Fellow libertarians....

[Middleoftheroad]

...does the Paul Ryan VP choice change your mind on Romney at all? I am still voting for Johnson I think due to the lack of catering to my beliefs. Unless Romney announces if elected he will appoint ron paul as treasury secretary the chances of me voting for him are zero.

Furthermore, will you be writing in ron paul or voting for gary johnson? Since Johnson is not quite as libertarian as ron paul (and his ideas on border security are a bit too lax imo) but he is actually on the list of runners, I will probably just vote for him instead of writing in ron paul. What are your thoughts?

If You are happy with Helping Obama win again go ahead and Vote Johnson.

There is no Doubt that Neither Romney or Obama are Perfect in the eyes of a Libertarian (which I believe I am to a point) but there is also No Doubt in my mind at least that Romney/Ryan will come closer to Libertarian Values than Obama/Biden in a second term.

Simple as that.

Because lets make sure that we have someone as president who gets a C grade rather then someone who gets a C-. In the meantime, make sure that the Libertarian Party is held down forever in this belief.

 

[Charles_Main]

I think, and Liberty can correct me if I'm wrong, that is a general phrase like "If you were a real man/woman." You know... Standing up for your convictions.

I mean if you say you are "pro-life" and then have an abortion because you were raped... Well... obviously something happened that you never thought would... But... Does that really make you pro-life? Looks like a pro-choice.

That doesn't really work. Pro-Life is either/or whereas one doesn't have to follow a party's platform word for word to be a Libertarian. You are either pro-life or you're not.

Piss on the party platform. Does the person you vote for promote libertarian values. That's all that matters.

Ron Paul is both a republican and a libertarian. If you were to vote for libertarian values, but HAD to vote republican as well (don't know why that would happen but) who would be the better option? Paul or Mitt?

I mean if you are a libertarian, then to show it, wouldn't it be common sense to vote for the more libertarian candidate?

Ah but the Choice for a Libertarian is not just Paul or Romney, Its Paul, Romney or Obama. I Order to stick to ones Libertarian values and Vote for Paul or Johnson one must do so knowing they are very likely helping Obama win another Term. So the only question in their minds really should be who will do the most Damage to the Libertarian Cause. A Obama/Biden Second Term, or a Romney/Ryan first term, Because only a complete Moron believes Paul or Johnson can win.

 

[PredFan]

...does the Paul Ryan VP choice change your mind on Romney at all? I am still voting for Johnson I think due to the lack of catering to my beliefs. Unless Romney announces if elected he will appoint ron paul as treasury secretary the chances of me voting for him are zero.

Furthermore, will you be writing in ron paul or voting for gary johnson? Since Johnson is not quite as libertarian as ron paul (and his ideas on border security are a bit too lax imo) but he is actually on the list of runners, I will probably just vote for him instead of writing in ron paul. What are your thoughts?

If You are happy with Helping Obama win again go ahead and Vote Johnson.

There is no Doubt that Neither Romney or Obama are Perfect in the eyes of a Libertarian (which I believe I am to a point) but there is also No Doubt in my mind at least that Romney/Ryan will come closer to Libertarian Values than Obama/Biden in a second term.

Simple as that.

I understand your feelings, I do, but I have a couple of points to make in rebuttal:

1. There won't be enough people voting for the LP candidate to make any difference in the general election.
2. Romney and Obama are way too close (in reality) to each other and neither are closer to Libertarian enough to make any difference.

The reason I'm trying to help Romney is because I believe that under his administration we have a chance to still have a recognizable country left in 2016. If we allow Obama another 4 years, it may be too late for even a Libertarian POTUS to fix things. That's a lot different than saying that Romney is closer to Libertarian than Obama.

 

[Shelzin]

That doesn't really work. Pro-Life is either/or whereas one doesn't have to follow a party's platform word for word to be a Libertarian. You are either pro-life or you're not.

Piss on the party platform. Does the person you vote for promote libertarian values. That's all that matters.

Ron Paul is both a republican and a libertarian. If you were to vote for libertarian values, but HAD to vote republican as well (don't know why that would happen but) who would be the better option? Paul or Mitt?

I mean if you are a libertarian, then to show it, wouldn't it be common sense to vote for the more libertarian candidate?

You forget, I was responding to a post from someone else who was trying to say a REAL Libertarian would do this or that. We have veered off the point.

Eh... No... I don't think we are veering off the point. But it does seem as if we are talking past one another.

I will say that peer pressure to vote for any candidate is... What's a good word?............................................................ Simplistic, and really the cause of the majority of our problems. That's what Republicans and Democrats do.

And I believe that Mitt will be just as harmful, although in other ways, to the libertarian stance.

 

[dblack]

...does the Paul Ryan VP choice change your mind on Romney at all? I am still voting for Johnson I think due to the lack of catering to my beliefs. Unless Romney announces if elected he will appoint ron paul as treasury secretary the chances of me voting for him are zero.

Furthermore, will you be writing in ron paul or voting for gary johnson? Since Johnson is not quite as libertarian as ron paul (and his ideas on border security are a bit too lax imo) but he is actually on the list of runners, I will probably just vote for him instead of writing in ron paul. What are your thoughts?

If You are happy with Helping Obama win again go ahead and Vote Johnson.

I'm completely fine with "helping Obama win again"

I'm not. But the claim that voting for Johnson is 'helping' Obama is a outrageous lie. It's based on the assumption that not helping Romney is the same as helping Obama. It's not. I'm not 'helping' either one. I'm voting Johnson.

 

[Middleoftheroad]

That doesn't really work. Pro-Life is either/or whereas one doesn't have to follow a party's platform word for word to be a Libertarian. You are either pro-life or you're not.

Piss on the party platform. Does the person you vote for promote libertarian values. That's all that matters.

Ron Paul is both a republican and a libertarian. If you were to vote for libertarian values, but HAD to vote republican as well (don't know why that would happen but) who would be the better option? Paul or Mitt?

I mean if you are a libertarian, then to show it, wouldn't it be common sense to vote for the more libertarian candidate?

Ah but the Choice for a Libertarian is not just Paul or Romney, Its Paul, Romney or Obama. I Order to stick to ones Libertarian values and Vote for Paul or Johnson one must do so knowing they are very likely helping Obama win another Term. So the only question in their minds really should be who will do the most Damage to the Libertarian Cause. A Obama/Biden Second Term, or a Romney/Ryan first term, Because only a complete Moron believes Paul or Johnson can win.

Part of your mistake is thinking that Romney is much closer to libertarian values then Obama is. To some libertarians he is, to many, he is marginally closer, and not much of an upgrade. Like I said, its a C vs a C-. it really wont make much of a difference. Depending on how other elections go and what the president actually puts as his priorities, he could be just as bad.

 

[eflatminor]

The addition of Ryan does not change my mind about who I'll vote for. My heart is with with Ron Paul. In the past,my vote would have been for Johnson. In November, I'll hold my nose and vote for Romney. I think Obama is that bad for the country.

 

[Contumacious]

...does the Paul Ryan VP choice change your mind on Romney at all? I am still voting for Johnson I think due to the lack of catering to my beliefs. Unless Romney announces if elected he will appoint ron paul as treasury secretary the chances of me voting for him are zero.

Furthermore, will you be writing in ron paul or voting for gary johnson? Since Johnson is not quite as libertarian as ron paul (and his ideas on border security are a bit too lax imo) but he is actually on the list of runners, I will probably just vote for him instead of writing in ron paul. What are your thoughts?

Fuck no.

I continue to remind the delegates that they are NOT committed to Romney.

.

 

[Shelzin]

If You are happy with Helping Obama win again go ahead and Vote Johnson.

I'm completely fine with "helping Obama win again"

I'm not. But the claim that voting for Johnson is 'helping' Obama is a outrageous lie. It's based on the assumption that not helping Romney is the same as helping Obama. It's not. I'm not 'helping' either one. I'm voting Johnson.

*shrugs* It's easier than arguing the point. And frankly in order to win in 2016 people who hold libertarian views, but vote lesser of two evils, need to understand that they can't win without us. "If you can't beat them, join them." It's really what they want to do in the first place.

The way I see it... If you don't want Obama as President... I think they need to understand that they are better off joining me. Because I won't join them. For Obama to lose... One of us has to jump ship and join the other. It will not be me who jumps.

 

[PredFan]

This has been posted before, but some people have missed it:

The vote count in November of 2008

barack hussein obama: 69,456,897
John McCain: 59,934,814
Ralph Nader: 738,475
Bob Barr: 523,686
Chuck Baldwin: 199,314
Cynthia McKinney: 161,603

United States presidential election, 2008 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Now it would be hard to believe that any of Ralph Nader's or Cynthia McKinney's (Green Party) would have gone to McCain had no one voted for them, so if we add Bob Barr (Libertarian) and Chuck Baldwin (Constitution) to McCain's vote total we'd get 60,657,814 votes to obama's 69,456,897. McCain could not have beaten Obama even if all of the 3rd party conservatives had voted for the lesser of the two evils. Hell, even if you gave McCain Nader's and McKinney's votes he would still fall far short.

Gary Johnson won't get much more than Bob Barr got in 2008 and I am confident that if Romney loses to Obama, the votes that went to Johnson won't make the difference. A vote for Johnson is only a vote for Johnson.

In fact I'll bet that the Johnson votes won't make a difference in this election. Anyone want to take that bet?

 

[PredFan]

I'm completely fine with "helping Obama win again"

I'm not. But the claim that voting for Johnson is 'helping' Obama is a outrageous lie. It's based on the assumption that not helping Romney is the same as helping Obama. It's not. I'm not 'helping' either one. I'm voting Johnson.

*shrugs* It's easier than arguing the point. And frankly in order to win in 2016 people who hold libertarian views, but vote lesser of two evils, need to understand that they can't win without us. "If you can't beat them, join them." It's really what they want to do in the first place.

The way I see it... If you don't want Obama as President... I think they need to understand that they are better off joining me. Because I won't join them. For Obama to lose... One of us has to jump ship and join the other. It will not be me who jumps.

Not true. there aren't enough people voting 3rd party to make a difference. you don't really matter, sorry.

 

[Shelzin]

I'm not. But the claim that voting for Johnson is 'helping' Obama is a outrageous lie. It's based on the assumption that not helping Romney is the same as helping Obama. It's not. I'm not 'helping' either one. I'm voting Johnson.

*shrugs* It's easier than arguing the point. And frankly in order to win in 2016 people who hold libertarian views, but vote lesser of two evils, need to understand that they can't win without us. "If you can't beat them, join them." It's really what they want to do in the first place.

The way I see it... If you don't want Obama as President... I think they need to understand that they are better off joining me. Because I won't join them. For Obama to lose... One of us has to jump ship and join the other. It will not be me who jumps.

Not true. there aren't enough people voting 3rd party to make a difference. you don't really matter, sorry.

No... There weren't enough people voting 3rd party. Past tense. Now there are.

 

[Shelzin]

In fact I'll bet that the Johnson votes won't make a difference in this election. Anyone want to take that bet?

If Paul isn't on the Ballot... yes... I'll take that bet. Kinda sucks that it's you though... I kind of like you.

What's the stakes?

Edit: And by not on the ballot means I can't really accept the bet till after we're sure that Paul really won't be on the Ballot.

 

[Contumacious]

I'm not. But the claim that voting for Johnson is 'helping' Obama is a outrageous lie. It's based on the assumption that not helping Romney is the same as helping Obama. It's not. I'm not 'helping' either one. I'm voting Johnson.

*shrugs* It's easier than arguing the point. And frankly in order to win in 2016 people who hold libertarian views, but vote lesser of two evils, need to understand that they can't win without us. "If you can't beat them, join them." It's really what they want to do in the first place.

The way I see it... If you don't want Obama as President... I think they need to understand that they are better off joining me. Because I won't join them. For Obama to lose... One of us has to jump ship and join the other. It will not be me who jumps.

Not true. there aren't enough people voting 3rd party to make a difference. you don't really matter, sorry.

Yes, indeed.

Political minorities have no rights the majority has to recognize.

Reason I need my assault weapon.

.

 

[Crackerjack]

First, Ryan doesn't represent my values any more than Romney, so no.

Secondly, a vote for Johnson is not a vote for Obama. Saying this shows that you have no concept of the electoral college or of libertarians in general. In a solid red or blue state, a vote for Johnson isn't going to make any difference to Romney. Further, most libertarians I know wouldn't vote for Romney in any scenario. All talk like that is for is getting your excuse in early for getting pwnt by a nothing like Obama. The least the party of personal responsibility could do is own up to nominating another Dole/Kemp ticket, but I guess that's a little too much to ask these days.

If you want to win our votes, nominate a candidate worthy of them. If our votes don't matter, then leave us the fuck alone to vote for whom we wish.

 

[JWBooth]

If You are happy with Helping Obama win again go ahead and Vote Johnson.

I'm completely fine with "helping Obama win again"

I'm not. But the claim that voting for Johnson is 'helping' Obama is a outrageous lie. It's based on the assumption that not helping Romney is the same as helping Obama. It's not. I'm not 'helping' either one. I'm voting Johnson.

Not a lie, uninformed-ignorant-partisan-hack bullshit, but not a lie.

 

[Shelzin]

I'm completely fine with "helping Obama win again"

I'm not. But the claim that voting for Johnson is 'helping' Obama is a outrageous lie. It's based on the assumption that not helping Romney is the same as helping Obama. It's not. I'm not 'helping' either one. I'm voting Johnson.

Not a lie, uninformed-ignorant-partisan-hack bullshit, but not a lie.

Well... It is a lie if they didn't believe what they said. But that's some serious hair splitting there.

 

[PredFan]

*shrugs* It's easier than arguing the point. And frankly in order to win in 2016 people who hold libertarian views, but vote lesser of two evils, need to understand that they can't win without us. "If you can't beat them, join them." It's really what they want to do in the first place.

The way I see it... If you don't want Obama as President... I think they need to understand that they are better off joining me. Because I won't join them. For Obama to lose... One of us has to jump ship and join the other. It will not be me who jumps.

Not true. there aren't enough people voting 3rd party to make a difference. you don't really matter, sorry.

No... There weren't enough people voting 3rd party. Past tense. Now there are.

Doubt it.

 

[PredFan]

In fact I'll bet that the Johnson votes won't make a difference in this election. Anyone want to take that bet?

If Paul isn't on the Ballot... yes... I'll take that bet. Kinda sucks that it's you though... I kind of like you.

What's the stakes?

Edit: And by not on the ballot means I can't really accept the bet till after we're sure that Paul really won't be on the Ballot.

Hmm...good point. Let me clarify. I'll bet that if you gave Romney all of the votes from the Libertarian candidate (I'm assuming it's Johnson, Ron Paul, and any Constitution Party candidate as well, it won't make a difference in the final outcome.

The stakes, hmmm..that's a tough one. There's time to iron that out.

 

[dblack]

Not true. there aren't enough people voting 3rd party to make a difference. you don't really matter, sorry.

No... There weren't enough people voting 3rd party. Past tense. Now there are.

Doubt it.

Sadly, I doubt it as well. I think most people will fall for the lesser of two evils nonsense yet again. If we had something like approval voting, we might get a true representation of how many people actually prefer liberty. As it is, too many of us fall for the Democrat/Republican blackmail schtick.