Gary Johnson wins Libertarian Party nomination

[kaz]

Funny, that's what I think about voting for Tweedledee or Tweedledum since you're either going to get your own candidate or someone identical to them. I'll grant you the parties say different things. But they don't actually do anything different

we are going to get one of them no matter what you do. They are not equally bad, Trump is a much better choice.

Do you really want HRC putting 3 or 4 judges on the SC?

What good have Republicans done for us in that regard? At one point 7 justicies were Republican appointed and they still failed to deliver any victories for the Constitution and in particular the 10th amendment.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me over and over and over and over and I just might be a Republican ...

I thought Roberts would tip the balance and finally start making a difference. Then he found government running healthcare in the Constitution. Twice. What difference do Republican justices make?

Oh you mean like Heller and McDonald? Not to mention dozens of cases where they slapped down Obama, like the raisin case.

Obamacare is such a massively destructive force that it dwarfs everything else. Obamacare and Social Security/Medicare are the two greatest insidiously evil government programs in our history because they make every American a dependent of government

OK so your statement "they failed to deliver any victories for the Constitution" is true only if you think Obamacare was the only case that had to do with the Constitution.
It must be nice to make your own rules.

So the DC gun one was positive, but seriously, that's what we got out of Republicans the last couple of decades?

 

[The Rabbi]

we are going to get one of them no matter what you do. They are not equally bad, Trump is a much better choice.

Do you really want HRC putting 3 or 4 judges on the SC?

What good have Republicans done for us in that regard? At one point 7 justicies were Republican appointed and they still failed to deliver any victories for the Constitution and in particular the 10th amendment.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me over and over and over and over and I just might be a Republican ...

I thought Roberts would tip the balance and finally start making a difference. Then he found government running healthcare in the Constitution. Twice. What difference do Republican justices make?

Oh you mean like Heller and McDonald? Not to mention dozens of cases where they slapped down Obama, like the raisin case.

Obamacare is such a massively destructive force that it dwarfs everything else. Obamacare and Social Security/Medicare are the two greatest insidiously evil government programs in our history because they make every American a dependent of government

OK so your statement "they failed to deliver any victories for the Constitution" is true only if you think Obamacare was the only case that had to do with the Constitution.
It must be nice to make your own rules.

So the DC gun one was positive, but seriously, that's what we got out of Republicans the last couple of decades?

OK let me repeat.
Heller.
McDonald
Slapping down many Obama Administration initiatives
Throwing out a New Deal era program on raisins.
There were lots of victories amid some very big disappointments.

 

[flacaltenn]

The Libertarians did the only sensible thing and nominated Gary Johnson for their candidate for president. Johnson is the only reasonable choice in the race. He is a two term governor with a solid record. Does he have plenty of downsides? Of course. But not nearly as many as McCain. And lots of people, including me, voted for McCain.

I see we've all learned about promoting from the DOnald. Got to have those catchy controversial sideshow slogans. I would proud to have a "Feel the Johnson" bumper sticker (on my tractor).

Didn't hear if Will Weld (past governor of Mass) was approved as VP. I do know there is a fight over whether Weld is "Libertarian enough". A problem my party has ALWAYS had. And in the race to being MORE Libertarian --- we are the world's richest mine of anarchists.

TWO successful state governors on one ticket would be really rad.. Considering the choices. The only polls INCLUDING Johnson recently ALREADY showed him at 10 or 12%. BEFORE the convention. So we're half-way there to throwing America's first election into the House in over 100 years.

And I want to see the tears and hissy fits stream from the Dem/Rep camps when we reach 15% and by the rules are SUPPOSED to be included in the debates. Except that the FEC "debate committee" is a bunch of hot-head party loyalists who signed a memo saying that their candidates WOULD ONLY debate Democrats or Republicans.

Now that's the kinda of "rigged system" this election is all about. Isn't it?

You really don't know how that works, do you? Which states will Johnson win? I can tell you! Neverland!

In a 3way, asssuming neither of your candidates go to trial for anything, LOL---- its pretty easy to draw 34%.
and thats the bar. Assuming clinstone and turumph are tying. I can see those purple states doing just that. And johnson will be strong in places like indiana, ohio, new mexico, colorado, maybe washington.state.. Places where the Drug war ended on maijuana, and arguments for school choice, smalleer govt, and less corporate welfare are desired..

Do you have any of your fantasy novels published?

Your dweedle dee and dum partisan pissants have been wrecking this country way too long. Time to take a break from that nonsense. Bombing WAY TOO MANY countries in a year is worse than bombing less of them. And I don't see the funcking govt working in any healthy way..

Both parties turn their backs on fixing the intrinsic problems. Need folks that will enlist the PEOPLE to get stuff done..

 

[BuckToothMoron]

If the reason you tell me to vote for your candidate is, "The other candidate is Satan", then that tells me more about your candidate than the other candidate. It tells me your candidate sucks so much, you can't think of any reason to vote for him. All you have is, "He isn't the other guy" and that I must vote against the other candidate!

And that is the sad fucking state of affairs this "voting for the lesser of two evils" has brought us to.

You can get all the information that you need from need form the Libertarian website.

But based upon your previous posts you won't like Gary. He is Jeffersonian. The ONLY rights you will enjoy are the rights to life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness.

FDR bill of rights will be abolished. . And as a parasite you need to suck on the government titties.

So find a pretext, we'll understand.

.

That is extremely inaccurate. There's plenty for a progressive to like about Gary Johnson. Johnson is essentially just a progressive who likes the Fair Tax.

I agree, a true and honest progressive could find some common ground with big Johnson. The progressive movement is more loyal to their actual cause however, which isn't promoting progressivism. The real call of the progressive movement is more power. Progressives don't gain power voting for a libertarian.

 

[The Rabbi]

If the reason you tell me to vote for your candidate is, "The other candidate is Satan", then that tells me more about your candidate than the other candidate. It tells me your candidate sucks so much, you can't think of any reason to vote for him. All you have is, "He isn't the other guy" and that I must vote against the other candidate!

And that is the sad fucking state of affairs this "voting for the lesser of two evils" has brought us to.

You can get all the information that you need from need form the Libertarian website.

But based upon your previous posts you won't like Gary. He is Jeffersonian. The ONLY rights you will enjoy are the rights to life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness.

FDR bill of rights will be abolished. . And as a parasite you need to suck on the government titties.

So find a pretext, we'll understand.

.

That is extremely inaccurate. There's plenty for a progressive to like about Gary Johnson. Johnson is essentially just a progressive who likes the Fair Tax.

I agree, a true and honest progressive could find some common ground with big Johnson. The progressive movement is more loyal to their actual cause however, which isn't promoting progressivism. The real call of the progressive movement is more power. Progressives don't gain power voting for a libertarian.

No such thing as an honest progressive. Progs are all about control. Progressives are fascists.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

The Libertarian Party retains its status as a backup plan for failed Republican politicians by nominating Johnson again, and likely nominating Bill Weld for his running mate. At this point, it's time for the Libertarian Party to rebrand since they seem to be more interested in nominating Republican cast-offs than anybody interested in libertarianism.

This attitude is exactly why the LP loses. Too many of you demand purity. Gary Johnson is a fine candidate for the LP and the most libertarian candidate running of anybody in this election including those who have already dropped out. Our country didn't go down this path of destruction overnight. It's been a slow process and if it's even possible to get it back on track, which I doubt, frankly, it will be a slow process back. Rome wasn't built in a day. Johnson has a lot more name recognition now. Both he and his running mate have been former governors. There is a better chance he could get included in the debates this year and have an impact. I just saw a poll over the weekend showing him polling at 18% among Millennials and another poll showing him trailing Clinton by only 6% among independent voters.

But hey, he doesn't 100% meet your definition of what a libertarian should be so fuck him and let the party stay irrelevant for another 50 years and really stick it to them cuz that's progress baby!

This has been addressed in the thread. I'm not looking for purity, but I am looking for a libertarian. Libertarians don't want to keep Gitmo open, don't want to engage in "humanitarian" wars, don't want to ban burqas, don't want to use the government to enforce "equality," and so on and so forth. No, he doesn't meet 100% of my definition of what a libertarian should be, but if he can barely even hit 10% why would I bother considering him just because he claims to be a libertarian?

If you want to waste your vote, go right ahead, no one really cares.

If I wanted to waste my vote I'd be a Trump tard.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Yep. It was cool. Just like in 1992 when I voted for Perot who cost HW the election

Proud of yourself then?

That's what I'm saying, yes. HW was a horrible President who deserved to lose, I'm glad I helped him do it

He was hardly "horrible" and certainly better than the man you helped elect.

Spoiler alert, Perot didn't win

Perot elected bubba Clinton, that's the point here.

No, the American people elected Bubba. Perot only got one vote like everyone else and he surely voted for himself.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Spoiler alert: Perot was the spoiler. A vote for him literally was a vote for Clinton.

I suggest you look up the definition of the word literally because you literally don't know what it means.

 

[ChrisL]

The Libertarians did the only sensible thing and nominated Gary Johnson for their candidate for president. Johnson is the only reasonable choice in the race. He is a two term governor with a solid record. Does he have plenty of downsides? Of course. But not nearly as many as McCain. And lots of people, including me, voted for McCain.

I see we've all learned about promoting from the DOnald. Got to have those catchy controversial sideshow slogans. I would proud to have a "Feel the Johnson" bumper sticker (on my tractor).

Didn't hear if Will Weld (past governor of Mass) was approved as VP. I do know there is a fight over whether Weld is "Libertarian enough". A problem my party has ALWAYS had. And in the race to being MORE Libertarian --- we are the world's richest mine of anarchists.

TWO successful state governors on one ticket would be really rad.. Considering the choices. The only polls INCLUDING Johnson recently ALREADY showed him at 10 or 12%. BEFORE the convention. So we're half-way there to throwing America's first election into the House in over 100 years.

And I want to see the tears and hissy fits stream from the Dem/Rep camps when we reach 15% and by the rules are SUPPOSED to be included in the debates. Except that the FEC "debate committee" is a bunch of hot-head party loyalists who signed a memo saying that their candidates WOULD ONLY debate Democrats or Republicans.

Now that's the kinda of "rigged system" this election is all about. Isn't it?

You really don't know how that works, do you? Which states will Johnson win? I can tell you! Neverland!

In a 3way, asssuming neither of your candidates go to trial for anything, LOL---- its pretty easy to draw 34%.
and thats the bar. Assuming clinstone and turumph are tying. I can see those purple states doing just that. And johnson will be strong in places like indiana, ohio, new mexico, colorado, maybe washington.state.. Places where the Drug war ended on maijuana, and arguments for school choice, smalleer govt, and less corporate welfare are desired..

Do you have any of your fantasy novels published?

Your dweedle dee and dum partisan pissants have been wrecking this country way too long. Time to take a break from that nonsense. Bombing WAY TOO MANY countries in a year is worse than bombing less of them. And I don't see the funcking govt working in any healthy way..

Both parties turn their backs on fixing the intrinsic problems. Need folks that will enlist the PEOPLE to get stuff done..

I think that's Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum.

I don't see anything changing from one party to the other. Both of them need to be taken down! It's only a matter of time. The partisans hate these kinds of threads because it makes them nervous.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

If the reason you tell me to vote for your candidate is, "The other candidate is Satan", then that tells me more about your candidate than the other candidate. It tells me your candidate sucks so much, you can't think of any reason to vote for him. All you have is, "He isn't the other guy" and that I must vote against the other candidate!

And that is the sad fucking state of affairs this "voting for the lesser of two evils" has brought us to.

You can get all the information that you need from need form the Libertarian website.

But based upon your previous posts you won't like Gary. He is Jeffersonian. The ONLY rights you will enjoy are the rights to life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness.

FDR bill of rights will be abolished. . And as a parasite you need to suck on the government titties.

So find a pretext, we'll understand.

.

That is extremely inaccurate. There's plenty for a progressive to like about Gary Johnson. Johnson is essentially just a progressive who likes the Fair Tax.

I agree, a true and honest progressive could find some common ground with big Johnson. The progressive movement is more loyal to their actual cause however, which isn't promoting progressivism. The real call of the progressive movement is more power. Progressives don't gain power voting for a libertarian.

No such thing as an honest progressive. Progs are all about control. Progressives are fascists.

Well the leaders are all about control, but there are a lot of wide-eyed

I appreciate your sentiment...but politics is all about compromise.

I am along enough in years to know you have to compromise once in a while. However, there is nothing which Trump or Clinton stand for which I agree with enough to compromise on all their bullshit I disagree with.

I am a lifetime Republican, and there is another reason I won't vote for Trump, and why I didn't vote for Romney. I am sick of the hypocrites, liars, psychopaths, bigots, and retards who have hijacked the GOP and taken it far, far off the conservative reservation. So my refusal to vote is not just a stand against Romney, it is a stand against these assholes who have ruined the Republican and Conservative brands.

They deserve Clinton as their President, just as they deserved Obama. Their wailing and gnashing of teeth these past seven years has been pleasing to my ears.

I am a lifetime Republican, and there is another reason I won't vote for Trump, and why I didn't vote for Romney. I am sick of the hypocrites, liars, psychopaths, bigots, and retards who have hijacked the GOP and taken it far, far off the conservative reservation.

Do you have the name of the person in politics who isn't a hypocrite, liar, psychopath, bigot, or retard? I can't think of one.

When was the last time you really liked a canidate? The first time I vote was for for Big Ronnie. It's been all down hill from there. So just accept the fact that politics is about compromise, hold your nose and vote for the smaller pile of shit.

 

[g5000]

When was the last time you really liked a canidate?

John Kasich. I've been for him since before he announced.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

When was the last time you really liked a canidate?

John Kasich. I've been for him since before he announced.

And for me he is a huge compromise. I wanted Carly.

 

[flacaltenn]

I see we've all learned about promoting from the DOnald. Got to have those catchy controversial sideshow slogans. I would proud to have a "Feel the Johnson" bumper sticker (on my tractor).

Didn't hear if Will Weld (past governor of Mass) was approved as VP. I do know there is a fight over whether Weld is "Libertarian enough". A problem my party has ALWAYS had. And in the race to being MORE Libertarian --- we are the world's richest mine of anarchists.

TWO successful state governors on one ticket would be really rad.. Considering the choices. The only polls INCLUDING Johnson recently ALREADY showed him at 10 or 12%. BEFORE the convention. So we're half-way there to throwing America's first election into the House in over 100 years.

And I want to see the tears and hissy fits stream from the Dem/Rep camps when we reach 15% and by the rules are SUPPOSED to be included in the debates. Except that the FEC "debate committee" is a bunch of hot-head party loyalists who signed a memo saying that their candidates WOULD ONLY debate Democrats or Republicans.

Now that's the kinda of "rigged system" this election is all about. Isn't it?

You really don't know how that works, do you? Which states will Johnson win? I can tell you! Neverland!

In a 3way, asssuming neither of your candidates go to trial for anything, LOL---- its pretty easy to draw 34%.
and thats the bar. Assuming clinstone and turumph are tying. I can see those purple states doing just that. And johnson will be strong in places like indiana, ohio, new mexico, colorado, maybe washington.state.. Places where the Drug war ended on maijuana, and arguments for school choice, smalleer govt, and less corporate welfare are desired..

Do you have any of your fantasy novels published?

Your dweedle dee and dum partisan pissants have been wrecking this country way too long. Time to take a break from that nonsense. Bombing WAY TOO MANY countries in a year is worse than bombing less of them. And I don't see the funcking govt working in any healthy way..

Both parties turn their backs on fixing the intrinsic problems. Need folks that will enlist the PEOPLE to get stuff done..

I think that's Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum.

I don't see anything changing from one party to the other. Both of them need to be taken down! It's only a matter of time. The partisans hate these kinds of threads because it makes them nervous.

That's why I called them Tweedle dum dee.. Can't tell them apart when it comes to PERSISTENTLY bad foreign policy or managing the Minions of Damned in Washington. The bureaucracy is about to be a larger threat to liberty than the ELECTED representatives.

Really need to get Congress unclogged and to man-up and start firing trainloads of incompetents and partisans.

 

[flacaltenn]

You Trumpsters are gonna be lining up for the Libertarian train --- IF you survive the trade wars, the corporate cabinet appointments, and 47 countries closing their borders to Americans for travel and biz..

You're also gonna love the "deals".. Especially the ones made with threats of turning the IRS, the OSHA, the HSecurity, the Justice Dept, and all those other "knee-breakers" he has to make deals happen.. Especially when these deals involve paying off the left to cooperate. Just wait. I'm bookmarking this post...

 

[ChrisL]

You Trumpsters are gonna be lining up for the Libertarian train --- IF you survive the trade wars, the corporate cabinet appointments, and 47 countries closing their borders to Americans for travel and biz..

You're also gonna love the "deals".. Especially the ones made with threats of turning the IRS, the OSHA, the HSecurity, the Justice Dept, and all those other "knee-breakers" he has to make deals happen.. Especially when these deals involve paying off the left to cooperate. Just wait. I'm bookmarking this post...

I'm sure if Trumpster gets elected, he will become quite ineffective. It's not going to be as easy as he makes it sound, I'm sure.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

So how long before Rabbi declares that only losers could support Johnson now that David French is possibly running under Bill Kristol's Status-Quo Party?

 

[frigidweirdo]

libertarianism: definition of libertarianism in Oxford dictionary (American English) (US)

"An extreme laissez-faire political philosophy advocating only minimal state intervention in the lives of citizens."

Definition of “libertarian” | Collins English Dictionary

"a believer in freedom of thought, expression, etc"

Definition of LIBERTARIANISM

"a person who believes that people should be allowed to do and say what they want without any interference from the government"

Three quite different definitions from three dictionaries.

Libertarianism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"
Libertarianism (Latin: liber, "free") is a political philosophy that upholds liberty as its principal objective. Libertarians seek to maximize autonomy and freedom of choice, emphasizing political freedom, voluntary association, and the primacy of individual judgment.[1][2]"

I think I prefer Wikipedia's version.

What is The Libertarian Party?

"Libertarians believe in the American heritage of liberty, enterprise, and personal responsibility."

It's not that much different to what the Libertarians say themselves.

So, it's about liberty which is about not being controlled by the government or others.

However, I'd say, like any right, there are limitations. Many freedoms conflict with other freedoms, many desires of free will conflict with other desires of free will. Who is there to mediate between the two? Should it be a free for all? No, that's Anarchy.

Libertarianism would be maximum freedom for all, which requires government regulation in order to achieve this.

So, I'd say liberty is the ability to walk down the street, go into any public business and conduct business there. If I am denied conducting business the same as everyone else, then I don't have liberty.
If I am denied service in a shop because I am black, or because I am a woman, or because I am gay, or because I have a deformed part of my body, or if I am denied because of something I was born with, then I am not free, I don't have liberty.

anarchy: definition of anarchy in Oxford dictionary (American English) (US)

Anarchy

"A state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority:"

This is what some people believe is Libertarianism. It's not.

Oh, thank goodness. Finally, someone to explain libertarianism to libertarians. We've been lost without you. Your liberty is derived from property rights, that's where the limitations exist. For example, you have the freedom of the press, but it's not an abridgement of your press freedom if the New York Times refuses to publish your op-ed because it's their property. Likewise, if I decide not to serve you in my business it's not an affront to your liberty because it's my property. To force the New York Times to publish your op-ed or to force me to serve you against my will is the affront to liberty, because you're violating property rights. That has nothing to do with anarchy, and everything to do with respecting property rights.

Not really. You can't do whatever you want on your property, can you? Murder is still illegal on your property.

You don't have to set up a business on your property, do you? But if you decided to set up a business, you decide to follow the rules the country sets for businesses.

Now some Libertarians might say that a person should be able to serve whoever they like on their business and not serve others they don't like. However others might say that this takes away the liberty of individuals so isn't libertarianism.

And yet as libertarians I think we're the ones who get to define libertarianism. And no, that doesn't mean you get to murder people on your property, because people have a property right in themselves and murder is an example of a violation of property rights. Me not wanting to serve you a hamburger does not violate your property rights at all, but you forcing me to would violate my property rights. Libertarianism is against the use of violence against person and property. That's the definition.

Then define Libertarianism so that it isn't Anarchy.

Murder is a violation of property rights? What?

I think you need to define "property rights" first.

I repeat, "Libertarianism is against the use of violence against person and property." That doesn't have to mean anarchy, just ask any of the minarchist libertarians on this board, but it may mean anarchy to the anarcho-capitalists.

Yes, murder is a violation of property rights, of course it's not in the same realm as, say, stealing someone's television, but a violation of a higher degree. We all know what property is, but, from a libertarian perspective, my property in my material objects is derived from self-ownership. In other words, a property right in myself and my own body. Therefore, we have to logically conclude that any harm that befalls my body, assault, murder, rape, etc, is a violation of my property right in myself.

I really think you shouldn't stick to calling your body your property.

However, if we're going to deal with that, then here's my case.

If I hit you in the face, that's assault, and goes against Libertarianism.
If I call you an insult, isn't that also assault, it could potentially harm the other person, make them feel bad, etc?

So, if I walk into a bakery and the bakery says "we're not serving you because you're a n*gger [or add any other insult]" then this goes against your supposed property rights.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Gary Johnson and William Weld?

Shouldn't they call it the RINOtarian Party?

 

[Seawytch]

What an election year! The GOP nominates Donald Trump and the Libertarian party might break the 3-5% of the vote they normally get. Still means ya'll get used to saying President Hillary Clinton.

Even Trump is warning Bill Kristol not to run a Republican as an independent because then they can kiss the Supreme Court goodbye.

Trump slams 'spoiler' bid after Kristol says independent candidate to run | Fox News

Donald Trump took to Twitter Sunday night to slam fresh predictions from Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol that an independent candidate would soon be entering the race for president, warning that a 2016 “spoiler” could swing the race to the Democrats.

Trump:The Republican Party has to be smart & strong if it wants to win in November. Can't allow lightweights to set up a spoiler Indie candidate!
Bill: Just a heads up over this holiday weekend: There will be an independent candidate--an impressive one, with a strong team and a real chance.

Trump: If dummy Bill Kristol actually does get a spoiler to run as an Independent, say good bye to the Supreme Court!

This is why I won't vote for Trump. The Supreme Court hangs in the balance.

But I also find it funny Trump isn't even worried about the Losertarian Johnson. Libertarians are nothing more than a blip in the radar. Unable to even convince 5% of us that their ideas are good. Even the tea party did better with nuts like Bachman & Palin.

Ralph Nader, with 2.7% of the vote, cost Gore the election.

Bush won Florida by 500. Nader got 100,000 votes in this state.

So it matters.

Sorry Toro, not true.

Debunked: The Myth That Ralph Nader Cost Al Gore the 2000 Election

 

[NYcarbineer]

What an election year! The GOP nominates Donald Trump and the Libertarian party might break the 3-5% of the vote they normally get. Still means ya'll get used to saying President Hillary Clinton.

Even Trump is warning Bill Kristol not to run a Republican as an independent because then they can kiss the Supreme Court goodbye.

Trump slams 'spoiler' bid after Kristol says independent candidate to run | Fox News

Donald Trump took to Twitter Sunday night to slam fresh predictions from Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol that an independent candidate would soon be entering the race for president, warning that a 2016 “spoiler” could swing the race to the Democrats.

Trump:The Republican Party has to be smart & strong if it wants to win in November. Can't allow lightweights to set up a spoiler Indie candidate!
Bill: Just a heads up over this holiday weekend: There will be an independent candidate--an impressive one, with a strong team and a real chance.

Trump: If dummy Bill Kristol actually does get a spoiler to run as an Independent, say good bye to the Supreme Court!

This is why I won't vote for Trump. The Supreme Court hangs in the balance.

But I also find it funny Trump isn't even worried about the Losertarian Johnson. Libertarians are nothing more than a blip in the radar. Unable to even convince 5% of us that their ideas are good. Even the tea party did better with nuts like Bachman & Palin.

Ralph Nader, with 2.7% of the vote, cost Gore the election.

Bush won Florida by 500. Nader got 100,000 votes in this state.

So it matters.

Sorry Toro, not true.

Debunked: The Myth That Ralph Nader Cost Al Gore the 2000 Election

That article doesn't really debunk the myth, it merely makes an argument that it's not a certainty that Nader cost Gore the election.