Matt Kibbe / Balanced Rebellion Johnson ad goes VIRAL

[eleganz]

Good numbers and a really good reasonable point that Americans would appreciate.

100k views on the tube

250k shares on FB

Share the $#@! out of it.

[luctor-et-emergo]

Laughed my ass off. Helping to spread as I'm watching it for a second time.

[Mikezelot]

This is awesome!

[RJ Liberty]

Watched, liked, shared, posted, tweeted, emailed! This is a great, funny ad that spreads the word about how bad Clump are.

The ad's even made its way around the media, being the subject of articles on Red State, Washington Post, the San Diego Tribune, and other places. Most excellent.

[dean.engelhardt]

Good video. They have a method of matching unhappy (D)s with unhappy (R)s. To enter the site I had to answer; if Trump or Hilary were your only choices, who would you vote for? I didn't have an answer and closed the browser.

[RJ Liberty]

Good video. They have a method of matching unhappy (D)s with unhappy (R)s. To enter the site I had to answer; if Trump or Hilary were your only choices, who would you vote for? I didn't have an answer and closed the browser.

Yeah, BalancedRebellion will only work for people who have a preference between a $#@! sandwich and a giant douche.

[notsure]

No offense, but this sounds ridiculous. I don't think they'll be able to fool many people with this. People are either going to vote for Johnson or not. Matching me with a Democrat who will vote for Johnson just to help cancel out a pro-Hillary vote is ridiculous and counter-productive to defeating Hillary if that was my original intention of voting for Trump anyway. This just looks like another mechanism to generate an email list.

[notsure]

and if the only thing balancedrebellion has against Trump is the media's constant claims that he is a racist; then they don't really have anything on Trump at all. Calling a candidate racist is the oldest and most played out line of them all. We all know that if Rand was the nominee, they'd be calling him a racist too; just like they tried to do with his dad Ron.

[jllundqu]

It's a gimmick, but it's funny enough to go viral. I tweeted it. I suspect it will have an impact, albeit slight.

I'm not voting for GJ, but I do hope he makes the debates...

[eleganz]

No offense, but this sounds ridiculous. I don't think they'll be able to fool many people with this. People are either going to vote for Johnson or not. Matching me with a Democrat who will vote for Johnson just to help cancel out a pro-Hillary vote is ridiculous and counter-productive to defeating Hillary if that was my original intention of voting for Trump anyway. This just looks like another mechanism to generate an email list.

Not exactly sure about the efficacy on the grand scale but you don't really have a clear understanding of how exactly a lot of these voters are thinking. The video makes an important point that a lot of these people are A) voting against the other person and B) voting third party is a wasted vote, giving some good argument as to why A and B are no long important.

Kibbe is going for 100M reach and has already put 100K in ad spend for this video.

Already 30k people pledged their vote in the few days this has been up and I haven't been asked for my email yet.

[Mike4Freedom]

My favorite part was the: Building a 20 billion dollar wall in case if mexico does not know what ladders are. HAHAH. I was laughing loud at that one.
This is seriously a good idea though.

[Keith and stuff]

This is a really interesting new political technology. Not saying that I'm voting for Johnson, but this is the best new political technology I've heard of all cycle. It is even better than Liberty Ballot, my favorite new technology from the last cycle.

[RJ Liberty]

My favorite part was the: Building a 20 billion dollar wall in case if mexico does not know what ladders are. HAHAH. I was laughing loud at that one.

Me too! That was great... and, sadly, accurate. Does anyone believe a wall will do much when we already have a wall along long portions of the border?

[RJ Liberty]

This is a really interesting new political technology. Not saying that I'm voting for Johnson, but this is the best new political technology I've heard of all cycle. It is even better than Liberty Ballot, my favorite new technology from the last cycle.

They need something like that for other states, too.

[BamaAla]

The correct play is to sign up and vote for Trump anyway thereby stealing a vote from Hillary. Only one problem, that Hillary match is probably doing the same thing. Drat

[Murray N Rothbard]

Using Abraham Lincoln to advertise for libertarians is just a ridiculous sham.

[JohnM]

Using Abraham Lincoln to advertise for libertarians is just a ridiculous sham.

Lincoln was a very odd choice. The two lines that jumped out at me were:

"Splitting the nation in two - but what do I know about that."

"Trump and Hillary are both pro-war."

Coming from the guy who split the nation in two and started a disastrous war, I wondered whether this was intentional irony.

I found the ad creepy.

And then the line about "not try to tell you how to practice your religion" - this, about the guy who said that freedom of religion was a black hole - by which he clearly meant that the government can tell you how to practice your religion.

[helmuth_hubener]

Me too! That was great... and, sadly, accurate. Does anyone believe a wall will do much when we already have a wall along long portions of the border?

It does seem to be a very proven concept, over thousands of years of human history. Few human inventions have been used as often, as thoroughly, and as long, as the wall. It exceeds the wheel, for example, on all these counts by ten to a hundred times.

Walls are proven technology. (It is bizarre that anyone would have to point this out.)

[Keith and stuff]

They need something like that for other states, too.

Agreed. The only thing close to it that I've seen is the RLCNH using it this cycle to target RINO state reps. in primaries. I guess the RLCNH also likes it
http://rlcnh.org/nh/sample-ballots/

[RJ Liberty]

It does seem to be a very proven concept, over thousands of years of human history. Few human inventions have been used as often, as thoroughly, and as long, as the wall. It exceeds the wheel, for example, on all these counts by ten to a hundred times.

Walls are proven technology. (It is bizarre that anyone would have to point this out.)

I live seven miles from the border with Mexico. While there is a big wall here, it doesn't keep illegals out. Your "proven technology" has been foiled by more advanced "technology": shovels, ladders, smugglers, etc. It's bizarre that anyone would have to point this out to you.

"This idea of building the China Wall on our southern border and making Mexico pay for it, I don't understand how people say 'that's a good idea,' and that's his rallying cry. I find that a little bit silly." --Ron Paul

[Nighthawkeye]

The great wall of china was also a failure and many chinese died in its crafting, but it ultimately failed at its intention. It was designed to keep northern barbarians out, and slow them from retreating with there plunder. I guess no one ever heard of the mongolian hoard, you know those northern barbarian invaders they tried to stop. Well the wall failed and mongolia was able to conquer all of china, and became one of the chinese dynasties. You don't see castles and walled cities being built like they did in ancient times because technology has overcome them, you know like ladders.

With a determined adversary to get to the other side, ones with unlimited time and ingenuity walls are an absolute waste and failure. The only way to slow the migration down is to remove that determination. Removing the drug war will remove the incentive profit in the drug trade one of the foreign groups you would like to keep out. And getting rid of government backed hand outs will remove the incentive for those immigrants that are looking just for the free stuff. The others I believe on a whole are a net benefit to the economy of the country, so I personally have no desire to try and keep them out.

On this issue I agree with Johnson's approach

[RJ Liberty]

The great wall of china was also a failure and many chinese died in its crafting, but it ultimately failed at its intention. It was designed to keep northern barbarians out, and slow them from retreating with there plunder. I guess no one ever heard of the mongolian hoard, you know those northern barbarian invaders they tried to stop. Well the wall failed and mongolia was able to conquer all of china, and became one of the chinese dynasties. You don't see castles and walled cities being built like they did in ancient times because technology has overcome them, you know like ladders.

Yep. Walls alone do little good to keep out invasions. Walls are much more effective when there are armed guards with a 'shoot to kill' policy. This is why the Berlin Wall worked for as long as it did, though you'll notice there's no Berlin Wall today. Who is advocating for armed guards and a 'shoot to kill' policy?

With a determined adversary to get to the other side, ones with unlimited time and ingenuity walls are an absolute waste and failure. The only way to slow the migration down is to remove that determination. Removing the drug war will remove the incentive profit in the drug trade one of the foreign groups you would like to keep out. And getting rid of government backed hand outs will remove the incentive for those immigrants that are looking just for the free stuff. The others I believe on a whole are a net benefit to the economy of the country, so I personally have no desire to try and keep them out.

On this issue I agree with Johnson's approach

Excellent points: eliminating government handouts will go much further in reducing the taxpayer burden of supporting non-native citizens. Then there's no impetus to come, no reason to break through already existing walls.

[silverhandorder]

Lol he called Trump a racist uncle while he is getting service in a black church. The amount of applause for Trump must really piss off haters.

[Foreigner]

Lol he called Trump a racist uncle while he is getting service in a black church. The amount of applause for Trump must really piss off haters.

Yes, Trump get's universal acclaim! No wonder he's at 80% in the polls. Everyone loves him, except mexican drug dealers and haters who are jealous of his intellect.

[silverhandorder]

Yes, Trump get's universal acclaim! No wonder he's at 80% in the polls. Everyone loves him, except mexican drug dealers and haters who are jealous of his intellect.

U got that right.

[surf]

Your "proven technology" has been foiled by more advanced "technology": shovels, ladders, smugglers, etc.

thread winner

[helmuth_hubener]

Your claim was that walls inevitably "don't do much," and you furthermore expressed amazement that anyone would think they could.

The experience of Hungary, Slovenia, Austria, Macedonia, Israel, Malta (Valleta and Mdina); Jericho, Masala, Krujë, Constantinople, Carcassonne; Stonewall Jackson, George Washington, Charlemagne, Nehemiah, Douglas McArthur... in short, every post-Neolithic country that has ever existed, every city that was ever built, and every general who ever lived, all are available to you to ask in case you have any lingering doubts as to the efficacy of walls.

I am simply replying to and refuting the words you literally wrote. Your extreme aversion to a certain candidate and to a certain policy proposal seems to have goaded you into making sweeping and unsupportable statements. That, however, is not a way to discredit the idea you dislike -- rather, it is a way to discredit yourself. Walls work. Physical barriers have always and do continue to effectively impede human movement, due to the continuing persistence of those annoyances we call "physical laws of science".

The wisdom of building any particular wall certainly may with all prudence be called into question. Not every wall that theoretically could be built should be built. This is the sensible terrain of debate -- to instead disparage all walls as stupid; hapless tools of fools, well, it makes you yourself look like the fool. Guarded walls do effectively impede humans, but if the incentive is high enough some will continue to try to breach the barrier, and some will probably succeed. Despite a wall some East Germans were able to escape into West Germany over the decades of partition. Not many, but a few. So if your goal is 100% effectiveness rather than satisfaction with 99%, incentives must also be addressed (that is: eliminated).

[juleswin]

I have to say something to this idea that walls dont work/they are ineffective. They wont completely prevent the flow of illegal immigrants coming to the country. But they are still very effective in stopping the movement of people. They are not 100% effective but they do enough to accomplish their goal.

This is the reason why people like Ron warn about walls keeping people in. Just like how you dont dismiss using umbrellas during the rain because your boots are still wet when using it, walls cannot be dismissed as ineffective because of ladders and underground tunnels etc.

The thing about walls and other barriers like rivers and mountains is that they create a bottle neck in the process that smugglers have to overcome to reach their destination. All the border patrol has to do is stand outside the bottle neck exit and catch them.

Walls do work which is why immigration allies dont like it.

[helmuth_hubener]

A wall plastered with these signs, for example, would tend to somewhat undermine its own effectiveness.

[juleswin]

A wall plastered with these signs, for example, would tend to somewhat undermine its own effectiveness.

Lol, not unless the signs were written in Spanish. If anything, it would have a slightly opposite effect because the mostly Spanish speaking immigrants crossing the southern border would view it as a warning sign to turn back..

This is what happens when idiots make signs for the American audience masquerading as DNC signs welcoming illegal immigrants.