Gary Johnson 2016 over the hillaries(hillary/trump)!!Spread the websites far and wide

[Jamesiv1]

One time I'll let you do that. Once.

wtf? lol

[Thor]

No. I've been rather passive on the screwery. I thought the op was rather arrogant in his previous communication when he told those of us who support the primary fundamental principles of Individual Liberty to go away and just let him have a free pass to promote someone whose position is fundamentally contrary to it.

When preferable "activism" is accepted and understood to be actions that promote presidential candidates who hold positions that are patently contrary to the primary fundamental principles of Individual Liberty, yet in the name of Individual Liberty, then I think it's time for a reassessment of why we're here.

So we can sit and bitch and moan for another decade or 2... Johnson is not perfect. Far from it. But it is the best step we have in the right direction to reach the masses. If we can wake the masses to voting for a Libertarian, we can move more towards our principles. But "not pure enough NOW, so I will pout and tell anyone who is promoting him that he is bad" is a grand plan... It will really help advance Liberty. LOL I would like Johnson to be better on some issues too. But I want Johnson to actually win and help make libertarianism a household name and then slowly get more pure libertarians in offices locally and nationally off the coattails.

Hey, what is that light at the end of the tunnel? Quick, block it out...

Purists are defeatist who want to remain obscure. They like being in the corner bitching at the wall.

[Natural Citizen]

So we can sit and bitch and moan for another decade or 2... Johnson is not perfect. Far from it. But it is the best step we have in the right direction to reach the masses. If we can wake the masses to voting for a Libertarian, we can move more towards our principles. But "not pure enough NOW, so I will pout and tell anyone who is promoting him that he is bad" is a grand plan... It will really help advance Liberty. LOL I would like Johnson to be better on some issues too. But I want Johnson to actually win and help make libertarianism a household name and then slowly get more pure libertarians in offices locally and nationally off the coattails.

Hey, what is that light at the end of the tunnel? Quick, block it out...

Purists are defeatist who want to remain obscure. They like being in the corner bitching at the wall.

So, then, we should remain content to promote "Libertarianism" as a household name, except absent the primary fundamental principle of Individual Liberty itself - and we should promote the philosophy as a means of activism? And if we don't promote the philosophy, then, we're, as the op mentioned, not real activists? Because that's Johnsons' position. Have you thought his positions through all the way? Because some of them are patently contrary to the fundamental foundation of Individual Liberty. That's a big deal. Mainly, because as you mention, some friends want to encourage Libertarianism as a household name through him. Which means his philosophy. I'm sorry but he just ain't the one. He is patently not the one.

Now. Two things, though. 1 - I'm not a defeatist. I'm a realist. I try to take the time to consider exactly what the other guy is actually stimulating and 2 - sitting in the corner pouting is likely the very last thing I'll ever do. It's dangerous to your cause to assume that I would. I'm likely not the only one either. I was very clear to say that I oppose this specific brand of coercion. That means that I actively oppose it.

[Working Poor]

I wish Ron Pauls people would have gotten behind Rand Paul.

I do too but they didn't.

[speciallyblend]

No. I've been rather passive on the screwery. I thought the op was rather arrogant in his previous communication when he told those of us who support the primary fundamental principles of Individual Liberty to go away and just let him have a free pass to promote someone whose position is fundamentally contrary to it.

When preferable "activism" is accepted and understood to be actions that promote presidential candidates who hold positions that are patently contrary to the primary fundamental principles of Individual Liberty, yet in the name of Individual Liberty, then I think it's time for a reassessment of why we're here.

i never said go away unless you used baking cakes as a deal breaker but ok , it is obvious you are not here to help, so you made your point.

[speciallyblend]

I'll stay out of your thread but I want to respond to this. Gary Jonhnson holds a position that is contrary to the primary fundamental priciple of Individual Liberty. To promote Johnson in the name of Liberty is essentially bastardizing its fundamental principles.

Some people around here may endorse that kind of activism. I don't. And I'll actively oppose it whether it be here or any place else. And I couldn't care less what you or or anyone else thinks about it. You don't get the luxury of promoting someone in the name of Individual Liberty whose positions are contrary to it's primary fundamental principle just because you say you do. You don't. Not today. Not tomorrow. Not any day. The only way you'll continue to do so here without opposition is if people like me get banned for speaking in the name of the primary fundamental principle of Individual Liberty. So, I'm telling you this respectfully. My intention is not to further timulate the antagonistic position that you've taken. I'm simply telling you that you won't get a free pass to pass off a candidate in the name of Individual Liberty whose position is contrary to its most fundamental principles.

we get it, you wont support gary so , if you are not here to help gary beat trump or hillary. you can support whoever start your own thread and spend your money so far you have added nothing but cat meows to this thread. Gary johnson over the hillaries(trump/hillary)

[speciallyblend]

I do too but they didn't.

i was a ron paul person and i supported rand even though i opposed things he said,luckily baking cakes wasnt a deal breaker, i donated to rand did what i could.

[speciallyblend]

So we can sit and bitch and moan for another decade or 2... Johnson is not perfect. Far from it. But it is the best step we have in the right direction to reach the masses. If we can wake the masses to voting for a Libertarian, we can move more towards our principles. But "not pure enough NOW, so I will pout and tell anyone who is promoting him that he is bad" is a grand plan... It will really help advance Liberty. LOL I would like Johnson to be better on some issues too. But I want Johnson to actually win and help make libertarianism a household name and then slowly get more pure libertarians in offices locally and nationally off the coattails.

Hey, what is that light at the end of the tunnel? Quick, block it out...

Purists are defeatist who want to remain obscure. They like being in the corner bitching at the wall.

exactly, maybe if i throw some tuna over there these cats will go away

[Natural Citizen]

i never said go away unless you used baking cakes as a deal breaker but ok

The "baking cakes" issue, as you call it, is directly germane to the primary foundation that provides for the fundamental principles of Individual Liberty itself. It's THE one. The issue is far more critical and relevant than minimizing it to "baking cakes." And with consequences should it not be recognized as such.

[Thor]

So, then, we should remain content to promote "Libertarianism" as a household name, except absent the primary fundamental principle of Individual Liberty itself

Yes.

[speciallyblend]

once again if you are not here to help gary johnson 2016 win over trump/hillary. then stay way or go away, it is pretty simple. a few have 0 motives to help just whine about gary here. If you are not here to help gary, i can only assume you are here to help trump/hillary! or just not help at all.

[speciallyblend]

but it is not a reason to support trump and hillary and oppose gary. just stop go away say your piece somewhere else , you are not here to help gary beat trump or hillary. we get it you oppose gary and will not help over baked cakes, it is a deal breaker , you said your piece move on.

[Natural Citizen]

Originally Posted by Natural Citizen

So, then, we should remain content to promote "Libertarianism" as a household name, except absent the primary fundamental principle of Individual Liberty itself

Yes.

If that's what the site supports by way of providing a platform for its function, then, there is no reason I can see to stay here with you people. In fact, it demonstrates every reason why one would provide a service to Individual Liberty by separating from it and actively work against it.

To your credit, though, it does seem that way if omission is of any indication...



It's unfortunate.

[speciallyblend]

Wow. You guys are unbelievable. The framers would have hung yuns.

you are troll obviously you just cannot stfu, you have to say something but by your level $#@! rand paul to he is not perfect. you have some dream candidate go for it support them on another thread.

[speciallyblend]

If that's what the site supports, then, there is no reason see to stay here with you people. In fact, it demonstrates every reason why one would do well to separate and actively work against it.

you are not here to help gary, you are here to whine and help trump/hillary. please leave asking nicely you are not helping you know this. you said your piece repeatly over and over and over like a stray cat ,move along

[Natural Citizen]

you are troll obviously you just cannot stfu, you have to say something but by your level $#@! rand paul to he is not perfect. you have some dream candidate go for it support them on another thread.

No, I don't care about candidates. I care about the fundamental principles of Individual Liberty. I care about the primary foundation in which those fundamental principles are established. In fact, the only interest that I have with regard to Johnson is that he is being promoted as a candidate for Liberty. This is coercion of the highest magnitude. Again, his position is patently contrary to the primary foundation for the fundamental principles of Individual Liberty itself.

And there is no such thing as a troll. Consider taking your opposition more seriously. Because your opposition takes you seriously.

[Thor]

No, I don't care about candidates.

So get out of the Gary Johnson thread.

[Natural Citizen]

So get out of the Gary Johnson thread.

And provide a free pass for you people to bastardize the very foundation for the principles of Individual Liberty itself by promoting a cultural Marxist like Johnson as its difinitive entity in the household? His position is patently contrary to them. Nope. Not today. It wouldn't be very patriotic of me to just let you guys do that. The only way you guys won't have the inconvenience of having the truth mentioned about what you're stimulating here is if a mod steps in to run interference for what you're promoting..

[Thor]

And provide a free pass for you people to bastardize the very foundation for the principles of Individual Liberty itself by promoting a cultural Marxist like Johnson as its difinitive entity in the household? His position os patently contrary to them. Nope. Not today. It wouldn't be very patriotic of me to just let you guys do that. The only way you guys won't have the inconvenience of having the truth mentioned about what you're stimulating here is if a mod steps in to run interference for what you're promoting.

LOL. I do not want to help Liberty advance unless it is PURE liberty. STFU

[Natural Citizen]

LOL. I do not want to help Liberty advance unless it is PURE liberty. STFU

Pure? To be clear, what/who is being promoted here in the name of activism is a candidate whose position is patently contrary to the primary foundation for the principles of Individual Liberty itself. We're not talking about pure here. We're talking about the primary fundamentals. We're talking about the fundamental principles of Individual Liberty here. The nuts and bolts. Promoting a philosophy that is patently contrary to them is nothing to LOL about. It really isn't. I think it's rather disturbing that you disregard the principles to the extent that you LOL about them. I mean, that's a major naw naw.

[Thor]

Pure? To be clear, what/who is being promoting in the name of activism is a candidate whose position is patently contrary to the primary foundation for the principles of Individual Liberty itself. We're not talking about pure here. We're talking about the primary fundamentals. We're talking about the fundamental principles of Individual Liberty here. The nuts and bolts. Promoting a philosophy that is patently contrary to them is nothing to LOL about. It really isn't. I think it's rather disturbing that you disregard the principles to the extent that you LOL about them. I mean, that's a major naw naw.

Versus pouting in the corner and waiting another 4 years to wake Americans up... Thanks, but I will go with the small step in the right direction instead of shooting myself in the foot to wait for the right time to stand up. Ok, bye bye...

[Natural Citizen]

Ah well. I'm going to go weed my flower beds.

Just don't forget relevant priorities is all I'm saying. I get that people are upset because we've lost elections in the past. I do. I understand that people want to contribute. They want to feel like they're part of something. They want to feel significant. But I see no logical reason or benefit in trading the primary foundation for the principles of Individual Liberty for a label in an election that you're going to lose anyway. To say it's based on principle is bunk. If it is, then, it's premised upon the wrong principles given that the candidate's philosophy that you're endorsing in the name of Liberty (as a houshold name, no less) is patently contrary to the very foundation that establishes Individual Liberty.

Just know, though, that if you don't think things through, then, you may well end up selling yourself the very rope that you'll surely hang by. Be careful. Don't be misled by people who are content only to count their names. It is best to leave your mark. But it has to be the right mark. And a mark left for the right reasons. And one left on the more relevant and worthy field of battle.

You folks have a good day.

[Thor]

Ah well. I'm going to go weed my flower beds.

Just don't forget relevant priorities is all I'm saying. I get that people are upset because we've lost elections in the past. I do. I understand that eople want to contribute. They want to feel like they're part of something. They want to feel significant. But I see no logical reason or benefit in trading the primary foundation for the principles of Individual Liberty for a label in an election that you're going to lose anyway. To say it's based on principle is bunk. If it is, then, it's premised upon the wrong principles given that the candidate's philosophy that you're endorsing in the name of Liberty (as a houshold name, no less) is patently contrary to the very foundation that establishes Individual Liberty.

Just know, though, that if you don't think things through, then, you may well end up selling yourself the very rope that you'll surely hang by. Be careful. Don't be misled by people who are content only to count their names. It is best to leave your mark. But it has to be the right mark. And a mark left for the right reasons.

You folks have a good day.

It is a stepping stone in the right direction. Is it the shore of Liberty? Nope. But a stepping stone we should use to get to the shore of Liberty. Using your attitude, we will be pushing up daisies in your flower bed before we see any more Liberty in our Lifetime. And he does have a chance with all the Bern victims, Hillary haters and Trump adverse. I want to seize this first time ever opportunity to make some headway, instead of pacing on the short of despair waiting for the right ship or right stepping stone to appear. Good day as well.

[donnay]

Ah well. I'm going to go weed my flower beds.

Just don't forget relevant priorities is all I'm saying. I get that people are upset because we've lost elections in the past. I do. I understand that people want to contribute. They want to feel like they're part of something. They want to feel significant. But I see no logical reason or benefit in trading the primary foundation for the principles of Individual Liberty for a label in an election that you're going to lose anyway. To say it's based on principle is bunk. If it is, then, it's premised upon the wrong principles given that the candidate's philosophy that you're endorsing in the name of Liberty (as a houshold name, no less) is patently contrary to the very foundation that establishes Individual Liberty.

Just know, though, that if you don't think things through, then, you may well end up selling yourself the very rope that you'll surely hang by. Be careful. Don't be misled by people who are content only to count their names. It is best to leave your mark. But it has to be the right mark. And a mark left for the right reasons. And one left on the more relevant and worthy field of battle.

You folks have a good day.

Well said.

Johnson reminds me of Glenn Beck.

Besides Liberty doesn't come from a man.

[Suzanimal]

Ah well. I'm going to go weed my flower beds.

Just don't forget relevant priorities is all I'm saying. I get that people are upset because we've lost elections in the past. I do. I understand that people want to contribute. They want to feel like they're part of something. They want to feel significant. But I see no logical reason or benefit in trading the primary foundation for the principles of Individual Liberty for a label in an election that you're going to lose anyway. To say it's based on principle is bunk. If it is, then, it's premised upon the wrong principles given that the candidate's philosophy that you're endorsing in the name of Liberty (as a houshold name, no less) is patently contrary to the very foundation that establishes Individual Liberty.

Just know, though, that if you don't think things through, then, you may well end up selling yourself the very rope that you'll surely hang by. Be careful. Don't be misled by people who are content only to count their names. It is best to leave your mark. But it has to be the right mark. And a mark left for the right reasons. And one left on the more relevant and worthy field of battle.

You folks have a good day.

Well said.

Johnson reminds me of Glenn Beck.

Besides Liberty doesn't come from a man.

Indeed. Out of rep for NC.

[Working Poor]

No matter what I can't vote for Hillary or The Donald. I would rather stay home.

[speciallyblend]

we are now 2% from getting gary on the debate stage. spread these websites, www.trumphoon.com and www.hitlary.com, working on radio ads to run in denver and the co mtns, keep up the good work for anyone doing what they can to make change!! Gary can Win. Gary has to Win, WE ALL LOSE WITH hillary or trump(hillary with a phallus)!!!

[Thor]

Include Gary Johnson in national Presidential polls

https://www.change.org/p/cnn-include...idential-polls

The Commission on Presidential Debates determines whether or not a candidate can be included in the debates based on their performance in five selected national polls. In order to be included in the debates, a candidate must be polling at 15% nationwide. We, the undersigned, believe that Governor Gary Johnson, the Libertarian nominee for President has a chance to reach that threshold. A recent Fox News poll found Gov. Johnson to have 12% support nationwide and his mainstream media exposure in recent weeks has been unprecedented for a Libertarian Presidential candidate, which means that his support has likely grown. Paired with the fact that polls have consistently shown Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton to be among the most polarizing candidates in history, we believe that there is a real opportunity this year for a third-party candidate to make a difference. With the Libertarian Party being the only third party likely to appear on the ballot in all fifty states and the political experience of both Gov. Johnson and his running mate, Governor William Weld, we believe that they are the most likely to capitalize on this opportunity. We urge you to include Governor Johnson in your national polling and help give the American voter another option this November.

This petition will be delivered to:

• CNN
• Rasmussen Reports
• ABC
• CBS
• Washington Post
• NBC
• Wall Street Journal
• Douglas Schwartz, PhD - Quinnipiac University Poll
• Bridget Jameson - Pew Research Center
• USA Today

Over 40,000 signed.

[r3volution 3.0]

If Gary wins just one state, the world turns upside down.

Every stripe of libertarian should see advantage in breaking the two party duopoly, in destroying forever the "don't waste your vote" narrative.

We can go back to tearing each other to pieces after November 8, okay, but for now let's try winning, for once, shall we?

[Thor]

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-n...nap-story.html

Libertarian Gary Johnson looks to boost credibility, with a little help from Drew Carey



The email invitation for a Gary Johnson fundraiser hosted by comic Drew Carey called for a “Libertarian comfortable” dress code, which could have been cause for concern. After all, just two months ago, at the Libertarian Party convention, a portly man stripped down to his skivvies and danced onstage for two minutes, with C-SPAN cameras capturing every move.

But on Saturday night, in Carey’s Mediterranean-style villa, “Libertarian comfortable” meant mostly blazers, jeans and cocktail dresses. There were chi-chi appetizers and American flag-themed name badges and a sprinkling of famous faces.

It was an utterly normal political fundraiser, which may be exactly what Johnson needs to help power his utterly abnormal bid to win the White House as a third-party candidate.

The fundraiser marked a milestone of sorts for Johnson, who is striving to propel his candidacy, and his party, from the margins to the mainstream. When he last ran for president, in 2012, he certainly wasn’t standing in a well-known television personality’s backyard, eating vanilla ice cream and snapping photos with admirers.

“Nothing could compare,” he said. “Nothing.”

Libertarians sense enormous opportunity in this year of enormously unpopular major party candidates. But Johnson, a former GOP governor of New Mexico, remains far behind in name recognition and fundraising; it is far from clear if he’ll get the 15% in polls which would qualify him for the presidential debates in the fall.



Johnson’s second shot at the presidency has focused on building legitimacy with the broader electorate: tapping former Massachusetts Gov. William Weld as his running mate, tirelessly working the media circuit, and now, rubbing elbows with celebrities.

“You have to create this notion that you might actually win,” Johnson said. “For a sophisticated few at the moment, there is that recognition. I think that's going to get bigger as you go forward.”

The event’s cohost interjected: "Can we have a Hollywood moment? One of Drew's “Price is Right” models loves you and wants to say a quick hello."

There were several Hollywood moments. Krist Novoselic, the former bassist of Nirvana, made a detour to Los Angeles just for the event, flying into town on his private Piper Saratoga. The “Price is Right” model, Gwendolyn Osborne-Smith, brought her husband, former NBA player and commentator Kenny Smith, who explained he was open to hearing more about Libertarians thanks to his friendship with Carey, the game show’s host.

In all, about 145 people attended the shindig, which planners said would bring in about $100,000 for the campaign. Two founders of separate pro-Johnson super PACs also hobnobbed with the crowd, which including at least one Libertarian-leaning mega-donor, the tomato magnate Chris Rufer.

The courting of deep-pocketed donors may be crucial to Johnson’s chances. His campaign brought in less than $700,000 in June, according to filings with the Federal Election Commission.

Throughout the evening — as refreshments progressed from appetizer-sized chicken and waffles to a buffet of flank steak and roasted heirloom carrots to “homemade pudding shots” at the dessert bar — guests offered different takes on what kind of success the Johnson-Weld ticket could achieve this year.

“I think they can get elected,” said Novoselic. “Miracles happen. I was in a band in 1990. People didn't think that we were ever going to be No. 1 on the Billboard. And then mores change, things go viral.”

Carey, who described himself as politically unenthused until he discovered Libertarianism through Reason magazine, acknowledged that a Johnson victory may be a long shot. But, he said, even swinging the balance in once state might be enough to send a message.

“Then the very best scenario is that people quit treating this country as a two-party country,” he said “and they always include the Libertarian point of view in every single discussion.”



At a question-and-answer session, Johnson laid out that perspective: fiscally conservative, socially liberal, noninterventionist in foreign affairs.

Asked about Islamic State, he took a decidedly nonalarmist tone, asserting that the terrorist group had largely been contained geographically, although he acknowledged that the problem of the group inspiring “lone-wolf” attackers posed a thornier challenge. He vowed to slash taxes and pined for abolishing the IRS “if he could wave a magic wand.”

About the Supreme Court, he was unusually deferential to his vice-presidential pick, saying the judiciary would be Weld’s area of expertise.
Entirely absent were the quirkier queries that dominated the party’s convention, held in Florida, where diehard Libertarians debated the need for driver’s licenses or civil rights legislation.

“This is not like Orlando,” said Kerry Welsh, the event’s co-organizer, who expressed frustration with the party’s “out of the mainstream, wacko types.”
Idiosyncratic reputation aside, Welsh said Libertarianism is more in line with American political sensibilities now than when he first joined the party as a 19-year-old in 1978.

“My whole life, I've been used to people telling me, ‘Boy, Kerry, you have some really crazy views,’” Welsh said, citing his support for legalizing marijuana and same-sex marriage.

“Now my friends say, ‘Kerry, you are really making a lot more sense than you used to make,’” he added. “And I haven't changed a view on one thing in 35 years. So that's a lot of fun.”