PDA

View Full Version : You're all voting for Johnson so the LP gets matching funds, right?




limequat
10-31-2016, 10:27 AM
Been out of the forums since Rand dropped out. Was planning to sit this election out, when I read that the LP will be eligible for $10 million in Federal matching funds if Johnson crosses the 5% threshold.

Personally, I like Gary anyway, but isn't getting the LP $10 million a goal we can all get behind?

specsaregood
10-31-2016, 10:29 AM
Been out of the forums since Rand dropped out. Was planning to sit this election out, when I read that the LP will be eligible for $10 million in Federal matching funds if Johnson crosses the 5% threshold.

Personally, I like Gary anyway, but isn't getting the LP $10 million a goal we can all get behind?

Vote for the LP candidate so that Weld can get campaign welfare in 2020? I'll pass, thanks.

fcreature
10-31-2016, 10:29 AM
Yep, that's what I'm doing. 5% to Johnson might be the only positive thing out of this election cycle. Doubtful that he hits it though.

I'm also in NY where Hillary is going to crush Trump, despite the fantasies and delusions of the Trump supporters.

69360
10-31-2016, 10:34 AM
I am. I hope he gets it. It looked good for a while but now his RCP average is down to 4.7. That's typical for third party candidates close to the vote though.

Spikender
10-31-2016, 10:35 AM
I met a couple of Gary Johnson supporters the other day. An actual couple. They handed me a few stickers and we chatted for a bit. Nice folks.

69360
10-31-2016, 10:39 AM
I met a couple of Gary Johnson supporters the other day. An actual couple. They handed me a few stickers and we chatted for a bit. Nice folks.

There are actually Johnson signs all over town here. Both on public corners and in yards. I had nothing to do with them. It was kind of a surprise.

TheCount
10-31-2016, 10:51 AM
Unfortunately his numbers have been dropping in recent polls. I really hope he maintains 5%.

Tywysog Cymru
10-31-2016, 10:53 AM
It's his own fault that he's doing so poorly in the polls.

limequat
10-31-2016, 10:55 AM
My dream scenario is that Johnson wins New Mexico, and Clinton/Trump both come up shy of 270 electoral votes. Then the house votes for Johnson out of spite. President Johnson

This could actually happen and has a probability greater than zero. Next best would be a similar situation with McMullen winning Utah.

adam220891
10-31-2016, 11:01 AM
My dream scenario is that Johnson wins New Mexico, and Clinton/Trump both come up shy of 270 electoral votes. Then the house votes for Johnson out of spite. President Johnson

This could actually happen and has a probability greater than zero. Next best would be a similar situation with McMullen winning Utah.

There's a neocon out in Utah who has an infinitely higher chance of having this happen to him than GJ.

RonPaulMall
10-31-2016, 11:30 AM
If the LP finally qualifies for matching funds with a barely libertarian at all like Johnson as the nominee, what kind of message do you think that sends? What incentive would they have for running a more libertarian candidate in 2020? If the LP ever nominated somebody with enough popular support to win the Presidency, the money would come naturally anyway. If Ron Paul were younger and had run as LP this cycle he would have raised tens of millions easily. Chasing Federal money is a fool's errand that only corrupts the party without any benefit.

euphemia
10-31-2016, 11:33 AM
Nope he's a horrible candidate and a Libertarian should not ask for government handouts.

CaptUSA
10-31-2016, 11:37 AM
Nothing says "Libertarian" quite like requesting that the State should be used as a means to collect revenue to campaign for elections!!!

Spikender
10-31-2016, 11:57 AM
Nothing says "Libertarian" quite like requesting that the State should be used as a means to collect revenue to campaign for elections!!!

To be fair, the Libertarian candidate should worry about tearing down the funding after obtaining it. It would simply put the LP on more (very small amount more) equal footing with the two major parties. It's the system we live under and it's designed that way for a reason.

P3ter_Griffin
10-31-2016, 12:09 PM
I voted for him so he wins. But that doesn't look real promising. America would be on such a better path if he did. Demokracy, fuck yeah!

enhanced_deficit
10-31-2016, 12:16 PM
Unless someone can post a link here showing any Johnson's statement in opposition to Iraq war from prior to 2003, he will get ZERO support from me.

wizardwatson
10-31-2016, 12:23 PM
Vote for libertarian ticket so that the anti-tax party can get more taxpayer funds.

fisharmor
10-31-2016, 12:27 PM
It's his own fault that he's doing so poorly in the polls.

Amen.

And I'm NOT going to vote for Johnson - as specs pointed out, my first thought was "Hey aren't libertarians supposed to be AGAINST federal handouts?"

If they get money this year it will embolden all the kidney-smellers who put Johnson in the nomination to begin with. The last thing anyone needs is reinforcing the idea that Johnson is some kind of answer to our problems.

nikcers
10-31-2016, 12:37 PM
I thought we are doing it so they are on the ballot in 2020? I guess strategically you might not want a libertarian on the ballot in 2020 if Rand Paul becomes the Republican nominee because that would take away votes.

specsaregood
10-31-2016, 12:41 PM
It's his own fault that he's doing so poorly in the polls.

I'll just put this here.

791858718967107584

phill4paul
10-31-2016, 12:43 PM
Still not sure which route I'm going. Might stay home. But, I almost had a Hillary supporter convince me to vote Trump. I hate both Trump and Hillary but this Feminazi had me thinking it was time to pull the lever for Trump. Of course coming on these forums and reading the Trump shrills righted the boat.

P3ter_Griffin
10-31-2016, 12:43 PM
I'll just put this here.

Thanks Trumpster, I hadn't seen that yet.

specsaregood
10-31-2016, 12:43 PM
I'll just put this here.

oh and this
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cv4FKFXUIAAH6Nh.jpg

specsaregood
10-31-2016, 12:45 PM
Still not sure which route I'm going. Might stay home. But, I almost had a Hillary supporter convince me to vote Trump. I hate both Trump and Hillary but this Feminazi had me thinking it was time to pull the lever for Trump. Of course coming on these forums and reading the Trump shrills righted the boat.

thats the only reason i'm voting for him. i hate her supporters more than I hate his, nothing to do with the candidate himself.

phill4paul
10-31-2016, 12:48 PM
I thought we are doing it so they are on the ballot in 2020? I guess strategically you might not want a libertarian on the ballot in 2020 if Rand Paul becomes the Republican nominee because that would take away votes.

I think you have to have 15% for ballot access. There is no way Johnson/Weld will reach that.

Jesse James
10-31-2016, 12:57 PM
Nope he's a horrible candidate and a Libertarian should not ask for government handouts.
:rolleyes:

you better stop using public roads. no true libertarian would use public roads

Jesse James
10-31-2016, 12:58 PM
Nothing says "Libertarian" quite like requesting that the State should be used as a means to collect revenue to campaign for elections!!!
yeah, it's not like you are morally obligated to take back YOUR money or anything...




oh wait....

Jesse James
10-31-2016, 12:59 PM
Unless someone can post a link here showing any Johnson's statement in opposition to Iraq war from prior to 2003, he will get ZERO support from me.
even if you find one, he recently said Hiroshima was justified. that's reason enough not to support him

Jesse James
10-31-2016, 12:59 PM
Vote for libertarian ticket so that the anti-tax party can get more taxpayer funds.
you mean THEIR funds?

undergroundrr
10-31-2016, 01:00 PM
I'll just put this here.

Well, that's kind of alpha-male. Might win over some trumpies.

Jesse James
10-31-2016, 01:00 PM
"Hey aren't libertarians supposed to be AGAINST federal handouts?"

no. it's our money to take. they stole it from us and we have a duty to steal it back.

dannno
10-31-2016, 01:02 PM
Vote for libertarian ticket so that the anti-tax party can get more taxpayer funds.

You have to admit, from a practical standpoint, libertarian politicians are one of the best investments or expenditures that the government could possibly make.

wizardwatson
10-31-2016, 01:08 PM
no. it's our money to take. they stole it from us and we have a duty to steal it back.

Well, it goes to the party doesn't it? It isn't like the party is going to cut a check to everyone who calls themselves a libertarian. Plus, if the LP was actually producing Ron Pauls instead of potheads and Clinton shills, I'd be more inclined to sympathize.


You have to admit, from a practical standpoint, libertarian politicians are one of the best investments or expenditures that the government could possibly make.

Well, it would give us a reason I suppose to support the LP.

limequat
10-31-2016, 01:23 PM
I've given up on any sort of purity tests for Libertarians. I consider myself an anarchist, but I think a Libertarian president would be an improvement over Clinton. Is that up for debate?

fisharmor
10-31-2016, 01:28 PM
I've given up on any sort of purity tests for Libertarians. I consider myself an anarchist, but I think a Libertarian president would be an improvement over Clinton. Is that up for debate?

I remember the 90s quite fondly. It was a brief time of reprieve, between our time of constant fear of the existential threat of nuclear annihilation, and our time of constant fear of Islamic terrorism.
There were plenty of jobs, gas was cheap, regulations were more lenient than today, cops stuck to beating up undesirables.
Plenty of pot to go around.
Overall attitude was postive.

When I apply the same purity test to Clintons as some do for Johnson, I find it difficult to hate on Hillary.

dannno
10-31-2016, 01:31 PM
I've given up on any sort of purity tests for Libertarians. I consider myself an anarchist, but I think a Libertarian president would be an improvement over Clinton. Is that up for debate?

I think Trump could end up being miles ahead of Hillary, possibly, not for certain though. I voted for GJ cuz I don't live in a swing state.

dean.engelhardt
10-31-2016, 01:40 PM
Unless someone can post a link here showing any Johnson's statement in opposition to Iraq war from prior to 2003, he will get ZERO support from me.

That is kind of an odd test. GJ left government 1 January 2003 and didn't re-enter until running for president in 2012. I assume he went back to running a business. His stand on the Iraq war wasn't going to gather much media attention. There are many sites were he states he was against the war from the start. That isn't an unusual position for a libertarian, but I can't find a link.

Just curious as to why is it important to you? That was 13 years ago.

bunklocoempire
10-31-2016, 01:47 PM
Vote for libertarian ticket so that the anti-tax party can get more taxpayer funds.

First we have to make the land safe for liberty, and then people can have liberty.

Why does this method sound so familiar?

Jesse James
10-31-2016, 01:48 PM
Well, it goes to the party doesn't it? It isn't like the party is going to cut a check to everyone who calls themselves a libertarian. Plus, if the LP was actually producing Ron Pauls instead of potheads and Clinton shills, I'd be more inclined to sympathize.
yes, obviously it goes to the party. I would much prefer a third party be on the same playing field.

69360
10-31-2016, 02:50 PM
no. it's our money to take. they stole it from us and we have a duty to steal it back.

Yep.

presence
10-31-2016, 03:37 PM
isn't getting the LP $10 million a goal we can all get behind?

perhaps giving 3 entitled groups $10m of "free money"
is worse than giving 2 entitled groups $10m of "free money"

??


Vote for libertarian ticket so that the anti-tax party can get more taxpayer funds.
yeah I think I'll pass

nikcers
10-31-2016, 03:46 PM
I've given up on any sort of purity tests for Libertarians. I consider myself an anarchist, but I think a Libertarian president would be an improvement over Clinton. Is that up for debate?

Most people don't want to debate this because they get pigeon holed into debating whether or not first past the pole is absolute. I tend to think that first past the pole is more like physics than gravity, and therefore is only a symptom of the limited examples of elections that we have already held. I don't think that we can change gravity, but I also think that isn't the argument, the argument is whether or not the laws of physics are absolute or if maybe we don't have all the information.

Occam's Banana
10-31-2016, 03:57 PM
Vote for the LP candidate so that Weld can get campaign welfare in 2020? I'll pass, thanks.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to specsaregood again.

You always get more of what you subsidize ...

Onward and upward! Weld/Ryan 2020!!

euphemia
10-31-2016, 04:32 PM
no. it's our money to take. they stole it from us and we have a duty to steal it back.

In what way will Gary getting matching funds give you back your money?

euphemia
10-31-2016, 04:34 PM
:rolleyes:

you better stop using public roads. no true libertarian would use public roads

Who says?

dannno
10-31-2016, 04:35 PM
In what way will Gary getting matching funds give you back your money?

Think of it like an investment into getting more of your money back.

r3volution 3.0
10-31-2016, 04:35 PM
Been out of the forums since Rand dropped out. Was planning to sit this election out, when I read that the LP will be eligible for $10 million in Federal matching funds if Johnson crosses the 5% threshold.

Personally, I like Gary anyway, but isn't getting the LP $10 million a goal we can all get behind?

It certainly should be. And apart from matching funds, there's also ballot access and media coverage to be won.

I'm hard pressed to see a downside. The purist counterargument ("how hypocritical to take taxpayer financed matching funds") is extremely shortsighted. The Trumpkin counterargument ("a vote for Gary's a vote for Hillary, whose worse than Trump, even though Trump's the same on every important issue!") is extremely retarded.

oyarde
10-31-2016, 05:02 PM
Been out of the forums since Rand dropped out. Was planning to sit this election out, when I read that the LP will be eligible for $10 million in Federal matching funds if Johnson crosses the 5% threshold.

Personally, I like Gary anyway, but isn't getting the LP $10 million a goal we can all get behind?

It would make sense if the money came to me , I am a Liberty expert and know more of this subject than the Libertarians do .

euphemia
10-31-2016, 06:05 PM
I've given up on any sort of purity tests for Libertarians. I consider myself an anarchist, but I think a Libertarian president would be an improvement over Clinton. Is that up for debate?

Of all people who should have purity tests, Libertarians are first on the list. Sheesh, if we can't produce a candidate that believes in the fundamental right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of property, then what are we doing? And if we can't find someone who believes in the Bill of Rights, can we call ourselves Libertarians?

euphemia
10-31-2016, 06:07 PM
Think of it like an investment into getting more of your money back.

An investment of what? A guy who wants to come after my freedom? Not even a little bit. Let him go raise the money to pay off his campaign. No matching funds to Johnson.

Nobody should get money to run for office, even if there are enough boxes checked on those tax forms.

GunnyFreedom
10-31-2016, 06:12 PM
No. that would just encourage them to produce a sequel for 2020. :(

Superfluous Man
10-31-2016, 06:14 PM
1) I don't believe Johnson stands much of a chance of breaking 5%.
2) Even if he does stand a chance, my vote won't make a difference in that.
3) I don't care about the LP getting matching funds.

CPUd
10-31-2016, 06:38 PM
The right candidate could get $10M in 1 or 2 moneybombs.

satchelmcqueen
10-31-2016, 08:13 PM
Been out of the forums since Rand dropped out. Was planning to sit this election out, when I read that the LP will be eligible for $10 million in Federal matching funds if Johnson crosses the 5% threshold.

Personally, I like Gary anyway, but isn't getting the LP $10 million a goal we can all get behind?
i thought once rand dropped then yes we ALL could get behind something like this. but prepare to be surprised brother. people here support trump far more than you can imagine and have forgot what ron stood for. i feel ashamed for this movement and this forum because of it. im voting for gary.

69360
10-31-2016, 08:41 PM
In what way will Gary getting matching funds give you back your money?

It redirects the money the government stole from me via taxation to something I care about.

Natural Citizen
10-31-2016, 08:42 PM
No.

GunnyFreedom
10-31-2016, 09:38 PM
i thought once rand dropped then yes we ALL could get behind something like this. but prepare to be surprised brother. people here support trump far more than you can imagine and have forgot what ron stood for. i feel ashamed for this movement and this forum because of it. im voting for gary.

Roughly 20% of a largely unmoderated forum who support Trump should not come as that much of a surprise. I am curious though, you do understand that opposition to Gary Johnson does not auto-magically mean support for Trump or Clinton, right?

GunnyFreedom
10-31-2016, 09:40 PM
It redirects the money the government stole from me via taxation to something I care about.

Just look at all the good that 501(c) money did for the church..... oh wait....

Anti Federalist
10-31-2016, 10:03 PM
Vote for the LP candidate so that Weld can get campaign welfare in 2020? I'll pass, thanks.

Annnd there you have it.

Origanalist
10-31-2016, 10:47 PM
It certainly should be. And apart from matching funds, there's also ballot access and media coverage to be won.

I'm hard pressed to see a downside. The purist counterargument ("how hypocritical to take taxpayer financed matching funds") is extremely shortsighted. The Trumpkin counterargument ("a vote for Gary's a vote for Hillary, whose worse than Trump, even though Trump's the same on every important issue!") is extremely retarded.

Since you seem to have missed it, OB and specs already presented it;


You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to specsaregood again.

You always get more of what you subsidize ...

Onward and upward! Weld/Ryan 2020!!

P3ter_Griffin
10-31-2016, 11:18 PM
Since you seem to have missed it, OB and specs already presented it;

This ain't a movie.

Turning down the funds could be a good way to highlight the public dollars funneled into the elections and two major parties.

Origanalist
10-31-2016, 11:19 PM
This ain't a movie.

Turning down the funds could be a good way to highlight the public dollars funneled into the elections and two major parties.

And who is going to do that?

Origanalist
10-31-2016, 11:20 PM
And what the hell does movies have to do with any of this?

P3ter_Griffin
10-31-2016, 11:26 PM
And what the hell does movies have to do with any of this?

I'm saying it is not scripted. And we can influence future results if we put our minds to it.

P3ter_Griffin
10-31-2016, 11:30 PM
And who is going to do that?

I imagine the 'matching funds' would go to the party directly so the party chair and body?

Origanalist
10-31-2016, 11:35 PM
I imagine the 'matching funds' would go to the party directly so the party chair and body?

I guess hope springs eternal.

P3ter_Griffin
10-31-2016, 11:48 PM
I guess hope springs eternal.

Not a big issue for me either way but I do think they should reject it if it is offered. And I think there can be benefits in rejecting the funds.

bunklocoempire
10-31-2016, 11:51 PM
Just look at all the good that 501(c) money did for the church..... oh wait....

Agree 110%. Dig those state churches.

It's one slick, evil trick of the flesh -a believer being comfortable and thinking government had something to do with it.

Did someone mention movies?

I'm here a week now... waiting for a mission... getting softer. Every minute I stay in this room, I get weaker, and every minute Charlie squats in the bush, he gets stronger. Each time I looked around the walls moved in a little tighter.

Jesse James
11-01-2016, 08:41 AM
In what way will Gary getting matching funds give you back your money?
I'm supporting the practice in general. I'm not talking about voting for the libertarian party. reading comprehension

Jesse James
11-01-2016, 08:42 AM
Who says?
people who say it is immoral to take money from the government, if they don't want to be hypocrites.

satchelmcqueen
11-01-2016, 05:24 PM
Roughly 20% of a largely unmoderated forum who support Trump should not come as that much of a surprise. I am curious though, you do understand that opposition to Gary Johnson does not auto-magically mean support for Trump or Clinton, right?
yes i understand

euphemia
11-01-2016, 07:59 PM
people who say it is immoral to take money from the government, if they don't want to be hypocrites.

That's a stretch. The Constitution says Congress is required to maintain a post office and the roads necessary to deliver mail.

Driving on a road is not the same thing as accepting a check for a failed campaign. People freely give tax deductible donations to political campaigns. They get their money back, for the most part and can give more to the loser Libertarian Party if they want. Road money is confiscated.

Athan
11-02-2016, 02:48 PM
Been out of the forums since Rand dropped out. Was planning to sit this election out, when I read that the LP will be eligible for $10 million in Federal matching funds if Johnson crosses the 5% threshold.

Personally, I like Gary anyway, but isn't getting the LP $10 million a goal we can all get behind?

I voted for Johnson at Ron Paul's recommendation in 2008. That dude has gone friggin mental this year, from throwing a dude's gift pistol, going full retard on a female reporter talking with his tongue in his mouth, and recently aggressively scolding a reporter asking a question like a crazed maniac. I'll never cast a vote for that idiot. Dude has single-handedly destroyed a lot of credibility built up by Ron Paul.

phill4paul
11-02-2016, 03:49 PM
I voted for Johnson at Ron Paul's recommendation in 2008. That dude has gone friggin mental this year, from throwing a dude's gift pistol, going full retard on a female reporter talking with his tongue in his mouth, and recently aggressively scolding a reporter asking a question like a crazed maniac. I'll never cast a vote for that idiot. Dude has single-handedly destroyed a lot of credibility built up by Ron Paul.

From what I understand he swore off marijuana for the election. Might have something to do with it. He needs to get back on his "meds."

euphemia
11-02-2016, 04:44 PM
Just look at all the good that 501(c) money did for the church..... oh wait....

How does the church take money from the federal government, exactly? The church members pay taxes. Pastors, because the government can't recognize God as an employer, are considered independent contractors. Even though pastors generally make very little, they are taxed at much higher rates and have to pay Social Security, insurance, and whatnot. I have a lot of pastor friends who have churches in rural, economically depressed areas. It isn't easy. Many of them work second jobs to get by.

You never saw Hillary or Bill do that, even though they make a lot of money and their friends get hefty deductions for their so-called charitable giving.

GunnyFreedom
11-02-2016, 05:19 PM
How does the church take money from the federal government, exactly? The church members pay taxes. Pastors, because the government can't recognize God as an employer, are considered independent contractors. Even though pastors generally make very little, they are taxed at much higher rates and have to pay Social Security, insurance, and whatnot. I have a lot of pastor friends who have churches in rural, economically depressed areas. It isn't easy. Many of them work second jobs to get by.

You never saw Hillary or Bill do that, even though they make a lot of money and their friends get hefty deductions for their so-called charitable giving.

Because 501(c)3 allows donations to churches to be written off on the donor's income taxes, that money (which has been given to a church and then deducted from income taxes) is technically "taxpayer money," whereupon being taxpayer money it comes with certain strings attached, like regulating what may and may not be spoken from the pulpit.

Ender
11-02-2016, 05:43 PM
Because 501(c)3 allows donations to churches to be written off on the donor's income taxes, that money (which has been given to a church and then deducted from income taxes) is technically "taxpayer money," whereupon being taxpayer money it comes with certain strings attached, like regulating what may and may not be spoken from the pulpit.

Churches were always tax-exempt from the founding of the country, but then most were conned into LBJ's 501(c)3 crapolla so that the gov actually controls them.

specsaregood
11-02-2016, 05:58 PM
I voted for Johnson at Ron Paul's recommendation in 2008. That dude has gone friggin mental this year, from throwing a dude's gift pistol, going full retard on a female reporter talking with his tongue in his mouth, and recently aggressively scolding a reporter asking a question like a crazed maniac. I'll never cast a vote for that idiot. Dude has single-handedly destroyed a lot of credibility built up by Ron Paul.

You have your names and/or years off. Johnson wasn't a candidate for anything in 2008 and I don't think RP recommended voting for him in 2012.

euphemia
11-02-2016, 07:46 PM
Because 501(c)3 allows donations to churches to be written off on the donor's income taxes, that money (which has been given to a church and then deducted from income taxes) is technically "taxpayer money," whereupon being taxpayer money it comes with certain strings attached, like regulating what may and may not be spoken from the pulpit.

But there are other nonprofits, like the Clinton Foundation, that do nothing but enrich the Clintons, that are tax deductible. Those deductions are also taxpayer dollars. So basically, it's a big, fat money laundering operation at government expense.

My church has several hundred members and is fairly affluent, but I can guarantee you they do a lot of charitable work. They have a very good reputation here in our community for charity. We don't give because of the tax deduction. We give because God asks us to give and because the church is accountable for how they spend the money. They certainly do not buy political favors with it.

Jesse James
11-02-2016, 07:48 PM
You have your names and/or years off. Johnson wasn't a candidate for anything in 2008 and I don't think RP recommended voting for him in 2012.
yes.

Ron has never supported Johnson. don't know what this guy is talking about

phill4paul
11-02-2016, 07:48 PM
But there are other nonprofits, like the Clinton Foundation, that do nothing but enrich the Clintons, that are tax deductible. Those deductions are also taxpayer dollars. So basically, it's a big, fat money laundering operation at government expense.

What is this "government expense" you speak of?

euphemia
11-02-2016, 07:58 PM
How much would you consider it has cost us to maintain the Clintons in the style to which they aspire? How many millions of dollars of tax deductions have flowed through their nonprofits? It's a lot more than any hundred churches I know of that are actually serving people.

People should get a choice of how they spend or give their money. I don't choose to give a dime to the Libertarian Party when they put forth candidates that wouldn't know a Constitutional right or legitimate use of government if it came up and bit them on the nose. The point of the OP is that people should vote for Gary Johnson so he will reach 5% and the Libs will get matching funds. No way, no how, not at gunpoint. If the Libertarians want to participate in this process, let them raise their own (tax deductible) election money and follow the principles they claim to have.

Athan
11-02-2016, 09:41 PM
You have your names and/or years off. Johnson wasn't a candidate for anything in 2008 and I don't think RP recommended voting for him in 2012.

Your right. It was Barr, who I did vote for. Johnson was on 2012, and infact I did recall meeting him in Fort Worth during the Republican convention when he had a meeting in a bar. He spoke to us delegates surrounding him by a pool table. Either way that dude went off the deep end this year. This year the libertarian party convention went bonkers. I have no clue what the fuck happened.

TheTexan
11-02-2016, 09:54 PM
This year the libertarian party convention went bonkers. I have no clue what the fuck happened.

Thats what happens when you put a bunch of potheads all in the same room together.

r3volution 3.0
11-02-2016, 10:02 PM
The LP has two factions:

The Gary Johnson, middle of the road, 95% libertarian, try to look normal, try to win votes, try to grow the party faction.

And this..

https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/thumbnails/image/2016/05/29/23/liberation-party-strip.jpg

TheTexan
11-02-2016, 10:27 PM
This ain't a movie.

Turning down the funds could be a good way to highlight the public dollars funneled into the elections and two major parties.

It's a good thing that's not a movie, cus I would totally sleep through that movie if it were. Yawn...

specsaregood
11-02-2016, 10:36 PM
The LP has two factions:

The Gary Johnson, middle of the road, 95% libertarian, try to look normal, try to win votes, try to grow the party faction.


Which faction is the VP candidate part of? I'd rather vote for the mostly naked guy over that fuckface.

Danke
11-02-2016, 10:43 PM
The LP has two factions:

The Gary Johnson, middle of the road, 95% libertarian, try to look normal, try to win votes, try to grow the party faction.

And this..

https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/thumbnails/image/2016/05/29/23/liberation-party-strip.jpg

This would have been a better choice.

http://libertybuzz.us/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Cb9QboQWoAUqJ77.jpg

heavenlyboy34
11-02-2016, 10:51 PM
I remember the 90s quite fondly. It was a brief time of reprieve, between our time of constant fear of the existential threat of nuclear annihilation, and our time of constant fear of Islamic terrorism.
There were plenty of jobs, gas was cheap, regulations were more lenient than today, cops stuck to beating up undesirables.
Plenty of pot to go around.
Overall attitude was postive.

When I apply the same purity test to Clintons as some do for Johnson, I find it difficult to hate on Hillary.
Gas is still cheap-you're just paying for it with debased currency. ;) :(

GunnyFreedom
11-03-2016, 08:37 AM
The LP has two factions:

The Gary Johnson, middle of the road, 95% libertarian, try to look normal, try to win votes, try to grow the party faction.

And this..

Really? Really?

The only way someone is allowed to be a libertarian, in r3volution universe, is either Gary Johnson or fat naked guy?

There is NO OTHER WAY to be a libertarian, besides Gary Johnson and fat naked guy?

This is seriously what you are arguing now?


https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/thumbnails/image/2016/05/29/23/liberation-party-strip.jpg

Carlybee
11-03-2016, 08:41 AM
The L party is nutso. We need an "l" party. But if it's a true "l", there can be no party.

euphemia
11-03-2016, 08:41 AM
I think most true libertarians are not members of the Libertarian Party. Just my opinion, but there you go. The Libertarian Party has a lot of agenda driven libertines in it, including Johnson. The cause of Liberty will not be served by a windfall of my hard earned tax dollars.

Occam's Banana
11-03-2016, 08:54 AM
The LP has two factions:

The Gary Johnson, middle of the road, 95% libertarian, try to look normal, try to win votes, try to grow the party faction.

And this..

https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/thumbnails/image/2016/05/29/23/liberation-party-strip.jpg

Well, at least that guy's 50% libertarian.

And if he was smoking pot, he'd be 100% ...

euphemia
11-03-2016, 09:56 AM
A true libertarian believes in the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of property, the Bill of Rights, the limited enumerated powers of government, and does not put his own personal spin or use the cause of liberty to advance his own personal agenda. Gary Johnson does not pass any kind of sniff test there. He does not believe in the most fundamental rights for Americans, and is nothing like a libertarian.

Carlybee
11-03-2016, 11:11 AM
A true libertarian believes in the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of property, the Bill of Rights, the limited enumerated powers of government, and does not put his own person spin or use the cause of liberty to advance his own personal agenda. Gary Johnson does not pass any kind of sniff test there. He does not believe in the most fundamental rights for Americans, and is nothing like a libertarian.

And the LP is complicit for continuing to nominate him and hold him up as the defacto rep.

FSP-Rebel
11-03-2016, 11:34 AM
Johnson/Weld's hi-5ing of Clinton has done nothing but drive the LP's poll numbers down. Active sabotage, inside job. Way to go!

Carlybee
11-03-2016, 04:07 PM
I propose the Wrangled Jello party

AdamL
11-03-2016, 08:02 PM
The LP has two factions:

The Gary Johnson, middle of the road, 95% libertarian, try to look normal, try to win votes, try to grow the party faction.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXhR41lsEJY

I, for one, appluad the Gary Johnson faction's efforts to grow the party by trying to win over the all-important lizard person demographic.

Gary Johnson 2016: Be Lizardtarian With Me!

Jesse James
11-03-2016, 09:04 PM
Who converted the most libertarians?

Most importantly, who converted the most anarcho capitalists?

Ron Paul or Gary Johnson?

case closed on which way works. Ron Paul wins for both awards

r3volution 3.0
11-07-2016, 07:08 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXhR41lsEJY

I, for one, appluad the Gary Johnson faction's efforts to grow the party by trying to win over the all-important lizard person demographic.

Gary Johnson 2016: Be Lizardtarian With Me!

I did say try...

...but yea, I appreciate Gary is not an ideal candidate, in any respect, but he'll do for the moment, for the task at hand.

jkob
11-08-2016, 02:35 PM
What difference does it make to get matching funds if the Libertarian Party isn't libertarian? They're not going to compete just by the nature of matching funds, that hasn't happened in the past and it won't in 2020. Johnson and Weld have given me absolutely zero reason to vote for them.

undergroundrr
11-08-2016, 02:57 PM
To become a major party, the LP is going to have to keep bringing forward candidates with positive name recognition and as much governing experience as possible. It would be great if one of these also believed in every plank of the platform, but not likely.

I really hope there can someday be enough liberty congressmen that an Amash or Massie can afford to shave off and run for pres on the LP ticket.

GunnyFreedom
11-08-2016, 03:12 PM
If I were the guy pulling switches, I would establish "The American [or State] Party for the Constitutional Republic" and in general speech refer to as "Constitutional Republicans." Gather every American that just wants a government to obey the Constitution. Start explicitly from the bottom up, run School Board, Municipal Board, County Commission. Elect enough of those for noise to be made and then run Mayors and Sheriffs. Elect enough of those for noise to be made and then run State Legislators and Senators. Elect enough of those to have an impact and then run Governor and Congress. Elect enough of those to have an impact and then run President. Guaranteed 30-year total victory for a constitution oriented Party, but when you are making your own luck this way sometimes things can happen very fast.

The American Party for the Constitutional Republic
The North Carolina Party for the Constitutional Republic

Bottom up. No Presidential rock star is going to come along and save the day.

We could totally do it and we could totally win, but is anybody really willing to start electing the school boards and then work their way up step by step stacking the bottom with Constitutional Republicans before moving up the food chain?