• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Libertarian ticket could spoil Clinton party

Abbazorkzog said:
A unipolar sole superpower is not required to police the world. There is nowhere in the U.S. Constitution that says, "police the world".
Click to expand...

That is hardly the point. And I doubt that you understand so little about this that you really believe it is.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
I live in Texas where neither Hillary nor Johnson has any chance to win.
Click to expand...

Maybe. Can't win if you don't vote for him though.

In the end, I'm not sitting here thinking that Johnson is for sure going to win the election, I know that any third party challenge is excessively unlikely. However, the fact remains that a third party candidate, who would normally net a few percent of the popular vote, has, without coverage or exposure, been polling at 12%. That tells me that people really do not want Trump or Hillary. That the Republocrats put up such crap, that people are starting to turn away.

As such, if he were allowed to compete, if he could get into the debates, I think you'd see a lot more than 12%...perhaps even in Texas. But it's this political competition we NEED in order to keep the Republic.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Even at triple that (36%) he would lose - see Bernie Sanders.
Click to expand...

Triple that, 36%, leaves 64% and two other candidates. If they split it, as often is the case with the Republocrat candidates (tends to be 50/50 ± Noise), that gives Trump and Clinton 32%....Johnson wins.
 
VanceMack said:
I think people are underestimating the combination of Johnsons appeal, Bernies betrayal, and just how unpopular Hillary Clinton is. There is a daily concerted media onslaught against Trump...yet at Trump venues they have to turn people away it is so crowded. Conversely...

View attachment 67205195
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if the Trump venues aren't pulling the same shtick though.

Regardless, at 12%, he should be getting more coverage and he should be allowed into the debates. He won't be, but he should be.
 
Ikari said:
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.
Click to expand...

All Johnson as to do is to out poll both Trump AND Clinton. It'd be a game changer. Let's see if he can get enough poll response, 15% I think it is, to earn his way onto the presidential debate stage. I say yes! Lets' get him up there. See how he does, and what greater traction he can gain with the electorate.

Could be that he'd embarrass both major party candidates. But somehow I doubt it. History isn't with him on this. But hell, let him try.
 
Ikari said:
Triple that, 36%, leaves 64% and two other candidates. If they split it, as often is the case with the Republocrat candidates (tends to be 50/50 ± Noise), that gives Trump and Clinton 32%....Johnson wins.
Click to expand...

Only if that "noise" is under 5% in a given swing state. Many states, like Texas and California, are far from that 50/50 split. I am not saying it is impossible for a third party to win a state (it has happend) but never on a scale needed to win.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Only if that "noise" is under 5% in a given swing state. Many states, like Texas and California, are far from that 50/50 split. I am not saying it is impossible for a third party to win a state (it has happend) but never on a scale needed to win.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I get it. It is, as the system is set up, neigh impossible for third parties to win states. But this election...maybe. I think that if Johnson were given a fair shake this go around, that he can make quite the impact. And we need the political competition, for sure.

the 15% to participate in the debates was set there specifically because it is so artificially high, that without exposure no third party candidate could make it. And exposure is also very closely controlled. But this year, we already have a third party candidate polling at 12%. I think he should be allowed in, over 10% is a significant chunk of the whole. He won't be because the Republocrats don't want to risk the possible power struggle that would result, but he should be. And it would do the Republic good if he were allowed to.
 
Ikari said:
I'm not sure if the Trump venues aren't pulling the same shtick though.

Regardless, at 12%, he should be getting more coverage and he should be allowed into the debates. He won't be, but he should be.
Click to expand...
I think both parties are scared to death of Johnson/Weld. This isnt a scenario where he would take one sides or the others. Their candidates are so bad both parties will lose voters.
 
VanceMack said:
I think both parties are scared to death of Johnson/Weld. This isnt a scenario where he would take one sides or the others. Their candidates are so bad both parties will lose voters.
Click to expand...

I would agree. It's because both parties know, in the end, they have put up the biggest piles of poo they could have. But they absolutely cannot risk a third party foothold or a third party challenge or anything that may present third parties as viable alternatives. Even if they can come out on top or in the long run reassert themselves as the only "choice", there will be several election cycles with additional competition and they'll have to perform really well to keep their power. So I think, regardless of where Johnson ends up polling, they will do their best to absolutely not mention it one bit. Not even Trump is dumb enough to open his mouth about the third party candidates.
 
At the current rate I think they will almost HAVE to let Johnson into the debates. If they do...can you even IMAGINE Trump, Clinton, and Johnson sharing the stage?
 
VanceMack said:
At the current rate I think they will almost HAVE to let Johnson into the debates. If they do...can you even IMAGINE Trump, Clinton, and Johnson sharing the stage?
Click to expand...

They are going to stick to the letter of regulation, the 15%, and hope that the continued near media blackout of him will help keep him from getting to 15%. If he does get there, I would expect them to start making excuses as to why he still shouldn't be allowed in.

They will never budge on allowing Johnson on stage with them and will do everything they possibly can to play the obstructionist.
 
Ikari said:
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.
Click to expand...

I'm all for anything that keeps Queen Cankles out of power. But this article is the first indication I have seen that Johnson is pulling votes from Dems so I'm a little suspicious of it. Despite current polls I believe the only chance She has is for someone like Johnson to repeat history and pull a Ross Perot.
 
Casca XV said:
I'm all for anything that keeps Queen Cankles out of power. But this article is the first indication I have seen that Johnson is pulling votes from Dems so I'm a little suspicious of it. Despite current polls I believe the only chance She has is for someone like Johnson to repeat history and pull a Ross Perot.
Click to expand...

The only chance Trump would have is if someone Perot-ed Hillary. Otherwise, Hillary will wipe the floor with Trump.
 
Unlimited money in politics? Support of the TPP? Mass deregulation, including in the financial sector (because we saw how well that went)? Regressive flat taxes? Abolishing the IRS? Opposed to net neutrality? Moving solidly away from singlepayer? Saying "we're bankrupt" while advocating tax cuts that disproportionately favour the richest people? Johnson is still untenably awful aside from his stances on the drug war, non-interventionism (albeit I think he takes it to an extreme) and civil liberties.

I don't know exactly where he lies on the continuum of awful between Trump and Hillary (probably not quite as bad as Trump), but he's definitely on it.
 
Ikari said:
OK, and if no one ends up with 50 + 1?
Click to expand...

most likely plurality takes. I don't know if laws requiring runoff elections in some states apply to the presidential race.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
most likely plurality takes. I don't know if laws requiring runoff elections in some states apply to the presidential race.
Click to expand...

So...it doesn't take 50% + 1. If Johnson were allowed in the debates, he could conceivably take the state with 36% of the vote, yes?

My contention in this thread was never that Johnson would 100% win states. Merely that with all the media blackout and lack of exposure, he's still polling at 12% nationally, and has some pretty big spikes in other States. If he were allowed to compete and get exposure, I think his popular vote total would certainly rise, while both Clinton's and Trump's fall.
 
Ikari said:
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.
Click to expand...

Well, I'm an independent in the real sense of the word. I don't like Clinton, personally. And Trump is like Palin on steroids...just a clown, albeit a dangerous one. But there's no way I'd vote for a libertarian, incl. Johnson. They are Republicans. Johnson, for example, is strong on privatizing Social Security, eliminating Medicare, and all sorts of things that assist people that are mainly the working class and middle class. I'd never vote for such a person. They truly are of the "you're on your own...if you have to buy cat food to live on, that's your problem, sucka." All the while demanding that his ilk get all sorts of tax advantages and loans and such...because, like the L'Oreal commercials say...."I'm worth it."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom