Feel The Johnson!

[dblack]

Someone wasted a lot of free time making shit up there. You and I have been over TPP and the FACT that the details are STILL TO THIS SECRET and that Johnson reasonably says he doesn't yet know the details

Which is why it should be rejected out-of-hand, on the general principle.

He MIGHT be pro-choice -- because we're pretty much pro-choice on EVERYTHING that isn't illegal or harmful to others. But Libertarians would likely not use govt funds for such a controversial practice. Being "pro" PParenthood, simply means you don't shut down a large sector of women's health services. YOU MIGHT want to look into the money laundered back to the DNC tho.. Since taxpayer funds should NOT be in a revolving racket for political advocacy..

Still a state issue and I know of no libertarian who believes that PP should be getting taxpayer any money.

And Weld's issue on gun control is 25 years old. 25 years ago -- I was a committed leftist reading Noah Chomsky for fun and enlightenment.

Which mitigates his positions on Iraq, the Patriot Act, and abuse of eminent domain in what way?

Who do you prefer instead?

 

[AnCap'n_Murica]

The ticket with the most governing experience is the Libertarian ticket. What does that tell you about the political environment?

That is one of the very few things those two squishy moderate republicans have going in their favor.

Even so, if one is going with that ticket with the idea that they're going to get a Ron Paul or even a Harry Browne, you're kidding yourself.

 

[AnCap'n_Murica]

Who do you prefer instead?

Nobody. I have a mean agorist streak, to go with my ancap proclivities.

 

[Toro]

The ticket with the most governing experience is the Libertarian ticket. What does that tell you about the political environment?

That is one of the very few things those two squishy moderate republicans have going in their favor.

Even so, if one is going with that ticket with the idea that they're going to get a Ron Paul or even a Harry Browne, you're kidding yourself.

And that's another reason to vote for them.

 

[dblack]

Who do you prefer instead?

Nobody. I have a mean agorist streak, to go with my ancap proclivities.

So hitlery it is...

Who are you hoping her SCOTUS appointees are?

In my view, Trump is the biggest driving force in getting Hillary elected. Unprincipled anger won't improve our government. In refusing to vote for Johnson, you're simply ensuring that Hillary gets elected.

 

[dblack]

Who do you prefer instead?

Nobody. I have a mean agorist streak, to go with my ancap proclivities.

So hitlery it is...

Who are you hoping her SCOTUS appointees are?

In my view, Trump is the biggest driving force in getting Hillary elected. Unprincipled anger won't improve our government. In refusing to vote for Johnson, you're simply ensuring that Hillary gets elected.

Hitlery owns you....

Not at all. I'm not falling for the lesser-of-two-evils extortion racket.

 

[AnCap'n_Murica]

And that's another reason to vote for them.

As republicans, yes. As libertarians, no.

Johnson and Weld are so far afield from principled libertarianism, that it can't even be said that those pointing this out are using the no true Scottsmen fallacy. When you're from China, it's abundantly clear that you're not a Scottsman in any way.

 

[dblack]

And that's another reason to vote for them.

As republicans, yes. As libertarians, no.

Johnson and Weld are so far afield from principled libertarianism, that it can't even be said that those pointing this out are using the no true Scottsmen fallacy. When you're from China, it's abundantly clear that you're not a Scottsman in any way.

Regardless, Johnson and Weld represent the best opportunity in my lifetime to move the nation toward libertarian values. I'm not going to pass it up.

 

[AnCap'n_Murica]

Regardless, Johnson and Weld represent the best opportunity in my lifetime to move the nation toward libertarian values. I'm not going to pass it up.

That's fair enough. I'm not here to argue anyone into giving up as I have.

But be mindful of getting your hopes up, that a couple of big government guys might somehow give you smaller government.

 

[Toro]

And that's another reason to vote for them.

As republicans, yes. As libertarians, no.

Johnson and Weld are so far afield from principled libertarianism, that it can't even be said that those pointing this out are using the no true Scottsmen fallacy. When you're from China, it's abundantly clear that you're not a Scottsman in any way.

My family is from Sterling, Ayr, Peterhead and Glasgow.

I also was an Objectivist in college.

And I don't care if they are principled libertarians.

 

[AnCap'n_Murica]

My family is from Sterling, Ayr, Peterhead and Glasgow

I wasn't speaking literally. It was in the context of the no true Scottsmen fallacy.

And I don't care if they are principled libertarians.

Your prerogative, your vote. If you're good with the unprincipled, that's your bag.

 

[flacaltenn]

Someone wasted a lot of free time making shit up there. You and I have been over TPP and the FACT that the details are STILL TO THIS SECRET and that Johnson reasonably says he doesn't yet know the details

Which is why it should be rejected out-of-hand, on the general principle.

He MIGHT be pro-choice -- because we're pretty much pro-choice on EVERYTHING that isn't illegal or harmful to others. But Libertarians would likely not use govt funds for such a controversial practice. Being "pro" PParenthood, simply means you don't shut down a large sector of women's health services. YOU MIGHT want to look into the money laundered back to the DNC tho.. Since taxpayer funds should NOT be in a revolving racket for political advocacy..

Still a state issue and I know of no libertarian who believes that PP should be getting taxpayer any money.

And Weld's issue on gun control is 25 years old. 25 years ago -- I was a committed leftist reading Noah Chomsky for fun and enlightenment.

Which mitigates his positions on Iraq, the Patriot Act, and abuse of eminent domain in what way?

Good questions actually. The fact that the Govt feels it NEEDS to make a trade agreement secret says that they are over-extending their authority to micro-manage that trade. BUT -- just to be ornery --- there COULD be justifications for putting the details under lock and key. .Like avoiding bubbles or crashes on the currency or stock markets due to speculation or fear.

Which is why Johnson has been very clear that based on what HE'S BEEN TOLD by folks with access to the details, he MIGHT support it. But even today OBAMA HIMSELF is distancing himself from TPP. So it's likely to die anyways.

As for planned parenthood -- There's a lot of existing funding for Women's health. Maybe too many duplicate programs and not enough actually "exam room" help. And what's obvious is that PP enjoys a "preferred status" and protection from the DNC for their political advocacy and money laundering. THAT part should end. It's a pragmatic view of PROBLEM SOLVING -- with an advised Libertarian bent that I'm after. NOT expecting miracles of automatic barn cleaning in a period of four years.

That "preferred status" WARPS the market for the numerous private clinics and providers that are there to supply women's services. It HURTS the market and picks winners based on political dogma.

And that's why I haven't gone over to the anarcho-capitalist side. Because my life and profession is about logic, reason and problem solving -- not emotion and academically "pure" expectations for what politicians are supposed to do..

 

[AnCap'n_Murica]

I'm ancap because no matter what politicians do it will be ineffective, because it begins and ends with aggression, not because I'm "purist".

If someone is concerned about that costs and availability of any product or service, let alone those dealing with women's health, subsidization is the surest way to make it more costly. Subsidies merely hide the higher costs they inevitably spawn behind visible beneficiaries.

 

[kaz]

No one in his right mind can vote for Trump. He is a fascist and an incompetent and borderline psychotic.
No one is his right mind can vote for Hillary. She is a criminal and a liar.
There is one ticket to vote this year. Libertarian. Is it perfect? No. I disagree strongly with many of their positions. But they get the basic problem right, the economy. And if we dont get that right nothing else matters.

I agree with you about the Libertarian party, but not Johnson

 

[The Rabbi]

No one in his right mind can vote for Trump. He is a fascist and an incompetent and borderline psychotic.
No one is his right mind can vote for Hillary. She is a criminal and a liar.
There is one ticket to vote this year. Libertarian. Is it perfect? No. I disagree strongly with many of their positions. But they get the basic problem right, the economy. And if we dont get that right nothing else matters.

I agree with you about the Libertarian party, but not Johnson

Another "Let's shoot ourselves in the foot because it isnt 100%" libertarian. They let the perfectbe the enemy of the good.

 

[Cecilie1200]

No one in his right mind can vote for Trump. He is a fascist and an incompetent and borderline psychotic.
No one is his right mind can vote for Hillary. She is a criminal and a liar.
There is one ticket to vote this year. Libertarian. Is it perfect? No. I disagree strongly with many of their positions. But they get the basic problem right, the economy. And if we dont get that right nothing else matters.

I think I heard one poll cited that had him in a statistical three-way dead heat with Trump and Clinton. I'll have to find that.

 

[kaz]

No one in his right mind can vote for Trump. He is a fascist and an incompetent and borderline psychotic.
No one is his right mind can vote for Hillary. She is a criminal and a liar.
There is one ticket to vote this year. Libertarian. Is it perfect? No. I disagree strongly with many of their positions. But they get the basic problem right, the economy. And if we dont get that right nothing else matters.

I agree with you about the Libertarian party, but not Johnson

Another "Let's shoot ourselves in the foot because it isnt 100%" libertarian. They let the perfectbe the enemy of the good.

Johnson isn't libertarian at all. He changed his positions after losing in the Republican primary. You just listen to him and he sounds like he's trying to figure out what his position is supposed to be, and he usually gets it wrong

 

[dblack]

He changed his positions after losing in the Republican primary. You just listen to him and he sounds like he's trying to figure out what his position is supposed to be, and he usually gets it wrong

That's what's so great about him. He contradicts the usual libertarian stereotype of a rigid ideologue. He's a personable, open-minded candidate with proven leadership experience.

If you really wanted to see the cause of liberty make gains, you'd recognize that he's the best candidate who's ever run as a Libertarian and is positioned perfectly to offer a sane alternative to Americans who badly want one.

 

[kaz]

He changed his positions after losing in the Republican primary. You just listen to him and he sounds like he's trying to figure out what his position is supposed to be, and he usually gets it wrong

That's what's so great about him. He contradicts the usual libertarian stereotype of a rigid ideologue. He's a personable, open-minded candidate with proven leadership experience.

If you really wanted to see the cause of liberty make gains, you'd recognize that he's the best candidate who's ever run as a Libertarian and is positioned perfectly to offer a sane alternative to Americans who badly want one.

I'm old fashioned, I like my libertarians to be libertarian.

And I'm not sure what calling making our own choices an "ideology" even means. To me the idea that someone can make your choices for you better than you can is what sounds like an "ideology"

 

[AnCap'n_Murica]

That's what's so great about him. He contradicts the usual libertarian stereotype of a rigid ideologue. He's a personable, open-minded candidate with proven leadership experience.

If you really wanted to see the cause of liberty make gains, you'd recognize that he's the best candidate who's ever run as a Libertarian and is positioned perfectly to offer a sane alternative to Americans who badly want one.

Or he is flip-flopping and pandering.

Or maybe he's trying to be the Harold Stassen of the LP.

He's a crap shoot for sure.