Post here if you voted for Gary Johnson

[DSUrocks07]

So did Gary Johnson cost Romney the election?

[ASUMountaineer]

I said over and over that they despise conservatism because they nominated a self-described and proven "progressive" and that their actions since 2000 prove they despise conservatism. The fact that they would not vote for a candidate like Gary Johnson (or any candidate with similar policies/stances) were he in the R primaries just helps further the point.

Good grief, I don't want to relive the whole thing again, but this post is exactly what got me going in the first place. You make one comment that is fine, but then follow it up with a "fact" that's not even approaching a fact and does further your point that I was arguing against.

Because they didn't vote for Ron Paul doesn't prove squat. For every good idea he had, he had a cooky one.

Good grief indeed.

[kalm]

FWIW, it was a hypothetical question and ASUmounty answered it splendidly.

I think Gary Johnson would have beat Obama exactly because he embodies true conservative convictions.
Mitt just wanted to get elected. He figured the easiest path was to simultaneously appease the christian right while appearing progressive and neo-liberal.

[Skjellyfetti]

Y'all honestly believe Gary Johnson would have beaten Obama? Seriously?

[kalm]

Y'all honestly believe Gary Johnson would have beaten Obama? Seriously?

Yes. Obama was the more convincing of two complete frauds...ooops I mean politicians.

[Skjellyfetti]

Y'all honestly believe Gary Johnson would have beaten Obama? Seriously?

Yes. Obama was the more convincing of two complete frauds...ooops I mean politicians.

I mean, you can like Johnson... that's fine. I liked quite a bit of his platform.

But, he couldn't even come CLOSE to winning the Republican nomination. He dropped out before the primaries even started. Like his policies all you want... but, to suggest he would realistically have beaten Obama is absolutely laughable and based on absolutely nothing.

[Ibanez]

Y'all honestly believe Gary Johnson would have beaten Obama? Seriously?

Christ. You really are dense. The point wasn't to have Gary win. The point was to get him 5% of the vote. If he received 5% then ... You know what? Do the research yourself. F'n a!

[UNI88]

Yes. Obama was the more convincing of two complete frauds...ooops I mean politicians.

I mean, you can like Johnson... that's fine. I liked quite a bit of his platform.

But, he couldn't even come CLOSE to winning the Republican nomination. He dropped out before the primaries even started. Like his policies all you want... but, to suggest he would realistically have beaten Obama is absolutely laughable and based on absolutely nothing.

It's a hypothetical question ... could Gary Johnson have beaten Obama if he'd been the Republican nominee? Not could Gary Johnson have won the Republican nomination and then beaten Obama. Of course Johnson couldn't win the Rep nomination but IMO, his policies and lack of conviction (i.e. lack of flip flopping wishy-washiness) would made him more appealing to the center than Romney (or Obama for that matter).

[GSUhooligan]

I mean, you can like Johnson... that's fine. I liked quite a bit of his platform.

But, he couldn't even come CLOSE to winning the Republican nomination. He dropped out before the primaries even started. Like his policies all you want... but, to suggest he would realistically have beaten Obama is absolutely laughable and based on absolutely nothing.

It's a hypothetical question ... could Gary Johnson have beaten Obama if he'd been the Republican nominee? Not could Gary Johnson have won the Republican nomination and then beaten Obama. Of course Johnson couldn't win the Rep nomination but IMO, his policies and lack of conviction (i.e. lack of flip flopping wishy-washiness) would made him more appealing to the center than Romney (or Obama for that matter).

Yep. It was a hypothetical jelly. If he had the ability to $pread his message to the extent that Romney could, it wouldn't have been close.

An R next to his name gets him 45% off the bat.
Pro-marriage equality
Anti-drug war
Anti-interventionist foreign policy
plan to balance the budget
Pro immigrant

He could easily get another 5-15% from dems who are socially liberal-fiscally conservative.

[Skjellyfetti]

Christ. You really are dense. The point wasn't to have Gary win. The point was to get him 5% of the vote. If he received 5% then ... You know what? Do the research yourself. F'n a!

I wasn't questioning the 5% thing.

I was questioning the people that legitimately believe Gary Johnson would have won head-to-head with Obama.

[kalm]

Christ. You really are dense. The point wasn't to have Gary win. The point was to get him 5% of the vote. If he received 5% then ... You know what? Do the research yourself. F'n a!

I wasn't questioning the 5% thing.

I was questioning the people that legitimately believe Gary Johnson would have won head-to-head with Obama.

Read the post above yours. Yes he could have.

[Pwns]

Y'all honestly believe Gary Johnson would have beaten Obama? Seriously?

Yes, I do. He would get many more latino votes and the people who don't like the social conservatism of the republican party.

[Skjellyfetti]

Read the post above yours. Yes he could have.

That post just lists his more popular policies... while leaving out his policies that would DOOM any national politician -- like getting rid of medicare/medicaid, getting rid of the IRS, getting rid of the Fed, etc. Those positions isolate a great many voters.






Oh, by the way. Gary Johnson is back under 1% of the popular vote.

[DSUrocks07]

Read the post above yours. Yes he could have.

That post just lists his more popular policies... while leaving out his policies that would DOOM any national politician -- like getting rid of medicare/medicaid, getting rid of the IRS, getting rid of the Fed, etc. Those positions isolate a great many voters.






Oh, by the way. Gary Johnson is back under 1% of the popular vote.

You're right, why would anyone vote for a third party. Everybody should have to choose between the two major parties or don't vote at all.

[Ibanez]

Christ. You really are dense. The point wasn't to have Gary win. The point was to get him 5% of the vote. If he received 5% then ... You know what? Do the research yourself. F'n a!

I wasn't questioning the 5% thing.

I was questioning the people that legitimately believe Gary Johnson would have won head-to-head with Obama.

Dude, that wasn't it! Goddamnit. The answer has been posted many times. People didn't vote for Gary b/c they thought he'd win.

[kalm]

Read the post above yours. Yes he could have.

That post just lists his more popular policies... while leaving out his policies that would DOOM any national politician -- like getting rid of medicare/medicaid, getting rid of the IRS, getting rid of the Fed, etc. Those positions isolate a great many voters.






Oh, by the way. Gary Johnson is back under 1% of the popular vote.

Entitlements would be problematic, but I don't think there are many fed fans out there much less that many voters who understand it. He didn't get 1% because of his ideas, he got 1% because of the duopoly.

[Ibanez]

Analjelly, if you were a hot dog and were hungry would you eat yourself?















Go Cubs!

[GSUhooligan]

Read the post above yours. Yes he could have.

That post just lists his more popular policies... while leaving out his policies that would DOOM any national politician -- like getting rid of medicare/medicaid, getting rid of the IRS, getting rid of the Fed, etc. Those positions isolate a great many voters.


Oh, by the way. Gary Johnson is back under 1% of the popular vote.

Getting rid of the IRS and replacing it with a consumption tax wouldn't doom him. Getting rid of the Fed wouldn't doom him. He doesn't want to get rid of medicare/medicaid, he would block-grant the funds back to the states.

He's also a pretty pragmatic Libertarian. He's not a "my way or the highway" type like Ron Paul. I'll loosely quote him by saying that he and Paul both agree on how to get from A to Z. Paul won't go to B unless you agree to go to Z, whereas Gary would be happy to get to G.

[Skjellyfetti]

You're right, why would anyone vote for a third party. Everybody should have to choose between the two major parties or don't vote at all.

I have nothing against 3rd parties... and really hope a legitimate 3rd party becomes viable soon.

But, a 3rd party candidate that is easy painted as extreme, radical, etc. is not going to win a national election.

The 3rd party that will be viable will have to come from the center. Gary Johnson is not it. People that believe he (or someone like him) could actually WIN a national election aren't living in reality.

[kalm]

You're right, why would anyone vote for a third party. Everybody should have to choose between the two major parties or don't vote at all.

I have nothing against 3rd parties... and really hope a legitimate 3rd party becomes viable soon.

But, a 3rd party candidate that is easy painted as extreme, radical, etc. is not going to win a national election.

The 3rd party that will be viable will have to come from the center. Gary Johnson is not it. People that believe he (or someone like him) could actually WIN a national election aren't living in reality.

Ever heard of the radical middle?

[Ibanez]

You're right, why would anyone vote for a third party. Everybody should have to choose between the two major parties or don't vote at all.

I have nothing against 3rd parties... and really hope a legitimate 3rd party becomes viable soon.

But, a 3rd party candidate that is easy painted as extreme, radical, etc. is not going to win a national election.

The 3rd party that will be viable will have to come from the center. Gary Johnson is not it. People that believe he (or someone like him) could actually WIN a national election aren't living in reality.

Agreed on the last line.

[Skjellyfetti]

Ever heard of the radical middle?

That is exactly where a legitimate 3rd party would need to be. Again, Gary Johnson is not it. Not even close.

[kalm]

Ever heard of the radical middle?

That is exactly where a legitimate 3rd party would need to be. Again, Gary Johnson is not it. Not even close.

Psshttt!

[UNI88]

Ever heard of the radical middle?

That is exactly where a legitimate 3rd party would need to be. Again, Gary Johnson is not it. Not even close.

Please define that "middle" for us? I'm guessing that your definition is pretty close to your own views. IMO, you're making the mistake of believing that the "middle" is roughly analogous with your own opinions when in reality the "radical middle" is a hodge podge of different perspectives and ideas that covers a pretty wide spectrum. The question needs to be whether parts of GJ's & the Libertarian platform would be appealing enough to those in the middle for them to overlook the parts they don't agree with. This would be done in comparison to Obama's platform plus the intangibles (charisma, trustworthiness, etc.). Johnson isn't nearly as whackadoodle as Ron Paul so he would have a much better chance if people knew who he was and what he stands for. He might not beat Obama but I think he would have had a chance, especially in the swing states.

[Skjellyfetti]

Please define that "middle" for us?

Here's what wikipedia says on it:

The radical center is most often associated with ideologies such as social liberalism and progressivism. Policies from the radical center tend to be pro-civil liberties, progressive taxation and climate change tackling.

Gary Johnson definitely has the social liberalism down... but, he is extremely far from progressivism. He is very pro-civil liberties. He is couldn't be more anti-progressive taxation.

Here's a ranking by Project Vote Smart of the politicians most aligned with the idea of a radical middle:
http://votesmart.org/interest-group/185 ... J1Od8XA98E" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ron Paul is at the very bottom of that list. Gary Johnson isn't on the list... but, he would certainly be towards the bottom as well... I would bet