View Full Version : You know there is a 3rd candidate for POTUS
It should piss you off that the mass media pays no particular attention to the Libertarian Party and the fact that a currently serving executive, he Governor of NM, is running. He is a sensible candidate and deserves a good look at a presidential debate. Especially before the blowhard and the criminal.
Gary Johnson.
Look at his issues and you'll see he is not far off the mark with most of us. https://garyjohnson2016.com/issues/
He's not going anywhere except a wasted vote that aids HRC.
Vote Libertarian for anything state or below if you want but there is only two real choices at the National level.
mark46th
05-08-2016, 20:17
I think we should start promoting Bernie Sanders as a third party candidate. That would piss off the the Dems...
PedOncoDoc
05-09-2016, 08:17
I think we should start promoting Bernie Sanders as a third party candidate. That would piss off the the Dems...
I was thinking the same thing - divide the leftist vote the way Perot did to the conservatives....
I was thinking the same thing - divide the leftist vote the way Perot did to the conservatives....
You have that right. Run 3d Party Bernie Run!
I heard Johnson on Dana Loesch's radio show today and he wandered off the reservation on the rights of business owners when it comes to violating their religious beliefs.
She had Austin Petersen on a few weeks ago and I liked him better, were I to vote off the reservation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BD2AjhqtI5M
Pat
CAARNG 68W
05-09-2016, 21:59
Californian here, I changed my Registration from Libertarian to Republican last month expecting to have a necessary vote in the Republican Primary.
I doubt I'll go back to Libertarian, if that party was smart they'd become absorbed into the GOP and attempt to slowly influence GOP party platforms
Roguish Lawyer
05-10-2016, 01:30
It should piss you off that the mass media pays no particular attention to the Libertarian Party and the fact that a currently serving executive, he Governor of NM, is running. He is a sensible candidate and deserves a good look at a presidential debate. Especially before the blowhard and the criminal.
Gary Johnson.
Look at his issues and you'll see he is not far off the mark with most of us. https://garyjohnson2016.com/issues/
That's who I'm planning to vote for in the general.
That's who I'm planning to vote for in the general.
Not Hillery? Cruz's big money man has switched to her.
Oh, well, anything to keep the Uniparty in office for now.
What amazes me is the number of Cruz supporters who are willing to throw the election to Hillery and then say "I told you so." If Trump loses in November it's because of you not us.
And you think your guy can come back in four years as the White Knight from Heaven to lead us out of the wilderness? Fat chance on that.
Soulless
05-10-2016, 06:35
He's not going anywhere except a wasted vote that aids HRC.
Vote Libertarian for anything state or below if you want but there is only two real choices at the National level.
I think you are missing something essential in understanding how the American election system works. No successful presidential campaign has been run without the support of a national party. So you are right in saying that he doesn't stand a chance of winning.
However, you have made the mistake of ignoring the 25m target. The first step is to gain 5% of the popular vote. That gives the Libertarian Party the same legal classification as the other major parties. This prevents millions of otherwise useful campaign dollars spent on litigation as the major parties manipulate ballot access laws, and in the actual ballot access process. It also prevents them from being excluded from the national debates (As happened in 2008 when they were on the ballot in 48 states and were a legit option).
Then as a part it is easier to push candidates in other partisan elections which they were previously disadvantaged in. Which builds a political "bench strength" as is required to support successful national office bids.
The problem with the general citizen's understanding of politics, and we can get caught up in it as well, is that one personality has the strength to change a whole system. Not really. The needle moves very little and new fears surface during every election. The separation of powers has worked very well in the last 8 years. Not as well as I would have liked...but well enough. If you want to see a change that will impact politics for generations to come, then you are looking to add a third national party to the mix. The polar politics would not longer work. It would no longer be us or them. There would be alternative ideas in the form of a political alignment which more than half of the national electorate is polled to support (generally).
Your post.
Libertarians need to work from the bottom up not from the top down.
They've been trying the top down for how many years?
Get those few rabid Libertarians in the local area and start with the county dog catcher, county commissioners, a state rep - build a power base and work up.
All that said with two L's in my family who are all about the % and not the win.
Not Hillery? Cruz's big money man has switched to her.
Oh, well, anything to keep the Uniparty in office for now.
What amazes me is the number of Cruz supporters who are willing to throw the election to Hillery and then say "I told you so." If Trump loses in November it's because of you not us.
And you think your guy can come back in four years as the White Knight from Heaven to lead us out of the wilderness? Fat chance on that.
It is a pipe dream to think that Cruz would have ever won against Hillary. Once the evangelicals from the south sensed hypocrisy and ran away from him it was all over at that point barring any serious self destruction by Trump.
The big money that buys politicians, yes Cruz too, would rather see Hillary in power than a true wild-card anti-establishment not playing by the "rules" candidate, like Trump... or Bernie, so them shifting to Hillary makes complete sense. They are just trying to maintain their influence and power.
I would like to say that I am surprised that Cruz voters don't care that by not supporting Trump they supporting Hillary and voting for another 4 years of Dems in power and the CERTAINTY that we will have a jacked up America and SCOTUS for a generation to come. But I'm not. That's how we got 8 yrs of Obama.
I think you are missing something essential in understanding how the American election system works. No successful presidential campaign has been run without the support of a national party. So you are right in saying that he doesn't stand a chance of winning.
However, you have made the mistake of ignoring the 25m target. The first step is to gain 5% of the popular vote. That gives the Libertarian Party the same legal classification as the other major parties. This prevents millions of otherwise useful campaign dollars spent on litigation as the major parties manipulate ballot access laws, and in the actual ballot access process. It also prevents them from being excluded from the national debates (As happened in 2008 when they were on the ballot in 48 states and were a legit option).
Then as a part it is easier to push candidates in other partisan elections which they were previously disadvantaged in. Which builds a political "bench strength" as is required to support successful national office bids.
The problem with the general citizen's understanding of politics, and we can get caught up in it as well, is that one personality has the strength to change a whole system. Not really. The needle moves very little and new fears surface during every election. The separation of powers has worked very well in the last 8 years. Not as well as I would have liked...but well enough. If you want to see a change that will impact politics for generations to come, then you are looking to add a third national party to the mix. The polar politics would not longer work. It would no longer be us or them. There would be alternative ideas in the form of a political alignment which more than half of the national electorate is polled to support (generally).
Nice plan. I agree with Pete. Get started at the local level. I'm more concerned with the hard choice that needs too be made NOW between the only two people that have a chance at becoming President NOW. It's vote for Trump or get Hillary and a Hillary appointed SCOTUS. Time to stop the wringing of the hands and the wishing for something different. It is what it is.
Golf1echo
05-10-2016, 08:45
However, you have made the mistake of ignoring the 25m target. The first step is to gain 5% of the popular vote.
I recall a time when I voted for the independent candidate.........thinking the same ideals. It was a waste of my vote and obviously did not make an impact. I'm not completely sure we need three or four parties but I am convinced both major parties need serious reforms. If the GOP was smart they would already be deep within the disconnect of the Democratic constituency and pushing alternatives...if not GOP ideas then independent or libertarian.....pages taken directly from the liberal play book.
Bottom line if your not voting for one of the primary parties your giving away your vote to one or the other of the two candidates.
Lets not limit ourselves...
Jesse Ventura (https://ballotpedia.org/Jesse_Ventura)is also running on the Independence party ticket...
Then of course we have Jill Stein (https://ballotpedia.org/Jill_Stein_presidential_campaign,_2016)taking the lead for the Green Party...
...hell maybe we could even drum up some votes for the Prohibition Party.
#anyonebuttrumphillaryromneysanderswebbbidenbushca rson
I don't mind living under the worst possible woman to ever darken the halls at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave - as long as I don't compromise my election integrity and vote my conscience.
Besides, Jesse has a few good points worth looking into.
Golf1echo
05-10-2016, 09:10
Lets not limit ourselves...
Jesse Ventura (https://ballotpedia.org/Jesse_Ventura)is also running on the Independence party ticket...
Then of course we have Jill Stein (https://ballotpedia.org/Jill_Stein_presidential_campaign,_2016)taking the lead for the Green Party...
...hell maybe we could even drum up some votes for the Prohibition Party.
#anyonebuttrumphillaryromneysanderswebbbidenbushca rson
I don't mind living under the worst possible woman to ever darken the halls at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave - as long as I don't compromise my election integrity and vote my conscience.
Besides, Jesse has a few good points worth looking into.
To bad John got a new job with a gaming company....I thought he was going to take a Libertarian run. If nothing else, he gets style points
Soulless
05-11-2016, 08:40
Nice plan. I agree with Pete. Get started at the local level. I'm more concerned with the hard choice that needs too be made NOW between the only two people that have a chance at becoming President NOW. It's vote for Trump or get Hillary and a Hillary appointed SCOTUS. Time to stop the wringing of the hands and the wishing for something different. It is what it is.
I understand the position. Many Libertarian candidates do well in local elections, but the ballot access measures at even the state level make it an uphill battle to build any momentum off those local victories. Which is why that 5% needs to happen to clear away the road blocks the big 2 put in place every election cycle. I kinda do consider that "starting at the bottom". There is no expectation of a national level victory really until that can happen.
Soulless
05-11-2016, 08:50
I recall a time when I voted for the independent candidate.........thinking the same ideals. It was a waste of my vote and obviously did not make an impact. I'm not completely sure we need three or four parties but I am convinced both major parties need serious reforms. If the GOP was smart they would already be deep within the disconnect of the Democratic constituency and pushing alternatives...if not GOP ideas then independent or libertarian.....pages taken directly from the liberal play book.
Bottom line if your not voting for one of the primary parties your giving away your vote to one or the other of the two candidates.
In 2008 I believe the national return was around 2-3% for Johnson. The number of independent and Libertarian registered voters has increased considerably in the interim. This of course is no promise of a vote along those lines, but the general feeling amongst voters seems to be that what we have been doing isn't working. So that's a positive. The post mortem from 2008 also showed that Libertarians took about the same number of votes away from both parties, so the idea that they are splitting the vote in favor of one or the other is mostly lip service by the primary parties that are scratching for ever shrinking margins as voters are coming to realize that there is little difference between the two parties anymore.
To continue to perpetuate the "us or them" message isn't going to change anything. You'll continue to be given the choice of either a giant douche or a turd sandwich...and somehow rationalizing that isn't as bad as the other doesn't make it any better when you are still losing as a citizen. There is a time for everything. The situation may not always be ripe for third party advances, but it's looking better than any other point I can rememeber.
.....To continue to perpetuate the "us or them" message isn't going to change anything. You'll continue to be given the choice of either a giant douche or a turd sandwich....
Obama didn't win NC in 2008 - the third party Barr voters gave it to him.
They had a choice and it was to elect Obama.
Soulless
05-11-2016, 10:30
Obama didn't win NC in 2008 - the third party Barr voters gave it to him.
They had a choice and it was to elect Obama.
Could be worse. Could have been like WV....went the other way and was just dismissed as being a state full of bigots.
Badger52
05-11-2016, 19:02
Obama didn't win NC in 2008 - the third party Barr voters gave it to him.
They had a choice and it was to elect Obama.Sounds familiar. Before Scott Walker we had a governor's race. Terrific man, ran as an L, WELL known, solid values, overwhelmingly elected mayor of his town, great guy but wanted to make a "statement." Many of those who would've voted for him across the state had an education-deficit, in that they had ZERO idea WTF a Libertarian even stood for. The R candidate got thrashed & the demographics showed crystal-clear the votes that let his statist D opponent win & give us 4 more years of his scaled-down version of a Chicago machine.
Ol' Ed (RIP) told me personally that his running that time as a Libertarian was the stupidest thing he ever did (which speaks well of his candor & character).
Libertarians have a mission and it's NOT focusing on winning national general elections. It's an education mission & this will be multi-generational if they want to make it work. Forget the 25m target - they need to hit that 5-yd silhouette a bunch of times. Low-crawl/crawl/walk/run, etc.
CAARNG 68W
05-12-2016, 21:21
Lets not limit ourselves...
Jesse Ventura (https://ballotpedia.org/Jesse_Ventura)is also running on the Independence party ticket...
I had rather not for someone who's persona involves Stolen Valor, conspiracy theories, suing a widow, serving only one term of a State with a kooky reputation, defending the assault of John Stossel (or a small man getting beat up by a large man for a ridiculous reason).
The hell with Jimmy Janos
To bad John got a new job with a gaming company....I thought he was going to take a Libertarian run. If nothing else, he gets style points
What if like Hilary, McAfee gets indicted? lol, granted it would be by another country, but still
I had rather not for someone who's persona involves Stolen Valor, conspiracy theories, suing a widow, serving only one term of a State with a kooky reputation, defending the assault of John Stossel (or a small man getting beat up by a large man for a ridiculous reason).
The hell with Jimmy Janos
...are you suggesting that Trump is a better pick than Jesse Ventura ?
...are you suggesting that Trump is a better pick than Jesse Ventura ?
hmmm... that's going to have to be a toss-up.
hmmm... that's going to have to be a toss-up.
Ventura is surely more entertaining than Trump. After all, Trump's shows can't compete with Ventura's "Conspiracy Theory." :D
Gary Johnson - That's who I'm planning to vote for in the general.
Given your number of posts, and it translating to the amount of time you've spent commiserating with QP's on this site, one would expect that a learned practicality might have taken hold...or, at minimum, an observed one.
Roguish Lawyer
05-14-2016, 11:38
Given your number of posts, and it translating to the amount of time you've spent commiserating with QP's on this site, one would expect that a learned practicality might have taken hold...or, at minimum, an observed one.
Why don't you go fuck yourself.
Why don't you go fuck yourself.
Supreme Court appointments, RL.
...and who Trump chooses for his VP and cabinet. Give it some time...maybe he will surprise you.
Supreme Court appointments, RL.
...and who Trump chooses for his VP and cabinet. Give it some time...maybe he will surprise you.
Like him or not Trump didn't get to where he is being a idiot, and he has accumulated the most votes in Republican history. I believe he will surprise many in a good way, if you are Bill Kristol or karl Rove types the surprises may be unpleasant.
The Reaper
05-14-2016, 21:27
Supreme Court appointments, RL.
...and who Trump chooses for his VP and cabinet. Give it some time...maybe he will surprise you.
Yeah, maybe it will be Christie, or one of his ilk. :rolleyes:
TR
Yeah, maybe it will be Christie, or one of his ilk. :rolleyes:
TR
Maybe he will tap Biden again.
Christie would be a lot of braggadocio for one ticket...perhaps too much to handle.