Gov. Gary Johnson - AMA

http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/10ia67/i_am_gov_gary_johnson_the_libertarian_candidate/

Just a heads up for those interested in more on his stances.

Neat, didn't see he was doing another one.

If you vote for that douche in a swing state you are voting for Obama
_______________________________________________________________
"I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making it easy for them in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it" Ben Franklin

Originally posted by: ~~Snake~~
If you vote for that douche in a swing state you are voting for Obama

And if you vote for Romney, in any state, you are a fucking sell out and might as well have voted for Obama.

Same shit different bubble.

Even Republicans hate Romney. Only an Obama loving douche would take votes away from a good choice and waste them on Romney. He won't win and if he did win, he would destroy America and try to make it Mormon.


Vote out Obama, pick a candidate who can win, vote American, vote independent!

Originally posted by: Mockery

Originally posted by: ~~Snake~~
If you vote for that douche in a swing state you are voting for Obama

And if you vote for Romney, in any state, you are a fucking sell out and might as well have voted for Obama.

Same shit different bubble.

You are such an ignorant fool.
_______________________________________________________________
"I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making it easy for them in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it" Ben Franklin

Originally posted by: ~~Snake~~

Originally posted by: Mockery

Originally posted by: ~~Snake~~
If you vote for that douche in a swing state you are voting for Obama

And if you vote for Romney, in any state, you are a fucking sell out and might as well have voted for Obama.

Same shit different bubble.

You are such an ignorant fool.

Thank you........

Because as someone who considers you to be the most difficult, obtuse, and mindless troglodyte I have ever wasted words with........Anything divergent of the way you think (or don't think) is an evolutionary advancement IMO.

Originally posted by: ~~Snake~~
If you vote for that douche in a swing state you are voting for Obama

I'm voting for Obama or Gary Johnson specifically to make people who say stuff like this angry (killet and snake)

Originally posted by: Bigguns 93
Even Republicans hate Romney. Only an Obama loving douche would take votes away from a good choice and waste them on Romney. He won't win and if he did win, he would destroy America and try to make it Mormon.


Vote out Obama, pick a candidate who can win, vote American, vote independent!

My sentiments exactly...........

Originally posted by: Mockery

Originally posted by: ~~Snake~~

Originally posted by: Mockery

Originally posted by: ~~Snake~~
If you vote for that douche in a swing state you are voting for Obama

And if you vote for Romney, in any state, you are a fucking sell out and might as well have voted for Obama.

Same shit different bubble.

You are such an ignorant fool.

Thank you........

Because as someone who considers you to be the most difficult, obtuse, and mindless troglodyte I have ever wasted words with........Anything divergent of the way you think (or don't think) is an evolutionary advancement IMO.

no problem kiddo. Your level of ignorance is only exceeded by your temper tantrums. Thank god Cali isn't a swing state.
_______________________________________________________________
"I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making it easy for them in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it" Ben Franklin

Originally posted by: -Sesshomaru-

Originally posted by: ~~Snake~~
If you vote for that douche in a swing state you are voting for Obama

I'm voting for Obama or Gary Johnson specifically to make people who say stuff like this angry (killet and snake)

it doesnt make me angry, this country is dying whichever gets elected, one just has all intentions of accelerating it, the other I'm not so sure about. I'll vote Romney simply because I wont vote for someone thats proud to hate this country and what it stands for . . . and I wont vote for someone that has no chance of winning in some irrelevant gesture that means nothing to anyone but myself. But you guys knock yourself out and have fun, thats what democracy is all about!

Originally posted by: Bigguns 93
He won't win and if he did win, he would destroy America and try to make it Mormon.

Be real. The Mormons already run everything. The [Democratic] Senate majority leader is Mormon.

Governor Johnson is the best candidate on the ballot.

"I have currently reached four of the highest peaks on all seven continents, including Mt. Everest."

Why?

I have turned at least a dozen and a half people on Facebook who were going to hold their nose and vote for Romney into active Governor Johnson supporters.

Voting independent is far from a waste. What is a waste is throwing away a vote on a suck ass candidate. All it takes is for a few people to believe. Jesse Ventura did it, and he was a clown on the WWE.


Even if the independant candidate does not win, it is far from a wasted vote. It SCREAMS to both parties, the one that narrowly won and the one that narrowly lost, change your position or lose more votes. Change your platform, its about to be taken out from underneath you. Hear the voice of the disenfranchised. We will not pacified by telling us the other guy is bad, the other guy will destroy America. We don;t want to hear vote for me, I might suck, but the other guy really sucks.


Right now small groups have big influence. The religious right, the tea party, LGC. Imagine how big a noise it makes when 15% of the people voting go independent? That roar would drown out the other fucks.


No, voting independent is far from a waste. I can only imagine a farmer in 1775 saying it would be a waste for him to fight against an army like the British. I can only imagine a black woman who walks to the back of the bus because she thinks its a waste or a black preacher not organizing walks because its a waste.


Fuck no. I am American. Americans have a long history of being the underdogs. The bigger the odds the harder we fight. In 200+ years our country has evolved more than others have in centuries because people believe.


Vote independent, vote American, show the same balls that all the people who gave you this country showed.
Post edited by Bigguns 93 at 9/26/2012 2:25:24 PM

and in which election has anyone voting independent made any difference at all?

Seriously Snake? You have so little value to any discussion. It has just become nothing but a predictable waste of time to read your posts.


Now on with the thread:

The problem I have with voting for Romney or Obama lies within their performance, actions and policies. I will not fire one misguided body to be replaced by another. I find them both extremely lacking in urgency; that is in their policies of past, current and future.

I also find that both are too typical of the current divisive nature. I firmly believe they would gladly sit in stalemates for an entire term or two; only to kick the can down the road. Whether kicking through poor policy or political security it makes no difference when the result is a bankrupted America 'borrowing' more.

It's quite obvious that neither one is willing to go beyond their political games, to sit in that oval office and do the right thing. We need a leader to go around and lift peoples' heads out of the sand. Tell them 'no!' and have the fortitude and selflessness to understand they won't be making friends or political gains by doing right.

Bottom line, neither Romney nor Obama will do the following two things: 1) Cut the budget as drastically as mathematically required 2) Get rid of the current tax code, thus ridding all the loop holes they and their special interest groups currently use.
Post edited by subroutine at 9/26/2012 2:33:14 PM

Curse your edit Sub!

Originally posted by: subroutine
Seriously Snake? You have so little value to any discussion. It has just become nothing but a predictable waste of time to read your posts.

Snake can be very entertaining when we start talking about things like Golden Taint's touchdown...

Have you heard the guy talk about it?

They ask: What about that deliberate push that should've been called an offensive pass interference...
Guy immediate lowers his voice and says:
"Idoennowatchutawkin'bout..."

Originally posted by: DirtyMitten
I have turned at least a dozen and a half people on Facebook who were going to hold their nose and vote for Romney into active Governor Johnson supporters.

You are a fucking politcal pioneer. I can't wait for my children to read about you in the history books.

That being said I'll probably be voting for Johnson as well.

Originally posted by: Killet
and in which election has anyone voting independent made any difference at all?

Two that I can think of:

Bush I vs. Clinton (Perot)

Bush II vs. Gore (Nader)

But this not my most fail moment of missing the 't' I royally fucked up my week once converting a sequence at the lab.

Originally posted by: Bigguns 93

Voting independent is far from a waste. What is a waste is throwing away a vote on a suck ass candidate. All it takes is for a few people to believe. Jesse Ventura did it, and he was a clown on the WWE.


Even if the independant candidate does not win, it is far from a wasted vote. It SCREAMS to both parties, the one that narrowly won and the one that narrowly lost, change your position or lose more votes. Change your platform, its about to be taken out from underneath you. Hear the voice of the disenfranchised. We will not pacified by telling us the other guy is bad, the other guy will destroy America. We don;t want to hear vote for me, I might suck, but the other guy really sucks.


Right now small groups have big influence. The religious right, the tea party, LGC. Imagine how big a noise it makes when 15% of the people voting go independent? That roar would drown out the other fucks.


No, voting independent is far from a waste. I can only imagine a farmer in 1775 saying it would be a waste for him to fight against an army like the British. I can only imagine a black woman who walks to the back of the bus because she thinks its a waste or a black preacher not organizing walks because its a waste.


Fuck no. I am American. Americans have a long history of being the underdogs. The bigger the odds the harder we fight. In 200+ years our country has evolved more than others have in centuries because people believe.


Vote independent, vote American, show the same balls that all the people who gave you this country showed.

You could ask a question about something already answered in a post, but then it just seems like you didn't read it, didn't understand it, or aren't interested in legitimate discussion.

I can understand why people would be scared. Imagine what happens when an independent gets into office and they can't blame their problems on "the other party". 1775 must have been scary. Glad those guys nutted up and voted independent.

Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-

Originally posted by: Killet
and in which election has anyone voting independent made any difference at all?

Two that I can think of:

Bush I vs. Clinton (Perot)

Bush II vs. Gore (Nader)

the ONLY thing voting independents have done is give the liberals victory. End of story
_______________________________________________________________
"I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making it easy for them in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it" Ben Franklin

Originally posted by: ~~Snake~~

Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-

Originally posted by: Killet
and in which election has anyone voting independent made any difference at all?

Two that I can think of:

Bush I vs. Clinton (Perot)

Bush II vs. Gore (Nader)

the ONLY thing voting independents have done is give the liberals victory. End of story

Duh, anything less than tattooing an R on your eyes is socialist cowardice.

Originally posted by: Puckfist

Originally posted by: ~~Snake~~

Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-

Originally posted by: Killet
and in which election has anyone voting independent made any difference at all?

Two that I can think of:

Bush I vs. Clinton (Perot)

Bush II vs. Gore (Nader)

the ONLY thing voting independents have done is give the liberals victory. End of story

Duh, anything less than tattooing an R on your eyes is socialist cowardice.

R for Redistribution?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The right is more virtuous than the left. They have twice as many virtues because they have double the standards.

Originally posted by: ~~Snake~~

Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-

Originally posted by: Killet
and in which election has anyone voting independent made any difference at all?

Two that I can think of:

Bush I vs. Clinton (Perot)

Bush II vs. Gore (Nader)

the ONLY thing voting independents have done is give the liberals victory. End of story

uhhh Nader took votes away from Gore not BushII
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The right is more virtuous than the left. They have twice as many virtues because they have double the standards.

Originally posted by: ~~Snake~~
the ONLY thing voting independents have done is give the liberals victory. End of story

Tell that to George Washington and Teddy Roosevelt. Lincoln, a Republican, was elected because of the effect of a previous independent in the race.

Michael R. Beschloss
Senior Fellow, Annenberg Washington Program

Third parties have been a crucial factor in a number of elections. Because of third-party candidates, 40 percent of the presidents elected since 1840 lacked a popular-vote majority, which affected their presidencies. In 1856 the Republicans got one-third of the popular vote and eleven states; four years later, they elected Abraham Lincoln. When Theodore Roosevelt ran in 1912 as the Bull Moose candidate, he got 88 electoral votes and changed the outcome of the election.

If you keep third-party candidates out of debates, you are depressing and in certain cases removing the contribution that they have made throughout history. They tend to check the effectiveness of the main parties. They also tend to bring issues onto the national agenda that the major-party candidates sometimes avoid. Finally, competition is healthy in all things. Third-party candidates in presidential debates will have the effect, ultimately, not of weakening the two-party system, but of strengthening it.

Originally posted by: Pixel

Originally posted by: ~~Snake~~

Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-

Originally posted by: Killet
and in which election has anyone voting independent made any difference at all?

Two that I can think of:

Bush I vs. Clinton (Perot)

Bush II vs. Gore (Nader)

the ONLY thing voting independents have done is give the liberals victory. End of story

uhhh Nader took votes away from Gore not BushII

That was just part of a liberal plot to disenchant the electorate with the republican party via Bush II, meanwhile their socialist flower, Obama, was coming into season. This is gradeschool political strategy, really.

Originally posted by: Puckfist

Originally posted by: ~~Snake~~

Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-

Originally posted by: Killet
and in which election has anyone voting independent made any difference at all?

Two that I can think of:

Bush I vs. Clinton (Perot)

Bush II vs. Gore (Nader)

the ONLY thing voting independents have done is give the liberals victory. End of story

Duh, anything less than tattooing an R on your eyes is socialist cowardice.

That is a retarded comment. But getting the worst President in US history out of office is about what this election should be about. And Gary Johnson has ZERO chance of winnning. NONE. So in swing states voting for him is voting for Obama. Saying its not shows ignorance.
_______________________________________________________________
"I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making it easy for them in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it" Ben Franklin

Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-

Originally posted by: Killet
and in which election has anyone voting independent made any difference at all?

Two that I can think of:

Bush I vs. Clinton (Perot)

Bush II vs. Gore (Nader)

ok, let me rephrase the question

"and in which election has anyone voting independent made any intended difference at all?"

If an independent ran and actually had a chance of winning, just stormed the polls and debates then by all means vote and hope for the best. I would vote independent in a minute if there was a viable candidate that had momentum and could win . . . unfortunately GJ isnt that guy. The system has been corrupted by the politicians to make a viable 3rd party almost impossible to make a reality.

So at this point you can either give your vote to obama or hold your nose and vote for romney like I will. I wish like hell we had better candidates but it just isnt to be in this election, nor was it in the last, or the one before that, or the one before that etc, etc . . so whine and bitch and moan all you want then decide which candidate (that has a chance to win) you want for the next 4 years and vote for them, or just stay home and keep on whining and moaning and bitching, doesnt matter to me, make yourself happy

Originally posted by: Killet

Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-

Originally posted by: Killet
and in which election has anyone voting independent made any difference at all?

Two that I can think of:

Bush I vs. Clinton (Perot)

Bush II vs. Gore (Nader)

ok, let me rephrase the question

"and in which election has anyone voting independent made any intended difference at all?"

If an independent ran and actually had a chance of winning, just stormed the polls and debates then by all means vote and hope for the best. I would vote independent in a minute if there was a viable candidate that had momentum and could win . . . unfortunately GJ isnt that guy. The system has been corrupted by the politicians to make a viable 3rd party almost impossible to make a reality.

So at this point you can either give your vote to obama or hold your nose and vote for romney like I will. I wish like hell we had better candidates but it just isnt to be in this election, nor was it in the last, or the one before that, or the one before that etc, etc . . so whine and bitch and moan all you want then decide which candidate (that has a chance to win) you want for the next 4 years and vote for them, or just stay home and keep on whining and moaning and bitching, doesnt matter to me, make yourself happy

Exactly Killet. But trying to explain that to some of these folks is like talking with a rock. Good luck!
_______________________________________________________________
"I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making it easy for them in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it" Ben Franklin

Originally posted by: ~~Snake~~

Originally posted by: Killet

Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-

Originally posted by: Killet
and in which election has anyone voting independent made any difference at all?

Two that I can think of:

Bush I vs. Clinton (Perot)

Bush II vs. Gore (Nader)

ok, let me rephrase the question

"and in which election has anyone voting independent made any intended difference at all?"

If an independent ran and actually had a chance of winning, just stormed the polls and debates then by all means vote and hope for the best. I would vote independent in a minute if there was a viable candidate that had momentum and could win . . . unfortunately GJ isnt that guy. The system has been corrupted by the politicians to make a viable 3rd party almost impossible to make a reality.

So at this point you can either give your vote to obama or hold your nose and vote for romney like I will. I wish like hell we had better candidates but it just isnt to be in this election, nor was it in the last, or the one before that, or the one before that etc, etc . . so whine and bitch and moan all you want then decide which candidate (that has a chance to win) you want for the next 4 years and vote for them, or just stay home and keep on whining and moaning and bitching, doesnt matter to me, make yourself happy

Exactly Killet. But trying to explain that to some of these folks is like talking with a rock. Good luck!

nah, I'm done, I have work to do, theres alot of people out there counting on me to pay my taxes you know, an aspirins job is never done
Post edited by Killet at 9/26/2012 3:54:30 PM

Originally posted by: Bigguns 93

Originally posted by: ~~Snake~~
the ONLY thing voting independents have done is give the liberals victory. End of story

Tell that to George Washington and Teddy Roosevelt. Lincoln, a Republican, was elected because of the effect of a previous independent in the race.

Michael R. Beschloss
Senior Fellow, Annenberg Washington Program

Third parties have been a crucial factor in a number of elections. Because of third-party candidates, 40 percent of the presidents elected since 1840 lacked a popular-vote majority, which affected their presidencies. In 1856 the Republicans got one-third of the popular vote and eleven states; four years later, they elected Abraham Lincoln. When Theodore Roosevelt ran in 1912 as the Bull Moose candidate, he got 88 electoral votes and changed the outcome of the election.

If you keep third-party candidates out of debates, you are depressing and in certain cases removing the contribution that they have made throughout history. They tend to check the effectiveness of the main parties. They also tend to bring issues onto the national agenda that the major-party candidates sometimes avoid. Finally, competition is healthy in all things. Third-party candidates in presidential debates will have the effect, ultimately, not of weakening the two-party system, but of strengthening it.

Its like people ask question already asked just to prove they don't understand.

I think the tactic of saying voting for an independent is voting for Obama screams of desperation that Romney can not win. ZERO chance. So really Romeny is stealing votes from qualified independent candidates.


Name one time when a major party candidate like Duchacis or McCain in did anything other than take votes from qualified candidates?

What part of you have 2 choices that can win do you still not understand?

They don't grasp it. Being practical is being over ridden by ideology. Very similar to Muslims when you think about.
_______________________________________________________________
"I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making it easy for them in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it" Ben Franklin

Originally posted by: Bigguns 93

Originally posted by: ~~Snake~~
the ONLY thing voting independents have done is give the liberals victory. End of story

Tell that to George Washington and Teddy Roosevelt. Lincoln, a Republican, was elected because of the effect of a previous independent in the race.

Michael R. Beschloss
Senior Fellow, Annenberg Washington Program

Third parties have been a crucial factor in a number of elections. Because of third-party candidates, 40 percent of the presidents elected since 1840 lacked a popular-vote majority, which affected their presidencies. In 1856 the Republicans got one-third of the popular vote and eleven states; four years later, they elected Abraham Lincoln. When Theodore Roosevelt ran in 1912 as the Bull Moose candidate, he got 88 electoral votes and changed the outcome of the election.

If you keep third-party candidates out of debates, you are depressing and in certain cases removing the contribution that they have made throughout history. They tend to check the effectiveness of the main parties. They also tend to bring issues onto the national agenda that the major-party candidates sometimes avoid. Finally, competition is healthy in all things. Third-party candidates in presidential debates will have the effect, ultimately, not of weakening the two-party system, but of strengthening it.

Lincoln won because he carried the most populated section of the Union in a four-man race. He carried that section of the Union because his policies were designed to directly benefit them. Because he was a shill.


_________________
The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to the doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can "throw the rascals out" at any election without leading to any profound or extreme shifts in policy.

— Carrol Quigley, Tragedy and Hope

Originally posted by: ~~Snake~~

Originally posted by: Puckfist

Originally posted by: ~~Snake~~

Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-

Originally posted by: Killet
and in which election has anyone voting independent made any difference at all?

Two that I can think of:

Bush I vs. Clinton (Perot)

Bush II vs. Gore (Nader)

the ONLY thing voting independents have done is give the liberals victory. End of story

Duh, anything less than tattooing an R on your eyes is socialist cowardice.

That is a retarded comment. But getting the worst President in US history out of office is about what this election should be about. And Gary Johnson has ZERO chance of winnning. NONE. So in swing states voting for him is voting for Obama. Saying its not shows ignorance.

unless, for instance, you were going to vote Obama between the big two. Then voting third party is like voting for Romney! Jesus, marry and joseph that was difficult to conceptualize!

Originally posted by: Killet
What part of you have 2 choices that can win do you still not understand?

Originally posted by: ~~Snake~~
They don't grasp it. Being practical is being over ridden by ideology. Very similar to Muslims when you think about.

The mass of people like you is the only reason that's true. Oh, and institutionalized control over the election process like the CPD setting barriers to prevent third parties in the debates, uphill battles to get names on ballots, discarding write in votes, etc. I had a door to door guy try to sell me the 'lesser of two evils' mindset as well, and it's just not going to happen. Down with monolithic, disenfranchising, whipped, entrenched parties!

As for the Muslim comparison, wtf are you smoking?
Post edited by Puckfist at 9/26/2012 4:27:15 PM

Originally posted by: Killet
What part of you have 2 choices that can win do you still not understand?

what part of voting for Gary or Nader don't you understand that means you want to vote for Gary or Nader? it's really pretty straightforward.

now like I said, Nader or Gary may or may not affect the election. for example if Nader was not running, i am sure some of those people would now feel that Gore was their top choice. but some of those people wouldn't even vote at all. should Nader or Gary not run on their principles because brainwashed people like you and snake have a distorted view of actual principles?

not at all. so what if Nader and Gary have no shot of actually winning, the only shot of the system being changed is of people sticking to their principles anyways. the more brainwashed people are like you and snake, the more you should look at yourselves as a sytemic problem.


Post edited by Pixel at 9/26/2012 4:28:07 PM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The right is more virtuous than the left. They have twice as many virtues because they have double the standards.