I thought about this all evening. Honestly, when he said he thought Trump was better than 90% of the people he works with, I had to respect that. He's right there in the belly of the beast. He knows the players far better than we ever will. We don't have to agree with him, but we are well served to respect his thoughts on the matter.
My husband is thinking seriously of voting Trump just because of this statement.
I brought up the CRA since Johnson supports at least parts of it, I thought that was what you getting after. I see philosophies and principles pretty much the same (strategic viewpoint), but policies are different, as they are tactical.
I agree with this 100%. Well stated. It is also principal in support of Man's life itself.
The agenda is put forth in the site's Mission:
Please let me know if you have any questions off of that.
The campaign evaluation system is a bit more complex than our Mission principles, since it recognizes the political challenges our movement has. A key issue that you seem to be hitting on is with the Civil Rights Act, to be certain, this legislation is in violation of the fundamental concepts you outline but conversely, attacking it is near political suicide. From a practical standpoint if we had a choice between a candidate that would further the welfare / warfare state vs one who would drive us to 100% liberty minus keeping the CRA, what do we do? Our lives would be 99.99% better with candidate #2, so some will choose to support them with an asterisk that the disagree with the CRA issue.
When evaluation candidate on the issue they get graded as follows:
Nowhere in the article did it say that Trump promised anything. Reading it, the campaign never offered to pay them for anything - just allow them to set up a table and sell merchandise. They, however, neglected to bring the table.
It sounds to me like the guy is a lousy businessman as well as a jerk. Life is a tough lesson. Just another case of Trump derangement syndrome. That thing that Sarah Palin does to drive some people insane? Trump has that same effect on other people, it seems.
I think before we can try to take over anything at a national level new leaders need to emerge. We are seriously lacking in well spoken accomplished individuals to bring libertarian philosphy to the national stage. Gary Johnson seems as good as it gets right now.
As much as I admire grassroots leaders and quirky activists they just don't have the chops to take things mainstream. We need charasmatic, trustworthy people with a long track record of success to carry the flag for us. Thomas Massie is a fairly good example. We need more people like him.
Great. The Neocons took over the Tea Party, and now they're coming for the Libertarian Party. Trying to find strong leaders with a philosophy of not wanting to run your life is perhaps an insurmountable paradox.
Remember when Ron Paul wanted us to take over the GOP from within? He wanted us to be positioned to take advantage of these opportunities. But most of us bailed a while ago.
"Your mother's dead, before long I'll be dead, and you...and your brother and your sister and all of her children, all of us dead, all of us..rotting in the ground. It's the family name that lives on. It's all that lives on. Not your personal glory, not your honor, but family." - Tywin Lannister