You know there is a 3rd candidate for POTUS

[18Ddave]

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/

[Pete]

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]

I think we should start promoting Bernie Sanders as a third party candidate. That would piss off the the Dems...

[PedOncoDoc]

Originally Posted by mark46th

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....

[cbtengr]

Originally Posted by PedOncoDoc

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!

[PSM]

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]

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]

Originally Posted by 18Ddave

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.

[Pete]

Originally Posted by Roguish Lawyer

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]

Originally Posted by Pete

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).

[Pete]

Originally Posted by Soulless

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.

[abc_123]

Originally Posted by Pete

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.

[abc_123]

Originally Posted by Soulless

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]

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.

[Box]

Lets not limit ourselves...

Jesse Ventura is also running on the Independence party ticket...

Then of course we have Jill Stein 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.