Thread: Gary Johnson

We all know that Ross Perot may have helped get Clinton elected by taking away Republican votes. We also know that Nader may have helped get GW elected by taking away Democrat votes. Either way, if a 3rd party takes away so many votes that it causes an R or a D to lose an election, then that R or D DESERVED to lose!

You know how I feel about the last election? I may not have liked Obama, but with our sorry choice of candidates, the Republicans totally deserved to lose and lose hard by abandoning their core principals in favor of going farther left in order to simply beat the other side. Thus, I didn't vote in the last election. I didn't think either candidate deserved my vote. If it takes losing an election to get either party's attention, then so be it. As harmful as 3rd parties appear at first glance, I think they're an important component in the political process.

This is where Gary Johnson comes into play. He's right on the money with some left-wing issues, so if Obama loses, then good. Obama should have been more true to his principles. He's also right on the money with some right-wing issues. If Romney loses, then good. Romney should have been more true to his principles. Swinging from the left AND the right! Go GJ!

Originally Posted by AustinFromSA

We all know that Ross Perot may have helped get Clinton elected by taking away Republican votes.

I'm not so sure if that is true.

I know I voted for Ross Perot in that election, and I usually vote for Democrats.

Originally Posted by AustinFromSA

You know how I feel about the last election? I may not have liked Obama, but with our sorry choice of candidates, the Republicans totally deserved to lose and lose hard by abandoning their core principals in favor of going farther left in order to simply beat the other side. Thus, I didn't vote in the last election. I didn't think either candidate deserved my vote. If it takes losing an election to get either party's attention, then so be it. As harmful as 3rd parties appear at first glance, I think they're an important component in the political process.

Just to be clear, if McCain had chosen a different running mate than Sarah Palin then you might have a point about the GOP moving to the left...but as it turned out the last election had McCain moving further to the fringe right as a last hope to hopefully have a fighting chance against Obama. The GOP were sick of the cut taxes and drive up huge deficites like that of Reagan & GWB...they most certainly did not move to a more moderate "center" as you are trying to portray.

Originally Posted by AustinFromSA

This is where Gary Johnson comes into play. He's right on the money with some left-wing issues, so if Obama loses, then good. Obama should have been more true to his principles. He's also right on the money with some right-wing issues. If Romney loses, then good. Romney should have been more true to his principles. Swinging from the left AND the right! Go GJ!

I agree with this. Back in 2000 I voted Nader...living in IL at the time so it didn't matter...but I could very well vote GJ this round as a F you to Obama...I wanted single payer or medicare for all, I wanted carbon emission legislation, I wanted immigration reform, I wanted the war in Afghanistan to be over, leagalized pot would be cool...what's the point of voting for Obama if he's not going to advocate for liberal causes?

Originally Posted by AustinFromSA

We all know that Ross Perot may have helped get Clinton elected by taking away Republican votes. We also know that Nader may have helped get GW elected by taking away Democrat votes. Either way, if a 3rd party takes away so many votes that it causes an R or a D to lose an election, then that R or D DESERVED to lose!

You know how I feel about the last election? I may not have liked Obama, but with our sorry choice of candidates, the Republicans totally deserved to lose and lose hard by abandoning their core principals in favor of going farther left in order to simply beat the other side. Thus, I didn't vote in the last election. I didn't think either candidate deserved my vote. If it takes losing an election to get either party's attention, then so be it. As harmful as 3rd parties appear at first glance, I think they're an important component in the political process.

This is where Gary Johnson comes into play. He's right on the money with some left-wing issues, so if Obama loses, then good. Obama should have been more true to his principles. He's also right on the money with some right-wing issues. If Romney loses, then good. Romney should have been more true to his principles. Swinging from the left AND the right! Go GJ!

Wait. You didn't bother to vote in the last Presidential election?

pillsbury/dbs - how has Ron Paul changed the Republicans? He's changed interwebz conservitrolls, I haven't seen much change in the party. actually, they seem to ignore him. Like I ignore the people in front of the post office with Lyndon Larouche banners who want to save Nasa because Obama's hitler

Originally Posted by AustinFromSA

We all know that Ross Perot may have helped get Clinton elected by taking away Republican votes. We also know that Nader may have helped get GW elected by taking away Democrat votes. Either way, if a 3rd party takes away so many votes that it causes an R or a D to lose an election, then that R or D DESERVED to lose!

You know how I feel about the last election? I may not have liked Obama, but with our sorry choice of candidates, the Republicans totally deserved to lose and lose hard by abandoning their core principals in favor of going farther left in order to simply beat the other side. Thus, I didn't vote in the last election. I didn't think either candidate deserved my vote. If it takes losing an election to get either party's attention, then so be it. As harmful as 3rd parties appear at first glance, I think they're an important component in the political process.

This is where Gary Johnson comes into play. He's right on the money with some left-wing issues, so if Obama loses, then good. Obama should have been more true to his principles. He's also right on the money with some right-wing issues. If Romney loses, then good. Romney should have been more true to his principles. Swinging from the left AND the right! Go GJ!

O.K. fair enough but understand that Romney will win in Montana. Our electoral votes amount to squat anyway.

What I have been doing is encouraging any folks I know who have a brain to give Johnson a fair look. If they like what they see/hear then to do the same and encourage their friends and family to give him a fair look.

I don't pretend to think he can win but maybe he can force the GOP and the Democrats to listen to someone besides the wealthy and connected, the Left wing and Right wing crazies and the so called Christians.

Originally Posted by Hugh Conway

pillsbury/dbs - how has Ron Paul changed the Republicans?

He's convinced a small minority of them that getting some of them tickets to the Superbowl of republican politics and watching him introduce the lame half time act is equivalent to wining the game and getting a ring.

Also possibly lessened the chances of one of the tea-party candidates getting the nomination and it going to Romney instead?

Originally Posted by PNWbrit

Also possibly lessened the chances of one of the tea-party candidates getting the nomination and it going to Romney instead?

This...I gotta think that some of his voters would go for a tea partier like Bachman or Assholefoam.

Originally Posted by PNWbrit

Also possibly lessened the chances of one of the tea-party candidates getting the nomination and it going to Romney instead?

Nah, there's was never a serious chance of a tea-party candidate getting the nomination

Originally Posted by Hugh Conway

Nah, there's was never a serious chance of a tea-party candidate getting the nomination

But he probably made their chances somewhat less serious... it's not that dissimilar to the role of a third party candidate in presidential election?

Originally Posted by PNWbrit

But he probably made their chances somewhat less serious... it's not that dissimilar to the role of a third party candidate in presidential election?

If RP wasn't in the GOP mix voter turnout would've been even lower because you wouldn't have the moderates jumping the dem ship to vote for RP in the hopes of getting legalized pot and immediate withdrawl of troops abroad. These folks would otherwise not be involved in the GOP nomination process IMO. RPs remaining supporters are tea partiers IMO and would've then thrown their support to Bachman or buttfoam

Originally Posted by Adolf Allerbush

If RP wasn't in the GOP mix voter turnout would've been even lower because you wouldn't have the moderates jumping the dem ship to vote for RP in the hopes of getting legalized pot and immediate withdrawl of troops abroad. These folks would otherwise not be involved in the GOP nomination process IMO. RPs remaining supporters are tea partiers IMO and would've then thrown their support to Bachman or buttfoam

Eggszxtly.

Originally Posted by PNWbrit

Eggszxtly.

Or the pizza guy...

Originally Posted by Adolf Allerbush

If RP wasn't in the GOP mix voter turnout would've been even lower because you wouldn't have the moderates jumping the dem ship to vote for RP in the hopes of getting legalized pot and immediate withdrawl of troops abroad. These folks would otherwise not be involved in the GOP nomination process IMO. RPs remaining supporters are tea partiers IMO and would've then thrown their support to Bachman or buttfoam

Originally Posted by PNWbrit

Eggszxtly.

In the case of a Caucus state like WA what did it matter?

I disagree that there are many flippers from D to Ron Paul.

I also think that if RP wasn't in the mix, then we'd could have very well been dealing with Newt Gingrich instead of Romney. Like Johnson, I'm not on board with all his positions, but I was glad to see RP get as far as he did this time. While Republicans and Democrats just enjoy flinging poo at each other and getting nowhere, Ron Paul at least brought a lot of attention to the issues that need to be addressed, and that's something I have faith that Gary Johnson will be important for as well.

Originally Posted by Hugh Conway

In the case of a Caucus state like WA what did it matter?

Ask DBS?

Originally Posted by AustinFromSA

I also think that if RP wasn't in the mix, then we'd could have very well been dealing with Newt Gingrich instead of Romney.

This is a joke, right? Newts biggest enemy was and is..... Newt.

Originally Posted by Hugh Conway

I disagree that there are many flippers from D to Ron Paul.

I've got some pretty socially liberal friends that flipped to RP...but fuck if I know how many RP supporters voted for Obama in 08.

Originally Posted by Adolf Allerbush

I've got some pretty socially liberal friends that flipped to RP

Because they are completely insane?

I voted for obama. After donating quite a bit of money and volunteering for RP. More accurately I voted against palin, who was NOT a far right conservative. All she was, was a SOCIALLY conservative idiot with little to no understanding of any other issues.
She was a last ditch effort to get the support of the religous right. If mccain had chosen lieberman, as he wanted to he would have won.

As far as the influence RP has had on the repub party, PAY ATTENTION, read some of the links I have posted. In AZ, NV, AK, VA, OH, WA, OK, LA, and other states RP supporters have been elected to key positions such as party chairmen, rules committees, etc... The Republican party now has more of a libertarian influence within the party than at any time in its history.

Has it affected the national party? Not yet, but it will.

Sent from my PantechP8000 using TGR Forums

Originally Posted by doughboyshredder

I voted for obama. After donating quite a bit of money and volunteering for RP. More accurately I voted against palin, who was NOT a far right conservative. All she was, was a SOCIALLY conservative idiot with little to no understanding of any other issues.
She was a last ditch effort to get the support of the religous right. If mccain had chosen lieberman, as he wanted to he would have won.

As far as the influence RP has had on the repub party, PAY ATTENTION, read some of the links I have posted. In AZ, NV, AK, VA, OH, WA, OK, LA, and other states RP supporters have been elected to key positions such as party chairmen, rules committees, etc... The Republican party now has more of a libertarian influence within the party than at any time in its history.

Has it affected the national party? Not yet, but it will.

Sent from my PantechP8000 using TGR Forums

It doesn't seem like that is the case, unfortunately. Tea Party seems to be a much bigger influence and the religious right than anything the libertarians are influencing. And make no mistake, RP and RP2 are the religious right. Don't be fooled.

Originally Posted by Adolf Allerbush

And make no mistake, RP and RP2 are the religious right. Don't be fooled.

I disagree entirely.
The religious right is fundamentally opposed to the concept of live and let live which is the cornerstone of libertarian philosophy. The religious right is no different than the liberal left in their desire to use government to enforce their viewpoints on others. While RP is definitely very religious, his policies in no way support the government enforcing his religious beliefs.

The "tea party" is a misnomer now. Originally the tea party was the burgeoning libertarian wing of the GOP. Then it was quickly taken over by the establishment republicans. Dim witted fools like DBT just haven't figured that out yet.

Originally Posted by doughboyshredder

I disagree entirely.
The religious right is fundamentally opposed to the concept of live and let live which is the cornerstone of libertarian philosophy. The religious right is no different than the liberal left in their desire to use government to enforce their viewpoints on others. While RP is definitely very religious, his policies in no way support the government enforcing his religious beliefs.

I see where you're coming from, but to me the Pauls' religious beliefs drives their policy. RP signed the personhood pledge if memory serves, and some other equally ridiculous pledges. He's no libertarian. That's why I dig GJ...none of that BS in his political views. Religion just shouldn't be a factor in ones politics...period. The GOP is the party of legislating morality IMO.

Originally Posted by Adolf Allerbush

I see where you're coming from, but to me the Pauls' religious beliefs drives their policy. RP signed the personhood pledge if memory serves, and some other equally ridiculous pledges. He's no libertarian. That's why I dig GJ...none of that BS in his political views. Religion just shouldn't be a factor in ones politics...period. The GOP is the party of legislating morality IMO.

That is definitely the biggest problem in the GOP. IMO the legislating of morality is completely contrary to actual conservative (not religious conservative) values.

Abortion is a really tough issue to judge people on. IMO it is the killing of a being. The older I get the more I come to believe that abortion is unequivocally wrong. However, I still can't get to a place where I believe the government should tell others they have to agree with me. Some people basically attribute it to murder (and I can understand that belief). For these people it only makes sense that the government should do all it can to ban the practice. The line of reasoning is that the government enforces laws against murder, and abortion should be no different.

What really makes no sense is that the same people who would have the government outlaw abortion often times also want the government to ban contraception (or at least make it extremely difficult to obtain).

The easiest way to reduce abortion IMO is to increase family planning.

Wednesday Night: Town Hall with Judge Jim Gray
& Special Guest Rob Kampia, Executive Director of
the Marijuana Policy Project


Wednesday, June 13, 2012
6:00 PM PDT/ 7:00 PM MDT/ 8:00 PM CDT/ 9:00 PM EDT

Please join Judge Jim Gray, Libertarian Party vice presidential nominee, for an online town hall Wednesday evening, 9 p.m. EDT/ 6 p.m. PDT.

Joining Judge Gray is special guest Rob Kampia, co-founder and executive director of the Marijuana Policy Project, the largest nonprofit organization in the U.S. that is solely dedicated to ending cannabis prohibition.

This town hall will be featured on Vokle.com. To ask questions via video or text, simply sign into your Facebook account or sign up for a Vokle account. If you just want to watch the town hall, go to www.GaryJohnson2012.com.







These informal online video chats are an excellent opportunity to exchange ideas regarding important issues of the day, and we urge you to participate if you can.

Again, go to www.GaryJohnson2012.com Wednesday evening for what I am sure will be a great discussion.

Hope to see you online!

Judge Jim Gray