I Wonder if Obama Even Cares....

[CAA Flagship]

Got it. I'll update my notes shortly.

Stalker

[Grizalltheway]

Got it. I'll update my notes shortly.

Stalker

Your living room carpet could probably use a good vacuuming. Just sayin'.

[CAA Flagship]

Stalker

Your living room carpet could probably use a good vacuuming. Just sayin'.

Closing blinds now.

[UNI88]

"1889hen"



Good post too.

Why not make it 1789hen, to commemorate Bastille Day?

I agree -- good UNIBOMBER88 post!

Nice work!

[UNI88]

I'm shocked that all you Johnson guys agree. That's really odd.


#1... we agree
#2... you think Johnson can win?????
#3... this is where we disagree
#4... the debates are before the election, we were talking about VOTING for Johnson, not polling for him
#5... redundant with #2

This is all a matter of opinion and while I respect your approach I don't think it's the only one.

I think #2 and #5 are related but different enough to not be redundant. I don't think Johnson will win but that doesn't mean that I should vote for Trump or Hillary. I don't want either to be president and voting for them would be a wasted vote for me personally. You can disagree with me on #3 but there are a lot of people who agree with me and to dismiss their opinion is arrogant and condescending. Your opinion is no more valid or right than theirs. To some this election might be more than just about who will be POTUS from 2017-2021. It could be about the direction that the Republican and/or Democratic parties are taking and the future of this country. A vote for Trump or Hillary could be less important to them than trying to get a party back on track for the long-term. You can disagree but it's a perfectly reasonable and valid approach to voting in 2016 and should not be dismissed out of hand.

FTR, I personally fall under #1. I've been voting libertarian for the last several presidential elections and will continue to do so.

[kalm]

I'm shocked that all you Johnson guys agree. That's really odd.


#1... we agree
#2... you think Johnson can win?????
#3... this is where we disagree
#4... the debates are before the election, we were talking about VOTING for Johnson, not polling for him
#5... redundant with #2

This is all a matter of opinion and while I respect your approach I don't think it's the only one.

I think #2 and #5 are related but different enough to not be redundant. I don't think Johnson will win but that doesn't mean that I should vote for Trump or Hillary. I don't want either to be president and voting for them would be a wasted vote for me personally. You can disagree with me on #3 but there are a lot of people who agree with me and to dismiss their opinion is arrogant and condescending. Your opinion is no more valid or right than theirs. To some this election might be more than just about who will be POTUS from 2017-2021. It could be about the direction that the Republican and/or Democratic parties are taking and the future of this country. A vote for Trump or Hillary could be less important to them than trying to get a party back on track for the long-term. You can disagree but it's a perfectly reasonable and valid approach to voting in 2016 and should not be dismissed out of hand.

FTR, I personally fall under #1. I've been voting libertarian for the last several presidential elections and will continue to do so.

Gawdammit, 89stonge! You could have just quoted the entire post so that people can refer back to what each number was talking about!

3) They're sick of both parties and live in a strong red or blue state and believe that their vote for Hillary or Trump will make less of a difference than a protest vote for Johnson.

I'm obviously a three. But I'd be voting for Johnson even if I lived in a swing state. I think we need a reset and I'm open minded enough to give his fiscal policies a try.

If anyone was struggling with these notions before, the conventions should be an easy reminder of how fucked up the system is, how sheepish the delegates are, and how badly the establishment needs to be reigned in.

Sitting out is understandable but voting for either party is a joke at this point.

[AZGrizFan]

I'm obviously a three. But I'd be voting for Johnson even if I lived in a swing state. I think we need a reset and I'm open minded enough to give his fiscal policies a try.

If anyone was struggling with these notions before, the conventions should be an easy reminder of how fucked up the system is, how sheepish the delegates are, and how badly the establishment needs to be reigned in.

Sitting out is understandable but voting for either party is a joke at this point.

100% agree.

What I hope we're seeing (now that we've gotten a peek behind the curtains) is an awakening of the American public as to how badly we're being hornswoggled. And I hope that (ultimately) leads to the collapse of the two party system and the emergence of a viable 3rd (and even 4th!) party that gives us actual choices instead of choosing between two lying, cheating, stealing, crazy pieces of shit.

I just wish that everybody who said "I'd vote for Johnson but it's a wasted vote" would ACTUALLY vote for Johnson instead of truly wasting their vote on the two POS mainstream candidates....I think that would send a huge message that it IS possible.

[kalm]

I'm obviously a three. But I'd be voting for Johnson even if I lived in a swing state. I think we need a reset and I'm open minded enough to give his fiscal policies a try.

If anyone was struggling with these notions before, the conventions should be an easy reminder of how fucked up the system is, how sheepish the delegates are, and how badly the establishment needs to be reigned in.

Sitting out is understandable but voting for either party is a joke at this point.

100% agree.

What I hope we're seeing (now that we've gotten a peek behind the curtains) is an awakening of the American public as to how badly we're being hornswoggled. And I hope that (ultimately) leads to the collapse of the two party system and the emergence of a viable 3rd (and even 4th!) party that gives us actual choices instead of choosing between two lying, cheating, stealing, crazy pieces of shit.

I just wish that everybody who said "I'd vote for Johnson but it's a wasted vote" would ACTUALLY vote for Johnson instead of truly wasting their vote on the two POS mainstream candidates....I think that would send a huge message that it IS possible.

And nice use of "hornswoggled"!

[AZGrizFan]

100% agree.

What I hope we're seeing (now that we've gotten a peek behind the curtains) is an awakening of the American public as to how badly we're being hornswoggled. And I hope that (ultimately) leads to the collapse of the two party system and the emergence of a viable 3rd (and even 4th!) party that gives us actual choices instead of choosing between two lying, cheating, stealing, crazy pieces of shit.

I just wish that everybody who said "I'd vote for Johnson but it's a wasted vote" would ACTUALLY vote for Johnson instead of truly wasting their vote on the two POS mainstream candidates....I think that would send a huge message that it IS possible.

And nice use of "hornswoggled"!

Why thank you.

I just feel that all those "well I WOULD vote for Johnson" people are just playing right into the hands of the two party system...they're HELPING maintain the status quo, when the status quo really, really, really really sucks.

[Ivytalk]

I'm obviously a three. But I'd be voting for Johnson even if I lived in a swing state. I think we need a reset and I'm open minded enough to give his fiscal policies a try.

If anyone was struggling with these notions before, the conventions should be an easy reminder of how **** up the system is, how sheepish the delegates are, and how badly the establishment needs to be reigned in.

Sitting out is understandable but voting for either party is a joke at this point.

100% agree.

What I hope we're seeing (now that we've gotten a peek behind the curtains) is an awakening of the American public as to how badly we're being hornswoggled. And I hope that (ultimately) leads to the collapse of the two party system and the emergence of a viable 3rd (and even 4th!) party that gives us actual choices instead of choosing between two lying, cheating, stealing, crazy pieces of ****.

I just wish that everybody who said "I'd vote for Johnson but it's a wasted vote" would ACTUALLY vote for Johnson instead of truly wasting their vote on the two POS mainstream candidates....I think that would send a huge message that it IS possible.

I've highlighted what, to me, is the key word in AZ's post. To be "viable," parties like the Libertarians and the Greens need to start running credible candidates for state and local office on a broad scale. Otherwise, the perception that those parties are the home of cranks and flakes will persist.

[AZGrizFan]

100% agree.

What I hope we're seeing (now that we've gotten a peek behind the curtains) is an awakening of the American public as to how badly we're being hornswoggled. And I hope that (ultimately) leads to the collapse of the two party system and the emergence of a viable 3rd (and even 4th!) party that gives us actual choices instead of choosing between two lying, cheating, stealing, crazy pieces of ****.

I just wish that everybody who said "I'd vote for Johnson but it's a wasted vote" would ACTUALLY vote for Johnson instead of truly wasting their vote on the two POS mainstream candidates....I think that would send a huge message that it IS possible.

I've highlighted what, to me, is the key word in AZ's post. To be "viable," parties like the Libertarians and the Greens need to start running credible candidates for state and local office on a broad scale. Otherwise, the perception that those parties are the home of cranks and flakes will persist.

I don't care what it's called, but a party that's fiscally responsible/conservative and wants to butt out of social issues would appeal (I believe) to about 60% of Americans. But yes, they'd have to get beyond the "weirdo" label that's been applied to anybody not called a D or R.

[AZGrizFan]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/07 ... ation.html

Not my kind of party, but I believe what's happening in the Republican party also could be happening in the Donk party...

PHILADELPHIA – Bernie Sanders loyalists warned that the Democratic Party could rupture over the nomination of Hillary Clinton after a volatile night that saw a large group of Sanders delegates and supporters exit the party's national convention to stage a sit-in at a nearby media tent.

They rejected Sanders' call for unity even after the Vermont senator took the symbolic step of declaring Clinton the winner of the state-by-state delegate count inside the convention in Philadelphia.

"I suspect we are witnessing an event that will fundamentally change American politics," said Cory James, 22, a college student from Flint, Michigan, who expects the Democratic Party to break apart over Clinton's victory.

I certainly hope Cory James is right.

[TheDancinMonarch]

And nice use of "hornswoggled"!

Why thank you.

I just feel that all those "well I WOULD vote for Johnson" people are just playing right into the hands of the two party system...they're HELPING maintain the status quo, when the status quo really, really, really really sucks.

"Suck" does not even come close to describing it. But failing a better word, you will need to iterate "really" a few more times.

[SDHornet]

If anyone was struggling with these notions before, the conventions should be an easy reminder of how fucked up the system is, how sheepish the delegates are, and how badly the establishment needs to be reigned in.

Sitting out is understandable but voting for either party is a joke at this point.

[AZGrizFan]

Why thank you.

I just feel that all those "well I WOULD vote for Johnson" people are just playing right into the hands of the two party system...they're HELPING maintain the status quo, when the status quo really, really, really really sucks.

"Suck" does not even come close to describing it. But failing a better word, you will need to iterate "really" a few more times.

I really really really really really thought I did...

[CAA Flagship]

100% agree.

What I hope we're seeing (now that we've gotten a peek behind the curtains) is an awakening of the American public as to how badly we're being hornswoggled. And I hope that (ultimately) leads to the collapse of the two party system and the emergence of a viable 3rd (and even 4th!) party that gives us actual choices instead of choosing between two lying, cheating, stealing, crazy pieces of ****.

I just wish that everybody who said "I'd vote for Johnson but it's a wasted vote" would ACTUALLY vote for Johnson instead of truly wasting their vote on the two POS mainstream candidates....I think that would send a huge message that it IS possible.

I've highlighted what, to me, is the key word in AZ's post. To be "viable," parties like the Libertarians and the Greens need to start running credible candidates for state and local office on a broad scale. Otherwise, the perception that those parties are the home of cranks and flakes will persist.

This. The third party has to form from the bottom up, and not the top down. For example: A Senate with 45%, 45%, 10% split would be very interesting. That 10% would be very influential. Probably more influential than a third party President working with a 50-50 Senate.

[89Hen]

But I'd be voting for Johnson even if I lived in a swing state. I think we need a reset and I'm open minded enough to give his fiscal policies a try.

I'm in awe of your open mindedness.

[89Hen]

What I hope... And I hope... I just wish...

[89Hen]

You can disagree with me on #3 but there are a lot of people who agree with me and to dismiss their opinion is arrogant and condescending.

Who dismissed it? We just disagree.

[89Hen]

I've highlighted what, to me, is the key word in AZ's post. To be "viable," parties like the Libertarians and the Greens need to start running credible candidates for state and local office on a broad scale. Otherwise, the perception that those parties are the home of cranks and flakes will persist.

We found some ground on which to agree Ivy.

[kalm]

I've highlighted what, to me, is the key word in AZ's post. To be "viable," parties like the Libertarians and the Greens need to start running credible candidates for state and local office on a broad scale. Otherwise, the perception that those parties are the home of cranks and flakes will persist.

We found some ground on which to agree Ivy.

Do you define credible by their positions or poll numbers?

[89Hen]

We found some ground on which to agree Ivy.

Do you define credible by their positions or poll numbers?

Both.

[Ivytalk]

Do you define credible by their positions or poll numbers?

Both.

Yup. One begets the other.

[CAA Flagship]

Do you define credible by their positions or poll numbers?

Both.

[kalm]

Both.

This.