Be Libertarian with me for ONE election -- Live Free
- Thread starter skiminnesota
- Start date
cottage_steeze
Member
people forget that the point of the election isnt to vote for the possible winner, its to vote for who you support
accualyisdolan
Active member
End the drug war party. Good stuff I would do anything to see Ron Paul prez
sklermang
Active member
Ok I mean good for libertarians everywhere that theres a candidate to represent them, but what I don't understand is why any of the candidates who obviously don't have a chance at winning the election even bother running. Its like throwing a couple years of your life and tons of money straight down the drain, for what, a little publicity on election day?
cottage_steeze
Member
durrr
cottage_steeze
Member
well if you read the thread, maybe you will see the point. They run in order to get there ideas out there and build there resume for the future, Gary Johnson was governor of New Mexico for 2 terms under the republican party, and had attempted to run as the republican ticket in the presidential race. As libertarian, he is getting his name out and getting the ideas that republicans and democrats dont talk about out there as well. Who's to say that he can't be running as the republican in the next presidential race? And all the points that are brought up by third party candidates that actually have potential can in fact influence the 2 main parties. Need any more reasons?
sklermang
Active member
Aside from half of your post being summed up by "getting their name (and ideas) out there", which I said in my first post (maybe its you who should be doing the reading, dumbass.) these are the only 2 new reasons you actually brought up why a candidate not nominated by the dem or rep party might be running. Now personally, I would be less inclined to vote for a candidate in a presidential election who has already ran and failed. It shows a lack of judgement on the part of the candidate, and I would rather have seen him spent his time running another office, business, anything but desperately pouring dollars and hours into a fruitless campaign.
To your last point - a smart politician who wants not to assume the office of president but still have an influence on the decisions of the president (I think thats what you meant to say instead of "parties"...) would stick with one party, in this case Republican, and assert his influence through another position in the executive branch, or through the inner workings of the party...If you think that the Republican party is going to adopt any Libertarian ideas that haven't already been backed by Republicans, you're wrong.
Peace bitch.
To your last point - a smart politician who wants not to assume the office of president but still have an influence on the decisions of the president (I think thats what you meant to say instead of "parties"...) would stick with one party, in this case Republican, and assert his influence through another position in the executive branch, or through the inner workings of the party...If you think that the Republican party is going to adopt any Libertarian ideas that haven't already been backed by Republicans, you're wrong.
Peace bitch.
cottage_steeze
Member
well you asked why, and i answered, no need to call me a dumbass. i gave you 2 new reasons, 2 more than you had. Personally, I dont care what you personally are less inclined to vote for. Your ideas lack sense; you say youd rather see a candidate give up than to keep trying, and you say that you would rather see them running another office of business. well Johnson started a 1 man handyman business and grew it until it employed 1000 people: engineers, architects, contractors, etc. He also has held the position of Governor of New Mexico for 2 terms (the limit in case you didn't know) and he did that with no political background running as a republican in a 2 to 1 democratic state. Id say he has been successful. To your last point - how can you say the Republican party isnt going to adopt any Libertarian ideas if he was already a Republican governor with the majority of the same ideas? He is attempting to move up from his last position of Governor, attempting to get other views out (and being successful at it), and doing what HE wants to do. So keep on calling me names, but I will keep supporting the people I believe in, and I will not fall for the stupid idea of 2 parties rule all, and the rest should give up.
"No personally, I would be less inclined to vote for a candidate in a presidential election who has already ran and failed" - Well I guess your personal view is that perseverance doesn't pay off, good call.
"No personally, I would be less inclined to vote for a candidate in a presidential election who has already ran and failed" - Well I guess your personal view is that perseverance doesn't pay off, good call.
Wallisch_pl
Active member
you literally are
I voted ron paul in 08. I wasn't voting for barr, and I sure as fuck wasn't wasting my vote on the front runners. Decided to at least vote for who I wanted to, even if it didn't count.
God damn this shit.
Vote for who you want to win. The whole reason this 2 party bullshit continues on is because of ignorant people like you. IF you vote for the 3 or 4th choice just because he can win, you're voting for somebody shitty every election. IF you always vote for somebody shitty, how the fuck can anyone decent get in?
Fuck. People kill me sometimes. Oh herp derp derp, he was the lesser of two evils.
ZOMG he cost al gore the election? Who gives a fuck? We would have been in the same place regardless. Al Gore sure as hell wasn't the answer. People are incredibly stupid sometimes.
But go ahead and vote for a shitty candidate. Go cast your vote for somebody that will probably win and isn't going to do shit to better America. At least then you can say you voted for the winning side.
Congrats.
Vote for who you want to win. The whole reason this 2 party bullshit continues on is because of ignorant people like you. IF you vote for the 3 or 4th choice just because he can win, you're voting for somebody shitty every election. IF you always vote for somebody shitty, how the fuck can anyone decent get in?
Fuck. People kill me sometimes. Oh herp derp derp, he was the lesser of two evils.
ZOMG he cost al gore the election? Who gives a fuck? We would have been in the same place regardless. Al Gore sure as hell wasn't the answer. People are incredibly stupid sometimes.
But go ahead and vote for a shitty candidate. Go cast your vote for somebody that will probably win and isn't going to do shit to better America. At least then you can say you voted for the winning side.
Congrats.
Your killin me smalls.
It's about the principle. Instead of sitting on their ass watching America get butt fucked by the man, they're putting in some serious time trying to make some real changes and spread awareness. Their biggest problem is that they'll never have the backing of the mainstream media, and that's what tells most people who they like. I don't think they run expecting 50% of the people to vote for them. At the same time, you need those people to make an effort if you're going to get real positive changes down the road. It seems like there's more awareness in this election than the last. If they can get it to a point where they're getting a decent percentage, even if they're losing, it might help show people there's a chance. A lot of people don't vote for them because they feel it's a wasted vote. If you could show them that they had a chance that might changes things.
People donate a lot of money to those campaigns. If I give somebody money to run, and they run and lose, they aren't wasting my money.
The biggest thing really is the media attention. With a little bit of media coverage people could be convinced to vote for anybody. It's just sad that when there are some good candidates out there, people will be so easily swayed from voting for them.
" for what, a little publicity on election day?"
Yes, exactly. These people are putting in all this effort for the publicity they get. I mean look how much everyone talks about them and how much airtime they get on the news. This might as well be a publicity stunt.
It's about the principle. Instead of sitting on their ass watching America get butt fucked by the man, they're putting in some serious time trying to make some real changes and spread awareness. Their biggest problem is that they'll never have the backing of the mainstream media, and that's what tells most people who they like. I don't think they run expecting 50% of the people to vote for them. At the same time, you need those people to make an effort if you're going to get real positive changes down the road. It seems like there's more awareness in this election than the last. If they can get it to a point where they're getting a decent percentage, even if they're losing, it might help show people there's a chance. A lot of people don't vote for them because they feel it's a wasted vote. If you could show them that they had a chance that might changes things.
People donate a lot of money to those campaigns. If I give somebody money to run, and they run and lose, they aren't wasting my money.
The biggest thing really is the media attention. With a little bit of media coverage people could be convinced to vote for anybody. It's just sad that when there are some good candidates out there, people will be so easily swayed from voting for them.
" for what, a little publicity on election day?"
Yes, exactly. These people are putting in all this effort for the publicity they get. I mean look how much everyone talks about them and how much airtime they get on the news. This might as well be a publicity stunt.
"maybe its you who should be doing the reading, dumbass."
This post really started off well.
"ow personally, I would be less inclined to vote for a candidate in a presidential election who has already ran and failed. It shows a lack of judgement on the part of the candidate, and I would rather have seen him spent his time running another office, business, anything but desperately pouring dollars and hours into a fruitless campaign."
A lack of judgement? How about a lack of knowledge on the part of the American people. Most Americans have their heads so far up into derpville they can't even begin to use logic in their thinking.
"To your last point - a smart politician who wants not to assume the office of president but still have an influence on the decisions of the president (I think thats what you meant to say instead of "parties"...) would stick with one party, in this case Republican, and assert his influence through another position in the executive branch, or through the inner workings of the party...If you think that the Republican party is going to adopt any Libertarian ideas that haven't already been backed by Republicans, you're wrong.
"
The chances of a non shit person getting a good position in a shit presidents white house are slim. Also why would somebody who actually stands for something want to be part of a fucked up political charade?
Actually you're wrong on the next point. Having ron paul in the race in 08 actually forced people to pull a little this or that into their campaigns. You could see it in some of the answers at the start of the debates this time around. Not a lot but a little bit.
Also that isn't really the point. The point is getting somebody who doesn't blow into office so our country stops sucking so badly. The rep and dem parties in the main sense will continue being shit for a long time. That's the problem. If they aren't going to change, you have to try to get people in with values that actually cares about shit. If you can't get on the rep or dem ticket, or you don't believe in either party, you have to run 3rd party.
"
Peace bitch."
Hopefully by the time you're 18 you won't be such an ignorant little child.
This post really started off well.
"ow personally, I would be less inclined to vote for a candidate in a presidential election who has already ran and failed. It shows a lack of judgement on the part of the candidate, and I would rather have seen him spent his time running another office, business, anything but desperately pouring dollars and hours into a fruitless campaign."
A lack of judgement? How about a lack of knowledge on the part of the American people. Most Americans have their heads so far up into derpville they can't even begin to use logic in their thinking.
"To your last point - a smart politician who wants not to assume the office of president but still have an influence on the decisions of the president (I think thats what you meant to say instead of "parties"...) would stick with one party, in this case Republican, and assert his influence through another position in the executive branch, or through the inner workings of the party...If you think that the Republican party is going to adopt any Libertarian ideas that haven't already been backed by Republicans, you're wrong.
"
The chances of a non shit person getting a good position in a shit presidents white house are slim. Also why would somebody who actually stands for something want to be part of a fucked up political charade?
Actually you're wrong on the next point. Having ron paul in the race in 08 actually forced people to pull a little this or that into their campaigns. You could see it in some of the answers at the start of the debates this time around. Not a lot but a little bit.
Also that isn't really the point. The point is getting somebody who doesn't blow into office so our country stops sucking so badly. The rep and dem parties in the main sense will continue being shit for a long time. That's the problem. If they aren't going to change, you have to try to get people in with values that actually cares about shit. If you can't get on the rep or dem ticket, or you don't believe in either party, you have to run 3rd party.
"
Peace bitch."
Hopefully by the time you're 18 you won't be such an ignorant little child.
Wallisch_pl
Active member
I hope everyone knoew that only mitt and obama have a chance
skiminnesota
Active member
you must be a political science major or something?
skiminnesota
Active member
fantastic!
to the person you quoted. do people really think that the world will implode if the government isnt at every turn saying "do the right thing"? i guess i just have more faith in humanity to be civil and act ethically.
to the person you quoted. do people really think that the world will implode if the government isnt at every turn saying "do the right thing"? i guess i just have more faith in humanity to be civil and act ethically.
It's not even do the right thing. It's do this do that. The government isn't in very good shape for morals these days.
But other than that I agree that people are derping pretty hard regarding everything.
But other than that I agree that people are derping pretty hard regarding everything.
Wallisch_pl
Active member
you made this thread
...go kill yourself
...go kill yourself
Your post was pretty derpin though.
skiminnesota
Active member
besides your post could actually be proved to be factually incorrect.
Wallisch_pl
Active member
but it won't