Can anyone really argue Gary Johnson is not the best candidate on the ballot?

[ChrisL]

Here's some recommended viewing for you:

Embedded media from this media site is no longer available

Well? Are you here to discuss the issues? Let's talk about your views on gun control. Which gun control measures do you support and how will they prevent murders?

 

[ChrisL]

Irony is when leftists will scream about how dangerous guns are and the people who wield them are dangerous, and then when I say I want a gun for self defense purposes, they will tell me I'm "paranoid." Lol. Well, I'm quite sure that home invasions and rape and other such crimes are statistically much more common than school shootings and accidental shootings.

 

[mamooth]

Johnson is an "abolish the Fed" guy.

He's bad on economics in general, being he's supply-sider. He's a "national sales tax" and "stop taxing the rich" guy.

He's a "privatize parts of social security" guy.

He's a "destroy public education" guy.

On MJ legalization, Clinton is just as good. She won't legalize it outright, but she will tell the feds not to interfere with states, and she will reclassify it to Schedule II. Just as it was with gay marriage, all that's necessary for change is for the feds stay out of the way of the states, and that's the Clinton plan. Just look at how abortion turned out when it was decreed by the feds instead of the states.

And on abortion, his record is not good. While he's not out to make it illegal, he thinks it should be treated differently than other healthcare, which is not good.

So, he's clearly inferior to Clinton on those issues, and others, and so I see Clinton as the better candidate. Obviously, nobody has to agree. The point is that it certainly can be argued Johnson is not the best candidate.

Face it, Gary Johnson stands for freedom and citizens' rights. Clinton and Trump do not.

What you demonstrated there was how Johnson fans tend to evade discussion of actual issues by chanting mindless slogans like a mantra. Cults are like that.

 

[ChrisL]

Johnson is an "abolish the Fed" guy.

He's bad on economics in general, being he's supply-sider. He's a "national sales tax" and "stop taxing the rich" guy.

He's a "privatize parts of social security" guy.

He's a "destroy public education" guy.

On MJ legalization, Clinton is just as good. She won't legalize it outright, but she will tell the feds not to interfere with states, and she will reclassify it to Schedule II. Just as it was with gay marriage, all that's necessary for change is for the feds stay out of the way of the states, and that's the Clinton plan. Just look at how abortion turned out when it was decreed by the feds instead of the states.

And on abortion, his record is not good. While he's not out to make it illegal, he thinks it should be treated differently than other healthcare, which is not good.

So, he's clearly inferior to Clinton on those issues, and others, and so I see Clinton as the better candidate. Obviously, nobody has to agree. The point is that it certainly can be argued Johnson is not the best candidate.

Face it, Gary Johnson stands for freedom and citizens' rights. Clinton and Trump do not.

What you demonstrated there was how Johnson fans tend to evade discussion of actual issues by chanting mindless slogans like a mantra. Cults are like that.

Um no. What I stated is the truth. He is the only candidate who stands for freedom.

 

[ChrisL]

Johnson is an "abolish the Fed" guy.

He's bad on economics in general, being he's supply-sider. He's a "national sales tax" and "stop taxing the rich" guy.

He's a "privatize parts of social security" guy.

He's a "destroy public education" guy.

On MJ legalization, Clinton is just as good. She won't legalize it outright, but she will tell the feds not to interfere with states, and she will reclassify it to Schedule II. Just as it was with gay marriage, all that's necessary for change is for the feds stay out of the way of the states, and that's the Clinton plan. Just look at how abortion turned out when it was decreed by the feds instead of the states.

And on abortion, his record is not good. While he's not out to make it illegal, he thinks it should be treated differently than other healthcare, which is not good.

So, he's clearly inferior to Clinton on those issues, and others, and so I see Clinton as the better candidate. Obviously, nobody has to agree. The point is that it certainly can be argued Johnson is not the best candidate.

Face it, Gary Johnson stands for freedom and citizens' rights. Clinton and Trump do not.

What you demonstrated there was how Johnson fans tend to evade discussion of actual issues by chanting mindless slogans like a mantra. Cults are like that.

Clinton and Trump are pretty much the same as far as policy goes, just on opposite sides of the pendulum. Both of the parties have become extremist.

Both parties hold ridiculous extreme ideological viewpoints. Most normal people just can't get on board with that.

 

[LaDexter]

What you demonstrated there was how Johnson fans tend to evade discussion of actual issues by chanting mindless slogans like a mantra. Cults are like that.

Translation - the ISRAEL LOBBY is very very worried that if Trump "winks out," the race becomes Johnson vs. Netanyahu/Hillary, and Johnson wins that easily...

 

[LaDexter]

Clinton and Trump are pretty much the same as far as policy goes, just on opposite sides of the pendulum. Both of the parties have become extremist.

Both have dumbed down to the least educated amongst. Trump got the dumbest Republicans, and Hillary got the dumbest Democrats, each by dumbing down issues...

 

[mamooth]

Both parties hold ridiculous extreme ideological viewpoints. Most normal people just can't get on board with that.

Yes, extreme ideological movements like "don't abolish public schools" and "don't privatize social security".

For fun, why don't you give us some specific examples of the "extreme ideological viewpoints" which Clinton holds?

 

[Jarlaxle]

If he gets to participate in the debates, he can make a major shift in everything if he does it right.

How?

The Hillary backers will not be swayed by any form of reason, sense or logic. If they could be, they'd be Conservatives to begin with.

What do Mr Johnson and Mr Weld offer CONSERVATIVES like me, who aren't voting Trump (or are only as an anti-Hillary vote) because he isn't Conservative enough?

Conservatives like you? By your own statements there may not be any conservatives like you.

He isn't a conservative. He is a fascistic psychopath.

 

[ChrisL]

Both parties hold ridiculous extreme ideological viewpoints. Most normal people just can't get on board with that.

Yes, extreme ideological movements like "don't abolish public schools" and "don't privatize social security".

For fun, why don't you give us some specific examples of the "extreme ideological viewpoints" which Clinton holds?

You need to face up to the fact that your party is just as extreme as the republican party, just on the opposite end of the spectrum. Why do you think more and more young people are rejecting your parties and your ideologies?

 

[Jarlaxle]

???

What's your confusion? Candidates need to be compared to the Standard of Conservatism and Morality before anything else. If they fail that test, then how much better or worse they are than another candidate is immaterual.

Where can we find that standard?

Ask the voices in his head...but wait until they finish arguing with the mouse in his pocket.

 

[ChrisL]

Both parties hold ridiculous extreme ideological viewpoints. Most normal people just can't get on board with that.

Yes, extreme ideological movements like "don't abolish public schools" and "don't privatize social security".

For fun, why don't you give us some specific examples of the "extreme ideological viewpoints" which Clinton holds?

For example, keeping in mind that I am pro choice, some of this goes a bit far. Not all but some of it. Also, her anti-gun rhetoric. That is anti-rights and anti-American. Those are just a couple of examples.

• Voted liberal line on partial birth & harm to fetus. (Oct 2005)
• Voted NO on defining unborn child as eligible for SCHIP. (Mar 2008)
• Voted NO on prohibiting minors crossing state lines for abortion. (Mar 2008)
• Voted YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines. (Apr 2007)
• Voted NO on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions. (Jul 2006)
• Voted YES on $100M to reduce teen pregnancy by education & contraceptives. (Mar 2005)
• Voted NO on criminal penalty for harming unborn fetus during other crime. (Mar 2004)
• Voted NO on banning partial birth abortions except for maternal life. (Mar 2003)
• Endorsed Recommended by EMILY's List of pro-choice women. (Apr 2001)
• Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record. (Dec 2003)

• FactCheck: Consistently against making bankruptcy stricter. (Jan 2008)
• 2005 bankruptcy bill was by big credit cards & lenders. (Jan 2008)
• Voted YES on $60B stimulus package for jobs, infrastructure, & energy. (Sep 2008)
• Voted NO on paying down federal debt by rating programs' effectiveness. (Mar 2007)
• Voted NO on $40B in reduced federal overall spending. (Dec 2005)

• Treat kids as “child citizens” not “minors” under the law. (Dec 1999)
• No dividing line between government vs. parents & children. (Dec 1999)

 

[Anathema]

That would be a disaster. We are much better off with letting the idiots that are ignorant of history, government, and current events stay away from the ballot boxes and not dilute the votes of those that put some sort of rational thinking into casting their votes.

Then maybe we would actually have to educate and inform these morons.

 

[Pilate]

Compared to whom?

Co.pared to the expected Standard. You make the mistake, as many do, of choosing the worst bad candidate rather than expecting them to live up to the Standard.

Trump is a NY Liberal.

Hello, Senator Cruz.

 

[Anathema]

So we can't find that standard anywhere.

You can find it in the DNA of Real Americans. If you can't find it, please report to your local extermina.... , I mean reeduca....., I mean vacation destination.

 

[LaDexter]

Yes, extreme ideological movements like "don't abolish public schools" and "don't privatize social security".

The ISRAEL LOBBY really loves the US public schools, because they keep our kids dumb enough to

1. fall for obvious frauds, like Global Warming
2. become dependent on government
3. vote for the Democrats, a wholly owned subsidiary of the Israeli government
4. never question things, like can a 757 really fly 400 mph at 8 feet off the ground with its engines in the ground

 

[ChrisL]

Her gun control schemes are absolutely disgusting and unconstitutional. SOME of these might make sense. A lot of them are just plain old infringements on OUR rights as American citizens.

• FactCheck: 33,000 gun deaths includes suicides & accidents. (Jan 2016)
• I support Brady Bill and closing the Charleston loophole. (Dec 2015)
• Arming more people is not appropriate response to terrorism. (Dec 2015)
• Reverse gun manufacturer immunity; let them get sued. (Nov 2015)
• Don't shield gun manufacturers from lawsuits:I vote that way. (Oct 2015)
• Sensible restraints on manufacturer liability & online sales. (Oct 2015)
• Gun control advocates see Clinton as an ally. (Jun 2015)
• Rein in idea that anybody can have a gun anywhere, anytime. (May 2014)
• 2000: advocate for national gun registry; 2008: backed off. (May 2014)
• Balance lawful gun ownership & keeping guns from criminals. (Apr 2008)
• Give local police access to federal gun tracking info. (Apr 2008)
• Let states & cities determine local gun laws. (Apr 2008)
• Against illegal guns, crack down on illegal gun dealers. (Jan 2008)
• Backed off a national licensing registration plan on guns. (Jan 2008)
• Get assault weapons & guns off the street. (Jul 2007)
• Background check system could prevent Virginia Tech massacre. (Apr 2007)
• FactCheck: VA Tech shooter not declared a danger to others. (Apr 2007)
• Congress’ failure at Littleton response inspired Senate run. (Nov 2003)
• Keep guns away from people who shouldn’t have them. (Sep 2000)
• Limit access to weapons; look for early warning signs. (Sep 2000)
• License and register all handgun sales. (Jun 2000)
• Tough gun control keeps guns out of wrong hands. (Jul 1999)
• Gun control protects our children. (Jul 1999)
• Don’t water down sensible gun control legislation. (Jul 1999)
• Lock up guns; store ammo separately. (Jun 1999)
• Ban kids’ unsupervised access to guns. (Jun 1999)
• Get weapons off the streets; zero tolerance for weapons. (Sep 1996)
• Voted NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005)
• Voted NO on banning lawsuits against gun manufacturers for gun violence. (Mar 2004)
• Prevent unauthorized firearm use with "smart gun" technology. (Aug 2000)

 

[12icer]

Good discussion, but the FACT is that Johnsons run will just assure that Clinton has a large percentage of the electoral college vote. Most of the voters who vote for a libertarian will come from the group that would otherwise vote for a Republican. The split right now without Johnson will be about 53 Trump 47 clinton with Johnson it is 43 Trump, 47 Clinton AND the major changes are in the electoral college because in red states there are a lot that will vote that margin and actually turn blue. So pat yourselves on the back and say wow clinton got the largest number of electoral college votes ever received by anyone even surpassing Ronald Reagan I would say that it will be about 508 to 518 \ 20 to 30 as it stands now. because in all but two or three states 10 percent will reverse the red states and turn them blue. So just go on and vote for clinton, and give her a real victory why not.

 

[ChrisL]

Good discussion, but the FACT is that Johnsons run will just assure that Clinton has a large percentage of the electoral college vote. Most of the voters who vote for a libertarian will come from the group that would otherwise vote for a Republican. The split right now without Johnson will be about 53 Trump 47 clinton with Johnson it is 43 Trump, 47 Clinton AND the major changes are in the electoral college because in red states there are a lot that will vote that margin and actually turn blue. So pat yourselves on the back and say wow clinton got the largest number of electoral college votes ever received by anyone even surpassing Ronald Reagan I would say that it will be about 508 to 518 \ 20 to 30 as it stands now. because in all but two or three states 10 percent will reverse the red states and turn them blue. So just go on and vote for clinton, and give her a real victory why not.

There are left and right leaning libertarians.

Change has to begin somewhere. If we just keep accepting the status quo, EVERY election, then we will never make necessary changes. You have to make a stand against the establishment. What better time than now?

 

[Onyx]

And you make the common error of thinking Libertarians are anarchists.

It would be better for everybody if the abusive statists in the libertarian party were not associated with the political anarchist community.

there are no statists in the LP, if you think so then you don't know the meaning of the term or the LP, possibly both.

The international anarchist community refers to anyone who supports the existence of the state as being a statist.

The US libertarian community refers to anyone who supports an expanded state as being a statist.

I think by definition, if you support the state, then you are a statist.