Trump

[Treetop]

Isnt it funny johnson almost never questions hillary but constantly questions trump? Is that because he believes he pulls more votes from the left even though he has 2.5X the republican minded support? lol. He recently switched from supporting choice on vaccines then later said he followed the science and wanted forced vaccines. He also wanted a carbon tax. Except the science on vaccines shows that even those immunized against something with vaccines can also be carriers. So the science doesnt support the idea we need to force vaccinations for better immunity. He later reversed his position on both points and claimed a carbon tax wouldnt work and we should have free choice in regards to vaccines. Neither position were libertarian of course. Keep in mind as I pointed out in another thread NO source of global temp showed recent warming until NOAA recently decided to adjust our argo based ocean temp data UP to relate to ship based data when we know the ship based data is artificially warmer not the other way around. Most other sources followed suit soon after but without this change and a few others made we havent had warming for nearly 20 years. Cagw is also being used as a point to push a global seat of governance BTW.

Do we need a 6k page agreement to have free trade like tpp that subverts national sovereignty no less? Wouldnt actual free trade simply be no protectionist policy between our nations? Seem like it wouldnt need more then a dozen pages to outline that. Sounds like market intervention perhaps? Isnt that evil? Balancing the playing field in what ways we can is bad but "free trade" pushed by crony capitalists is good? Right? Ron Paul an actual libertarian thinks TPP is a big boost for world government.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/ ... nment.html
http://www.ronpaul.com/2015-10-06/trans ... h-secrecy/

Keeping in mind Ron paul unlike myself wants actual "free trade" between nations. Its one of the issues I never agreed with him on. I agree with the founders of our own nation on that. They were wise men in most things, they got slavery very wrong as well.

Why am I harping on johnson? Nate keeps talking about what amounts to political purity. When his pick for prez isnt a libertarian at all. Neither is his VP. Nate made the point that the more people knew of trump before he was elected the less likely they were to support him, yet when I pointed out his massive landslides where he was best known Nate insisted it was not because they knew and liked him but because they were lefty states even though he had no similar landslides in other lefty states. His libertarian pick and the libertarian VP both won in lefty states though as republicans who lead as abridged republicans not libertarians. Could either of them had won in righty states? Can only speculate on that but looking at their positions it seems unlikely they would have even got their parties nomination.

So where is the heart of the liberty movement anyway, if the current torch bearer of it wants crony capitalists to define trade for our nation, he flip flops on several personal choice issues and his VP supports a ban on any automatic guns, far past trumps previous not current stance. A guy who cant run a campaign in the black who won in a lefty state and ran up debt here in NM faster then any other governor in the election meaning all those trump already put down. A guy who wants open borders which means the right will not be able to win again who supports executive orders from a president to enforce something like amnesty that by itself can mean the end to the liberty movement once enough come here, let alone the excutive action on it bypassing regular checks and balances.

All this said I dont care who any of you vote for, but get off the high horse. Johnson is no more pure then trump by any metric. I get trump is a gamble, but its one I am more then willing to take and worst case we save the 2nd amendment another generation and whatever else the supreme court votes on in this time, and best case we stop the flow of immigrants that by themselves will crush an chance the liberty movement ha of taking hold.

I will stand by america first. If hes a liar like johnson and the rest of the politicians? Oh well. I gambled many times in trump casinos I am willing to gamble directly on him as well.

[Treetop]

http://polling.reuters.com/#!poll/TM651 ... potlight/1

Trump now up by 2.2% in the reuters poll. Up 14 points in a bit over a week, and he does better in polls with 3rd parties included. We also havent had wikileaks drop the bomb yet that includes things he insists could get her arrested if the system wasnt corrupt.

[aloneibreak]

i personally dont think johnson is a true libertarian either

and very aware of welds anti2A status - johnson lost votes because of his pick

i use the term third party broadly - basically just to mean that just because weve always had 2 major parties, doesnt mean you have to support the candidate the party leaders choose

americans are tired of the same R&D type candidates every cycle

they flock to trump because he says what he thinks, hes not politically correct , he angers the ones who have been in charge of things for so long

im excited to see folks waking up - especially millennials

but theyre being duped into trump without realizing how similar he really is to what weve had all along - similar even to the other candidate

the strait up "if you dont vote for trump you must want hilary" rhetoric is causing a major divide amongst AMERICANS who just want whats best for OUR country

i personally dont think trump is it

that doesnt mean im any less of a patriot than you trump guys

i hope he beats hilary - my single vote wont matter

and i hope he can turn things around

in reality he will be lucky to keep things from getting worse

notice how no senate/house races are being followed ?

and there are some very important ones

[natsb88]

Yikes Treetop, tell us how you really feel

I never claimed Johnson was a pure libertarian, or even a good libertarian. I stated explicitly that I do not expect ideological purity, from any candidate. But they have to at least be in the ballpark. Trump is not. And you disagreeing with libertarian policies doesn't make the policies less libertarian, it just means you aren't as libertarian as you thought. Libertarian policy is generally liberal on immigration and in favor of free trade.

I am well aware of Gary's flaws and I even pointed them out. However, out of the final three LP candidates, he was the choice with the most broad appeal, and that is showing in the polls. Petersen or McAfee would have been totally dismissed and swept under the rug by now. (I agreed with Petersen the most on the issues).

I don't like Bill Weld.

Mike Pence supported NAFTA, CAFTA, and pretty much every other free trade agreement that came up. He also pushed the Patriot Act and voted three times to extend it. By your logic, you shouldn't vote for Trump because of his VP's positions. But I guess that is somehow different? (i.e. a double standard)

When the choices are Hillary, Trump, and Johnson, Johnson is by far the most libertarian. Trump's ample flaws are acceptable in comparison to Hillary, but Johnson's flaws are not? Doesn't matter. Johnson isn't going to win. Voting for the LP this time is about setting the party up for next time, and NOT endorsing either of the terrible major party candidates. The LP is getting close to thresholds that grant ballot access and funding for the next cycle. And getting close to the debate threshold with 12% in some recent polls. That is progress.

The rest of your last several posts is just rehashing things we've already been through and parroting Trump propaganda. Oh, and some climate change denial. The climate is changing, denial will get you nowhere. However it is not necessarily warming everywhere and it is not necessarily anthropogenic. I am opposed to any action by government to try to "fix" climate change.

I'll take a break from this thread for a couple days. I don't think it's good for you. Trump's intolerance / "my way or the highway" bullying mentality is starting to show through...

[Treetop]

And you disagreeing with libertarian policies doesn't make the policies less libertarian, it just means you aren't as libertarian as you thought.

More of one then johnson. I sure as heck never agreed with Bernies sanders 73% of the time like he does.

By your logic, you shouldn't vote for Trump because of his VP's positions. But I guess that is somehow different? (i.e. a double standard)

Never said anything of the sort.

The LP is getting close to thresholds that grant ballot access and funding for the next cycle. And getting close to the debate threshold with 12% in some recent polls. That is progress.

Running failed republicans without a libertarian backround is progress for libertarians? If you say so.

Oh, and some climate change denial. The climate is changing, denial will get you nowhere.

LOL, climate has always changed, but what I pointed out is a fact, none of the major sources of a global temp showed warming for 18-20 years depending on dataset until about a year ago when we moved argo based data up to correspond with ship based data we always knew was artificially warmed jut in time for the paris treaty. Heck ship based data isnt even uniformly artificially warmed either. Just because YOU dont know about the topic and how we came to the conclusions we did doesnt mean Im in denial of anything. It started being a political hot potato since it simply wasnt warming as many claimed and then suddenly a very faulty paper came out and WOW it was warming except the whole worlds measurements just didnt show it. With claims of denier for anyone who questioned it.

I don't think it's good for you. Trump's intolerance / "my way or the highway" bullying mentality is starting to show through...

This part had me rolling. This is what part of what I was trying to point out about yourself. If you like Trump it is "propaganda". When someone shows johnson isnt libertarian it also falls on trumps shoulders again and is now "my way or the highway". Did you get this mindset from some opinion piece? It sure wasnt anything I said. What even is the libertarian party anymore holding up a johnson weld ticket? Neither of their backrounds hint at libertarianism.

[Treetop]

All this said I dont care who any of you vote for, but get off the high horse. Johnson is no more pure then trump by any metric.

From the end of the last johnson post I made last night with similar things peppered throughout. Does this sound like my way or the highway as Nate suggested? I guess it does in a mindspace that ranks A johnson weld ticket as torch bearers for the liberty movement. He isnt even getting much support for the liberty movement anyway btw. More then 70% of his support isnt because of libetertarians support for liberty but because people arent liking clinton or trump.

Libertarians dialog has also changed drastically since the days of Ron Paul and even Bob Barr. Johnson changed it to "fiscally conservative socially liberal". Which frankly wasnt libertarian at all. The argument FOR gary has become one of the lesser of two evils rather then standing on actually libertarian ideals. How does this move the libertarian mindset forward?

Just read about libertarians around the net, it is disaffected republicans, gleeful democrat leaning sources happy he pulls more votes from the right while using smoke and mirrors to pretend he takes more from the left, and libertarians both appalled by him and those making the lesser of evils argument. The talk of liberty though? It is on the far far back burner. Any young voter not aware of the liberty movements past would have no idea in the world what it was about by looking at a johnson weld ticket.

I think article covered it pretty well.

http://libertyhangout.org/2016/07/there ... y-johnson/

[Treetop]

Aloneibreaks quote below

until folks are allowed and encouraged to actually dig into what the party stands for , we will continue to get the same 2 sided-coin lesseroftwoevils type status quo choices

Nates quote

Exactly what I mean when I talk about Trump poisoning conservatism. The difference between the left and the right is shrinking, and Trump is accelerating that convergence on the things that really matter.

@ Nate, If you actually read my posts from the start of the thread until this one a large percentage I said Id never fault a third party vote, and wasnt trying to belittle anyones choices. Somehow you interpreted this as me saying my way or the highway, which baffles me to no end. There was a mountain of text thrown out of course but surely you saw me express the same sentiment over and over. You seem to have missed the entire point of why I wrote so much on Gary Johnson. I made a case for the reasons why I like trump but I never tried to say people shouldnt vote their conscious.

What do you two think of Gary Johnson poisoning the liberty movement though? I assume youve both seen that libertarians are focusing much more on the lesser of evils argument this cycle rather then liberty. Im not even sure looking at his record and stances what makes Gary a libertarian, especially with his VP pick who he said would lead as his co president if he won. I guess I am having trouble wrapping my head around the fact you are much more concerned about your opinion of Trump watering down conservatism but gloss over Gary watering down the liberty movement which is the party you most align with? You did acknowledge it but still seem to downplay it by my interpretation of what you said. You keep insisting Trump will be the man you always thought he was but what about johnson? He was never a libertarian and is further towards authoritarianism then he ever was at this point. The dude agrees with bernie sanders 73% of the time in his own words and of course sanders answer for about everything is more government. I pulled up a list of sanders positions last night just to be sure and there was little I agreed with him on, and didnt see anything besides a non interventionist military that Id have thought libertarians support. Even issues he brought up I also thought were issues his answers were all more government in ways I didnt agree with. lol one thing I liked though is that he was against the crony capitalist TPP. Which isnt something Johnson agrees with him on.

I get that Johnson cant win but does the future of the liberty movement concern you much more then trump does when someone like Gary is the current torch bearer? If there are libertarian mindsets bernie holds they must be very few, nowhere close to 73%. I am honestly confused here. What exactly is the libertarian party now? I ask this sincerely. Even the idea he needs a set percentage to get federal funding for libertarians campaign seems decidedly anti libertarian, which he mentions often.

I know you disagree but imo Trump can save conservative values if he can stop the flow of illegal immigrants, so we stop shifting to the left so fast. What in the world is Gary doing to the liberty movement though besides turning it into something entirely different? How does supporting a non libertarian with an L next to his name helping the cause at all?

[Treetop]

In all seriousness if any libertarians decide to answer my last posts questions, I had nate tell me many times in this thread a stance I had wasn't libertarian, not that I argued any of those specific stances were anyway, but I am definitely much more of one then Gary Johnson.

[aloneibreak]

Aloneibreaks quote below

until folks are allowed and encouraged to actually dig into what the party stands for , we will continue to get the same 2 sided-coin lesseroftwoevils type status quo choices

I know you disagree but imo Trump can save conservative values if he can stop the flow of illegal immigrants, so we stop shifting to the left so fast. What in the world is Gary doing to the liberty movement though besides turning it into something entirely different? How does supporting a non libertarian with an L next to his name helping the cause at all?

I can't type out my thoughts as well as Nate can his own -- and he said he's giving you a couple days off from this thread

I stated Johnson is not a true libertarian, and I never stated he had my vote

as I said earlier, I believe bringing weld on was a mistake

I believe our shift to the left is due more to the entitlement mindset and lack of responsibility and punishment for ones actions than to the illegals

how does supporting a non republican with an r next to his name helping the cause at all ?

[Treetop]

how does supporting a non republican with an r next to his name helping the cause at all ?

Disagree or not I made a case for my thoughts on that much of this thread.

Weld was a mistake, but so was johnson. His past isnt libertarian, he agrees with sanders 73% of the time. Only issue I found of bernie a libertarians would have agreed with is non intervention. Also I wasnt chastising you for your potential libertarian vote I was pointing out he isnt a libertarian. A big part of what was said to me thus far is trump isnt a republican, or stances I had werent libertarian. I am much more libertarian then johnson.

It is pretty funny how we go back and forth on Trump and that is fine, but when the fact johnson isnt a libertarian comes up we essentially get the lesser of evils argument and GASP maybe its not healthy for me!!!! and its seen as me saying my way or the highway when I made the opposite clear over and over. If having an opinion and debating isnt healthy for me, I guess Im in trouble I do it constantly for many years. Rarely sick though so perhaps it is fine.

[johnbrickner]

. . . What in the world is Gary doing to the liberty movement though besides turning it into something entirely different? How does supporting a non libertarian with an L next to his name helping the cause at all?

I stated Johnson is not a true libertarian, . . .

. . . What do you two think of Gary Johnson poisoning the liberty movement though? . . .

What exactly is the libertarian party now? I ask this sincerely. Even the idea he needs a set percentage to get federal funding for libertarians campaign seems decidedly anti libertarian, which he mentions often. . . .

Having been away from the Party for many years now, I may not be qualified to answer the questions. But, I won't detail my past with the Party as it is not germane to the subject. I'll do my best to answer above.

The getting of federal funds has been debated by the Party since it's birth. Purists say NO! Those that want to win votes question the ideology.

Many in past years of working with the LP have been accused by the purists within the party of not being "true Libertarians". I was so accused by my willingness to: "Deal with the devil to forward our agenda or platform"; work with other Parties "on single issues where we saw eye-to-eye": and compromise to accept a less than pure Libertarian ideal or position. Simply put, I tried to win votes and put people in office. Albeit, local placements but I was growing the Party from the ground up.

Most of the time a pure Libertarian position turns voters off and does not win additional votes beyond the Party leaning or loyal. So it surprises me not, the LP now feels it's ok to put a conservative libertarian (former R Party) up for the presidency. Interesting is many started out as Libertarians then became libertarian conservatives in order to bring some libertarian views and ideals into the political arena. Ron Paul, Chris Cox (of the NRA,) and Dana Rohrabacher, Representative SoCal are examples (former LP now R Party).

It looks like Johnson has organizational skills and must know how to talk a good talk depending on who is audience is or he wouldn't be the LP candidate. I have to say a non-libertarian with an L next to his name is trying to win votes and bring his candidacy to America with a potential to garner more votes for the Party than any other Libertarian before him is what he is doing. More conservative and libertarian than Trump with similar (professed) socialistic ideals like Bernie could pull votes from both sides. Perhaps more from the Rs than Ds but, I would expect that from an LP candidate.

I don't think he is trying to help the liberty movement. It sincerely looks like he is playing politics to win votes. This is America, this is the game. It also looks like the LP is transitioning to a less pure Big L organization. A situation required if it wants to garner more than >1%-2% of the vote in major races. I personally would consider my self a Green Libertarian. Meaning, there are parts of both Parties I find desirable. I like fiscally conservative, socially liberal and making decisions about the planet with regard to how it will effect the next 7 generations. I also like less government, less powerful corporations and more power, autonomy, resiliency, independence and at the community level.

Why do I want this?

A local example is the toxic chemical water pollution that recently occurred in the upstate village of Hoosick Falls. Not far from me. Looks like the state is blaming the EPA, the EPA is blaming the state health dept. and the people in Hoosick Falls are blaming the company that dumped the chemical and they still don't have clean water to drink. Looks like another Flint, MI situation happening and the ones that suffer are the common folks like you and me. Also reminds me of the Love Canal problems reoccurring so it was never fixed the first time.

One Hoosick Falls resident interviewed said: You cause the pollution, you pay for it. You pay for it ALL. I would have to agree.

Not sure if that answers your questions but, the really short answer is, things change.

[Treetop]

I dont think Johnsons past or his VP pick that he said would be his co president if they won hint at being very conservative let alone libertarian, but I do appreciate the answer John.

You raise an interesting point. Things change. As recently as 1992 we saw the reform party of perot (same one trump ran on in 2000 but perot didnt like trump) garner 40% of the vote in polls before dropping about and rejoining to get 19%. In polling libertarians are getting up to 12% atm but had much more then the 1% they got in the last general election in polling then crashed on election day. Forget the exact number but it was well over 1%. We also know about 60% of the support they got last time and over 70% this time wasnt FOR the liberty movement at all but against the democrats and republicans.

SO why did perots reform party resonate so much better with people back in 1992? Was it the positions? The voters having different values back then or being more engaged? Do libertarians have a bad rap for some reason? Most jokes about libertarians seem to revolve around legalizing drugs but more people support that then ever.... so that wouldnt seem to be it. Lack or respect for third parties in general? I was only 12 back in 1992 and no internet back then but following comments versus the discussions I heard from politics back then, I hate to say it but I think that people just understand the issues less and the media does a better job of framing things to keep people confused.

Nothing wrong imo with socially liberal fiscally conservative btw, which trump is a variation of imo. Not the ideal of those but a variation of it. Social programs arent going away we should make them work instead.

So if the liberty movement is evolving for the times does johnson actually bring the most relevant issues to the table? His "co president" doesnt even support gun rights, supports the patriot act, and both of them support crony capitalist trade deals. Johnson wasnt terribly fiscally conservative either, hasnt even run his last campaign in the black, owed like 1m or so after the election. Multiplied our NM debt while insisting he balanced the budget which was officially true because of wording but he added a sharp increase to our debts. So if libertarians need to evolve for the times does a johnson weld ticket even bring the most important aspects of the liberty movement to a more palatable platform? I dont personally think so at all. Heck the guy thinks we should force a jewish baker to bake a Nazi cake, knowing he gets young votes for such a stance but just bizarre for a libertarian position imo.

Despite how most of the media words it I think Trump showed the democrats are fracturing about as fast as the republicans. This is great imo but probably happening to slow. Believe it or not Trump is pulling 15% of the democrat vote while hillary pulls 12% of the republicans. Last I looked (a few weeks back and polls shifted a good amount since then) they both were at about similar historically low levels of their own parties support. I dont think johnson moves the liberty mindset forward at all though. Past libertarians get the ideas of liberty out there where johnson just seems to be acting like the mainline parties and his record doesnt hint at liberty at all. I dont even think johnson is any better of a representation of fiscally conservative and socially liberal then trump is. Some would point to johnsons past support of a carbon tax but even if co2 was a major climate driver this fails at curbing it as proven where it was tried. Meanwhile there are other very pressing environmental issues the science actually supports that we all mostly ignore. Like the over fishing for I coincidentally offered a solution to in this thread, or the growing deadspots at the mouths of our rivers.

[Silverholic]

If we keep voting for one or the other in the two major parties then we only make them stronger. If you just vote for the candidate that best represents your beliefs then maybe after a few election cycles we can break this ridiculous two party system. Check this website out... https://www.isidewith.com/elections/201 ... ntial-quiz. I was 80+ percent with Gary Johnson... No more than 40% with any other candidate. I didn't think I was that one sided with any candidate.

[johnbrickner]

I dont think Johnsons past or his VP pick that he said would be his co president if they won hint at being very conservative let alone libertarian, but I do appreciate the answer John.

You raise an interesting point. Things change. As recently as 1992 we saw the reform party of perot (same one trump ran on in 2000 but perot didnt like trump) garner 40% of the vote in polls before dropping about and rejoining to get 19%. In polling libertarians are getting up to 12% atm but had much more then the 1% they got in the last general election in polling then crashed on election day. Forget the exact number but it was well over 1%. We also know about 60% of the support they got last time and over 70% this time wasnt FOR the liberty movement at all but against the democrats and republicans.

SO why did perots reform party resonate so much better with people back in 1992? Was it the positions? The voters having different values back then or being more engaged? Do libertarians have a bad rap for some reason? Most jokes about libertarians seem to revolve around legalizing drugs but more people support that then ever.... so that wouldnt seem to be it. Lack or respect for third parties in general? I was only 12 back in 1992 and no internet back then but following comments versus the discussions I heard from politics back then, I hate to say it but I think that people just understand the issues less and the media does a better job of framing things to keep people confused.

Nothing wrong imo with socially liberal fiscally conservative btw, which trump is a variation of imo. Not the ideal of those but a variation of it. Social programs arent going away we should make them work instead.

So if the liberty movement is evolving for the times does johnson actually bring the most relevant issues to the table? His "co president" doesnt even support gun rights, supports the patriot act, and both of them support crony capitalist trade deals. Johnson wasnt terribly fiscally conservative either, hasnt even run his last campaign in the black, owed like 1m or so after the election. Multiplied our NM debt while insisting he balanced the budget which was officially true because of wording but he added a sharp increase to our debts. So if libertarians need to evolve for the times does a johnson weld ticket even bring the most important aspects of the liberty movement to a more palatable platform? I dont personally think so at all. Heck the guy thinks we should force a jewish baker to bake a Nazi cake, knowing he gets young votes for such a stance but just bizarre for a libertarian position imo.

Despite how most of the media words it I think Trump showed the democrats are fracturing about as fast as the republicans. This is great imo but probably happening to slow. Believe it or not Trump is pulling 15% of the democrat vote while hillary pulls 12% of the republicans. Last I looked (a few weeks back and polls shifted a good amount since then) they both were at about similar historically low levels of their own parties support. I dont think johnson moves the liberty mindset forward at all though. Past libertarians get the ideas of liberty out there where johnson just seems to be acting like the mainline parties and his record doesnt hint at liberty at all. I dont even think johnson is any better of a representation of fiscally conservative and socially liberal then trump is. Some would point to johnsons past support of a carbon tax but even if co2 was a major climate driver this fails at curbing it as proven where it was tried. Meanwhile there are other very pressing environmental issues the science actually supports that we all mostly ignore. Like the over fishing for I coincidentally offered a solution to in this thread, or the growing deadspots at the mouths of our rivers.

Zac:

You are entirely welcome. Just glad to have found an opening to participate. Note: I called Johnson a conservative libertarian meaning former R Party. What he and his running mate actually are, only time will tell as I have had no exposure to either.

The people want something different. What exactly it is hasn't been decided or possibly figured out quite yet. I would think a political sociologist/pyschologist with the right computer program could come up with an interesting profile of what those who will vote really want. Or perhaps the right profile to motivate people to vote to cause a win.

Interesting is my son has been threatening to comment on Ray's (beauanderos) 5 Years From Now thread. Something about the CEOs Tim Cook (Apple,) Satya Nadella (Microsoft,) and CEO and President, Page and Brin (Alphabit) getting together and making a virtual presidential candidate (think, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress by Heinlein) who looks like, sounds like, and acts like the epitome of what everyone thinks a President should. Of course they hack all the computers to place his records to show he is real, etc. Doesn't make any face-to-face interviews but is seen everywhere digitally. Wins by a landslide, is controlled by Tech but everyone is pleased with his decisions. He's got a ton of ideas but, needs the time to do it.

I was very much around during Perot's run. America is very willing to back a dark horse if they see a winner. America loves a winner. Did we see a winning back then? We saw a no nonsense, get 'er done guy at this desk with one of the five original Spirit of '76 paintings on the wall behind him as he talked. http://www.newsvideo.com/images/Perot.jpg I mean, holy shat, the man owns an original Spirit of '76! He's a keeper. I had him down for the win 'till he dropped out.

I'm not sure the LP is representative of the liberty movement any more and I'm not sure if Johnson is representing the Liberty movement or if we are seeing a hijacking of the LP like we saw Republicans take over the Tea Party and make it theirs. If so, they will keep it so long as it suits their purposes then dump it at the side of the road when they are done like a used whore. While I have not studied Johnson's issues, if they are as you say then relevancy to liberty is not the flag being carried. It's all about getting votes and what is motivating Johnson to do so.

Does the LP need to evolve? Yes, that and a whole lot more. enough for now. Time to leave work.

[aloneibreak]

If we keep voting for one or the other in the two major parties then we only make them stronger. If you just vote for the candidate that best represents your beliefs then maybe after a few election cycles we can break this ridiculous two party system. Check this website out... https://www.isidewith.com/elections/201 ... ntial-quiz. I was 80+ percent with Gary Johnson... No more than 40% with any other candidate. I didn't think I was that one sided with any candidate.

yes ! thank you

i couldnt recall the link

every voter should take that quiz - if nothing else than to at least be up to speed on what the major issues are

be sure and click to expand and answer more questions in each segment

ETA : and on the "other stances" button to narrow it down even more

[johnbrickner]

No surprises here. I am a Green Libertarian as self-described.

High 80s Green, mid-70s Libertarian. Decidedly Green in environmental, economic and health care. Decidedly Libertarian in education and science.

Both in all other issues. But having now taken the survey I noticed there were a lot of issues I felt less strongly about and wondered how much of them being important issues was due to media exposure. Something I purposely try to avoid . . . like radiation.

[Treetop]

http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/06/_politics ... index.html

This is the CNN poll. Trump at 45%, clinton 43%, johnson at 7%, jill stein at 2%. He was previously as much as 8 points under in the CNN poll.

[Thogey]

Hillary is a frail old lady. I doubt she would make it through a term.

[frugi]

Hillary is a frail old lady. I doubt she would make it through a term.

i bet she doesnt make it through the first debate without coughing or having some sort of health issue.

[daviscfad]

Trump 93%
Castle 85%
Johnson 81%
Stein 13%
Clinton 5%
Theze are my results from the questions asked. I was not surprised

[Treetop]

Trumps support among registered republicans rose 5% in the last week according to one poll I was reading earlier. Meanwhile Assange from wikileaks is saying he will start releasing more on hillary next week. He thinks it will be a game changer if it gets decent coverage lol waited so long for it, Im very curious what he has.

[coppernickel]

When I was much younger I was talked into joining an organization against my better judgement. The argument when I finally gave in was, "If you don't like it, fix it."

This spring after many years I changed my party affiliation from Democratic to Constitutional, and last week to unaffiliated.

I will not vote against anyone. I agree with Castle and his party, but I am thinking a vote for Johnson will do more good.

[Treetop]

http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room ... epartment/

It is official now. Hacked email proof if you gave tot he clintons "charity" you would get special treatment by hillary as a public official. This was already pretty clear though because of the nature of how her stances changed as she received big donations and or hundreds of thousands for Bill to give a speech.

Hillary is a frail old lady. I doubt she would make it through a term.

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases ... 25065.html

TUCSON, Ariz., Sept. 8, 2016 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Concerns about Hillary Clinton's health are "serious—could be disqualifying for the position of President of the U.S.," say nearly 71% of 250 physicians responding to an informal internet survey by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS). About 20% said concerns were "likely overblown, but should be addressed as by full release of medical records." Only 2.7% responded that they were "just a political attack; I have confidence in the letter from her physician and see no cause for concern."

While more than 81% were aware of her history of a concussion, only 59% were aware of the cerebral sinus thrombosis, and 52% of the history of deep venous thrombosis.

More than 78% said the health concerns had received "not enough emphasis" in the media, and only 2.7% that there had been "too much emphasis."

[Treetop]

http://www.breitbart.com/jerusalem/2016 ... ne-voting/

Some more hacked documents from Soros. He wants to expand online and electronic voting. There have been major issues the last several elections actually in areas with electronic voting. A soros related company has bought up most electronic machines recently as well. Soros wanted obama to use executive action to get it done. Obama didnt actually use executive action to get it done BUT did recomme3nd all the same things soros wanted. If you remember we have email proof soros can send Hillary directions and she acts on them. He is the same guy pushing for open borders, and against voter ID laws, and "free trade" as well. He has bankrolled the black lives matter groups and several other things currently shaping our culture. Another group soros funds is trying to register 400k hispanic voters in battleground states by the election.

Since we know hillary is in his pocket this is among the reasons I think if Trump doesnt win this election, conservatism, and libertarian values will continue to be crushed.

It will be interesting to see if Trump fights it in court if it appears the election was stolen. We know for instance obama got 99-100% of the vote in many precincts with electronic voting in key battleground states. Which isnt actually possible. States like pennsylvania btw have no paper trail at all from what I have read recently. There are others.

[blackrabbit]

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-09-09/ron-paul-vote-all-you-want-secret-government-wont-change

Some good wisdom here.