if this clown can get his name on the ballots, it is very bad news for the Repub nominee...if he gets even 1-2% of the votes it can make all the difference in the general
if this clown can get his name on the ballots, it is very bad news for the Repub nominee...if he gets even 1-2% of the votes it can make all the difference in the general
Looks like I know who I'm voting for in November.
He got .01 percent last time. I doubt he improves on those numbers much, but I'd actually vote for him over Hillary, Trump, or Jeb.
Oh brother, haha.
If it's Trump vs. Hillary in November, Gary Johnson has my vote.
And when Hillary appoints a left wing justice early 2017 you can thank your precious little ego for such a worthless, meaningless vote.
Wait, so I'm voting Gary Johnson because of my "precious little ego"? You mean it's not because I refuse to vote for a man who isn't very bright, is an extreme narcissist who refuses to take advice, who has the self-control of an elementary school kid, who lacks even basic knowledge about foreign affairs, who is patently dishonest, who bragged in a book about sleeping with another man's woman, who donated money to Hillary and called her a great Secretary of State, and who would be in control of military and nuclear weapons?
News to me.
Hillary is going to nominate a decisively Left wing Justice and Trump won't, all your silly little ridiculous conspiracies aside.
If trump sucks you primary him with Cruz or Ryan in 2020 and take him out but a Supreme Court Selection lasts decades.
You and your temper tantrums will finally hit home come 2017 I can assure you of that.
Temper tantrums? LOL! The heck you talking about? I feel like I'm communicating with one of those CT nuts. lol
You can put your faith in Trump. I will not.
More faith in Trump to nominate a Supreme Court justice than Hillary and I would bet the house on that.
Fine. Bet the house. And if you "win," watch the country crash and burn. We are screwed either way.
Temper tantrums? LOL! The heck you talking about? I feel like I'm communicating with one of those CT nuts. lol
You can put your faith in Trump. I will not.
Oh my god Dos yet another CTer....you're getting pretty paranoid these days of people with other opinions. Take a deep breath.
Poly, welcome to the club. Haha..
Oh my god Dos yet another CTer....you're getting pretty paranoid these days of people with other opinions. Take a deep breath.
Poly, welcome to the club. Haha..
I didn't call him a CT nut. I don't think he's a 9/11 Troofer. You crazies are in a special class of stupid all by yourself.
the republican nominee is a 911 Cter truther. doesn't that drive ya nuts?
spend ten years dissing them, and now he's taking over.
I don't take anything you say at face value.
Ari Fleischer accused Trump of being a 911 truther. Who are you going to believe, awesome republican ari, or liberal trump?
Actually, trump never denies it... and he goes on alex jones and well, infowars/prison planet is pretty much working to get trump elected.
so yeah, the repub nominee is a damn big CTer. good luck with that ;)
I can tell who I don't believe: the compulsive liar (you).
he has /had best platform save ron paul or rand paul
would make excellent president
https://twitter.com/AriFleischer/status/245493715727159296
Read about it. Ari fleischer called Trump a 911 truther.
and yes, trump's been on jones' nutty show, and they're great buddies.
LOL at you not knowing this. You feel dumber than ever now. Trump is a 911 conspiracy theorist. LOL at you not knowing this - do you even know who alex jones is? Oh brother, you're clueless on this, huh? No worries, read about it.
the republican nominee is a 911 Cter truther.
Care to explain why you lied about Trump being a 9/11 Troofer?Donald Trump's extended riff on 9/11 last weekend — "the World Trade Center came down under the reign of George W. Bush," and so on — has not merely been rejected by the mainstream right. It has been described as disqualifying, as a conspiracy theory, as something "a liberal Democrat" (per Dick Cheney) or "Michael Moore" (per Jeb Bush) might say. And many of the critics have used a potent neologism, "truther," to insist that Trump has gone beyond the bounds of sanity.
Rhetorical question. You are incapable of telling the truth.
Donald Trump's extended riff on 9/11 last weekend — "the World Trade Center came down under the reign of George W. Bush," and so on — has not merely been rejected by the mainstream right. It has been described as disqualifying, as a conspiracy theory, as something "a liberal Democrat" (per Dick Cheney) or "Michael Moore" (per Jeb Bush) might say. And many of the critics have used a potent neologism, "truther," to insist that Trump has gone beyond the bounds of sanity.
"I thought Trump really exposed himself as a truther, and I don’t think that will play real well in South Carolina," said Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/02/16/trumps-foes-hes-a-911-truther-truthers-would-disagree/
Did you read the link you just posted?
"There's really no evidence that Trump doubts the facts of 9/11 — that 19 hijackers affiliated with al-Qaeda managed to evade detection and take down four commercial planes, two of them destroying the World Trade Center and murdering thousands of people."
LOL!
I just bumped the Trump 911 truther thread.
Just read his statements, including those about pre-911 warnings.
You really wanna defend this guy, I get it.
Almost no one knows he's running. That can't be very helpful to him.
IF he can get on stage at a televised debate - and that's a big IF....
He can provide ANY alternative to a nation that knows trump is a d-bag and hilary is an evil liar.
As long as he's not an evil lying douchebag, he can win some votes. He won't win, of course, but he can peel 8 or 9% off in a race where both options are shithead NY liberal RINOs who stand for nothing besides grabbing power.
I'll admit to being mostly ignorant about him, but if he got onto a nationally-broadcast debate stage with the other two and he managed to administer some hard swings on them, we may be surprised at how far he could go.
But you're right, what a giant 'if' that is, to think he might get the opportunity. Not cool at all that things are this way.
I really don't recall ever seeing the guy anywhere. Will look up some of his debates and watch him.
If he's good, then it's all the more reason to figure they'll never let him within a 100 miles of Hillary on a stage.
He was very good on NCIS.
Yeah, I doubt they'll let him get into the debate. Although the anti-moron feeling is strong, and even though he's unknown, he's at 11% already, to Clinton 42%, Trump 34%. He eats a LOT of the Trump vote actually.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/mar/24/libertarian-gary-johnson-double-digits-race-agains/
Really, I'd say 11% is very significant in this case, because I'd imagine that's similar to the percentage of people who are even aware of him.
Yep. I'd guess about 2% of the country really knows and loves this ticket. The other 9% there are just saying "Anybody but Trump or Hilary!"
All he has to do is show up and not act the fool. Often, the LESS the people know about a candidate, the MORE they like them. Palin lost points every time she spoke. Johnson should show up, act dignified, not get emotional/rattled with insults from trump, and just provide a sensible alternative to these two assclowns.
It's 2016. Literally, anything can happen. People are NOT voting their positions/beliefs in 2016 because, well, those of trump and hilary are just so close. People are voting for personality, leadership, strength, control, etc. So any odd positions Johnson may carry - they might not hurt him all that much.
Libertarians pick ticket, slam Trump
By Eli Watkins, CNN
Sun May 29, 2016
Orlando, Florida (CNN)Libertarians on Sunday selected a presidential ticket headed by former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson, who lit into presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump on immigration and a range of other issues.
At the party convention in Orlando, Florida, Johnson got his preferred running mate, former Massachusetts Gov. Bill Weld, in a weekend gathering that drew sharp contrasts with the major party candidates -- Trump and Hillary Clinton, the likely Democratic nominee.
Johnson described the real estate mogul's immigration policies as "just racist," particularly the Republican's call to deport 11 million undocumented people currently in the country.
Libertarian activists contend their ticket could play a pivotal role in the 2016 campaign, with Trump and Clinton both viewed unfavorably by large swaths of the electorate. Even grabbing a small percentage of the vote in key states could affect the Electoral College calculus.
Trump was a frequent target of criticism of many Libertarians at the weekend convention. In addition to immigration participants particularly took issue with Trump's stated positions on international trade and national security -- all of which stand in firm opposition to a party that tends to favor lax immigration restrictions, free trade and is skeptical of military intervention. Austin Petersen, one of the presidential candidates who lost to Johnson, called Trump a fascist, a term regularly echoed throughout the convention.
At one point on Sunday, an announcer told the convention that Trump had begun attacking Johnson and Weld. The audience roared in approval at the news. It was not immediately apparent what attacks the announcer was referring to, but in a statement to the New York Times about Weld, Trump said, "I don't talk about his alcoholism."
The Trump campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment Sunday night.
Johnson was the party's nominee in 2012 and once again won the position despite backlash from the party's more radical Libertarian wing.
Weld, for his part, took a somewhat more nuanced tone toward the Libertarians' rivals.
"Someone doesn't have to be disaffected with Ms. Clinton to think that we have a good story," Weld said. "One doesn't have to be Never Trump to see that we were two of the most fiscally conservative governors in the United States."
Thanking the Libertarian delegates after his victory, Johnson played up his general election chances.
"At a minimum, I think we're in the presidential debates," Johnson said to cheers.
Johnson also called for inclusion in more national polling surveys.
"This is another voice at the table," Johnson said. "How about some skeptic at the table when it comes to these military interventions?"
In the first round of voting, Johnson reached 49.5 percent of the vote, according to the official party total, just shy of the majority needed for victory. His nearest opponents, Petersen and John McAfee, reached 21 and 14 percent respectively. On the second round of voting, Johnson clinched the nomination with 55.8 percent of the vote. But his preferred choice for the vice-presidential nomination, Weld, also came up just short of 50 percent on the first round of balloting, leading to a second vote, which he won with just over 50 percent of the vote.
Many Libertarian activists were skeptical of Weld, arguing his 1991-97 gubernatorial tenure saw too much growth in government and new gun control measures. But Johnson argued Weld could bring momentum and fundraising power to the Libertarian ticket, and the delegates obliged him.
"I pledge to you that I will stay with the Libertarian Party for life," Weld said before the vice presidential nominating contest.
Johnson received almost 1 percent of the general election vote in 2012, but said that in a year of unpopular offerings from the Democratic and Republican parties, he stands a chance of breaking through.
A recent national poll had Johnson receiving 10 percent of support from registered voters, drawing his strongest support from respondents under 35. Another national poll showed 44 percent of registered voters would want a third party to run against Trump and Hillary Clinton, the likely Democratic nominee.
The Libertarian Party is the only third party with ballot access in 50 states. This means Johnson will be the only alternative to Trump and Clinton available to all voters in this election.
Just before the nomination vote, Johnson said if he were to win the nomination, he would head to New York on Monday for media opportunities.
Johnson, who served as New Mexico governor as a Republican from 1995-2003, said too few people knew what a Libertarian is, and that his job is to change that.
Libertarian National Committee chair Nicholas Sarwark spoke to press following the nomination process, discussing the Libertarian Party's outreach and fundraising efforts. Sarwark said the party had established a "back channel" to the Koch brothers, in the hopes the wealthy libertarian-leaning funders donate to the Libertarian Party. Sarwark also said he had been speaking to Matt Kibbe, former president of conservative advocacy group Freedomworks, about supporting the party's nominee.
The convention at times got rowdy. Many candidates issued lengthy protests and changed strategies throughout the day. Delegates stormed through the halls with signs and chants. At one point, a man did a striptease on stage until he sat before the audience -- and live television -- in nothing but his underwear.
"Never underestimate the ability of Libertarians to shoot themselves in the foot," said Christopher Barber, a delegate from Georgia, said before and after the display on stage.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/29/politics/libertarian-party-nominee-vote/
Fact: You are either going to live in Trump town or Hillary town, that's the 2 choices. You can protest all you want, but that doesn't accomplish anything but help elect Hillary in the end and get you moved to Hillary Town.
Johnson's ideas suck when it comes to immigration. He uses faggified, worn-out lines about "Americans won't do it!" and "that's racist!" etc.
He's just another weak gimp when it comes to immigration, and his ideas are self-defeating trash when it comes to the issue.
But he knows, too, it's a way to increase his chances to be heard through the media. Giving the message it wants politicians to give.
Either way, he's acting like a flake and I don't appreciate it.
But it is mostly racist.
No one cares about the illegals from Ireland or Canada or China... They only seem to care about the illegals that are of Latino or Middle Eastern decent.
Correct?
Only the most reptilian form of any argument could be racist. And when it comes to this situation, it's what people use when they want to "show" that an anti-immigration argument "must" be as low as racism.
No, the real story is that we (typical, everyday people) cannot compete against the reckless, pointless, stupid level of population growth in the rest of the world. We need to protect ourselves from it. It has done too much damage to the civilized world already and it can only get worse.
And btw, people from places like Ireland and Canada aren't likely to offer themselves up as slaves. That may have something to do it.
Fact: You are either going to live in Trump town or Hillary town, that's the 2 choices. You can protest all you want, but that doesn't accomplish anything but help elect Hillary in the end and get you moved to Hillary Town.
They are still illegal though right? Shouldn't we hate them as much as the rest of the "illegals" we claim to be against.
Somehow we don't seem to consider those people "illegal".
Um, you are free to hate whatever you want. If it is a matter of degradation to the value of work (and it is), then I'd say that may answer it for you.
Btw, I hope you don't think you're informing me that we have racists in our society. And anyone who thinks race is a valid argument against immigration, needs to get their Loser stick ready to hit themselves with it. Because it is not only a silly idea, but it won't work.
I'm not quite sure what you are trying to convey I suppose.
I do think race is somewhat a valid argument we do not treat all illegals the same based on their race. It's not me doing it. It's others.
Trump never talked about those evil Canadians or Irish did he? My point is that if we are going to be against immigration, because they are illegal, we shouldn't be labeling the heritage as a problem. That's what Trump and many of his supporters have done.
That's all I'm saying.
I mean it (race) isn't a valid argument to use against much of anything, and immigration is no different in that regard.
But I understand people will do it, especially when they're around others who pretend to validate it.
No, plenty of quality people out there from all races, and that is a fact. If someone recognizes problems with immigration and wants to express it, then that person should steer completely away from mentioning race. 100% away from it.
I agree with your premise. It should never be about race, but often times it is.
When Trump says they send us their worst. Their criminals... So on... and he does it to two very specific ethnic backgrounds, well, you get what I'm saying.
I agree with your premise. It should never be about race, but often times it is.
When Trump says they send us their worst. Their criminals... So on... and he does it to two very specific ethnic backgrounds, well, you get what I'm saying.
If he's at 13 percent and rising, why would he "piss off"? I'd like to see him in the debates. Hope he gets there. Could be the first step towards breaking up the two-party monopoly.
Get Jill stein on stage as well and you might be onto something.
Otherwise it is a waste of time. No different than 92
If he's at 13 percent and rising, why would he "piss off"? I'd like to see him in the debates. Hope he gets there. Could be the first step towards breaking up the two-party monopoly.
If he's at 13 percent and rising, why would he "piss off"? I'd like to see him in the debates. Hope he gets there. Could be the first step towards breaking up the two-party monopoly.
Agreed. I hope like hell he gets in there.
His message will resonate.
Johnson is at nearly 10 percent support in an average of the most recent polls approved by the Commission on Presidential Debates, and at 8 percent in non-commission polls.
Could you give a little more detail about that?
Less government intervention. Repealing drug laws. Less nanny state stuff.
There are other things as well, but there's a lot to like about the Libertarian platform.