A vote for Gary Johnson is a vote for Clinton's people--these people.
No. It's not. There are mountains of evidence showing libertarians pull from both sides. We're not stealing votes from Trump. Trump and his campaign being a continuous dumpster fire of such shittiness that people are willing to turn a blind eye to HRC's corruption are stealing votes from Trump. I dislike HRC and what she represents as much as anyone, but I'm not willing to support Trump or what he represents either (PROTIP: it's neither socially nor all that fiscally permissive, considering someone's gonna actually have to pay for the notional wall and the inevitable string of unnecessary military entanglements). If you're tired of seeing fucksticks like the fucksticks in that video full of fucksticks, put boots to the pavement and try and sort it out yourself. Be sure to upload the results.
Gary Johnson is a guy who will get at most 6 to 8% of the vote. It's at best a protest vote, voting for a guy who (smokes marijuana daily, owns a marijuana distributing business, would shrink the U.S. military even more than its current dangerously pre-WW II lows, knows embarrassingly nothing about international issues, and is an unprincipled jerk) is far lower on the scale than Donald Trump.
It can't be called voting on principle.
Trump, on the other hand, for all his manifest gaffs and flaws, knows how to negotiate, has stated he will focus on rebuilding our economy and jobs, has made clear who he would nominate as Supreme Court justices, will secure our borders, will rebuild our military, will make a serious priority of defeating ISIS and Al Qaida, will not let in thousands of un-vettable muslim immigrants (and will actually have the courage to identify the enemy, and use the term Islamic terror), has vowed to make a high priority of stopping and reversing our national debt, is a nationalist and not a globalist, would take serious steps to resists globalist attempts to destroy our sovereignty and reign us into a global system, has vowed to unify the nation in ways that other leaders in the last 25 years, both Democrat and Republican, have not!
Trump's rhetoric is so un-nuanced and direct that I'm willing to give him a chance, all things considered. He has proven leadership ability. Not a conventional political candidate, but a potentially capable one.
I respect that we all have to make our own choices, but knowing what I know about Gary Johnson, Jill Stein and Hillary Clinton, I don't see how anyone could think the latter 3 have demonstrated the ability to improve the nation and not further endanger us. Trump has built a billion-dollar global empire, has traveled internationally to do business, has even met some world leaders in the course of his business, has participated in politics on a state and national scale since at least the Reagan years, even as a donor at one point to the Clintons. I'll take Trump over the PROVEN criminality of Hillary Clinton and the (at best) naivete of the lesser two other candidates on the ballot.
A vote for Gary Johnson is a vote for Clinton's people--these people.
No. It's not. There are mountains of evidence showing libertarians pull from both sides. We're not stealing votes from Trump. Trump and his campaign being a continuous dumpster fire of such shittiness that people are willing to turn a blind eye to HRC's corruption are stealing votes from Trump. I dislike HRC and what she represents as much as anyone, but I'm not willing to support Trump or what he represents either (PROTIP: it's neither socially nor all that fiscally permissive, considering someone's gonna actually have to pay for the notional wall and the inevitable string of unnecessary military entanglements). If you're tired of seeing fucksticks like the fucksticks in that video full of fucksticks, put boots to the pavement and try and sort it out yourself. Be sure to upload the results.
The same allegations of "warmonger" were levelled at Ronald Reagan. Who rebuilt our military but didn't engage in any significant military action.
As Pariah pointed out on another thread, it is Obama and Hillary who are threatening the Russians, and potentially setting up a no-fly zone that could shoot down Russian jets and reign us into an unnecessary war. It is Hillary and Obama who are globalist interventionists. It is Hillary and Obama that have reduced our military, refused to defend our interests, and whose weakness has INVITED attacks on the U.S. by Russia, China, Iran and North Korea. I fail to see how Trump could possibly do worse.
Trump is no Ronald Reagan. Trump can't even lead the GOP much less the country.
Originally Posted By: WB
As Pariah pointed out on another thread, it is Obama and Hillary who are threatening the Russians, and potentially setting up a no-fly zone that could shoot down Russian jets and reign us into an unnecessary war. It is Hillary and Obama who are globalist interventionists. It is Hillary and Obama that have reduced our military, refused to defend our interests, and whose weakness has INVITED attacks on the U.S. by Russia, China, Iran and North Korea. I fail to see how Trump could possibly do worse.
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
It's a winner take all electoral state. The polls aren't at all close. Registered Democrats outnumber Republicans 2-1.
Every republican in the state could write in Bill the Cat or vote for Trump and the results to the electoral college will be the same.
The aftermath won't be the same if every would-be Trump voter decides to vote in someone else on the pipe dream that they'll manage to disrupt Hilldawg by voting tepidly.
Even if Trump loses, every vote for him signifies a view that rejects Hillary's agenda. Remainiacs, for instance, haven't been remiss in mentioning how divided Britain is to maintain the legitimacy of their opinion's prevalence. They're retards, no doubt, but the method is sound enough.
Supposing Hillary sees a victory, the more Trump-voters that Hillary must contend with post-win, the more difficult it will be for her to maintain absolute control over the masses.
Originally Posted By: Captain Sammitch
No. It's not. There are mountains of evidence showing libertarians pull from both sides. We're not stealing votes from Trump. Trump and his campaign being a continuous dumpster fire of such shittiness that people are willing to turn a blind eye to HRC's corruption are stealing votes from Trump.
So you're going to avoid voting for Trump because he sounds mean and makes lewd jokes about women, but you're going to support a proven fraud like Johnson under the disingenuous and arrogant premise that you're not taking likely votes from Trump.
You are so full of shit, your eyes are brown.
Johnson is complicit opposition, and only exists as a candidate for concern trolling, over-scrupulous cunts like yourself who could vote for Trump on policy, if not on character. If you were voting for Austin Peterson under these auspices, I might have believed you, but no, you're resting your pride and protest on fucking Gary Johnson. Congratu-fucking-lations on voting against your child's future.
Quote:
If you're tired of seeing fucksticks like the fucksticks in that video full of fucksticks, put boots to the pavement and try and sort it out yourself. Be sure to upload the results.
Originally Posted By: First Amongst Daves
Pariah, I can't see the video. If you're saying I endorse violence against a homeless person, then you're a piece of shit.
If I were in the area, you can bet I would have lost my mind (and my security clearance) on those motherfuckers, but since I keep my distance from Hollywood so as to avoid people like them and yourself, I was not in the area.
The reason I mention both you and Dave--and various others--with regards to those "fucksticks" is because of the language they use to justify their assault as she's lying on the ground, helplessly cornered. They shamed her with the same social justice terminology that you've chosen to adopt in defense of poor, downtrodden Zoe Quinn and Anita Sarkeesian, and is absolute Dave du jour to boot. Like it or not, your tolerance and acceptance of these social justice constructs makes you every bit as responsible for these people as HRC and Obama.
You are supporting Russia's choice Pariah. A weaker Country is to their benefit. I guess if you want states to pull away and secede you have mutual interests
No one could possibly weaken and endanger this country more, militarily, diplomatically or economically than cultural Marxists Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
You are supporting Russia's choice Pariah. A weaker Country is to their benefit. I guess if you want states to pull away and secede you have mutual interests
World War III is neither their interest nor our own.
