Scorecard for undecided liberty voters -- Johnson vs Trump

[RonPaulGeorge&Ringo]

Issue-----------------| Trump -----------------------------| Johnson

taxes ----------------| 2- high sales tax on foreign imports-| 0- high sales tax on everything, tax on breathing
religious liberty ----| 3- for -------------------------------| 0- gunpoint cake-baking for Xtians
Bush Crime Family ----| 3- against ---------------------------| 0- for
Iraq war 2003-16------| 3- against ---------------------------| 1- against 2011-16
Hillary for prison ---| 3- for ------------------------------| 1- mostly against
TPP global government | 3- against ------------------------- | 0- for
gun rights -----------| 3- for -----------------------------| 1- mixed / Weld
war with Russia ------| 3- against ---------------------------| 1- maybe
Climate change hoax --| 3- against ------------------------ | 0- all in
weed | 2- mixed ------------------ | 2- mixed
Mandatory poison | 2- mostly against ------------------- | 0- for
injections -----------|
Foreign usurpers in --| 3- against -------------------------- | 1- no position
White House

Total liberty score: | 33 / 36 -------------------- | 8 / 36




NEW UPDATE - LATE AUGUST - NEW UPDATE

This has been updated again.

Position scores now range from 0-3 to allow for more nuance.

Category updates:

"Iraq War opposition 2003-2016" -- Consolidated into one category. Trump gets a perfect score for his longtime opposition; Johnson gets one point out of three for opposing since 2011.

"Global warming hoax" -- Johnson sinks from 1/2 to 0/3 now that he has gone all in with this obscene lie.

"Mandatory poison injections." -- New category. Johnson gets a 0/3 for advocating a federal mandate to inject Americans with poisons. Trump's rhetoric remains good but could be better. 2/3 for Trump.

"Hillary for Prison" -- Trump has regained a perfect score after flirting with softer language. Johnson has been a bit more willing to discuss Hillary's crime lately, but still says she won't be prosecuted. Johnson moves up from 0/2 to 1/3.

"Gun rights" -- Johnson's co-President Weld continues to vocally back gun control laws and gungrabbing judges despite Johnson's positive rhetorical history on this issue. Johnson slips from 1/2 to 1/3.

New total Liberty scores:

Trump 33/36
Johnson 8/36

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OLD UPDATE - OLD UPDATE FOLLOWS:

This has been revised. Trump's score on "Hillary for Prison" has dropped one point since he's been getting too soft.

Johnson's score on "weed" has been dropped from "for" to "mixed" because I had forgotten and now remembered that he pardoned zero people for cannabis possession as governor.

Johnson gun rights score has been dropped from "for" to "mixed", now that Weld says they will appoint hardcore gungrabbers to the SCOTUS. If Johnson doesn't do anything to get gungrabber Weld in line, that score may drop from 1 to 0 points in the future.

There's a new category called "Bush Crime Family." Trump gets two points there, Johnson 0.

There are some new categories on the Iraq war also. Special thanks to that guy with Mormon Beehive avatar who on a different thread did research confirming that Johnson said nothing against the Iraq War for eight years.

New total Liberty Scores:
Trump 25/28 --------------------- Johnson 10/28

[r3volution 3.0]

That's extremely retarded.

[iNoob]

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?491719-Campaign-Evaluation-Donald-Trump-(POTUS)

[Tywysog Cymru]

Trump is anti-gun rights and hasn't indicated that he is pro-religious liberty.

[CPUd]

https://i.imgur.com/P4eiNqB.jpg

[Origanalist]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CoB4EcDVIAA-80-.jpg

[ifthenwouldi]

You seem to have found the wrong forum. I'll help you get where you need to be:

https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/

[Anti-Neocon]

Do you actually intend to fool people with that? It's really bad.

[RonPaulGeorge&Ringo]

This has been revised.

Trump's score on "Hillary for Prison" has dropped one point since he's been getting too soft.

Johnson's score on "weed" has been dropped from "for" to "mixed" because I had forgotten and now remembered that he pardoned zero people for cannabis possession as governor.

Johnson gun rights score has been dropped from "for" to "mixed", now that Weld says they will appoint hardcore gungrabbers to the SCOTUS. If Johnson doesn't do anything to get gungrabber Weld in line, that score may drop from 1 to 0 points in the future.

There's a new category called "Bush Crime Family." Trump gets two points there, Johnson 0.

There are some new categories on the Iraq war also. Special thanks to that guy with Mormon Beehive avatar who on a different thread did research confirming that Johnson said nothing against the Iraq War for eight years.

New total Liberty Scores:
Trump 25/28 --------------------- Johnson 10/28

[LatinsforPaul]

New total Liberty Scores:
Trump 25/28 --------------------- Johnson 10/28

Hilarious :D

[RonPaulGeorge&Ringo]

NEW UPDATE - LATE AUGUST - NEW UPDATE

This has been updated again.

Position scores now range from 0-3 to allow for more nuance.

Category updates:

"Iraq War opposition 2003-2016" -- Consolidated into one category. Trump gets a perfect score for his longtime opposition; Johnson gets one point out of three for opposing since 2011.

"Global warming hoax" -- Johnson sinks from 1/2 to 0/3 now that he has gone all in with this obscene lie.

"Mandatory poison injections." -- New category. Johnson gets a 0/3 for advocating a federal mandate to inject Americans with poisons. Trump's rhetoric remains good but could be better. 2/3 for Trump.

"Hillary for Prison" -- Trump has regained a perfect score after flirting with softer language. Johnson has been a bit more willing to discuss Hillary's crime lately, but still says she won't be prosecuted. Johnson moves up from 0/2 to 1/3.

"Gun rights" -- Johnson's co-President Weld continues to vocally back gun control laws and gungrabbing judges despite Johnson's positive rhetorical history on this issue. Johnson slips from 1/2 to 1/3.

New total Liberty scores:

Trump 33/36
Johnson 8/36

[RJ Liberty]

That's extremely retarded.

It definitely is, now. Johnson jokingly supports zombie vaccinations (http://reason.com/blog/2016/08/26/gary-johnson-no-to-carbon-taxes-and-mand) and this table of fake data gets updated with the "fact" that Johnson supports "mandatory poison injections".

[Suzanimal]

Insulted Ronald Reagan? LOL! I've insulted him. too.


https://i.imgur.com/P4eiNqB.jpg

[nikcers]

Insulted Ronald Reagan? LOL! I've insulted him. too.

Well aren't you a single issue voter, voting for Trump just because he insulted Reagan?

[Suzanimal]

Well aren't you a single issue voter, voting for Trump just because he insulted Reagan?

:confused:

Where did you get that I was voting for Trump from that? I just thought it was bizarre that insulting Reagan somehow makes you a liberal.

[euphemia]

This is acting as if either one of them are liberty candidates. And for the record, this is Donald Trump's first move into politics. Having an opinion is not the same as actually being a legislator and voting to do something or being an elected official and not doing something that you say you are in favor of doing. It's not good to be a kid in New Mexico these days.

Be realistic, people. A shred of honesty would be nice.

[nikcers]

This is acting as if either one of them are liberty candidates. And for the record, this is Donald Trump's first move into politics. Having an opinion is not the same as actually being a legislator and voting to do something or being an elected official and not doing something that you say you are in favor of doing. It's not good to be a kid in New Mexico these days.

Be realistic, people. A shred of honesty would be nice.

you can't advocate for the iraq war and advocate against ending the iraq war and claim you are against the Iraq war or wars in the middle east Trump is a logical fallacy.

[euphemia]

Trump has never been in a position to take decisive action on the Iraq war or anything else outside the Trump Organization.

Johnson has been in a position to take decisive action on a lot of things in New Mexico that he did nothing about or did the wrong thing.

That's such a big difference. Hillary keeps carping about a lot of things she had the power to change when she was the carpetbag senator from New York. I can ignore a personal opinion, but it's hard to pass on what someone did when s/he was in an actual elected office.

[nikcers]

Trump has never been in a position to take decisive action on the Iraq war or anything else outside the Trump Organization.

Johnson has been in a position to take decisive action on a lot of things in New Mexico that he did nothing about or did the wrong thing.

That's such a big difference. Hillary keeps carping about a lot of things she had the power to change when she was the carpetbag senator from New York. I can ignore a personal opinion, but it's hard to pass on what someone did when s/he was in an actual elected office.

Trump has no power over politics and that's why he brags about buying influence from the government?? The government steals from us and he buys what the government stole. He helped get people elected that supported the Iraq war, he is getting backed by people who run Genie energy, which is why he didn't want the US to leave Iraq, which is why he was against the Iran deal that gave the Iranians their money back, which is why he advocates for going into places like Libya and taking their oil, which is why Dick Cheney has endorsed him, the same guy who ran million dollar attack ads against Rand Paul the first day he announced he was running for president.

[euphemia]

Trump has never been elected to anything. He will say almost anything, and most of what he says is just talk. The actions of an elected official have weight, and they count. I'm not for either of these guys. I'm just trying to figure out how an opinion=support. It's an apples to oranges comparison.

[RJ Liberty]

And for the record, this is Donald Trump's first move into politics.

That's simply not true, Euphemia. Donald Trump ran for president on the Reform Party Platform in 2000 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_presidential_campaign,_2000). In that campaign, he made campaign appearances in California, Florida, and Minnesota. Memories these days are short, but not short enough that I could forget the four months that Trump was a presidential candidate in 1999-2000.



Having an opinion is not the same as actually being a legislator and voting to do something or being an elected official and not doing something that you say you are in favor of doing. It's not good to be a kid in New Mexico these days.

"These days"? What does a kid in New Mexico now have to do with Gary's governorship a generation ago? Gary spent much of his time in office vetoing bills the NM legislature foisted on the people of New Mexico, and also spent a great deal of time campaigning against (https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2245&dat=19991022&id=EOg0AAAAIBAJ&sjid=NyEGAAAAIBAJ&pg=6685,6199972) the country's failed drug wars.

[nikcers]

That's simply not true, Euphemia. Donald Trump ran for president on the Reform Party Platform in 2000 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_presidential_campaign,_2000). In that campaign, he made campaign appearances in California, Florida, and Minnesota. Memories these days are short, but not short enough that I could forget the four months that Trump was a presidential candidate in 1999-2000.



"These days"? What does a kid in New Mexico now have to do with Gary's governorship a generation ago? Gary spent much of his time in office vetoing bills the NM legislature foisted on the people of New Mexico, and also spent a great deal of time campaigning against (https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2245&dat=19991022&id=EOg0AAAAIBAJ&sjid=NyEGAAAAIBAJ&pg=6685,6199972) the country's failed drug wars.


I think what he was trying to say is Donald Trump will say anything so how can you form an opinion on him based on what he says. I think that's a really important point, if he will say anything then obviously having an opinion of him based on what he has said means that you have lost the game.

[Natural Citizen]

Well aren't you a single issue voter, voting for Trump just because he insulted Reagan?


:confused:

Where did you get that I was voting for Trump from that? I just thought it was bizarre that insulting Reagan somehow makes you a liberal.

This place needs an enema.

[nikcers]

This place needs an enema.

gosh i said that as a joke hold your horses.

[RJ Liberty]

I think what he was trying to say is Donald Trump will say anything so how can you form an opinion on him based on what he says. I think that's a really important point, if he will say anything then obviously having an opinion of him based on what he has said means that you have lost the game.

Right. If you can't form an opinion of Trump because he will say anything, then you can't trust him. If it's impossible to believe him based on what he says, does, or writes, then he can in no way be trusted. Trump repeatedly advocated for the Iraq War, in both interviews and in the books he wrote (https://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/in-2002-donald-trump-said-he-supported-invading-iraq-on-the?utm_term=.xnOzYYQJk#.wqXkLLJYz). Trump has repeatedly said during this election that he "wasn't a politician" at the time, despite the fact that he had recently run for POTUS, and we have people here parroting that lie, too.

[MattRay]

This is just ridiculously biased. Johnson has actually opposed all gun laws, unlike Trump, is better on foreign intervention(see their ISIS responses), better on welfare/entitlements, better on drugs, much better on civil liberties (i.e., Johnson would seriously consider pardoning Snowden, Trump wants to execute him) Johnson has serious flaws. His stance on discrimination shows that he really doesn't understand liberty, but it shouldn't be difficult to be honest and objective about their positions. Trump is far more questionable on Iraq. When asked if he supported it in 2002, he said; "I guess so." But more telling is in his 2000 campaign book The America We Deserve, Trump praises George H.W. Bush for the Gulf War, but with a caveat. Trump wished he stayed 3 more days and "finished the job." A stance he reiterated 2 years later in that Howard Stern interview. Also, he called for a preemptive strike on North Korea in the book. Not too different from Trump calling for action against Gaddafi on video in 2011. Now, if Trump has learned from those interventions, and I believe he has to some extent, then great, but if this had been Johnson, you'd crucify them. Both candidates have flaws. Johnson happens to be more liberty-oriented in general, but neither of them are going to be confused for Murray Rothbard.

By the way, we can't penalize Johnson for Weld's egregious Liberal Rockefeller Republican views any more than we can Trump for Pence's atrocious Bush neocon views. Both men are light years better than their VP's, despite their glaring flaws.

[eleganz]

If anybody thinks Trump actually cares about libertarian principles...man I feel bad for you.

[John F Kennedy III]

Neither is an option for liberty voters.

[LibertyEagle]

Trump is anti-gun rights and hasn't indicated that he is pro-religious liberty.

Are you kidding??? Yes he has.

[LibertyEagle]

If anybody thinks Trump actually cares about libertarian principles...man I feel bad for you.

If anybody thinks JOHNSON actually cares about libertarian principles...man I feel bad for you.

[Tywysog Cymru]

Are you kidding??? Yes he has.

When? He is also far to the left of most Republicans (and even many Democrats) on social issues.

[MattRay]

If anybody thinks JOHNSON actually cares about libertarian principles...man I feel bad for you.

It's more accurate to say that Johnson doesn't understand libertarian principles. If one is interested in the more libertarian candidate of the two, then Johnson is a better choice than Trump. However, if one is concerned about Johnson misrepresenting libertarians, then Trump may be a better choice because he doesn't claim to be a libertarian, but may tilt things slightly more in our direction on foreign policy and open the door more for alternative candidates. That's basically the reasoning that led to Murray Rothbard supporting Ross Perot after Buchanan lost the Republican Primary in 1992.

There is a case to be made for both of them. It really depends on what's important to you. Of course, if you want to vote on principle, then I think Darrell Castle seems like the best choice from what I know about him.