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.
Think the only reason Clinton and Trump lead in the polls is due to MSM and people are familiar with the two party system. I think if Gary was allowed to debate many would know his name and vote for him. I know a few Trump supporters switching to Gary. Gary is closing the gap with Clinton in polls for young voters.
what? Are you hoping that some perfect bon mot on Gary's part is going to turn the 92% of American voters who have decided to vote for T or C into instant Johnson voters? Wasn't that already decided in the primaries when he got 8% or less of the vote and lost every primary in every state by huge margins?
What exactly is the purpose, at this point? You want to disseminate a new message, do it in the primaries when the voters can decide, not in the champion playoffs where the division leaders have already won their field and are going for the gold.
Not all polls are accurate, or meaningful. The CNN poll with 18-34 y/o % for each candidate had such a small sampling of them the margin of error was unacceptable so it just said the info was N/A. I wish they could be forced to sample the same number of people in each age group. N/A should be not allowable.
If the only candidates on TV are Dem/Rep, that pretty much guarantees corporations are favored over individuals & groups of people that think bribery is wrong and that they should have some rights, too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by evilnewbie
The rules are 15%, in if you are above, not if you are below... There is no affirmative action in politics...
Gary is polling about 35% with 18-34 y/o voters & slightly above that with our troops. He's at 15%+ in 10 or more states & 10%+ in over 40 states. He's the first 3rd party candidate to get on the ballot in all 50 states since 1996. Some claim they've never heard of him & most think they are too busy to read a site like ontheissues that explains exactly what the Libertarians are for or against on 24 issues. So they just repeat info from whatever Clinton or Trump fans they are listening to. Of course, not everything said about Trump or Clinton is for sure 100% truth, either.
Gary Johnson won the Libertarian Party vote for Presidential candidate at the Libertarian Party convention. There were a *few* others he beat, so obviously he got much more than 8%. I will vote for him whether or not he is in the debates, as I have a high % of agreement with their issues positions. He only needs to get 5% of the popular vote for the Libertarian Party to get gov't funding in 2020. Best wishes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mohawkx
what? Are you hoping that some perfect bon mot on Gary's part is going to turn the 92% of American voters who have decided to vote for T or C into instant Johnson voters? Wasn't that already decided in the primaries when he got 8% or less of the vote and lost every primary in every state by huge margins?
What exactly is the purpose, at this point? You want to disseminate a new message, do it in the primaries when the voters can decide, not in the champion playoffs where the division leaders have already won their field and are going for the gold.
Provide checks and balances for what? This is a slugfest by two presidential candidates who each have between 45% and 47% of the national vote. One or the other of those candidates will get the job. Johnson has no chance to get the job. This is a job interview and he's already been screened out for consideration by the American people by only receiving a very small percentage of the vote. Now we want to conduct the final selection of the two candidates left. I know you Libertarian leaners want to get him front and center in a national debate but for what purpose and to what benefit to the American voting public?
He has no chance. He's just a spoiler if he debated at this point.
What's so hard to understand about this?
As I mentioned in my previous post, I think he's not a good choice for the libertarians. I wouldn't vote any libertarian who believes in open borders. So I'm not a "libertarian leaner" enough to give the party my vote but I feel they bring up many other good ideas.
The "benefit" is what's fair in a supposed/but not really open democratic society. And to allow at least someone else in there to express their views regardless if you/I agree or disagree with them. And again, it's another check/balance on a system where to me team R and D are basically the different side of the same coin. We need what I believe are largely, especially establishment type crooks from both parties running our country into the ground, to be watched/questioned as much as possible in a nationwide forum. Especially team D establishment clown exhibit A.
If you feel a 2 party system should be the begin and end all in our political system, perhaps this will help you grasp the reality of it all if you don't see how corrupt/self serving these clowns have been for our country for many decades now:
“There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution.”
How people walk into it like yourself thinking it's the "norm", the way it should be to only want and enable strictly a two party/2 people in the end competing for office, might want to listen to the wise words of a founding father. If one is so blinded not to understand what adam's is saying, then I'll tell those people they are exhibit A in what he's describing/was trying to warn people like you about....people lost/brainwashed in thinking a 2 party system that has been pathetic according to many in serving the needs of the people is the only way it should be and other parties need not apply.
FWIW, the Libertarian Party has several dozen running for Congress, & maybe 200+ running for state legislatures, mayor & city council seats, county boards, county attorneys, county sheriffs, governor, state attorney general, district judges. So, they are not just trying to build from the top down. The Libertarian candidate for mayor of Springfield, MO won last time (Springfield, MO, is way over 100,000 people).
I'd like to note that most people voting for Gary Johnson are *not* members of the Libertarian Party but I believe they are still the fastest growing party. Best wishes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mohawkx
I also feel that the only way they will be a formidable political force is to have many candidates run for the down ballots races and off year elections. You build a viable political party from the ground up and not from the top down.
Wins for Libertarians so far include UT State Sen, NH house, NE State Sen, NV State Assembly. The party will keep growing. Most of the 18-34 voters identify as no political party, & 1/3 will vote Libertarian. Soon, the Democrats & Republicans who only are there to collect bribes will be voted out (I hope).
I don't think a true Libertarian can win the White House. Think Johnson is more a Centralist 75% Democrat and 25% Republican.
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.
