he's not running ads all over the place, but he's polling at 12% regardless. That's also where we are at right now. And if he can get exposure, if the press will talk about him, if he's allowed to debate (yeah right), we'll see a lot higher than 12%.
In an election where the main party gave us a **** sandwich vs. a **** sandwich, I say vote for the turkey club with bacon, vote Johnson.
Being against does not qualify as experience. And as we now require is rather active and incessant leadership on the global stage. We just lost 8 years and time is getting a little short to mend what is getting dangerous.
There is certainly a better chance of a Johnson Presidency than the MSM would like us to believe. Perhaps this is the beginning of the media turning on the Republocrats.
When the Clinton News Network includes "spoil Clinton party" in one of their headline links, you know its about to get bad for her.
Reallybad
If it meant no Hillary, I'm completely for it.
Which state(s) could a Johnson/Weld ticket reasonably be expected to win? In 1992 Ross Perot got 19% of the popular vote and still got no electoral votes at all because of the winner take all assignment of electors.
I'm a lot more bitter at the whole system. I don't think the Press will come along because the Press is part of the status-quo problem and really only promotes the Republocrat Party Members. We can see that in how hard they are going after Trump (though he makes it easy). But remember how toxic the press was to Ron Paul when he was running.
I would love it if the press were free and fair, but I think it’s mostly just part of the machine. Regardless, the Party put up candidates this go around that are just so unsavory, that no one likes, that a third party candidate without exposure is already getting 12%. I think that means:
a) He should be given larger coverage because his polling numbers are so high
b) He should be allowed into the debates (he won’t be)
c) That people are getting real fed up with the **** after **** after **** the Republocrats keep trying to shove down our throats
May this be the election that breaks the camel’s back, as it were.
Being against does not qualify as experience. And as we now require is rather active and incessant leadership on the global stage. We just lost 8 years and time is getting a little short to mend what is getting dangerous.
He's polling at well over 20% in Utah.
And what are the solutions to this "leadership on the global stage". We've seen Hillary, we know how that will go. What about the unqualified, inexperience, egomaniac? Is that a good choice?
Even here, Johnson beats both the Republocrat candidates.
20% (or even 30%) will not win Utah or any other state.
Except in polls or elections.
that's with no coverage, no exposure. If he's allowed to compete, that all goes up.
He can't win if you don't vote for him.
With no exposure, he's polling at about 12% nationally. If he were allowed into the debates, it would be much higher.
It is already dangerous to displace millions of people and kill millions more and flood Europe and elsewhere with millions of refugees which is already destabilizing Europe. I'm not anti-immigration, but it is resoundingly known as "The Refugee Crisis" for a reason.
Need I even mention the ISIL recruitment ammunition?
It's like touching a hot stove eye...
...don't do it.
And what are the solutions to this "leadership on the global stage". We've seen Hillary, we know how that will go. What about the unqualified, inexperience, egomaniac? Is that a good choice?
Even here, Johnson beats both the Republocrat candidates.
The refugee crisis is really bad for Europe and could push some countries into much more autocratic systems than the present social democratic ones favored today. That would be very negative.
But in general, that is all of reasonably little danger on a global level. What we are seeing is a shift in relative wealth and so of the whole international structure of power. We are moving from Unipole to multipole and have been for some years. With this chnage the probability of major war increases slowly but dramatically to the point of near certainty. This will yet take a decade or so, but we need to address it now, if it is not to be too late. As a matter of fact, it might already be too late.
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?