goemaw.com

General Discussion => The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit => Topic started by: star seed 7 on January 06, 2016, 06:30:19 PM

Title: Gary Johnson
Post by: star seed 7 on January 06, 2016, 06:30:19 PM
 :love:
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: star seed 7 on January 06, 2016, 06:35:09 PM
Come on in guys (and girls) the freedom feels great
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: sys on January 06, 2016, 06:58:45 PM
it's nice to have a reality-based candidate to vote for.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: MakeItRain on January 06, 2016, 07:42:37 PM
 :zzz:
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: sonofdaxjones on January 06, 2016, 07:57:08 PM
Does he want to model the US after countries he doesn't understand?
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: puniraptor on January 07, 2016, 02:20:03 AM
Does he want to model the US after countries he doesn't understand?
Somalia I think
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: EllRobersonisInnocent on January 07, 2016, 02:53:58 AM
Stud

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on January 07, 2016, 08:18:59 AM
Yeah, I'll probably vote for Gary.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Cartierfor3 on January 07, 2016, 09:27:34 AM
i voted for him in 2012
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Asteriskhead on January 07, 2016, 09:43:50 AM
i voted for him in 2012
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: star seed 7 on January 07, 2016, 10:10:24 AM
i voted for him in 2012

That's pretty cool cf3
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: MakeItRain on January 07, 2016, 11:37:35 AM
Him wanting to turn medicare and medicaid to the states, many of which are right leaning, cash strapped states, is an assault on the poor and disadvantaged in this country; same could be said for the DoE. Instead of saying he wants to turn those things over to the states he should just say he wants to eliminate these things for millions of americans because that is what's going to happen.

But yaaay legal weed and 18 year old drinking age.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Cartierfor3 on January 07, 2016, 11:39:01 AM
i voted for him in 2012

That's pretty cool cf3

I probably wouldn't this time though. Don't know who I'd vote for.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: MakeItRain on January 07, 2016, 11:39:22 AM
Also you don't get to be a social liberal in this country and not be in favor of ANY FORM of gun control, that's rough ridin' crazy.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: sys on January 07, 2016, 11:55:35 AM
Also you don't get to be a social liberal in this country and not be in favor of ANY FORM of gun control.

false.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Asteriskhead on January 07, 2016, 12:17:11 PM
Also you don't get to be a social liberal in this country and not be in favor of ANY FORM of gun control.

false.

i'm with sys on this.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Asteriskhead on January 07, 2016, 12:18:18 PM
i'm not saying i'm not in favor of some gun control, fwiw. i'm also probably not voting for him this election cycle.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: MakeItRain on January 07, 2016, 12:30:43 PM
Also you don't get to be a social liberal in this country and not be in favor of ANY FORM of gun control.

false.

True

Being left of center on a couple of issues doesn't make him a liberal in any way shape or form, sorry bout it. He's a 70s and 80s conservative that was frozen out of the republican party after it was taken over by evangelicals.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: sys on January 07, 2016, 12:32:06 PM
Also you don't get to be a social liberal in this country and not be in favor of ANY FORM of gun control.

false.

True

Being left of center doesn't make him a liberal.

i was talking about me.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: MakeItRain on January 07, 2016, 12:42:57 PM
Also you don't get to be a social liberal in this country and not be in favor of ANY FORM of gun control.

false.

True

Being left of center doesn't make him a liberal.

i was talking about me.

You're not in favor of any gun control? I don't think that is an accurate assessment at all.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: sys on January 07, 2016, 12:46:05 PM
You're not in favor of any gun control? I don't think that is an accurate assessment at all.

i think, if you search diligently, you can find a post where i came out half-heartedly in favor of private ownership of nuclear warheads.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: MakeItRain on January 07, 2016, 12:51:56 PM
You're not in favor of any gun control? I don't think that is an accurate assessment at all.

i think, if you search diligently, you can find a post where i came out half-heartedly in favor of private ownership of nuclear warheads.

Is that shtick? Do you care to elaborate on that viewpoint, seems loony?
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: sys on January 07, 2016, 12:56:25 PM
people should be allowed to own what they want.  using their property to harm others should be illegal, but mere ownership of potentially dangerous property should not be.  same principle applied to a missile as to a gun, a leopard or a venomous snake.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: MakeItRain on January 07, 2016, 01:19:39 PM
people should be allowed to own what they want.  using their property to harm others should be illegal, but mere ownership of potentially dangerous property should not be.  same principle applied to a missile as to a gun, a leopard or a venomous snake.

I can walk down the street and feel pretty safe that someone isn't going to sick their leopard or king cobra on me because they're having a bad day. Your personal liberty should extend to people feeling free enough to walk down the street without fear of having a grenade thrown at them because they may have a threatening look on their face. Viewing personal liberty in absolutes invariably leads to intrusions of personal liberty considering we don't live equal brainless drones.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: sys on January 07, 2016, 01:28:53 PM
I can walk down the street and feel pretty safe that someone isn't going to sick their leopard or king cobra on me because they're having a bad day.

please write your representatives to let them know you are opposed to restrictions on private ownership of wildlife.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: MakeItRain on January 07, 2016, 01:50:34 PM
I'd rather discuss your view on unlimited personal liberty from a position of privilege.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: sys on January 07, 2016, 02:01:42 PM
go ahead.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: MakeItRain on January 07, 2016, 02:13:08 PM
Not making assumptions, just wondering how that works out in your head. You can't think that me walking around Boone, Iowa looking like Rambo would be treated like Cliven Bundy walking around Nevada looking the same way.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: ednksu on January 07, 2016, 02:16:46 PM
Not making assumptions, just wondering how that works out in your head. You can't think that me walking around Boone, Iowa looking like Rambo would be treated like Cliven Bundy walking around Nevada looking the same way.
worked in Texas.....

Freedom is freedom MIR!!!!!!  :Carl:

now with link for MIR
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=og81rso_fNU
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: sys on January 07, 2016, 02:17:27 PM
i'm sure that my life experiences influence my opinions.  it is very unlikely that i'd hold identical opinions if i'd led a very different life.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: MakeItRain on January 07, 2016, 02:23:45 PM
You seem like a pretty open and worldly dude that wouldn't take much convincing that absolute liberty is a fairy tale based on the current rules of our society.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: sys on January 07, 2016, 02:46:59 PM
it's a fairy tale i'd like to be more real and less fiction.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: michigancat on January 07, 2016, 03:28:16 PM
gross, no thanks

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jan/07/presidential-hopeful-gary-johnson-is-no-libertarian-hes-a-pro-pot-trump?CMP=edit_2221
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: star seed 7 on January 07, 2016, 03:50:01 PM
Hmm, that is pretty gross
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: puniraptor on January 07, 2016, 04:06:03 PM
He still functions well as a symbolic trash can in which to toss your vote. 
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Cartierfor3 on January 07, 2016, 04:28:28 PM
comparing Gary Johnson to Trump is laughable. Check his immigration record in New Mexico
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: MakeItRain on January 07, 2016, 05:13:19 PM
comparing Gary Johnson to Trump is laughable. Check his immigration record in New Mexico

You're rationalizing. Banning burquas is an extreme form of bigotry. Just because Johnson doesn't want to build a wall it doesn't invalidate other policy comparisons.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Cartierfor3 on January 07, 2016, 05:16:36 PM
well he already backtracked on that.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/01/07/libertarian-candidate-gary-johnson-actually-i-wouldn-t-ban-the-burqa.html (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/01/07/libertarian-candidate-gary-johnson-actually-i-wouldn-t-ban-the-burqa.html)
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: MakeItRain on January 07, 2016, 05:28:42 PM
well he already backtracked on that.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/01/07/libertarian-candidate-gary-johnson-actually-i-wouldn-t-ban-the-burqa.html (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/01/07/libertarian-candidate-gary-johnson-actually-i-wouldn-t-ban-the-burqa.html)

Cartier, you aren't the slightly bit dubious about his intent here? I mean it was yesterday when he said that, it's not like he was misquoted. This seems awfully politically motivated by someone who is supposed to be an alternative to the political machine. Sorry, but I believe what he said while being candid over what he said after he caught heat.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Cartierfor3 on January 07, 2016, 05:34:09 PM
well he already backtracked on that.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/01/07/libertarian-candidate-gary-johnson-actually-i-wouldn-t-ban-the-burqa.html (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/01/07/libertarian-candidate-gary-johnson-actually-i-wouldn-t-ban-the-burqa.html)

Cartier, you aren't the slightly bit dubious about his intent here? I mean it was yesterday when he said that, it's not like he was misquoted. This seems awfully politically motivated by someone who is supposed to be an alternative to the political machine. Sorry, but I believe what he said while being candid over what he said after he caught heat.

of course its politically motivated. he's a politician, he's not above the game. you're probably right that he was caught in a candid moment, but reflected and realized that using government force to enforce his personal beliefs goes against his own stated political ideology and then backtracked. 
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Cartierfor3 on January 07, 2016, 05:35:58 PM
I appreciate GJ but can't vote for him. I just can't. Show me a candidate who is pro-life (in reality, not the fake republican way), anti-war, and I'll put up with just about any other nonsense.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on May 04, 2016, 10:38:41 AM
It might be about time to resurrect this thread.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: MakeItRain on May 04, 2016, 09:39:45 PM
kook
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: 8manpick on May 05, 2016, 08:47:02 AM
I can vote for Big J again
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on May 05, 2016, 09:27:21 AM
I think this will be my guy. If a third party is going to ever make noise in an election this is the time. It is incredible that both of the current frontrunners are so widely disliked.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: wetwillie on May 05, 2016, 09:30:02 AM
He won't get any meaningful amount of votes
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: OK_Cat on May 05, 2016, 09:30:42 AM
Voting for a third party guy for president is the equivalent of the 'brag about not owning a tv' guy
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on May 05, 2016, 11:45:21 AM
Third party voting only hurts your cause, whether you lean right or left.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: star seed 7 on May 05, 2016, 11:53:04 AM
Third party voting only hurts your cause, whether you lean right or left.

Dumb
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on May 05, 2016, 01:43:47 PM
Third party voting only hurts your cause, whether you lean right or left.

False dichotomy.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on May 06, 2016, 04:08:13 PM
Possible to see GJ on the debate stage.

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/mar/24/libertarian-gary-johnson-double-digits-race-agains/
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: sys on May 06, 2016, 04:10:48 PM
Possible to see GJ on the debate stage.

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/mar/24/libertarian-gary-johnson-double-digits-race-agains/

 :excited:
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: eastcat on May 07, 2016, 10:43:42 PM
I'm #TeamGary
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on May 09, 2016, 02:52:36 AM
 :bigtoke: :bong: :fistpump:
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: CNS on May 19, 2016, 02:56:14 PM
Gary is on the current Joe Rogan podcast.  2+ hr interview.  Long form conversation. Not the normal political stuff.  Worth a listen if you have any interest in Gary.  He doesn't knock it out of the park.  I think the interview will do him some good for exposure, but I think it harms him a little too.  He def seems to not have fully thought out a few important issues that Joe questions him on.

Interesting guy.  I could vote for him compared to trump or hil.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on May 19, 2016, 06:36:09 PM
As much as I ideologically align with Gary, he is a certified Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) who shouldn't be in charge of anything except maybe colorado.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: mocat on May 19, 2016, 06:40:14 PM
If joe rogan has asked you too tough of a question, man
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: CNS on May 19, 2016, 07:17:16 PM
As much as I ideologically align with Gary, he is a certified Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) who shouldn't be in charge of anything except maybe colorado.
Better vote for trump, then.

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on May 19, 2016, 07:40:32 PM
I kind of felt the same way about Kascich
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on May 19, 2016, 08:13:22 PM
Will listen :excited:
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on May 21, 2016, 11:09:13 AM
Just listened to this and concur with CNS, although I think Gary was more in "let's explore issues" mode than "here's what I would do" mode.

Also, surprised to learn he is not anti-campaign finance like Bernie.

The not even being in polls thing is an insane amount of BS, by the way.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on May 22, 2016, 09:04:30 AM
Yea. I like Joe, but I wouldn't want to get stuck talking too long with him at a party. Talking about some conspiracy and saying "it's actually been completely proven true."
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: sys on May 25, 2016, 02:21:00 PM
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/pay-attention-to-libertarian-gary-johnson-hes-pulling-10-vs-trump-and-clinton/
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on May 25, 2016, 08:08:20 PM
Can anyone name anything more overrated than NPR?
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: puniraptor on May 26, 2016, 06:04:51 AM
Can anyone name anything more overrated than NPR?
If it's rated at all, it's under.

The most overrated thing is TED.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: CNS on May 26, 2016, 12:37:14 PM
TED is the worst. 
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on May 27, 2016, 12:03:43 AM
hate TED. Incredible waste of time.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: mocat on May 27, 2016, 02:25:45 PM
also the movie Ted is horrible
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on May 27, 2016, 02:26:38 PM
I have no idea what TED even is.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Cartierfor3 on May 27, 2016, 02:28:33 PM
Can anyone name anything more overrated than NPR?

soccer
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Emo EMAW on May 27, 2016, 02:32:12 PM
Can anyone name anything more overrated than NPR?

soccer

cheese
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: MakeItRain on May 27, 2016, 09:29:36 PM
also the movie Ted is horrible

so millennial
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: MakeItRain on June 09, 2016, 09:56:38 PM
Those of you who think voting for this kook is an intelligent, informed decision; please explain this

Quote
Too many unnecessary laws leads to too many in prison. (Jan 2016)
Vetoed early release of prisoners due to overcrowding. (Aug 2012)

http://www.ontheissues.org/Gary_Johnson.htm
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 09, 2016, 11:09:04 PM
Those of you who think voting for this kook is an intelligent, informed decision; please explain this

Quote
Too many unnecessary laws leads to too many in prison. (Jan 2016)
Vetoed early release of prisoners due to overcrowding. (Aug 2012)

http://www.ontheissues.org/Gary_Johnson.htm

Yes, because in the U.S. legislative process on both a national and state level there's never any tack-on amendments and such that force vetoes.     

BTW I'm not voting for Johnson because he's basically a "throw the gates" open and let everyone in the country and don't bother checking out who they are, but then again I'm a crazy "racist" who wants to know who is coming into our country (which somehow got turned into not letting anyone in at all in some sort of crazy whack-a-doodle liberal non reality).

Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: star seed 7 on June 09, 2016, 11:18:57 PM
Those of you who think voting for this kook is an intelligent, informed decision; please explain this

Quote
Too many unnecessary laws leads to too many in prison. (Jan 2016)
Vetoed early release of prisoners due to overcrowding. (Aug 2012)

http://www.ontheissues.org/Gary_Johnson.htm

Yes, because in the U.S. legislative process on both a national and state level there's never any tack-on amendments and such that force vetoes.     

BTW I'm not voting for Johnson because he's basically a "throw the gates" open and let everyone in the country and don't bother checking out who they are, but then again I'm a crazy "racist" who wants to know who is coming into our country (which somehow got turned into not letting anyone in at all in some sort of crazy whack-a-doodle liberal non reality).

This feels like a lot of explaining
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 09, 2016, 11:20:09 PM
Those of you who think voting for this kook is an intelligent, informed decision; please explain this

Quote
Too many unnecessary laws leads to too many in prison. (Jan 2016)
Vetoed early release of prisoners due to overcrowding. (Aug 2012)

http://www.ontheissues.org/Gary_Johnson.htm

Yes, because in the U.S. legislative process on both a national and state level there's never any tack-on amendments and such that force vetoes.     

BTW I'm not voting for Johnson because he's basically a "throw the gates" open and let everyone in the country and don't bother checking out who they are, but then again I'm a crazy "racist" who wants to know who is coming into our country (which somehow got turned into not letting anyone in at all in some sort of crazy whack-a-doodle liberal non reality).

This feels like a lot of explaining

If I say it 50 more times, you may have a point.

Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: MakeItRain on June 09, 2016, 11:20:31 PM
Why, in your mind, do you think liberals don't want any immigration laws our reform? This is a test of if you can actually muster a somewhat salient, thought provoking answer about anything beyond "lol," "sad," or some variant of "I know you are but what am I."
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: MakeItRain on June 09, 2016, 11:23:29 PM
Those of you who think voting for this kook is an intelligent, informed decision; please explain this

Quote
Too many unnecessary laws leads to too many in prison. (Jan 2016)
Vetoed early release of prisoners due to overcrowding. (Aug 2012)

http://www.ontheissues.org/Gary_Johnson.htm

Yes, because in the U.S. legislative process on both a national and state level there's never any tack-on amendments and such that force vetoes.     

BTW I'm not voting for Johnson because he's basically a "throw the gates" open and let everyone in the country and don't bother checking out who they are, but then again I'm a crazy "racist" who wants to know who is coming into our country (which somehow got turned into not letting anyone in at all in some sort of crazy whack-a-doodle liberal non reality).

This feels like a lot of explaining

If I say it 50 more times, you may have a point.

Dax never ever repeats himself. In no way shape or form is the Hillary Clinton thread comprised of like 10 pages of the exact same dax post.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 09, 2016, 11:28:22 PM
Those of you who think voting for this kook is an intelligent, informed decision; please explain this

Quote
Too many unnecessary laws leads to too many in prison. (Jan 2016)
Vetoed early release of prisoners due to overcrowding. (Aug 2012)

http://www.ontheissues.org/Gary_Johnson.htm

Yes, because in the U.S. legislative process on both a national and state level there's never any tack-on amendments and such that force vetoes.     

BTW I'm not voting for Johnson because he's basically a "throw the gates" open and let everyone in the country and don't bother checking out who they are, but then again I'm a crazy "racist" who wants to know who is coming into our country (which somehow got turned into not letting anyone in at all in some sort of crazy whack-a-doodle liberal non reality).

This feels like a lot of explaining

If I say it 50 more times, you may have a point.

Dax never ever repeats himself. In no way shape or form is the Hillary Clinton thread comprised of like 10 pages of the exact same dax post.

I'v never said I don't repeat myself.   But that's not over explaining.

Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: star seed 7 on June 09, 2016, 11:32:27 PM
Those of you who think voting for this kook is an intelligent, informed decision; please explain this

Quote
Too many unnecessary laws leads to too many in prison. (Jan 2016)
Vetoed early release of prisoners due to overcrowding. (Aug 2012)

http://www.ontheissues.org/Gary_Johnson.htm

Yes, because in the U.S. legislative process on both a national and state level there's never any tack-on amendments and such that force vetoes.     

BTW I'm not voting for Johnson because he's basically a "throw the gates" open and let everyone in the country and don't bother checking out who they are, but then again I'm a crazy "racist" who wants to know who is coming into our country (which somehow got turned into not letting anyone in at all in some sort of crazy whack-a-doodle liberal non reality).

This feels like a lot of explaining

If I say it 50 more times, you may have a point.

Dax never ever repeats himself. In no way shape or form is the Hillary Clinton thread comprised of like 10 pages of the exact same dax post.

I'v never said I don't repeat myself.   But that's not over explaining.

This fells like explaining too fyi
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 09, 2016, 11:45:01 PM
Those of you who think voting for this kook is an intelligent, informed decision; please explain this

Quote
Too many unnecessary laws leads to too many in prison. (Jan 2016)
Vetoed early release of prisoners due to overcrowding. (Aug 2012)

http://www.ontheissues.org/Gary_Johnson.htm

Yes, because in the U.S. legislative process on both a national and state level there's never any tack-on amendments and such that force vetoes.     

BTW I'm not voting for Johnson because he's basically a "throw the gates" open and let everyone in the country and don't bother checking out who they are, but then again I'm a crazy "racist" who wants to know who is coming into our country (which somehow got turned into not letting anyone in at all in some sort of crazy whack-a-doodle liberal non reality).

This feels like a lot of explaining

If I say it 50 more times, you may have a point.

Dax never ever repeats himself. In no way shape or form is the Hillary Clinton thread comprised of like 10 pages of the exact same dax post.

I'v never said I don't repeat myself.   But that's not over explaining.

This fells like explaining too fyi

Lib, MIR doesn't need your help, he needs help, lots of it, but not your kind of help.   Thanks, tho

Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: mocat on June 10, 2016, 08:59:49 AM
Why, in your mind, do you think liberals don't want any immigration laws our reform? This is a test of if you can actually muster a somewhat salient, thought provoking answer about anything beyond "lol," "sad," or some variant of "I know you are but what am I."

dax  :frown:
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on June 10, 2016, 11:20:45 AM
Those of you who think voting for this kook is an intelligent, informed decision; please explain this

Quote
Too many unnecessary laws leads to too many in prison. (Jan 2016)
Vetoed early release of prisoners due to overcrowding. (Aug 2012)

http://www.ontheissues.org/Gary_Johnson.htm

These are not contradictory positions. First of all, one is a general principle whereas the other is a response to a specific piece of legislation (which conceivably could be riddled with other crap).

Most reasonable people agree with the first, typically with reference to the ridiculous criminalization of marijuana and mandatory minimums on nonviolent crimes.

The second depends on who is getting released. If it is people other than the ones convicted on nonviolent drug offenses it makes some sense. He also could have done it as a way of saying "no way guys, you need to fix the problem on the front end instead of just planning on having an escape hatch every so often when your overcriminalization bites you in the ass."
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: MakeItRain on June 11, 2016, 02:34:37 AM
Releasing prisoners due to overcrowding is a good combo with overcriminalization or mandatory sentencing. That way prisons can operate towards their maximum capacity and make the most profits, it's just good business guys.

His support of for profit prisons make my top 10 list of things deplorable about Gary Johnson.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: MakeItRain on June 11, 2016, 02:38:26 AM
Those of you who think voting for this kook is an intelligent, informed decision; please explain this

Quote
Too many unnecessary laws leads to too many in prison. (Jan 2016)
Vetoed early release of prisoners due to overcrowding. (Aug 2012)

http://www.ontheissues.org/Gary_Johnson.htm

These are not contradictory positions. First of all, one is a general principle whereas the other is a response to a specific piece of legislation (which conceivably could be riddled with other crap).

Most reasonable people agree with the first, typically with reference to the ridiculous criminalization of marijuana and mandatory minimums on nonviolent crimes.

The second depends on who is getting released. If it is people other than the ones convicted on nonviolent drug offenses it makes some sense. He also could have done it as a way of saying "no way guys, you need to fix the problem on the front end instead of just planning on having an escape hatch every so often when your overcriminalization bites you in the ass."

Naw man, he's just a weirdo kook who has flimsy explanations for some of his contradictory opinions.
Quote
As governor, a highly-publicized bill was coming through the legislature, which would have allowed early release of prisoners due to overcrowding. When the bill passed, I vetoed it.
Some representatives (including a few who were potential allies for me) were outraged because it made them look soft on criminals.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on June 11, 2016, 09:43:33 PM
I'm not feelin' the Johnson.
Title: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on June 12, 2016, 05:05:31 PM
Why would a for profit prison be incentivized any different than a state run prison when it comes to keeping prisons full to maximize jobs? My bigger concern would be prison conditions since the easiest way to maximize profits is by lowering costs. However, it cuts both ways because state run prisons can be even more crippled by crappy budgeting from the state. At least the state can impose minimum standards and sue private prisons that don't abide by them.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: sys on June 12, 2016, 05:42:10 PM
Why would a for profit prison be incentivized any different than a state run prison when it comes to keeping prisons full to maximize jobs?

with govt prisons, labor is incentivized to keep prisons full.  with for profit prisons, both labor and owners are incentivized.  but with both, taxpayers ultimately fund everything, and have the only real control on prison costs.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: sys on June 23, 2016, 04:22:37 PM
His support of for profit prisons make my top 10 list of things deplorable about Gary Johnson.

interesting article (long).

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/06/cca-private-prisons-corrections-corporation-inmates-investigation-bauer
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: eastcat on July 13, 2016, 05:22:26 PM
TED is the worst.

NPR is bad. It's a really sad attempt at recreating the BBC's talk show news. It just doesn't work without the accents.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: eastcat on July 13, 2016, 05:23:58 PM
Try going from the BBC world service to the diane rehm show. It's horrendous.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: puniraptor on July 14, 2016, 05:41:50 AM
(https://cdn.meme.am/instances/500x/69434391.jpg)
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Trim on August 01, 2016, 03:40:44 PM
I just saw this guy for the first time on the last nightly show.  He's kind of #oscar awkward.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: CNS on August 01, 2016, 03:42:03 PM
Kinda.  However, he isn't following Frank Martin and an E8 run.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Trim on August 01, 2016, 03:42:31 PM
http://www.cc.com/video-clips/av3zvj/the-nightly-show-with-larry-wilmore-gary-johnson-shares-his-libertarian-vision
Title: Gary Johnson
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 01, 2016, 04:10:24 PM
Big shout out to Bill and Hillary for their crime bill that ensured well stocked prisons.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on August 01, 2016, 05:39:44 PM
Just donated!
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 01, 2016, 09:53:55 PM
Just donated!

 :lol:
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: MakeItRain on August 03, 2016, 11:30:13 PM
http://rare.us/story/gary-johnson-gave-the-perfect-answer-to-the-problem-of-police-brutality-in-black-communities/
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 03, 2016, 11:45:06 PM
http://rare.us/story/gary-johnson-gave-the-perfect-answer-to-the-problem-of-police-brutality-in-black-communities/


This guy should be voted for  :love:
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: puniraptor on August 04, 2016, 12:43:09 AM
If Trump drops out, it then becomes a 2 party race between Gary and Hil. How many pubs move over to Gary? All of them (that didn't seppuku)?
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on August 04, 2016, 09:37:12 AM
That's a pretty hilarious hypothetical, but I do think Libertarian ideals probably appeal more to Republicans than Democrats since they are both largely focused on smaller government.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on August 04, 2016, 09:38:13 AM
Which I guess just means that I see many registered Republicans voting for Gary in this election.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on August 04, 2016, 09:41:13 AM
Is Gary an anti-vaxxer? I guess that would be consistent with libertarianism, but that's one of the problems I have with him.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on August 04, 2016, 09:59:17 AM
Is Gary an anti-vaxxer? I guess that would be consistent with libertarianism, but that's one of the problems I have with him.

You're thinking Jill Stein, Bernie plan b
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: star seed 7 on August 04, 2016, 09:59:59 AM

Is Gary an anti-vaxxer? I guess that would be consistent with libertarianism, but that's one of the problems I have with him.

Pretty sure he just doesn't think it should be mandatory law, not that he's against vaxin'. I could be wrong tho
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Kat Kid on August 04, 2016, 10:02:44 AM
Why would a for profit prison be incentivized any different than a state run prison when it comes to keeping prisons full to maximize jobs?

with govt prisons, labor is incentivized to keep prisons full.
with for profit prisons, both labor and owners are incentivized.  but with both, taxpayers ultimately fund everything, and have the only real control on prison costs.

not true, labor seeks to maximize working conditions for incumbents.  I don't know this for a fact, but I bet there is a lot of prison guard union bitching about prison overcrowding.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on August 04, 2016, 10:06:27 AM

Is Gary an anti-vaxxer? I guess that would be consistent with libertarianism, but that's one of the problems I have with him.

Pretty sure he just doesn't think it should be mandatory law, not that he's against vaxin'. I could be wrong tho

This sounds most libertarian to me.

What does it take to be an anti-vaxer anyway? I'm not hardcore libertarian, but I don't like the idea of any forced medication from the government. Maybe incentivize it with tax benefits or something.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: star seed 7 on August 04, 2016, 10:24:33 AM
Yup, the incentive that your kid won't die from diseases we have vaccines for just simply isn't enough
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on August 04, 2016, 10:25:48 AM
Yup, the incentive that your kid won't die from diseases we have vaccines for just simply isn't enough

Your kid can't go to school unless they are vaccinated, right? So the incentive is that you get to use the education that you are already paying for (through taxes).
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: sys on August 04, 2016, 10:30:13 AM
not true, labor seeks to maximize working conditions for incumbents.  I don't know this for a fact, but I bet there is a lot of prison guard union bitching about prison overcrowding.

i don't know either, but i would guess they would bitch about understaffing rather than overcrowding.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on August 04, 2016, 10:32:45 AM
So you were thinking Gary wanted to eliminate that requirement for schools? Is that even a federal requirement? I honestly don't know about any of this stuff.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: sys on August 04, 2016, 10:33:36 AM
libertarian philosophy doesn't insist on absolute individual freedom.  an individual's decision to vaccinate or not impacts the health of other people, hence it is philosophically consistent to permit coercion on this issue.


i don't know what johnson has said on the issue, just commenting.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: 'taterblast on August 04, 2016, 10:47:17 AM
https://twitter.com/govgaryjohnson/status/113419678730301440
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on August 04, 2016, 11:18:44 AM
libertarian philosophy doesn't insist on absolute individual freedom.  an individual's decision to vaccinate or not impacts the health of other people, hence it is philosophically consistent to permit coercion on this issue.


i don't know what johnson has said on the issue, just commenting.

Yea, but that gets into scary levels of government control in the name of protecting the public like forced sterilization. I don't think many libertarians are willing to cross that line.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on August 04, 2016, 12:26:40 PM
So you were thinking Gary wanted to eliminate that requirement for schools? Is that even a federal requirement? I honestly don't know about any of this stuff.

All I know is that he says no mandatory vaccines. What does that mean?  :dunno: Is requiring them for school making them "mandatory"?  :dunno: I'd like clarification on his stance.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: star seed 7 on August 04, 2016, 12:28:40 PM
Tweet and ask him
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 04, 2016, 12:50:28 PM
Dumb position.   
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on August 04, 2016, 12:52:02 PM
Tweet and ask him

OK, I did it. But I don't really know how twitter works so I'm not sure if I am going to know if he responds.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: massofcatfan on August 31, 2016, 03:45:58 PM
Gary Johnson sure seems like a nicer guy than Trump or Clinton
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: CNS on August 31, 2016, 04:24:50 PM
https://www.facebook.com/govgaryjohnson/videos/10153279334364364/ (https://www.facebook.com/govgaryjohnson/videos/10153279334364364/)
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on August 31, 2016, 05:31:44 PM
Looks like a match.com ad.  :D
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: CNS on August 31, 2016, 07:32:12 PM
I think its a pretty good ad

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: treysolid on September 08, 2016, 09:53:08 AM
just going to leave this right here...

http://digg.com/2016/gary-johnson-aleppo-syria-gaffe-morning-joe (http://digg.com/2016/gary-johnson-aleppo-syria-gaffe-morning-joe)
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: CNS on September 08, 2016, 09:56:18 AM
Has Gary received security briefings like the other two fuckfaces? If not, what is the threshold that would initiate that?
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on September 08, 2016, 10:09:29 AM
Pales in comparison to the Hillary gaffe in Syria which contributed to 800,000 deaths.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on September 08, 2016, 10:16:15 AM
He's still the best candidate on the ballot.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: CNS on September 08, 2016, 10:18:11 AM
I would rather him start at zero and admit that than start at a position that he doesn't understand but spouts off about it anyway.

That said, it's a bad look.  Even if you don't spend enough time on it to have a solid position, at least know what the eff it is.

Gary probably isn't spending time on things like that as his main military position is to pull out and let them figure their own crap out. 
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: michigancat on September 08, 2016, 10:34:05 AM
that certainly got him more press than anything else possibly could have.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Kat Kid on September 08, 2016, 10:41:13 AM
not true, labor seeks to maximize working conditions for incumbents.  I don't know this for a fact, but I bet there is a lot of prison guard union bitching about prison overcrowding.

i don't know either, but i would guess they would bitch about understaffing rather than overcrowding.

maybe in extreme cases, but racking up OT in a prison would be a goal of most prison guards.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: MakeItRain on September 08, 2016, 12:06:03 PM
LOL at the Gary Johnsonstans shrugging this off. Regular people should know what/where Aleppo is, [redacted] can't read or does he not have a television?
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on September 08, 2016, 12:21:08 PM
Gary is definitely a flawed candidate just like every candidate in history. I'm not voting for him because he's perfect. I'm voting for him because I agree with his positions more than any other national candidate.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on September 08, 2016, 12:22:51 PM
LOL at the Gary Johnsonstans shrugging this off. Regular people should know what/where Aleppo is, [redacted] can't read or does he not have a television?

It's definitely not a good look, but he would have to do something much worse than that for me to decide to vote for Clinton or Trump instead.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on September 08, 2016, 03:11:59 PM
Was probably HAF. He knows where Aleppo is most of the time, I'm sure.

JD fact: I have an Aleppo pine in my back yard.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: sys on September 08, 2016, 09:23:26 PM
i like weld better.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: mocat on September 08, 2016, 09:31:14 PM
libertarians are much more concerned with domestic policy than what's going on in BFSyria
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Spracne on September 09, 2016, 02:25:23 AM
Can someone help me out re: GJ? Is Gary small 'l' libertarian or big 'L' Libertarian?

Thanks for your time.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: ednksu on September 09, 2016, 06:29:26 AM
I'm amazed at people's ability to ignore a candidate's failure on one the biggest foreign policy issues for the next 2 to 3 presidential terms.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on September 09, 2016, 08:56:15 AM
Well, IMO, not knowing about Syria seems like a significantly better foreign policy than a) nuke Syria, or b) sell arms to homicidal, genocidal regime who supports isis and lie about it foreign policy.


All 3 are pretty bad, tho.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: DQ12 on September 09, 2016, 09:04:05 AM
in his defense ""What would you do if you were elected about Aleppo?" is a weird way to ask a candidate about their plans for the Syrian conflict.  do people really think Johnson has no clue about the Syrian civil war?
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: 8manpick on September 09, 2016, 09:13:14 AM
Makes me feel better about Gary going full isolationist when we elect him
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Panjandrum on September 09, 2016, 09:19:12 AM
Makes me feel better about Gary going full isolationist when we elect him

"Make America Margaritaville Again!"
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: 8manpick on September 09, 2016, 09:34:50 AM
I just don't understand the concern over specifics for someone who has zero chance of actually becoming president. Worry about he and his party's overarching ideology, not a gotcha gaffe in an interview.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: steve dave on September 09, 2016, 09:50:24 AM
in his defense ""What would you do if you were elected about Aleppo?" is a weird way to ask a candidate about their plans for the Syrian conflict.  do people really think Johnson has no clue about the Syrian civil war?

yeah, weird question. but his response made it pretty clear he had no idea what aleppo was. it wasn't the question that threw him off. I'm sure he knows some stuff about the conflict but it's less than I know (and I only know what I get from bbc news on the drive to and from work).
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: wetwillie on September 09, 2016, 11:33:31 AM
I think he heard the question as a "Leppo" and got thrown off.  Probably thought they found another planet.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on September 09, 2016, 11:38:22 AM
I'm amazed at people's ability to ignore a candidate's failure on one the biggest foreign policy issues for the next 2 to 3 presidential terms.

Who is ignoring it?
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on September 09, 2016, 12:49:10 PM
I think he heard the question as a "Leppo" and got thrown off.  Probably thought they found another planet.

It did sound like he asked "what's a leppo?"
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on September 09, 2016, 01:27:32 PM
I think he heard the question as a "Leppo" and got thrown off.  Probably thought they found another planet.

It did sound like he asked "what's a leppo?"

It's like that time when someone interviewed Justin Bieber and he didn't know what the word "German" meant.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on September 09, 2016, 01:37:40 PM
The interviewer should have followed up with, how are you feelings on updog?
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: cfbandyman on September 09, 2016, 01:39:30 PM
in his defense ""What would you do if you were elected about Aleppo?" is a weird way to ask a candidate about their plans for the Syrian conflict.  do people really think Johnson has no clue about the Syrian civil war?

yeah, weird question. but his response made it pretty clear he had no idea what aleppo was. it wasn't the question that threw him off. I'm sure he knows some stuff about the conflict but it's less than I know (and I only know what I get from bbc news on the drive to and from work).

IT was pretty much this. When you hear just the clip it sounds really bad, but also a poor way to word the question. But then if you hear the whole thing you realize that no, he basically Trump's the question and says "it's a mess, really bad over there"
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: MakeItRain on September 09, 2016, 05:11:03 PM
If he was informed about Syria at all, he just needed to hear the word Aleppo and he could have answered without any further context. It's a question/issue without a good answer, "Trumping the answer" is all anyone can do.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: wetwillie on September 09, 2016, 06:43:07 PM
Official position from Gary Johnson was he thought it was an acronym



https://twitter.com/sopandeb/status/773887813301440512
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 09, 2016, 07:37:22 PM
Gary just needs the mysterious in ear pearl like Hillary.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: steve dave on September 09, 2016, 07:53:00 PM
gj head staffer guy in charge of junk: you are like third place in the president race and have some pretty big time things coming up and you're going to get some questions about current events. you want to brush up on, like, just the top 5 biggest things?

gj: nah
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: wetwillie on September 09, 2016, 08:05:22 PM
All Libertarians Entertain Purple People Offsite   A.L.E.P.P.O
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: sys on September 09, 2016, 08:50:32 PM
i once had a conversation with my grandfather in which i forgot/blanked on/whatever that my uncle was my grandfather's child, which was a fact that i knew.

the idea that he's never heard the name "aleppo" before not only isn't credible, it isn't possible.  i'll give him the benefit of the doubt on the gaffe, with the annotation that he often sounds a little off on a lot of questions, which bothers me more than any single particular.  it really would be better if weld were the candidate.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Trim on September 09, 2016, 08:58:28 PM
I'd never heard of aleppo, and I'm fine with that.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: steve dave on September 09, 2016, 09:02:28 PM
BARNICLE: What would you do, if you were elected, about Aleppo?
JOHNSON: About?
BARNICLE: Aleppo.
JOHNSON: And what is Aleppo?
BARNICLE: You’re kidding.
JOHNSON: No.
BARNICLE: Aleppo is in Syria. It’s the — it’s the epicenter of the refugee crisis.
JOHNSON: OK, got it, got it.
BARNICLE: OK.
JOHNSON: Well, with regard to Syria, I do think that it’s a mess. I think that the only way that we deal with Syria is to join hands with Russia to diplomatically bring that at an end. But when we’ve aligned ourselves with — when we’ve supported the opposition of the Free Syrian Army — the Free Syrian Army is also coupled with the Islamists.
And then the fact that we’re also supporting the Kurds and this is — it’s just — it’s just a mess. And that this is the result of regime change that we end up supporting. And, inevitably, these regime changes have led a less-safe world.
GEIST: So alliance with Russia is the solution to Syria. Do you think Vladimir Putin and Russia are good and a reliable partner?
JOHNSON: Well, I think diplomatically that that is the — that that has to be the solution, is joining hands with Russia to bring — to bring this civil war to an end.
BRZEZINSKI: Joe?
SCARBOROUGH: So, Aleppo is the center of a lot of people’s concerns across the planet about the terrible humanitarian crisis that’s unfolding not only in Syria but, especially, in Aleppo.
You asked, “What is Aleppo?” Do you really think that foreign policy is so insignificant that somebody running for President of the United States shouldn’t even know what Aleppo is, where Aleppo is, why Aleppo is so important?
JOHNSON: Well, no, I do understand Aleppo, and I — I understand the crisis that is going on. But when we involve ourselves militarily — when we involve ourselves in these humanitarian issues we end up — we end up with a situation that in most cases is not better, and in many cases ends up being worse.
And we find ourselves always — politicians are up against the wall and asked what to do about these things and this is why we end up committing military force in areas that, like I say, at the end of the day have an unintended consequence of making things worse.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: steve dave on September 09, 2016, 09:04:04 PM
sys, were you like, "who is that?" and they were "you serious?" and you were "ya" and they were like "your cousin or uncle or whatever" and you were just like "ok, got it. got it."?
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Trim on September 09, 2016, 09:06:17 PM
Allep-nope.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: sys on September 09, 2016, 09:08:03 PM
the details were different, but my spacing off and confusion were comparable.


i mean, that transcript pretty much illustrates my point, it's not logical to think that he's heard of the free syrian army and the kurds, but not of aleppo.  otoh, the remainder of his answer is vague and superficial and makes clear that it's not an issue he is prepared to discuss substantively.  which i think is more the point.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: steve dave on September 09, 2016, 09:16:12 PM
It's one of the top international stories right now, I agree that he's heard of it before, but he's obviously not put a lot of thought into it. which is fine, most of us haven't. but he should probably cram for this test and make it looks like he has, because he looks like an enormous dipshit for not doing so. if you knew you were going to have the family election about knowing which uncle was which you'd put a little pre-thought into it.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Trim on September 09, 2016, 09:23:19 PM
This is why it should be teams running for president.

"oh you have a question about aleppo? Well let me introduce you to the BITSyriaB, _______. Hit it, ______."
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: sys on September 09, 2016, 09:30:31 PM
he should probably cram for this test and make it look like he has, because he looks like an enormous dipshit for not doing so.

yeah.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 09, 2016, 09:40:02 PM
Man those TV guys are like really, really important people.   

I'm telling ya, earpiece, advisors helping on the other end, long pauses before answering.  Works man, it works.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 09, 2016, 09:42:08 PM
Stammer a lot, that works as well.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: steve dave on September 09, 2016, 09:44:33 PM
dax, it's ok to ridicule other people without having to try to turn it to ridiculing hillary. she sucks enormous ass, we agree on that. but this isn't that thread.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: steve dave on September 09, 2016, 09:45:03 PM
and I'm not 100% positive that's what you were doing because I didn't understand what you were saying but I'm pretty sure it was
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: treysolid on September 09, 2016, 09:48:36 PM
and I have no idea if that's what you were doing because I didn't understand what you were saying but I'm pretty sure it was

rest assured that 90% of dax's posts in the pit are blatant or veiled Hillary bashing. the other 10% are defending trump.
Title: Gary Johnson
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 09, 2016, 09:56:03 PM
I've already ridiculed Johnson, but the self importance of some of these people is comical.

In writing about Johnsons gaffe the NYT's had to correct their rough ridin' article twice because they called Aleppo the capital of Syria and then the capital of ISIS.

Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 09, 2016, 09:59:24 PM
and I have no idea if that's what you were doing because I didn't understand what you were saying but I'm pretty sure it was

rest assured that 90% of dax's posts in the pit are blatant or veiled Hillary bashing. the other 10% are defending trump.

Have you admitted you love Hillary yet? I forget, but you do just in case you haven't reconciled yourself to that, yet.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Tobias on September 10, 2016, 03:36:46 AM
omg dax :love:
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 10, 2016, 05:32:19 AM
Gawd dammit Gary, Aleppo is the capital of Syria, no it's the capital of ISIS, no, wait it's a mediocre Hookah Bar in Damascus, no, it's a quaint bistro on the border of Jordan.
http://www.salon.com/2016/09/08/media-and-pundits-dont-know-what-aleppo-is-but-they-try-to-explain-it-to-gary-johnson/
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: treysolid on September 10, 2016, 09:09:08 AM
and I have no idea if that's what you were doing because I didn't understand what you were saying but I'm pretty sure it was

rest assured that 90% of dax's posts in the pit are blatant or veiled Hillary bashing. the other 10% are defending trump.

Have you admitted you love Hillary yet? I forget, but you do just in case you haven't reconciled yourself to that, yet.

I don't know about love, but I voted for Hillary in the poll, just like I'll be voting for Hillary in November. It's not a tough thing to admit. Now you try it with your bro, Trump...
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on September 10, 2016, 10:07:14 AM
 :lol:
Why would anyone admit to voting for Hillary

How humiliating
 :lol:
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: treysolid on September 10, 2016, 10:11:42 AM
no, not really.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on September 10, 2016, 10:13:04 AM
Honest Question: Are you a Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)?
 :ROFL:
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: treysolid on September 10, 2016, 10:18:10 AM
no. so i'm automatically more qualified than two of the candidates i'm not voting for in november.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on September 10, 2016, 10:30:31 AM
Not a compelling non-Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) argument.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on September 10, 2016, 10:45:48 AM
Would you say you are on of those people who is so utterly ignorant that you actually believe hillary would be a competent president, or would you say you are one of those people who is so utterly ignorant that you've been scared into supporting her over what might happen if she's not elected president?
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: treysolid on September 10, 2016, 11:04:38 AM
Would you say you are on of those people who is so utterly ignorant that you actually believe hillary would be a competent president, or would you say you are one of those people who is so utterly ignorant that you've been scared into supporting her over what might happen if she's not elected president?

haha. the way you frame your questions as a rigid binary option when your being accusatory is so cute.

my voting strategy is very simple - i vote for the most competent candidate and then i hope like hell that they will be a competent president.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on September 10, 2016, 11:23:56 AM
Why didn't you just say yes when I asked if you were a Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)?
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: treysolid on September 10, 2016, 11:57:48 AM
oh sick burn dude. be sure to tell all your bros at your next men's rights activist group meeting. i'm sure they'll all be ROLLING.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on September 10, 2016, 12:04:21 PM
I suppose you could have just answered the former, not the latter, when responding to my "binary" query.

"Men's rights activist group", good grief, what an indoctrinated little dipshit.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: sys on September 12, 2016, 11:21:56 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3JX4m4nJKw

kinda interesting video (interview w. penn jillette on politics and whatnot).  in this thread because he's a liblib, not because the interview is much on johnson.  the clinton-nixon comparison is really very good (written on the back of a truck in the facebook thread, also not really in the interview much).
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: star seed 7 on September 12, 2016, 11:26:53 PM
Does it include the $30k donation story? I like that story
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: MakeItRain on September 13, 2016, 01:29:45 AM
When did he stop being fat? He looks weird.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: EllRobersonisInnocent on September 26, 2016, 03:10:01 PM
This dumbass (GJ) is going to cost Hillary the election and I'm not happy about it.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on September 26, 2016, 03:13:28 PM
Did he say something along the lines of We don't need to worry about global warming because the sun is going to engulf the Earth eventually anyway.?
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: sys on September 28, 2016, 06:13:37 PM
very animated in engaing chris matthews on msnbc right now.  i wish i could vote for weld, that guy appears to be a magnificent badass.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: chum1 on September 28, 2016, 09:29:58 PM
Gary. Dude.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/28/politics/gary-johnson-chris-matthews/index.html
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on September 28, 2016, 09:34:49 PM
Gary. Dude.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/28/politics/gary-johnson-chris-matthews/index.html

stoned again. :cool:
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on September 28, 2016, 10:10:00 PM
I do wish Weld was the presidential candidate, but just tell myself if nothing else his being the VP candidate reflects very well on Gary's judgment.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: wetwillie on September 28, 2016, 10:21:28 PM
He didn't answer because he hates them all
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on September 29, 2016, 09:01:32 AM
I saw a GJ sign on my way to work this morning.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Cartierfor3 on September 29, 2016, 09:27:15 AM
meh. he's running for president not jeopardy champion.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on September 29, 2016, 09:53:14 AM
It's a trap question anyway, right? They can spin your answer by looking for the worst thing that leader is accused of and saying you support it...

Would love to see that as a debate question: "if you could be president of another country, which country would you pick?"
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on September 29, 2016, 09:56:11 AM
Also, it's amazing how many Hillary supporters are speaking out against Johnson now (haven't seen many Trump supporters criticize him). It's like the guy didn't even exist until the polls started tightening between Trump and Hillary.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on September 29, 2016, 09:57:33 AM
It's a trap question anyway, right? They can spin your answer by looking for the worst thing that leader is accused of and saying you support it...

Would love to see that as a debate question: "if you could be president of another country, which country would you pick?"

Yeah, you know that after his Aleppo mishap, he probably spent a lot of time studying up on world issues featuring horrible world leaders. He probably just had a bunch of names he couldn't say he likes running through his head, like Putin and Kim Jun Un.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: chum1 on September 29, 2016, 10:00:51 AM
Yeah, who cares if a candidate for President never, ever reads any news on foreign countries. Does the President even have to deal with foreign countries?
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: DQ12 on September 29, 2016, 10:02:05 AM
yeah, I think GJ may be pretty dumb. 
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on September 29, 2016, 10:04:12 AM
#LetHimDebate  :lol: JK, this guy sucks too.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on September 29, 2016, 10:12:18 AM
GJ is definitely not dumb, but he's on the low end of the contemporaneous speaking scale. I wouldn't expect an amazing debate performance from him, but just being on the stage I think would force the other candidates to focus on the issues.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on September 29, 2016, 10:14:14 AM
Also, the guy has been very public about his desire to cut down on the interventionalism that has cost us lives and ridiculous amounts of money. Fair to say he's not as interested in foreign policy as Hillary or Trump.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on September 29, 2016, 10:23:25 AM
GJ is definitely not dumb, but he's on the low end of the contemporaneous speaking scale. I wouldn't expect an amazing debate performance from him, but just being on the stage I think would force the other candidates to focus on the issues.

Did you see the interview where he talked while biting his tongue and said that if he talked like that the whole debate he will still go up in polls?  :lol:
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on September 29, 2016, 10:27:57 AM
Who would you guys have said? I probably would have gone with Merkel.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on September 29, 2016, 10:45:51 AM
Weld's answers were as good as you could do. First start with the dead guy because everyone is saying nice things about him, then a generally well known and respected woman leader (Merkel).
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on September 29, 2016, 10:48:10 AM
I didn't see the part where Weld answered the question. Who was the dead guy he picked?
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Skipper44 on September 29, 2016, 11:11:09 AM
he should have said he shares Hillary's admiration for Chairman Mao
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: michigancat on September 29, 2016, 11:12:23 AM
Who would you guys have said? I probably would have gone with Merkel.

Trudeau
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on September 29, 2016, 11:24:54 AM
I didn't see the part where Weld answered the question. Who was the dead guy he picked?

The former Israeli prime minister. Too lazy to look up his name.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: treysolid on September 29, 2016, 12:02:25 PM
shimon peres. probably only knew the guys name because he had died the day before. they both failed miserably until weld managed to weakly say merkel.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Tobias on September 29, 2016, 12:35:31 PM
i would've gone with nieto, because i just read sys' thread and remember that dude's name now.  merkel would've come second
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on September 29, 2016, 01:30:18 PM
It's not a question you expect to get asked, so I think it's fair for it to take a little bit longer to answer. Not being able to come up with anyone is pretty bad, though.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: 'taterblast on September 29, 2016, 01:50:21 PM
https://twitter.com/GovGaryJohnson/status/781559655839522817
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: chum1 on September 29, 2016, 01:51:22 PM
As someone not running for President, I would struggle to come up with a name. If I did pull Merkel or someone out of my ass, I wouldn't be able to answer why.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: chum1 on September 29, 2016, 01:52:26 PM
https://twitter.com/GovGaryJohnson/status/781559655839522817

That's even more pathetic.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on September 29, 2016, 01:53:34 PM
As someone not running for President, I would struggle to come up with a name. If I did pull Merkel or someone out of my ass, I wouldn't be able to answer why.

Well, Gary doesn't really believe he has a chance to ever be president, so why bother studying up on foreign policy?
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: CNS on September 29, 2016, 02:22:03 PM
It's a lose/lose, imo. 

I mean, he looks like an idiot right not, but if you throw one out, you are aligning yourself with someone else's body of work that you probably only actually know 20% of.  Then, you can get picked apart forever afterward with everyone of their mistakes and stances.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: sys on September 29, 2016, 03:08:50 PM
the media coverage of this has been unfair/stupid, imo.  they claim he didn't know the name of a single foreign leader.  however, the question was not name any foreign leader.  it was fairly obvious to me, both in real time and in replays of the clip, that he was thinking of a specific person that he felt was at least adequate in the being admirable category but could not recall his name rather than casting about hopelessly for any name of any leader.

that happens to me about every five minutes, so i'm pretty sympathetic, but even if it didn't i would not conclude anything about his intelligence or ignorance based on forgetting fox's name.

i also think fox is a semi-decent name to pull out.  wasn't terribly effective, but very charismatic and spearheaded the movement that ended the pri's nearly century-long grip on power in mexico.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: michigancat on September 29, 2016, 03:14:52 PM
definitely a weird question, but Weld showed it wasn't an impossible one to answer.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: sys on September 29, 2016, 03:24:04 PM
definitely a weird question, but Weld showed it wasn't an impossible one to answer.

is merkel really the leader he most admires, or just a leader whose name he was able to recall?
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: chum1 on September 29, 2016, 03:27:41 PM
I think Chris Matthews saw Johnson's Aleppo answer, said, "Hey, I bet this guys doesn't ever read or follow the news much and can't even name a foreign leader," and was 100% correct. That's totally his style.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: star seed 7 on September 29, 2016, 03:38:25 PM
so don't ask for proof but i heard on the radio once that gary approaches the president/vp relationship more like a sharing of duties and defers to weld on certain topics.  i don't know what topics those are, but sounds like foreigners is one of them maybe idk.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on October 01, 2016, 08:34:49 AM
so don't ask for proof but i heard on the radio once that gary approaches the president/vp relationship more like a sharing of duties and defers to weld on certain topics.  i don't know what topics those are, but sounds like foreigners is one of them maybe idk.

Pretty sure this was from their 60 minutes interview FWIW.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: puniraptor on October 01, 2016, 08:55:22 AM
Txt me ( & emo ) when a presidential candidate climbs K2
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: CNS on October 01, 2016, 09:19:45 AM
I guarantee Donald has.  Just ask him.

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 01, 2016, 09:41:19 AM
Chicago Tribune editorial board endorsing Johnson
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: CNS on October 01, 2016, 09:44:26 AM
Detroit paper did yesterday too

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 01, 2016, 09:46:16 AM
He's by far and away the most credible candidate
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: puniraptor on October 08, 2016, 07:56:54 AM
Third party has never had an opportunity like this. I wish there was a better rep than Gary. But oh well.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: CNS on October 08, 2016, 10:23:27 AM
Looking at the two parties, there will probably be a good oppy next go round too.

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: renocat on October 11, 2016, 07:17:48 PM
Interesting. My 2 line in the sand issues are abortion and naming of Supreme Court Justice. I just read that Johnson would name originalist judges to the Supreme Court. He also favors keeping the Hydef Amendment and keeping restrictions on latter stages of abortion. He is a fiscal conservative. Doesn't know squat about foreign policy which is a good thing. I might vote doper.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: puniraptor on October 13, 2016, 01:52:21 AM
come on gary you idiot

do something crazy!
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: puniraptor on October 18, 2016, 04:49:20 AM
eff YOU GARY IM TRIPLE DOWN FOR MY GUY EVAN
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: _33 on October 18, 2016, 06:46:03 AM
Did you guys see the Last Week Tonight about 3rd party candidates?  I learned that it's not just the 2 major party candidates who are unelectable garbage but the 3rd party candidates are as well!  Does anyone know of any good 4th party candidates?
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: puniraptor on October 18, 2016, 06:51:27 AM
Did you guys see the Last Week Tonight about 3rd party candidates?  I learned that it's not just the 2 major party candidates who are unelectable garbage but the 3rd party candidates are as well!  Does anyone know of any good 4th party candidates?
EVAN MCMULLIN

also conveniently has a path to victory
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on October 18, 2016, 11:27:32 AM
Did you guys see the Last Week Tonight about 3rd party candidates?  I learned that it's not just the 2 major party candidates who are unelectable garbage but the 3rd party candidates are as well!  Does anyone know of any good 4th party candidates?
EVAN MCMULLIN

also conveniently has a path to victory

John Oliver didn't even mention him so I guess there was nothing bad to say.  :dunno:
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on October 18, 2016, 12:57:28 PM
There is no reason for Oliver to mention him because he is not a threat to draw away any of Hillary's voters.  A bunch of Bernie folks were moving to Johnson/Stein.  I doubt they'd go to McMullin.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: DQ12 on October 18, 2016, 01:10:03 PM
people voting for Johnson/stein don't actually expect either to become the next president i don't think.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on October 18, 2016, 01:23:39 PM
There is no reason for Oliver to mention him because he is not a threat to draw away any of Hillary's voters.  A bunch of Bernie folks were moving to Johnson/Stein.  I doubt they'd go to McMullin.

He mentioned this guy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sc-_7RCFArM
I think McMullin has more of a chance than him.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 18, 2016, 01:28:42 PM
people voting for Johnson/stein don't actually expect either to become the next president i don't think.

Yeah, those are protest votes. The candidates themselves don't matter. People just choose the party ideology that best fits them and vote as a way to avoid having to pull the lever for Hillary Clinton.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on October 18, 2016, 01:45:09 PM
There is no reason for Oliver to mention him because he is not a threat to draw away any of Hillary's voters.  A bunch of Bernie folks were moving to Johnson/Stein.  I doubt they'd go to McMullin.

He mentioned this guy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sc-_7RCFArM
I think McMullin has more of a chance than him.

Yea, but he's not pulling votes away from Hillary.  That's what I'm saying.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on October 18, 2016, 01:50:34 PM
people voting for Johnson/stein don't actually expect either to become the next president i don't think.

Yeah, those are protest votes. The candidates themselves don't matter. People just choose the party ideology that best fits them and vote as a way to avoid having to pull the lever for Hillary Clinton.

The whole "protest vote" terminology is a huge pet peeve of mine.  All votes are protest votes because no single vote actually matters in a presidential election.  You could stay home and it would not make a bit of difference in the outcome.  Acting like voting for a popular candidate has any more of an impact on the election is a joke.  Why vote for anyone other than the candidate you most closely align with ideologically?
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on October 18, 2016, 01:51:25 PM
There is no reason for Oliver to mention him because he is not a threat to draw away any of Hillary's voters.  A bunch of Bernie folks were moving to Johnson/Stein.  I doubt they'd go to McMullin.

He mentioned this guy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sc-_7RCFArM
I think McMullin has more of a chance than him.

Yea, but he's not pulling votes away from Hillary.  That's what I'm saying.

Oh, so you think Joe Exotic is pulling votes away from Hillary? Interesting, if true.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 18, 2016, 01:52:36 PM
people voting for Johnson/stein don't actually expect either to become the next president i don't think.

Yeah, those are protest votes. The candidates themselves don't matter. People just choose the party ideology that best fits them and vote as a way to avoid having to pull the lever for Hillary Clinton.

The whole "protest vote" terminology is a huge pet peeve of mine.  All votes are protest votes because no single vote actually matters in a presidential election.  You could stay home and it would not make a bit of difference in the outcome.  Acting like voting for a popular candidate has any more of an impact on the election is a joke.  Why vote for anyone other than the candidate you most closely align with ideologically?

Every single vote matters.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on October 18, 2016, 01:56:07 PM
people voting for Johnson/stein don't actually expect either to become the next president i don't think.

Yeah, those are protest votes. The candidates themselves don't matter. People just choose the party ideology that best fits them and vote as a way to avoid having to pull the lever for Hillary Clinton.

The whole "protest vote" terminology is a huge pet peeve of mine.  All votes are protest votes because no single vote actually matters in a presidential election.  You could stay home and it would not make a bit of difference in the outcome.  Acting like voting for a popular candidate has any more of an impact on the election is a joke.  Why vote for anyone other than the candidate you most closely align with ideologically?

Every single vote matters.

If you actually believed this then you wouldn't just lump in all third party votes as protest votes.  If someone was truly just protesting Trump/Hillary they would either not vote for president or they would write in a fictional candidate.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on October 18, 2016, 02:01:31 PM
There is no reason for Oliver to mention him because he is not a threat to draw away any of Hillary's voters.  A bunch of Bernie folks were moving to Johnson/Stein.  I doubt they'd go to McMullin.

He mentioned this guy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sc-_7RCFArM
I think McMullin has more of a chance than him.

Yea, but he's not pulling votes away from Hillary.  That's what I'm saying.

Oh, so you think Joe Exotic is pulling votes away from Hillary? Interesting, if true.

He's broke and gay.  He's not pulling votes away from Trump, that's for sure.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Emo EMAW on October 18, 2016, 02:10:13 PM
There is no reason for Oliver to mention him because he is not a threat to draw away any of Hillary's voters.  A bunch of Bernie folks were moving to Johnson/Stein.  I doubt they'd go to McMullin.

He mentioned this guy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sc-_7RCFArM
I think McMullin has more of a chance than him.

Yea, but he's not pulling votes away from Hillary.  That's what I'm saying.

Oh, so you think Joe Exotic is pulling votes away from Hillary? Interesting, if true.

He's broke and gay.  He's not pulling votes away from Trump, that's for sure.

Ya but have you seen that fu manchu?
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: CNS on October 18, 2016, 02:31:08 PM
people voting for Johnson/stein don't actually expect either to become the next president i don't think.

Yeah, those are protest votes. The candidates themselves don't matter. People just choose the party ideology that best fits them and vote as a way to avoid having to pull the lever for Hillary Clinton.

The whole "protest vote" terminology is a huge pet peeve of mine.  All votes are protest votes because no single vote actually matters in a presidential election.  You could stay home and it would not make a bit of difference in the outcome.  Acting like voting for a popular candidate has any more of an impact on the election is a joke.  Why vote for anyone other than the candidate you most closely align with ideologically?

anyone but trump is a protest vote in ks.  What should non tumpers do?
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: renocat on October 18, 2016, 03:04:34 PM
Protesting is leaving a.turd in the voting booth.  Voting is an honored civic privilege.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Cartierfor3 on October 18, 2016, 03:09:20 PM
there is no such thing as a protest vote.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: MakeItRain on October 18, 2016, 03:58:46 PM
people voting for Johnson/stein don't actually expect either to become the next president i don't think.

No we don't. I'm voting for Jill Stein because her beliefs match most more closely with mine, and I'm in the GP.

The John Oliver thing was fine, all he was doing was exposing the flaws of Johnson and Stein. I am actually glad he did it, he treated them like anyone running a national campaign for president should be treated.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Cartierfor3 on October 18, 2016, 04:35:27 PM
He's never treated HRC like that IIRC MIR.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 18, 2016, 04:41:31 PM
He's never treated HRC like that IIRC MIR.

He went after Clinton's scandals 2-3 weeks ago.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on October 18, 2016, 04:44:04 PM
I believe that is correct.  Oliver has given Hillary some grief before, but he has never done a feature segment on her unelectability like he has the other candidates. It's obvious he wants Hillary to be elected, but I can't really blame him.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on October 18, 2016, 04:45:39 PM
He's never treated HRC like that IIRC MIR.

He went after Clinton's scandals 2-3 weeks ago.

And I believe that segment ended with Oliver saying something like "but that is all NOTHING compared to Trump, so stop worrying about it." (with raisins)
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: CNS on October 18, 2016, 04:46:40 PM
John Oliver is controlling our electoral process!!!!!!   :runaway: :runaway: :runaway: :runaway:
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on October 18, 2016, 04:52:43 PM
John Oliver is controlling our electoral process!!!!!!   :runaway: :runaway: :runaway: :runaway:

Just another cog in the media wheel, CNS.
Title: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on October 18, 2016, 04:52:43 PM
I mean, he clearly wants to determine who wins. So do most people that discuss it, including myself. Oliver is probably just a little more effective at it than I am.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 18, 2016, 04:53:09 PM
He's never treated HRC like that IIRC MIR.

He went after Clinton's scandals 2-3 weeks ago.

And I believe that segment ended with Oliver saying something like "but that is all NOTHING compared to Trump, so stop worrying about it." (with raisins)

Well, when you put them side by side, that is sort of the objective conclusion.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: catastrophe on October 18, 2016, 04:54:08 PM
But notice when discussing Stein and Johnson, he did not compare their shortcomings to Trump's to explain them away.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 18, 2016, 04:55:42 PM
But notice when discussing Stein and Johnson, he did not compare their shortcomings to Trump's to explain them away.

I haven't watched that one yet. I agree that it would be better to explain them away by comparing them to both Donald and Hillary. Neither has any chance to win, though, so it's whatever.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: cfbandyman on October 18, 2016, 05:33:53 PM
I mean, he clearly wants to determine who wins. So do most people that discuss it, including myself. Oliver is probably just a little more effective at it than I am.

Pretty much. I do really enjoy John Oliver. While he/the Last Week Tonight show team sometime reaches, and sometimes has to take a few easy outs both for the sake of time and entertainment (which is ultimately what it should be) he does a real good job at exposing many of the ills of society in a compact, funny, smart, and researched way.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: _33 on October 18, 2016, 05:39:03 PM
people voting for Johnson/stein don't actually expect either to become the next president i don't think.

No we don't. I'm voting for Jill Stein because her beliefs match most more closely with mine, and I'm in the GP.

The John Oliver thing was fine, all he was doing was exposing the flaws of Johnson and Stein. I am actually glad he did it, he treated them like anyone running a national campaign for president should be treated.

Did you hear the part where he was making fun of those song lyrics?  When he said "silent thunder" is just silence I Lol'd. I love John Oliver. Even though our political leanings lean opposite ways.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: MakeItRain on October 18, 2016, 07:24:20 PM
people voting for Johnson/stein don't actually expect either to become the next president i don't think.

No we don't. I'm voting for Jill Stein because her beliefs match most more closely with mine, and I'm in the GP.

The John Oliver thing was fine, all he was doing was exposing the flaws of Johnson and Stein. I am actually glad he did it, he treated them like anyone running a national campaign for president should be treated.

Did you hear the part where he was making fun of those song lyrics?  When he said "silent thunder" is just silence I Lol'd. I love John Oliver. Even though our political leanings lean opposite ways.

Those lyrics were so incredibly awful.
Title: Re: Gary Johnson
Post by: MakeItRain on October 18, 2016, 07:32:38 PM
http://reason.com/blog/2016/10/17/progress-john-oliver-mocks-third-party-c