Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
One of Gary Johnson's favorite lines is I am not running for king or dictator, so Congress must agree to get many of these things done. Several dozen Libertarians are running for Congress, & Gary says if we make it to the White House, we will hire Libertarian leaning Democrats & Republicans, which may help to breakup partisan gridlock in Congress.
He is opposed to immigrants sneaking in here, working for less than the minimum wage & paying no taxes, as the govt doesn't even know they are here. He wants immigrants working here to get social security numbers & pay taxes. Presumably the employers would get in trouble if they weren't paying at least minimum wage. If immigrants want citizenship, they must pass tests. He won't accept bribes by special interest groups, he doesn't worship money or need more.
Many Americans won't work for the minimum wage, and those are the jobs immigrants would most likely take if unqualified for better.
He's for legal cannabis, because most say they are. That alone will get him several million votes.
Gary Johnson works for the people, not himself. He's very hard-working, creative, kind & caring, and he is abnormally honest. Libertarians keep no secrets from the voters, positions/candidates at lp.org/
Quote:
Originally Posted by Listener2307
You have not been listening to Johnson/Weld. They say - over and over - The Libertarian Party is not going to rule; it is going to preside. The legislature will submit rules and regulations and the president will sign them or not.
Your contention that Johnson will subvert the Constitution in some way or arbitrarily enforce and make up new law is without basis.
Your belief that borders will suddenly be "opened up" is without basis.
What is true is that Johnson wants to identify those who wish to come in and work, issue ID cards, and have those guest workers pay taxes just like you and me. If you cannot pass the background check you do not get an ID card and if you do not have an ID card you will not find work. The legislation for this approach does not yet exist, so Johnson would ask for it.
It seems to me Trump's calls for guns and walls and more police and arrests will result in chaos. I just don't see it working. Mexicans are not our enemy, and we should not make that so.
I urge you to look at his positions and approach carefully. You are wide of the mark.
May I submit to you that it's you that haven't been listening:
"Gary Johnson and Bill Weld don’t want to build an expensive and useless wall. The only thing a big wall will do is increase the size of the ladders, the depth of the tunnels, and the width of the divisions between us."
Translation....Open borders/let anyone flow in and worry later how to deal with them after they've snuck into the country illegally. Beyond naive approach. And against our current federal laws/constitution.
"We should appreciate and respect the diversity of legal immigrants that come to the United States to be productive members of society."
No johnson....we appreciate legal immigrants who follow/respected the laws/played by the rules to get here, not rewarding illegals/their families. Further on the issue/his views:
This statement alone proves my point about the illegality of his "policies". Notice the key word "illegal" on the 2 year grace period plan:
"2 year grace period for illegals to get work visas
There should be a two-year grace period for illegal immigrants to attain work visas so they can continue contributing to America and begin taking part in American society openly."
Immigrants should be able to bring their families to the US after demonstrating ability to support them financially."
So not only reward illegals here, let them bring their families in(!).
Come on supporters.....the guy is enabling/proposes to reward illegal behavior just like most of the other clowns in the other 2 parties. If he becomes president, what, will be ignore the oath/ask for key words to be changed about the part of upholding the rule of law/the constitution?
Again....this is simply pick/choose what laws/rules work for a given individual, potentially set at the highest level by our "leaders". Been working real well with the current set of clowns running the country, hasn't it? Wait until you get a bunch of people/the masses fed up and feel if it's right for the clowns high up that's it's good enough for the masses to ignore whatever law(s) they feel is ok ignore. I sure hope I'm not alive when the proverbial S*** hits the fan one day if and when our country becomes the wild west again because we sure seem to be going down a very ugly path while most of the herd is asleep/play enablers.
Steve likes to ignore how government should work. The Republicans and Democrats both believe we are electing kings and queens. Just listen to how Trump and Clinton speak. We will do this or that. That's not really their job and that's why people like Johnson make people confused. He doesn't want to rule the US like a king. Just like as governor of New Mexico, he didn't try to force the way of law by being governor.
Johnsons plan on dealing with illegals is by far the most reasonable and realistic plan by any candidate. Please tell me where Trump even stands on what to do with illegals, tomorrow he will change his stance again. This late in the election it's a huge joke that Trump doesn't have a set position of immigration.
Steve likes to ignore how government should work. The Republicans and Democrats both believe we are electing kings and queens. Just listen to how Trump and Clinton speak. We will do this or that. That's not really their job and that's why people like Johnson make people confused. He doesn't want to rule the US like a king. Just like as governor of New Mexico, he didn't try to force the way of law by being governor.
You didn't read my above post or 2 above carefully in which I clearly stated I said I see no difference between team D, R, and this team of RINO's/libertarians clearly expressing their choice of "pick and choose what laws we like to follow!".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattks
Johnsons plan on dealing with illegals is by far the most reasonable and realistic plan by any candidate. Please tell me where Trump even stands on what to do with illegals, tomorrow he will change his stance again. This late in the election it's a huge joke that Trump doesn't have a set position of immigration.
If you feel ignoring the rule of federal law is "most reasonable and realistic", sure. Like attracts like.
I can't answer on where trump stands. I can answer that johnson/weld have one thing in common with hillary and sander's and they are for amnesty/rewarding illegal behavior in regards to illegal aliens. I find them all self-serving/pathetic, especially on the topic on ignoring the rule of law when it serves their pocketbook and/or ideology, ie, the ideology of ignoring the rule of federal law in regards to immigration.
There's a certain allure around Johnson but it you start listening to him or how he responds to questions you'll see him for what he is. A man that receives support because the other two candidates are so much disliked.
There's a certain allure around Johnson but it you start listening to him or how he responds to questions you'll see him for what he is. A man that receives support because the other two candidates are so much disliked.
I voted for him in 2012 when neither Trump or Clinton were in the picture. He is a reasonable middle of the road guy who wants to bring some common sense back into things. Smaller, less obtrusive government, lower taxes, just some basic simple stuff that the current extreme Democratic and Republican parties have completely lost sight of over the last few election cycles.
You didn't read my above post clearly in which I clearly stated I said I see no difference between team D, R, and this team of RINO's/libertarians clearly expressing their choice of "pick and choose what laws we like to follow!".
If you feel ignoring the rule of federal law is "most reasonable and realistic".
I can't answer on where trump stands. I can answer that johnson/weld have one thing in common with hillary and sander's and they are for amnesty/rewarding illegal behavior in regards to illegal aliens. I find them all self-serving/pathetic, especially on the topic on ignoring the rule of law when it serves their pocketbook/ideology, ie, the ideology of ignoring the rule of federal law in regards to immigration.
I realize you think that any way for illegals to stay here equals amnesty, but that's not true. There are only 2 ways to deal with illegals. Because there will never be some major deportation force like Trump originally said.
1. Amnesty, giving illegals citizenship.
I don't like that and that is what most Democrats propose.
2. A path to legal status. If they have a job, give a 2 year grace period where all illegals are given an opportunity to get those work visas without risk of deportation. Part of that plan is ending all federal benefits for illegal immigrants permanently. After 2 years if an illegal gets caught they will get deported, but there will be no "deportation force."
Republicans will eventually have to do something like Johnson proposes. If the Democrats win amnesty, which they will if there is no viable alternative, like what you suggest, they will win every presidential election for the foreseeable future.
In a perfect world, I might agree with you. But a deportation of that scale is never going to happen. It's more of a pipe dream then Johnson winning this election and getting everything he wanted.
I realize you think that any way for illegals to stay here equals amnesty, but that's not true. There are only 2 ways to deal with illegals. Because there will never be some major deportation force like Trump originally said.
1. Amnesty, giving illegals citizenship.
I don't like that and that is what most Democrats propose.
2. A path to legal status. If they have a job, give a 2 year grace period where all illegals are given an opportunity to get those work visas without risk of deportation. Part of that plan is ending all federal benefits for illegal immigrants permanently. After 2 years if an illegal gets caught they will get deported, but there will be no "deportation force."
Republicans will eventually have to do something like Johnson proposes. If the Democrats win amnesty, which they will if there is no viable alternative, like what you suggest, they will win every presidential election for the foreseeable future.
In a perfect world, I might agree with you. But a deportation of that scale is never going to happen. It's more of a pipe dream then Johnson winning this election and getting everything he wanted.
3.) Self deportation of current illegals by providing and ENFORCING huge fines/sanctions against employers who hire them and the illegals who cross over here. The laws are there. They need to be ENFORCED.
And above all else:
Don't reward illegal behavior.
Don't reward illegal behavior.
Don't reward illegal behavior.
Regardless, you're still justifying why it's valid to break federal law. And please stop justifying/finding relief in rewarding illegal behavior which you and others keep doing. That's a very, very dangerous slope that goes way beyond the specifics of illegal immigration. It's a much wider picture that should be analyzed.
Example: Next up as a campaign topic.....since so many people are poor and it's now deemed necessary by political party ABCD who will run on the platform that it's ok for the poor to rob people to survive/take their money, as long as the people robbed are "rich" enough(tbd of course what rich equals). And robberies will be taken on a case by case basic to see if it's punishable at all or ignored and tolerated even though the laws on the book of robbery still call it a crime. Take money from someone/rough them up a bit and they survive and go away from the incident largely unhurt? No worries! It's considered good now because that poor person really needed the money. Someone is really hurt violently? See, that's still bad, and we'll enforce the law on that one. But let's take it case by case.
See the "fun" can of worms we can have to justify this/that law, play let's enforce it or not?
Be careful voters what sandbox you think is "reasonable". It's an ugly/dangerous slope when you justify in your mind the game of law bending/ignoring.
3.) Self deportation of current illegals by providing and ENFORCING huge fines/sanctions against employers who hire them and the illegals who cross over here. The laws are there. They need to be ENFORCED.
And above all else:
Don't reward illegal behavior.
Don't reward illegal behavior.
Don't reward illegal behavior.
Regardless, you're still justifying why it's valid to break federal law. And please stop justifying/finding relief in rewarding illegal behavior which you and others keep doing. That's a very, very dangerous slope that goes way beyond the specifics of illegal immigration. It's a much wider picture that should be analyzed.
Example: Next up as a campaign topic.....since so many people are poor and it's now deemed necessary by political party ABCD who will run on the platform that it's ok for the poor to rob people to survive/take their money, as long as the people robbed are "rich" enough(tbd of course what rich equals). And robberies will be taken on a case by case basic to see if it's punishable at all or ignored and tolerated even though the laws on the book of robbery still call it a crime. Take money from someone/rough them up a bit and they survive and go away from the incident largely unhurt? No worries! It's considered good now because that poor person really needed the money. Someone is really hurt violently? See, that's still bad, and we'll enforce the law on that one. But let's take it case by case.
See the "fun" can of worms we can have to justify this/that law, play let's enforce it or not?
Be careful voters what sandbox you think is "reasonable". It's an ugly/dangerous slope when you justify in your mind the game of law bending/ignoring.
Regardless of your opinions on Johnson, nobody has a f'ing clue what Trump is going to do, so thats just a crap shoot, and Hillary wants to step it up, so do you have a better alternative?
I realize you think that any way for illegals to stay here equals amnesty, but that's not true. There are only 2 ways to deal with illegals. Because there will never be some major deportation force like Trump originally said.
1. Amnesty, giving illegals citizenship.
I don't like that and that is what most Democrats propose.
2. A path to legal status. If they have a job, give a 2 year grace period where all illegals are given an opportunity to get those work visas without risk of deportation. Part of that plan is ending all federal benefits for illegal immigrants permanently. After 2 years if an illegal gets caught they will get deported, but there will be no "deportation force."
Republicans will eventually have to do something like Johnson proposes. If the Democrats win amnesty, which they will if there is no viable alternative, like what you suggest, they will win every presidential election for the foreseeable future.
In a perfect world, I might agree with you. But a deportation of that scale is never going to happen. It's more of a pipe dream then Johnson winning this election and getting everything he wanted.
For someone who wants to try to make sure that accurate information about your own party's platform is being disseminated, you should refrain from defining the plans of the Democratic candidate based on Republican talking points. Hillary is proposing a pathway to citizenship, not amnesty, which is what over 2/3rds of Americans feel is the right thing.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
