Gary Johnson

Julio3000 said:
Bill Weld doesn't really seem to want to be running for office, but he should've been on top of that ticket if Libertarians wanted to be taken seriously. But, yannow, Libertarians.
Click to expand...

If the Libertarians truly want to make a difference, guys like Rand Paul shouldn't be running as Republicans. Same goes for the Greens (and Sanders) on the left. Throughout American history, groups that change the major parties exist outside the major parties for an election cycle or two. Republicans trot out Rand on a high-profile issue to try and fool the public. They see the "R" next to Paul's name on the television screen and people are fooled into thinking that Mitch McConnell is as principled as Rand.
 
50PoundHead said:
If the Libertarians truly want to make a difference, guys like Rand Paul shouldn't be running as Republicans. Same goes for the Greens (and Sanders) on the left. Throughout American history, groups that change the major parties exist outside the major parties for an election cycle or two. Republicans trot out Rand on a high-profile issue to try and fool the public. They see the "R" next to Paul's name on the television screen and people are fooled into thinking that Mitch McConnell is as principled as Rand.
Click to expand...

It also doesn't help that Rand is no Ron on a personal level. Rand seems to me to be much more of a politician whereas Ron was here's what I believe and what I will do, if you agree then let's do it together, if not you need to go and find another candidate to follow.
 
Rand Paul isnt exactly the most popular amongst Libertarians. The more I think about the more I think he is Ron's trojan horse to get into the White House. Rand might not have gained much traction this time around but with Republicans its all about name recognition. Thats why they kept nominating the loser of the previous primary, they had such a head start in name recognition that they become the "electable" candidate since they do well in early polls. One day if things line up just right Rand might get the nomination. Then he can go full Libertarian and the establishment will have no choice but to back him. Whoever the democrats run will always be depicted as literally Hitler.
 
I was just using Rand as an example, but the Libertarians can't stand in the corner and play the "holier than thou" card and expect to be effective. I can't remember if it was Lenin or Boris Badenov who said "if you're going to make an omelet, you have to break some eggs." That requires playing the game to some extent, but as it stands right now, the Libertarians are being co-opted by the Republicans on a pick-and-choose basis.
 
why do people when analyzing (R) or (L) limit the conversation to the personalities running?

The simplest explanation is their policies do not resonate with voters.

It isn't Rand (or Ron) Paul personally. It is that only a slim margin of (R) votes for him and his message does not resonate across party lines.
Their (both Lib and Repub) ideology is rejected by voters

Their ideas are in the public - but voters reject .

Thought after the 2012 election (R) put their heads together and came to the same conclusion. To be be more inclusive and tolerant. So what do they do?
Fight over who uses which bath room and put up the head of their party a guy that thinks eating Taco Bell will resonate with Latinos

(L) puts up a guy that fights for a For Profit Prison system
..........................................................................................
 
57Brave said:
why do people when analyzing (R) or (L) limit the conversation to the personalities running?

The simplest explanation is their policies do not resonate with voters.

It isn't Rand (or Ron) Paul personally. It is that only a slim margin of (R) votes for him and his message does not resonate across party lines.
Their (both Lib and Repub) ideology is rejected by voters

Their ideas are in the public - but voters reject .

Thought after the 2012 election (R) put their heads together and came to the same conclusion. To be be more inclusive and tolerant. So what do they do?
Fight over who uses which bath room and put up the head of their party a guy that thinks eating Taco Bell will resonate with Latinos

(L) puts up a guy that fights for a For Profit Prison system
..........................................................................................
Click to expand...

I think you really need to see a doctor. Early stages of Alzheimer's or Dementia, or you are under some hypnotist.

I think you are good dude, blinded by the big "D" in the sky, but good nonetheless and I worry for your sanity.
 
57Brave said:
why do people when analyzing (R) or (L) limit the conversation to the personalities running?

The simplest explanation is their policies do not resonate with voters.

It isn't Rand (or Ron) Paul personally. It is that only a slim margin of (R) votes for him and his message does not resonate across party lines.
Their (both Lib and Repub) ideology is rejected by voters

Their ideas are in the public - but voters reject .

Thought after the 2012 election (R) put their heads together and came to the same conclusion. To be be more inclusive and tolerant. So what do they do?
Fight over who uses which bath room and put up the head of their party a guy that thinks eating Taco Bell will resonate with Latinos

(L) puts up a guy that fights for a For Profit Prison system
.................................................. ........................................
Click to expand...

You know what Trump was polling at when he ran for President in 2000 for the Reform Party? 7 percent. I bet Hillary would do worse than that if running for the Green Party. Your naive if you think the letter next to their name doesnt matter. We are polarized so much now that both sides see the other as literally Hitler. I would estimate a minimum of half the voters are voting to stop the other candidate and not because they believe in the one they are voting for.

I think your selling the accomplishments of the LP short. They have established themselves as THE third party. Its not going to happen over one election. Its a movement. The final hurdle is getting people to believe the LP can win the Presidency. The #1 response to "why wont you consider voting for Gary Johnson" is "Because then Hillary might win" and the #2 response is "Because then Trump might win". Hardly rebukes of the LP philosophy. Fact is most people dont know enough about the LP to even make a judgment. On the other hand you have non stop coverage of Trump and Hillary and their ideas and they both have 55% or worse unfavorability ratings in polls. I wouldnt call half the country thinking your a piece of **** qualifies as having their ideas resonate with people.

And its funny you talk about the Republicans wanting to/needing to "be more inclusive and tolerant" because if you take inclusive/tolerant and mix it with fiscally conservative policies you get the Libertarian Party.

And to make one last point about the Libertarian movement that Ron has spent his life building. Lets look at how things have changed over the years because Ron Paul's message was the same in 1988 as it will be in 2018.

[video=youtube;lqg-viAXdNQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lqg-viAXdNQ[/video]

Good ol Ron fighting the good fight back in 1998. Amazingly relevant to today. If only we listened to Ron back then.

You know why I can respect Bernie although I dont agree with most of his policies? Because he says what he believes and argues for it. Hillary feels the need to lie and deceive about what her agenda is. She says she doesnt want to ban guns but her emails show she is just waiting for the right opportunity. I dont respect politicians like that, which is sadly most of them. If your afraid of telling people your ideas then they are probably bad ones or unjustifiable.
 
It truly and deeply offends me that our own president and first lady are telling their country that voting a 3rd party is a wasted vote. I am honestly shocked that they could say that publicly. The entire concept is supposed to be predicated on the fact that every vote matters, and that you have the freedom to choose who you want to vote. To openly tell the country that your vote only matters if you vote for who we want you to vote for is such a hypocritical and unamerican thing to say.

Voting for someone you don't want to vote for is throwing away your vote. And the fact that they are covering up the fact that getting a party to 5% nationally matters a lot is even more sickening. Hmm the option between criminal A or criminal B, or get the libertarian party to a possible 5%? I will take that option every time, and I am not much of a GJ supporter.
 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...r-hillary-clinton_us_58195566e4b07c97c1c55168

...................................................................................................................................................................

Weld didn’t hesitate when Maddow questioned whether his loyalty to the Libertarian Party is stronger than his fear of a Donald Trump presidency.

“Well, I’m here vouching for Mrs. Clinton ― and I think it’s high-time somebody did,” he said.

Weld continued that his decision is based on his personal experience with the former secretary of state.

“I think she deserves to have people vouch for her other than members of the Democratic National Committee, so I’m here to do that,” he added.
 
cajunrevenge said:
And its funny you talk about the Republicans wanting to/needing to "be more inclusive and tolerant" because if you take inclusive/tolerant and mix it with fiscally conservative policies you get the Libertarian Party.

And to make one last point about the Libertarian movement that Ron has spent his life building. Lets look at how things have changed over the years because Ron Paul's message was the same in 1988 as it will be in 2018.

.
Click to expand...

1) The (R) re branding was a Republican initiative after getting dusted in 2008-12. The elders of the party concluded they would shortly be a niche party (how prphetic was that !!) unless they adopted a more inclusive stance and eased on the culture war battles. Could be Libertarian I don't know and don't really care.
It was their (Re pub) idea and initiative. Not mine
You can look it up

2) The Libertarian Party has been active long long before Ron Paul. So talk of all the hard work and time Ron Paul put into (L) is nonsense
You can look that up too

3) A political party that polls at 5% or lower with no Electoral College votes is a non factor. Ask Bill Weld. OR for that matter, ask Rand Paul
 
I dont recall ever saying anything good about Weld. Well before this I pointed out all the un Libertarian things he supported in this thread. Thats why its so funny when you argue against stereotypical Libertarian positions. They are anything but ideologically pure Libertarians.
 
My point in all of this is that as long as libertarians like the Pauls identify as Republicans, remaining libertarians will be cast as "tin-foil hat" people by the public-at-large. The libertarians have a cogent philosophy that merits disucssion. I don't agree with most of it, but I think the best thing the Libertarian Party can do is throw down the gauntlet to the Republican Party in the same way the Sanders movement did to the Democrats. They won't transform the Republican Party right out of the gate and in a world that demands immediate change, that can prove troublesome for the impatient. But they really have to quit cooperating with a party that at base level doesn't believe the libertarian message.
 
[video=youtube;fj0ZfNYZJ6g]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fj0ZfNYZJ6g[/video]

8/15/2011 Sean Hannity : "Ron Paul is right about the debt, he's right about the deficit, he's right about spending, he's right about budgets, he's right about the fed, he's right about a lot of things, he's right about gold. He's been right about a lot of things. Let's not fall into the Democrat's game of turning on each other as a means of elevating one candidate or another"

If Ron would just get aboard the war machine he would be embraced by Hannity and the RNC. Hannity says himself he agrees with 95% of what Ron Paul believes in.
 
goldfly said:
holy ****

5:04 for those that want to see the freak out
Click to expand...

That's what freaking out is these days? Jesus how soft do you have to be to think that a guy who gets a little angry over some stupid questions is now considered freaking out?

Go back to your safe place. I'll let you know when the world is again safe for you again.
 
ESP47 said:
That's what freaking out is these days? Jesus how soft do you have to be to think that a guy who gets a little angry over some stupid questions is now considered freaking out?

Go back to your safe place. I'll let you know when the world is again safe for you again.
Click to expand...

what the **** is a safe place?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top