Gary Johnson 2016

Anyone have a good reason for why Libertarians and the Green Party don't run and promote any Congressional nominees? I feel like shooting for the Presidency is a tall, tall task. Is it due to funding or is it just trying to raise awareness?

"BAKE THE FUCKING NAZI CAKE"

-Gary Johnson

Bernie Sanders is a fake


that feel the Burn shit was all bullshit

he should have endorsed Gary Johnson and give the Bernie supporters to him not that skank hilary

TheFlyingJewBernie Sanders is a fake


that feel the Burn shit was all bullshit

he should have endorsed Gary Johnson and give the Bernie supporters to him not that skank hilary

Idk if this is a troll or not but I'll bite.

First and foremost, Gary Johnson won't be elected.

Endorsing him would pretty much guarantee a Trump victory. That being his worst fear, his obvious best move is to endorse Hillary, who shares 90% of his political ideologies anyway.

Libertarians are fiscally conservative and anti-big gov't. Bernie is the polar opposite of that. He'd be an idiot to endorse someone who he hardly agrees with just to avoid endorsing Hillary.

TheFlyingJewhe should have endorsed Gary Johnson and give the Bernie supporters to him not that skank hilary

Bernie favors more federal involvement, Gary favors less federal involvement- the two are ideologically opposed to one another. I don't see how the majority of Bernie's plans would even be possible within the function/role of Gary's government. At least with Hillary, Bernie's plans are at least possible (yet highly improbable) within the function/role of Hillary's government because her idea of the role of the federal government at least allows for his plans to exist.

Do y'all honestly think that any candidate has a solid political platform and established ideologies? If you do you are nuts. All these so called pseudo candidates will say anything to get a fucking vote. People go out and vote for Gary, get him the 15 percent he needs to allow him to participate in the debates, and let's just see what happens. Its not about taking votes away from anyone, you don't vote for a candidate because the other candidates are worse. You vote for whatever candidate you think will do the best job. Cut the bullshit ppl.

Listen to this hipster bitch brag about his personal accomplishments. He's just another self-inflated tree hugger (like 50% of NS users).
https://www.newschoolers.com/videos/watch/834081/RWW-News--Gary-Johnson-Is-Running-For-President-By-Listing-His-Athletic-Exploits

TheFlyingJewDo y'all honestly think that any candidate has a solid political platform and established ideologies? If you do you are nuts. All these so called pseudo candidates will say anything to get a fucking vote. People go out and vote for Gary, get him the 15 percent he needs to allow him to participate in the debates, and let's just see what happens. Its not about taking votes away from anyone, you don't vote for a candidate because the other candidates are worse. You vote for whatever candidate you think will do the best job. Cut the bullshit ppl.

I think Bernie is honest about what he says because he's been saying the same thing for over 30 years. If he's simply saying things to get a vote, it's been one hell of an unpopular act for 30 years that's just now getting traction.

I said this in another thread, but here is a great quote from an interesting article: http://qz.com/717255/ethicists-say-voting-with-your-heart-without-a-care-about-the-consequences-is-actually-immoral/

“The purpose of voting is not to express your fidelity to a worldview. It’s not to wave a flag or paint your face in team colors; it’s to produce outcomes,” says Jason Brennan, a philosopher at Georgetown University and author of The Ethics of Voting. “If they’re smart, they’ll vote for the candidate likely to best produce the outcome they want. That might very well be compromising, but if voting for a far-left or far-right candidate means that you’re just going to lose the election, then you’ve brought the world further away from justice rather than closer to it.”

In 2000, when many of us old farts got to vote for the first time, we voted for our ideal candidate (Nader) and it actually screwed us all over big time and we (us, the USA, the world) got stuck with G.W. Bush, one of the worst Presidents in American history. We can't afford to make the same mistake in 2016, with Trump who will without a doubt be worse than Bush. We need to get all efforts concentrated to ensure his defeat, because historically, this type of leader is always a very bad thing.

The lesser of two evils is never a good spot to be in. But when we are in that scenario, like now, we need to make sure we bring the world closer to justice rather than vote for an ideal candidate who will simply increase the chances of the worst option actually becoming a reality. Avoid the worse option now, and make plans for the best candidate in 2020.

TheFlyingJewDo y'all honestly think that any candidate has a solid political platform and established ideologies? If you do you are nuts. All these so called pseudo candidates will say anything to get a fucking vote. People go out and vote for Gary, get him the 15 percent he needs to allow him to participate in the debates, and let's just see what happens. Its not about taking votes away from anyone, you don't vote for a candidate because the other candidates are worse. You vote for whatever candidate you think will do the best job. Cut the bullshit ppl.

What do you mean by pseudo candidates? While I agree that sometimes certain people will say anything to get a vote, you're failing to grasp the point that elections always have been and probably always will be a lesser of two evils type situation. If a liberal leaning person goes out and votes for Johnson, that is effectively a vote for Trump. It is absolutely taking away a vote from a candidate who has a legitimate chance of winning, this isn't an underdog rising up and winning kind of thing.

Still disagree? Here are some names you might recognize:

Ross Perot
Ralph Nader
George Wallace

Google "spoiler candidates" if you want more examples.

This is not to say that 3rd parties are useless as they can have an affect on the major parties by slightly swaying their platforms to secure the votes of the 3rd party, but by claiming that people should vote purely for whomever they think is the most fit candidate is misguided.

yo dont you

dont u lecture me on third party candidates


whats going on right now is that ppl r saying you better shut the fuck up about hillary or trump will get in

institutional corruption has spoiled politics and there is absolutely zero integrity

guess what? there are ppl out there that are not going to accept the two assholes running for office and ppl are going to fight it

look we are not going to just write off this election and say hey well we got two shit candidates to choose from so which one is worse? NO thats bullshit

Gary has hepes

TheFlyingJewguess what? there are ppl out there that are not going to accept the two assholes running for office and ppl are going to fight it

look we are not going to just write off this election and say hey well we got two shit candidates to choose from so which one is worse? NO thats bullshit

Which is exactly what was said in 2000. Looking back, Gore would have most likely been a far better option than what we ended up with. This is very much the same story, if not worse, with Hillary and Trump.

Voting and politics in general is about making pragmatic & practical decisions, not ideal ones. Given the amount of human suffering that Trump will undoubtedly cause by forcing all illegal immigrants out of the country, his clearly racist & bigoted strategies, etc. there should be no doubt as to what we should prevent from happening in 2016.

In regards to 2020, I'm all ears and open to any arguments to further a more just and better society & government.

The Libertarian and Green parties need to start running folks for State Legislatures, and Congress if they want to gain a solid legitimacy. Start there and build a decent sized minority party that can force a major party into a coalition or at least some consignment IOT get laws passed. Going straight for the Presidency is just silly, and by not running in a primary they loose the opportunity to shape policy of the eventual POTUS.

All that aside, this year IS significantly different. Both major canidates are dispised by over half the country, if not outright hated. Donald Trump is watching much of his support on the right rapidly vaporize. Getting destroyed on policy in the first debate will likely toast him, since it will be for the whole country not just the GOP base of rural, under educated white poor and middle class workers. The intellectual side of conservatism has already abandoned him. As more and more of the right do abandon him it will be out of fear of his ineptitude, not lack of enthusiasm. They will be looking for another candidate. The big business side of the GOP coalition will likely find themselves in hildawgs camp. Those with more deep rooteted conservatism however may find themselves in the GJ camp. Combine that with the Bernie Bros who don't realize that GJ is fundamentally opposed to many of their ideas and just want an antiestablishment canidate, you could get a solid number of voters.

cobra_commanderCombine that with the Bernie Bros who don't realize that GJ is fundamentally opposed to many of their ideas and just want an antiestablishment canidate, you could get a solid number of voters.

I sort of a agree here. I think Bernie came off as more anti-big government than he actually was. He's anti-establishment, and I think that's a lot of what resonated with my generation.

At the simplest level I've heard: "Bernie thought we should legalize weed, Garry supports that too."

At this point I still think Hillary is gonna be our president, and while I am very far from happy about that, I think it's a little optimistic to really expect a third party victory.

Don't fucking vote for him unless he gets into the debates and polls ahead of Trump. Otherwise it's a vote for the orange dickweasel

ForcilloDon't fucking vote for him unless he gets into the debates and polls ahead of Trump. Otherwise it's a vote for the orange dickweasel

No it's not dumbfuck.

Voting for a 3rd party candidate is not a vote for Trump/Clinton

THEDIRTYBUBBLENo it's not dumbfuck.

Voting for a 3rd party candidate is not a vote for Trump/Clinton

Way more potential Hillary voters will go to Johnson than potential Trump supporters. What I'm saying is that if you vote for a third party that doesn't have a realistic shot of winning, you're hurting Hillary, not Trump.

.MASSHOLE.Anyone have a good reason for why Libertarians and the Green Party don't run and promote any Congressional nominees? I feel like shooting for the Presidency is a tall, tall task. Is it due to funding or is it just trying to raise awareness?

I think they do its just kind of the catch 22 of raising a lot of money for a campaign would fly in the face of everything they stand for. It's like that feeling when your favorite indie band starts selling out arenas... Fuck

ForcilloWay more potential Hillary voters will go to Johnson than potential Trump supporters. What I'm saying is that if you vote for a third party that doesn't have a realistic shot of winning, you're hurting Hillary, not Trump.

The staunch conservatives are saying the exact same thing, except with the names flipped around.

THEDIRTYBUBBLEVoting for a 3rd party candidate is not a vote for Trump/Clinton

Until there are "established" 3rd and 4th parties, then unfortunately that is the case. They don't have any realistic chance of currently winning but they do have a realistic (and historically proven) chance of pulling votes from and weakening their main party. When they weaken their main party, it becomes much easier for the opposition to win. It would be awesome to have 4 or 5 parties in the government, but that won't happen because of a Presidential election. As Cobra said, they need to get into the state legislature and Congress and grow their support.

ForcilloWay more potential Hillary voters will go to Johnson than potential Trump supporters. What I'm saying is that if you vote for a third party that doesn't have a realistic shot of winning, you're hurting Hillary, not Trump.

As even the GOP shows, there are many Republicans who are not supporting Trump. These are mainly the well read and well educated conservatives, not the retarded rednecks, and they are absolutely repulsed by Trump and (so far) will not vote for him. Instead, they are going to vote for Johnson since he much more closely resembles their ideals than Hillary. I think (and hope) there could be enough of these people to at least weaken Trump's chances of winning, much like Nader did to Gore in 2000.

onenerdykidUntil there are "established" 3rd and 4th parties, then unfortunately that is the case. They don't have any realistic chance of currently winning but they do have a realistic (and historically proven) chance of pulling votes from and weakening their main party. When they weaken their main party, it becomes much easier for the opposition to win. It would be awesome to have 4 or 5 parties in the government, but that won't happen because of a Presidential election. As Cobra said, they need to get into the state legislature and Congress and grow their support.



As even the GOP shows, there are many Republicans who are not supporting Trump. These are mainly the well read and well educated conservatives, not the retarded rednecks, and they are absolutely repulsed by Trump and (so far) will not vote for him. Instead, they are going to vote for Johnson since he much more closely resembles their ideals than Hillary. I think (and hope) there could be enough of these people to at least weaken Trump's chances of winning, much like Nader did to Gore in 2000.

I think it's also worth mentioning that if Johnson gets 5% of the votes, the Libertarian party will receive federal funding.

THEDIRTYBUBBLEI think it's also worth mentioning that if Johnson gets 5% of the votes, the Libertarian party will receive federal funding.

And this, right here, is why you should vote for him if you are not in a swing state.

Libertarians are just republicans that smoke pot and get laid. Your not going to get third+ parties in there until baby boomers move on.