At least tell the pollsters

[jbauer]

So I know not all of you are going to vote for Johnson. There's things I don't agree with on him either.

BUT if polled by any number of the pollsters would you please tell them that you're voting for him??!!??

This is about the best chance in the history of the liberitarian party to get into the debates. If the party can't get in this year I'm not sure what else it'll take.

[helmuth_hubener]

Why would I want a fake, big-government weasel up on the debate stage, claiming to be a libertarian?

No thanks. Not interested.

[Lovecraftian4Paul]

Yeah, so far there's zero reason to think this won't just be like other election cycles, where every third party combined tops out at 1-3%. They always poll better early on and then sink like rocks as the reality of the General Election sets in. I'd say the Nader 2000 spoiler argument ruined third party politics in the US for at least a generation or two. Unless someone with huge name recognition and deep pockets ever runs, it isn't going to happen. I've put my money where my mouth is and bet on PredictIt that there will not be a third party candidate in any Presidential debate this year. Johnson isn't going to come anywhere close to polling 15% in a couple months.

[Ronin Truth]

The pollsters all gave up on asking my opinions about anything decades ago.

[helmuth_hubener]

Yeah, so far there's zero reason to think this won't just be like other election cycles, where every third party combined tops out at 1-3%.

I think there is a reason. Whenever there's a Middle-American in the race, it messes up the dynamic. There are some people who just can't stomach that philosophy: the Rockefeller-Romney types. Two Middle-American candidates ago, John Anderson got 7%.

So... the potential is there.

[nasaal]

Never been polled that I remember.

[jbauer]

Never been polled that I remember.

me neither but someone's gotta get asked and at some point we need to shake up the 2 party system.

[GunnyFreedom]

At least tell the pollsters so that we can get a statist authoritarian clown into a debate, to make libertarianism look stupid to the entire planet?


Why on Earth would I want to make people hate and revile libertarianism?

[Ronin Truth]

me neither but someone's gotta get asked and at some point we need to shake up the 2 party system.

Not voting for them anymore is pretty likely to eventually shake them up.

What was the last national election that the non-voters weren't the majority?

[GunnyFreedom]

Not voting for them anymore is pretty likely to eventually shake them up.

I'm voting for "Giant Meteor" this year.

[r3volution 3.0]

Well said OP.

At least tell the pollsters so that we can get a statist authoritarian clown into a debate, to make libertarianism look stupid to the entire planet?

Why on Earth would I want to make people hate and revile libertarianism?

You obviously aren't a (mod edit)

[andy2044]

I'm sorry, unlike Governor Johnson, I don't lie about what I support in order to advance my agenda.

[GunnyFreedom]

Well said OP.



You obviously aren't a (mod edit)

LOL Despite my opposition to labels, I'm clearly more 'libertarian' than you are if you support this statist authoritarian pig Johnson.

[r3volution 3.0]

LOL Despite my opposition to labels

Translation: My ideas are confused.

I'm clearly more 'libertarian' than you are if you support this statist authoritarian pig Johnson.

You are entirely (mod edit)

[GunnyFreedom]

Translation: My ideas are confused.

Yes, your ideas are desperately confused. You whine about principle and integrity when talking to Trump supporters, and then go full batship Trumpaloompa when someone brings up Johnson. This would seem to indicate significant confusion in your ideation.

You are entirely (mod edit)

Yes, behavior quite typical of (mod edit)

[nasaal]

Translation: My ideas are confused.





You are entirely (mod edit)

Bit further than necessary, don't you think? The guy differs in his view. That's all. No need to go personal

[r3volution 3.0]

Yes, your ideas are desperately confused. You whine about principle and integrity when talking to Trump supporters, and then go full batship Trumpaloompa when someone brings up Johnson. This would seem to indicate significant confusion in your ideation.

When dealing with **********s, I point out that Trump has radically anti-libertarian positions on every issue.

When speaking about Johnson (a new endeavor...), I point out that he has solidly libertarian positions on almost every issue.

...not seeing the connection.

...unless the commonality you mean to identify is me telling the truth.

^^couldn't even find your own meme?

Now I know you (mod edit)

Yes, behavior quite typical of (mod edit).

....uh huh....

[r3volution 3.0]

Bit further than necessary, don't you think? The guy differs in his view. That's all. No need to go personal

There are considerations to which you are not privy.

[GunnyFreedom]

When dealing with **********s, I point out that Trump has radically anti-libertarian positions on every issue.

And I have pointed out exhaustively where Johnson is antilberty on the most important issue in America today. Only you attempt to salve your conscience by calling that "dodging," and "equivocation." Which tells us more that you have no idea what those words actually mean, than it says anything about the objections I have listed. In other words, you see what you want to just as bad as the Trumpaloompas. You project your narrow perspective onto others just as bad as the Trumpaloompas.

When speaking about Johnson (a new endeavor...), I point out that he has solidly libertarian positions on almost every issue.

Only on the shyt YOU like.

And your arguments for Johnson party loyalty being different from Trump party loyalty just reveal you to be a flaming hypocrite.

...not seeing the connection.

Well, that may be the first honest thing you've said over the course of this entire multithread discussion.

...unless the commonality you mean to identify is me telling the truth.

Are you hearing voices now? Is that what's behind your irrational behavior?

^^couldn't even find your own meme?

Didn't need to. My recycling yours highlights the problems that you are currently having with projection.

Now I know you serviced Nixon for money..



....uh huh....

How is this absurd behavior not exactly like the Trumpaloompas you claim to hate?

[GunnyFreedom]

Bit further than necessary, don't you think? The guy differs in his view. That's all. No need to go personal

There are considerations to which you are not privy.

Apparently he thinks he's better than you, too.

[r3volution 3.0]

Presented without further comment:

And you do not believe that, on balance, Gary Johnson's policy positions represent a shift toward constitutional government?

A few of his many positions which represent a dramatic shift toward constitutional government:

• Abolishing the Fed
• Cutting federal spending (which is almost exclusively on unconstitutional programs) by 43%
• Repealing the PATRIOT Act

Which of his unconstitutional proposals (gay cakes?) are so egregious that they outweigh the above, for a net move away from the constitution?

None of which outweigh his desire to make morality a federal mandate.

Just to be clear: You think that the federal government forcing businesses to serve gays is worse than the Fed, the PATRIOT Act, and 43% of all federal programs combined? You'd rather prevent the former than abolish the latter?

You keep trying to pervert my position into the little box you have selected for me in your head.

Honesty?

...what's that?

[GunnyFreedom]

Presented without further comment:



Honesty?

...what's that?

Knowing what you do not know is the first step. Good job!

[GunnyFreedom]

I notice how you stripped back the context again to make the whole thing about cookies and gay sex. lmao Obsess much?

[r3volution 3.0]

Knowing what you do not know is the first step. Good job!

^^^those are words

[GunnyFreedom]

^^^those are words

My, they do grow up fast.

[GunnyFreedom]

Cookies and Gay Sex

[r3volution 3.0]

I notice how you stripped back the context again to make the whole thing about cookies and gay sex. lmao Obsess much?

How amusing...

You raised Gary's unlibertarian position on applying the CRA to "sexual orientation," vis a vis cakes for *****.

It is you who thinks this is an important issue.

My repeated references to "gay cakes," or whatever other dismissive phrase, is intended to express my utter contempt for this stupid bull$#@!.

Tell me about how some ***** baked a cake while the federal government is stealing a third of my income every $#@!ing year.

You $#@!ing poof.

[GunnyFreedom]

How amusing...

You raised Gary's unlibertarian position on applying the CRA to "sexual orientation," vis a vis cakes for *****.

It is you who thinks this is an important issue.

My repeated references to "gay cakes," or whatever other dismissive phrase, is intended to express my utter contempt for this stupid bull$#@!.

Tell me about how some ***** baked a cake while the federal government is stealing a third of my income every $#@!ing year.

I have never once brought up sexual orientation or anything. AGAIN that is all in your head

I care about the balance of federal and state power. full stop.

You sir, appear to have gay on the brain.

[r3volution 3.0]

I have never once brought up sexual orientation or anything. AGAIN that is all in your head

....

Like holding a gun to state's heads and making them obey his own private but now federalized version of morality?

To what policy does that refer?

Does it not refer to forcing businesses to serve *****?

If not, then to what specifically does it refer?

P.S. Did you enjoy fellatiing Roger Stone?

[GunnyFreedom]

....



To what policy does that refer?

Gary Johnson said a Jewish baker should be forced to make a nazi cake.

Does it not refer to forcing businesses to serve *****?

I do not know what ***** means, but it does refer to forcing businesses to serve Nazis.

If not, then to what specifically does it refer?

This is even further federal socal meddling than we already have.

Johnson is the dead opposite of libertarian.

If you are going to hold a gun to someone's head and make them do something, then you need to be in jail, not the White House.

Representing the LP with his rebranded version of big-gov collectivism will do nothing to expand the message of liberty.