Elections Gary Johnson at 12% (3% away from debates), potential game changer

[djacobox372]

Gotta love all the young uninformed Bernie supporters who are jumping on the Johnson.

LOL, how these idiots can jump from one end of the ideological spectrum to the other without even knowing about it. One day a socialist, the next a libertarian? WTF?

 

[Jack V Savage]

Gotta love all the young uninformed Bernie supporters who are jumping on the Johnson.

LOL, how these idiots can jump from one end of the ideological spectrum to the other without even knowing about it. One day a socialist, the next a libertarian? WTF?

It's not about policy at all. They were never on board with Sanders' policy program--they just liked the hipster aspect to his campaign.

 

[lfd0311]

Gotta love all the young uninformed Bernie supporters who are jumping on the Johnson.

LOL, how these idiots can jump from one end of the ideological spectrum to the other without even knowing about it. One day a socialist, the next a libertarian? WTF?

Bro. They're smart Bro. Third Party, bro. Smarter than you are, bro. Bro.

 

[Possum Jenkins]

It's not about policy at all. They were never on board with Sanders' policy program--they just liked the hipster aspect to his campaign.

I think they're just uninformed. They really did like Sanders' program... but Johnson's sounds cool too. They don't realize the vast inconsistencies in this.

But most importantly, I don't think there's that many of them. Yeah, they stick out but they probably shouldn't because they're not that important. I mean, something like 75% of Bernie supporters said they'll go Hillary. I'm guessing another 15% will go Stein, 5% won't vote and a measly 5% will go Johnson.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I think they're just uninformed. They really did like Sanders' program... but Johnson's sounds cool too. They don't realize the vast inconsistencies in this.

But most importantly, I don't think there's that many of them. Yeah, they stick out but they probably shouldn't because they're not that important. I mean, something like 75% of Bernie supporters said they'll go Hillary. I'm guessing another 15% will go Stein, 5% won't vote and a measly 5% will go Johnson.

Bernie supporters who now support Clinton (or even Stein, despite the implications of that support) aren't who we're talking about, though. Polls showed that Democratic primary voters who thought that Obama was too far to the left mostly preferred Bernie. It was the discontent and desire to support someone who wasn't mainstream that mattered. I remember there used to be a lot of Paulites who liked Dennis Kucinich, and it was the same thing.

 

[Rick Sanchez]

Right. You didn't realize that was one isolated incident in the almost 400 years of warfare between Natives and Europeans and it occured 300 years after Columbus, but I'm the one "trying too hard". You folks are hilarious....

it was a joke


its sad you didnt realize that...

why so serious

 

[Possum Jenkins]

Bernie supporters who now support Clinton (or even Stein, despite the implications of that support) aren't who we're talking about, though. Polls showed that Democratic primary voters who thought that Obama was too far to the left mostly preferred Bernie. It was the discontent and desire to support someone who wasn't mainstream that mattered. I remember there used to be a lot of Paulites who liked Dennis Kucinich, and it was the same thing.

Yeah, it's the "shake up the system!" crowd that doesn't really care who shakes it or in what direction just as long as something goes down.

But my point is they're very few and far between. They attract a lot of attention because they're so loud but I really don't think they're very numerous.

 

[helltoupee]

actually it benefits all of us, big businesses needs workers. who the fuck do you think works for corporations???
but i understand you really don't know shit about how the economy works.

Sounds to me that you don't know shit about what economic force/leverage is.

Ya, people in "company towns" had to work too.

 

[lfd0311]

it was a joke


its sad you didnt realize that...

why so serious

Right, a joke. It was a zinger

 

[helltoupee]

Yeah, I know, and I am generally in lock-step with your thoughts on most subjects around here. But it's all about priorities I guess. Right now I'd say I am going through a phase. All I want from the president is to be a strong anti-interventionist (not really an isolationist), leave people alone on pretty much every social issue, and basically stick to the constitution. I'm good with free trade and making it easier for hard working immigrants to come here and contribute, and I feel like the economy works itself out for the most part without much help from the gov't. We should focus on eliminating corporate lobbies, cronyism, and corruption right now. I'm fine with his record of vetoing everything that doesn't pay for itself, as I'd rather the federal gov't just not do anything at all. Lately I'm leaning towards state's rights more than I used to inasmuch as I really think people are better off when they can make significant decisions through local policy, and the federal role should be more about block funding and general frameworks, and less about administration.
As far as the environment is concerned, he doesn't deny climate change, he's a big clean energy proponent, and he supports nuclear energy. Dude rides his bike across New Mexico every year and created a new MJ edible, ffs. He governed a very blue state that is big into its environment and he won his second term in a rout. He just happens to be a market based solutions guy, and the jury is still out for me on what that looks like for some things.
He has a lot of ideas about the economy that I do not agree with, but I have said before I don't pretend to be an expert in that area, and I like the fact that he's been very forthcoming to admit when he's wrong and will embrace alternative ideas. He's also stated repeatedly he would never pull the rug out from under the most vulnerable citizens, and would craft policies accordingly.
Honestly, I disagree with about half of his platform when I look at it (private prisons? wtf? but guess what, he's reduced overcrowded prisons in NM with his policies so who knows, maybe it is worth the discussion). I suppose I just like the guy's sincerity, and I really don't like the direction my party, the dems, have been marching in over the last few years. I'm pissed about droning children to death, pissed about the invasion of privacy of citizens, with the government shoving a microscope up every orifice in our bodies, and as much as I think Hillary is a very predictable and safe choice overall, I'm pissed that she could be so careless with sensitive information when she was in charge of the security of our country. I'd at least like a fresh voice in there mixing it up in the debates because it's going to be a shitshow with objectively the worst candidate ever in Trump, and the least like-able in Hilldawg.
All that said, I live in a state that is almost certainly going Clinton's way, so I have the luxury of voting without any consequences. Take it for what it's worth.

Edit: Sorry for the wall of text, lol.

I agree with almost everything you wrote here except for the bolded above.

Look what happened when the "invisible hand" of the marketplace was allowed it's natural course in the sub-prime disaster. I'm not saying that everything has to be regulated. But there has to be some checks and balances to ensure that the natural greed of capital accumulation doesn't go overboard.

Same with private prisons. Now all of a sudden we have a corporation whose bottom line depends on jailing people - that's a recipe for disaster.

Quite frankly, I'm amazed that out of the 300 something million people who live in the US, this is the best we could do as far as candidates goes.

 

[VivaRevolution]

Where has Zinn sourced a single one of his claims? Of course a Truther would believe Zinn. Again, you folks are hilarious...

EDIT: Here is a diary entry from Columbus' Journal as attributed to him be De Las Casas, The basis for Zinn's claim. Zinn is a liar, and you're a clown if you believe his nonsense,

What follows are the very words of the Admiral in his book, about his first voyage to, and discovery of, these Indies. I, he says, in order that they would be friendly to us because I recognized that they were people who would be better freed and converted to our Holy Faith by love than by force to some of them I gave red caps, and glass beads which they put on their chests, and many other things of small value, in which they took so much pleasure and became so much our friends that it was a marvel. Later they came swimming to the ships' launches where we were and brought us parrots and cotton thread in balls and javelins and many other things, and they traded them to us for other things which we gave them, such as small glass beads and bells. In sum, they took everything and gave of what they had willingly. But it seemed to me that they were a people very poor in everything. All of them go around as naked as their mother bore them; and the women also, although I did not see more than one quite young girl. And all those that I saw were young people, for none did I see of more than 30 years of age. They are all very well formed, with handsome bodies and good faces. Their hair coarse—almost like the tail of a horse—and short. They wear their hair down over their eyebrows except for a little in the back which they wear long and never cut. Some of them paint themselves with black, and they are of the color of the Canarians [Canary Islanders], neither black nor white; and some of them paint themselves with white, and some of them with red, and some of them with whatever they find. And some of them paint their faces, and some the whole body, and some of them only the eyes, and some of them only the nose. They do not carry arms nor are they acquainted with them, because I showed them swords and they took them by the edge and through ignorance cut themselves. They have no iron. Their javelins are shafts without iron and some of them have at the end a fish tooth and others of other things. All of them alike are of good-sized stature and carry themselves well. I saw some who had marks of wounds on their bodies and I made signs to them asking them what they were; and they showed me how people from other islands nearby came there and tried to take them, and how they defended themselves; and I believed and believe that they come here from tierra firme to take them by captive. They should be good and intelligent servants, for I see that they say very quickly everything that is said to them; and I believe they would become Christians very easily, for it seemed to me that they had no religion. Our Lord pleasing, at the time of my departure I will take six of them from here to Your Highness in order that they may learn to speak No animal of any kind did I see on this island except parrots. All are the Admiral's words.

A huge copy paste, with no link huh?

You claimed the source was a fabrication.

Again where is your source here, showing that the quote is wrong?

FYI, Zinn sources his work rather well, so unless you can contest that, I would suggest taking that gigantic foot out of your mouth.

 

[lfd0311]

A huge copy paste, with no link huh?

You claimed the source was a fabrication.

Again where is your source here, showing that the quote is wrong?

FYI, Zinn sources his work rather well, so unless you can contest that, I would suggest taking that gigantic foot out of your mouth.

I've asked you twice now, what are his sources? He never sources it in his book.

A long copy and paste, got it. The source for that is Bartoleme De Las Casas, as I've said before.


It's Columbus' diary, freely google it. Google all of Zinn's unsourced and twisted BS. Zinn claims that Columbus brought 1200 men with him to conquer the new world on his return voyage. Columbus brought 17 ships filled with 1200 settlers forced to go to the new world by the Crown. It's pathetic. Read real history, don't read Zinn. Even the far left is starting to move away from teaching Zinn in Schools

 

[sickc0d3r]

I agree with almost everything you wrote here except for the bolded above.

Look what happened when the "invisible hand" of the marketplace was allowed it's natural course in the sub-prime disaster. I'm not saying that everything has to be regulated. But there has to be some checks and balances to ensure that the natural greed of capital accumulation doesn't go overboard.

Same with private prisons. Now all of a sudden we have a corporation whose bottom line depends on jailing people - that's a recipe for disaster.

Quite frankly, I'm amazed that out of the 300 something million people who live in the US, this is the best we could do as far as candidates goes.

It's probably a selfish perspective, but there is not much the federal government can do to affect me personally when they don't do much of anything. And Gary loves that veto stamp. Obama had a do nothing congress and we managed to pull out of the great recession despite their being shutdown every other month. The fed plays its game regardless.
Also, Gary is no friend of the banks, and he's no fan of the corporate lobby. He's not a utopian free market guy, either. He supports "common sense" regulation, whatever that means.
Until a candidate I actually like comes along, I'll vote to keep the federal government asleep, and focus my attention on local policy that affects me directly.

As far as private prisons my concern would be the same as yours, and I can't say I'm in favor. I'd like to see what measures are included to prevent a conflict of interest between rehabilitation and profit. I do know that Gary supports policies that would reduce the incarceration rate, like getting rid of mandatory minimum sentences and ending the drug war.

 

[helltoupee]

It's probably a selfish perspective, but there is not much the federal government can do to affect me personally when they don't do much of anything. And Gary loves that veto stamp. Obama had a do nothing congress and we managed to pull out of the great recession despite their being shutdown every other month. The fed plays its game regardless.
Also, Gary is no friend of the banks, and he's no fan of the corporate lobby. He's not a utopian free market guy, either. He supports "common sense" regulation, whatever that means.
Until a candidate I actually like comes along, I'll vote to keep the federal government asleep, and focus my attention on local policy that affects me directly.

As far as private prisons my concern would be the same as yours, and I can't say I'm in favor. I'd like to see what measures are included to prevent a conflict of interest between rehabilitation and profit. I do know that Gary supports policies that would reduce the incarceration rate, like getting rid of mandatory minimum sentences and ending the drug war.

I'll confess, I don't really know much about Johnson other than his pro-MJ legalization stance, which I think is appropriate.

From what you've wrote, I'd sure as hell take him over the illusion of choice that has been proffered currently.

What I'm not too sure of is whether or not he is more of "same church, different pew" - I guess in a certain sense, they all are.

 

[sickc0d3r]

I'll confess, I don't really know much about Johnson other than his pro-MJ legalization stance, which I think is appropriate.

From what you've wrote, I'd sure as hell take him over the illusion of choice that has been proffered currently.

What I'm not too sure of is whether or not he is more of "same church, different pew" - I guess in a certain sense, they all are.

It's possible, but he's well liked in the state he governed, so I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt. This way I don't have to hold my nose and vote for someone I genuinely do not like. It's not like he has a chance anyway

 

[VivaRevolution]

I've asked you twice now, what are his sources? He never sources it in his book.

A long copy and paste, got it. The source for that is Bartoleme De Las Casas, as I've said before.


It's Columbus' diary, freely google it. Google all of Zinn's unsourced and twisted BS. Zinn claims that Columbus brought 1200 men with him to conquer the new world on his return voyage. Columbus brought 17 ships filled with 1200 settlers forced to go to the new world by the Crown. It's pathetic. Read real history, don't read Zinn. Even the far left is starting to move away from teaching Zinn in Schools

Teaching Zinn in schools huh?

Zinn has something at the end of his book called a bibliography.

A people's history of the united states is one of the better sourced books I have ever seen.

If you are faulting Zinn for the perspective he writes from in this book, which he very clearly acknowledges, then you are not very bright.

The burden of proof here when calling a printed author a liar, is on you sir.

Again Howard Zinn > Ifd0311

 

[lfd0311]

Teaching Zinn in schools huh?

Zinn has something at the end of his book called a bibliography.

A people's history of the united states is one of the better sourced books I have ever seen.

If you are faulting Zinn for the perspective he writes from in this book, which he very clearly acknowledges, then you are not very bright.

The burden of proof here when calling a printed author a liar, is on you sir.

Again Howard Zinn > Ifd0311

Again, post it because I've never seen it. What is his source for Columbus bringing 1200 soldiers with him to conquer and enslave the New World as he claimed? What is his source for anything that he claimed, because it certainly isn't sourced anywhere but in his book. All other sources in history, including Columbus an De Las Casas themselves, two men who were enemies, state that the 1200 people who returned with Columbus between the first and second voyages were settlers there to inhabit Hispanolia, a place the found destroyed when they returned. Yet none of that is mentioned by Zinn. Because he's a lair, and you're a fool for believing his lies.

The burden of proof? Read some history other than Zinn, there's your "burden of proof". Just read Columbus' and De Las Casas' unaltered words for yourself, the same words that Zinn claims to be siting. Do you even realize that "A People's History" isn't even peer reviewed? The major historical academic reviewing bodies didn't even give that book the time of day. They recognized it for the piece of gutter trash it was.

 

[VivaRevolution]

Again, post it because I've never seen it. What is his source for Columbus bringing 1200 soldiers with him to conquer and enslave the New World as he claimed? What is his source for anything that he claimed, because it certainly isn't sourced anywhere but in his book. All other sources in history, including Columbus an De Las Casas themselves, two men who were enemies, state that the 1200 people who returned with Columbus between the first and second voyages were settlers there to inhabit Hispanolia, a place the found destroyed when they returned. Yet none of that is mentioned by Zinn. Because he's a lair, and you're a fool for believing his lies.

The burden of proof? Read some history other than Zinn, there's your "burden of proof". Just read Columbus' and De Las Casas' unaltered words for yourself, the same words that Zinn claims to be siting. Do you even realize that "A People's History" isn't even peer reviewed? The major historical academic reviewing bodies didn't even give that book the time of day. They recognized it for the piece of gutter trash it was.

Your response in a nutshell.........

Ifd0311 > Howard Zinn

My response back.........

 

[lfd0311]

Your response in a nutshell.........

Ifd0311 > Howard Zinn

My response back.........

Exactly. When asked to substantiate what you said, don't do it and post memes. That's kind of where I thought this was going.

 

[VivaRevolution]

Exactly. When asked to substantiate what you said, don't do it and post memes. That's kind of where I thought this was going.

Exactly, when asked to back up your assertion that Idf0311 > Howard Zinn, you tuck tail and run.

You made a claim, when challenged on it, you asked me to source proof against your claim. You are wearing clown pants right now man.

The burden of proof is on you.