Poll: Would you consider voting Libertarian?
Yes
No
Maybe, see my post
[Show Results]
 
3rd option for POTUS
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
04-07-2016, 11:59 AM
RE: 3rd option for POTUS
(04-07-2016 10:39 AM)WillHopp Wrote:  
(04-07-2016 10:25 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  Thanks for taking the time to do that, V -- I do appreciate it.

Christ, what a shitty "interview" -- even reading it, the desperate urge to be cool overwhelms the journalistic need for substance.

It's a comedy show.

Yeah, I don't have TV in my home, and don't serach out videos online due to the above-mentioned data limitations. I watch the occasional video at home despite that, but after having read that transcript, I'll pass.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-07-2016, 12:30 PM (This post was last modified: 04-07-2016 12:45 PM by DLJ.)
RE: 3rd option for POTUS
(04-07-2016 09:58 AM)Heatheness Wrote:  
(03-07-2016 03:19 PM)DLJ Wrote:  Why else would anyone vote for or not vote for someone if not their politics?

1. Because they are an asshole. Even if I agreed with Trumps party, and I don't, I would never vote for him because he's an asshole misogynist scum.

2. Because they are morally bankrupt.

3. Because they are sexist, racist, homophobic, classist or about any other personally abhorrent small minded hater.

4. Because they are stupid (re: Michelle Bachman, Sara Palin for examples)

5. Because they are religious fundy's (re: Mike Huckabee, Ben Carson, Ted Cruz and the repub list goes on and on and on....)

I don't know who or what this 3rd party guy stands for so, no, I wouldn't vote for someone I don't know. If I put it poorly that's on me but if you choose to judge that depressing before asking for clarification, that's on you.

I don't care who he is.... Why, because he's not viable. I'm not wasting my time on distractions and that's all a 3rd party candidate is in this country at this time. When and if that changes, I'll reconsider 3rd party candidates.

I'm glad you changed your mind about replying (it's no fun otherwise).

So to summarise:
Selection criteria include... character, skills/competencies, ethics, beliefs, principles and of course, policies.

As mentioned via PM, I would include most (but not all) of that under the heading of someone's politics.

Would it not then be incumbent on each voter to research each candidate to ascertain compatibility in each of these areas?

What are the criteria (how high is the bar) for deciding that a 3rd (or 4th) party is worth investigating to see if they match your views (to xx% of compatibility)?

1 million followers? 2 million facebook likes? 5 seats in Congress?

(04-07-2016 10:09 AM)WillHopp Wrote:  ...
I'm with her.

Heatheness/Hopp 2024!

Drinking Beverage

So am I. Those are good selection criteria.

The irony, of course, is that the "I'm with her" slogan points to the one thing that Heatheness, fortunately, omitted ... identity.

I've been seeking out vox-pops over the last few months (interviews with US voters) and frankly it's not impressive.

"Why are you with her?" ... "because she's Hilary" or "because it's her time".

It was worse with Palin ... not one interviewee that I found knew what she stood for beyond the sound-bites.

And Trump is the absolute epitome of this.

If it wasn't for the people here on TTA who generally can put forward coherent opinions regarding policies (obviously excluding Lord Dark Helmet and his cold dead hand) and do a little research into a candidate's track record (ethics, competency etc.), I would have long ago lost hope in the democratic principle.

And bear in mind that I grew up with people like that girl in the BREXIT vid that Dark Light posted who thought that leaving the EU meant having to watch less football... so I have a high tolerance threshold.

Wink

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like DLJ's post
04-07-2016, 12:31 PM
RE: 3rd option for POTUS
(04-07-2016 10:18 AM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  Gary Johnson, yeah I could vote for him. He's pro 2nd amendment. That's really all I care about.

That's all you care about? We can illegally invade countries, run up the national debt, dumb down our educational system, poison our environment, hand over trillions of tax payer dollars to corrupt financial institutions, but as long you can buy an AR15 without having to suffer the indignity of a waiting period or a check to make sure you're not a convicted felon, you're all good?

Jeezes there are a lot of idiots in this country.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 7 users Like BnW's post
04-07-2016, 12:35 PM
RE: 3rd option for POTUS
(04-07-2016 09:58 AM)Heatheness Wrote:  I don't care who he is.... Why, because he's not viable. I'm not wasting my time on distractions and that's all a 3rd party candidate is in this country at this time. When and if that changes, I'll reconsider 3rd party candidates.

But that's a self fulfilling prophesy. He's not viable because you refuse to take the time to find out who he is and would never consider voting for him. You can't have it both ways. You can't complain a third party isn't viable and then refuse to even consider voting for one or doing basic research to learn about who they are. Maybe Gary Johnson, or even Jill Stein, doesn't align with your beliefs but it amazes me how people can just blindly write them off and then say "they are not viable".

Btw, Jesse Ventura became governor of a state running as a 3rd party candidate. Bernie Sanders became a Senator running outside the confines of the Democratic Party. That's clearly not the same as winning a national election, but it is possible for a 3rd party to win. On a national scale, I admit it's improbable but if people are willing to consider them, it becomes more likely.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like BnW's post
04-07-2016, 12:50 PM
RE: 3rd option for POTUS
(04-07-2016 12:35 PM)BnW Wrote:  
(04-07-2016 09:58 AM)Heatheness Wrote:  I don't care who he is.... Why, because he's not viable. I'm not wasting my time on distractions and that's all a 3rd party candidate is in this country at this time. When and if that changes, I'll reconsider 3rd party candidates.

But that's a self fulfilling prophesy. He's not viable because you refuse to take the time to find out who he is and would never consider voting for him. You can't have it both ways. You can't complain a third party isn't viable and then refuse to even consider voting for one or doing basic research to learn about who they are. Maybe Gary Johnson, or even Jill Stein, doesn't align with your beliefs but it amazes me how people can just blindly write them off and then say "they are not viable".

Btw, Jesse Ventura became governor of a state running as a 3rd party candidate. Bernie Sanders became a Senator running outside the confines of the Democratic Party. That's clearly not the same as winning a national election, but it is possible for a 3rd party to win. On a national scale, I admit it's improbable but if people are willing to consider them, it becomes more likely.

Again, I agree that it probably is BUT for me, as I've said many times before, the vote is not just about this presidency. It's about who will be nominated for SCOTUS in possibly three seats for their lifetime. That is a game changer and I am unwilling to take the risk on a third party support. This is why I did not support Bernie even though I do like him. I did not think he could win as easily as Hillary.

Presidents come and go but SCOTUS is for life. Repubs in the here and now are fundy run and I would not in any way risk the progress of the country, particularly the progress of women, to a chance they might get that opportunity to fill those spots with more Scalia's. Just not happening.

As for 3rd party politics, I do think eventually it will happen, maybe not in my lifetime but eventually, yes.

[Image: dnw9krH.jpg?4]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Heatheness's post
04-07-2016, 12:59 PM
RE: 3rd option for POTUS
Ok. I think that's actually a fair and reasonable answer. And, the next President is definitely going to name one justice, probably 2 and possibly 3. I can't imagine Ginsburg is going to make it until 2020 and Kennedy is 79 and will be 80 before the end of July. So, the next President is absolutely going to have a huge impact on the Supreme Court.

It's unrelated to this topic, but I think the Republicans seriously fucked up by holding up the nomination of Merrick Garland. Even if she likes him, I think there is little chance that is who Clinton will put forth to replace Scalia. Assuming she wins (and I think, absent an indictment or something else unforeseen, she's going to win handily) she's going to use this opportunity to put an extreme liberal on the bench. The Republicans, who made a big stink about the American people have a say through their vote for President, are not going to be in a position to stop any nominee. Even if they keep enough of the Senate to block a a fillabuster vote, the pressure on them to take a vote to the floor will be enormous. I think Mitch McConnell is going to rue the day he played this particular hand of poker.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like BnW's post
04-07-2016, 01:06 PM
RE: 3rd option for POTUS
(04-07-2016 12:59 PM)BnW Wrote:  Ok. I think that's actually a fair and reasonable answer. And, the next President is definitely going to name one justice, probably 2 and possibly 3. I can't imagine Ginsburg is going to make it until 2020 and Kennedy is 79 and will be 80 before the end of July. So, the next President is absolutely going to have a huge impact on the Supreme Court.

It's unrelated to this topic, but I think the Republicans seriously fucked up by holding up the nomination of Merrick Garland. Even if she likes him, I think there is little chance that is who Clinton will put forth to replace Scalia. Assuming she wins (and I think, absent an indictment or something else unforeseen, she's going to win handily) she's going to use this opportunity to put an extreme liberal on the bench. The Republicans, who made a big stink about the American people have a say through their vote for President, are not going to be in a position to stop any nominee. Even if they keep enough of the Senate to block a a fillabuster vote, the pressure on them to take a vote to the floor will be enormous. I think Mitch McConnell is going to rue the day he played this particular hand of poker.

Totally agree with this. ^^^^

[Image: dnw9krH.jpg?4]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-07-2016, 04:27 PM
RE: 3rd option for POTUS
(04-07-2016 06:13 AM)Vosur Wrote:  
(03-07-2016 10:51 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  I don't have any high-speed data on my plan, is there a transcript I can read somewhere?
There wasn't one until I created one just now. Enjoy.


[Intro]

Samantha Bee
Welcome back to the show. Let's say you were choosing a sandwich. What do you when your only choices are something morally reprehensible, against the rule of law and decency and a symbol for all that's wrong in America [an image of Trump's face next to giant hamburger dripping with sauce is displayed in the background] and something you, I don't know, you don't really know why you just never cared for [an image of Clinton's face next to a plain old toast sandwich is displayed in the background]? You might be wondering if there's anything else on the menu [a picture of a smiley face made out of a sandwich and vegetables is displayed in the background]. Well, guess what, there is! It's not FDA-inspected, but I took a bite anyway.

Samantha Bee
For the last 160 years, Americans have only elected Democrats and Republicans for president, but this year, that could all change.

Female CNN news anchor
44% of registered voters said that they would want a third party option.

Male CNN news anchor
There's already a third party candidate running right now.

MSNBC news anchor
The Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson.

Fox News anchor
Gary Johnson.

Gary Johnson on CNN
Who the hell is Gary Johnson?

Samantha Bee
Good question, guy who is Gary Johnson. We sat down so Gary could introduce himself to America.

[Start of the interview]

Gary Johnson
I'm Gary Johnson. I am running for president on the Libertarian party.

Samantha Bee
What is a Libertarian?

Gary Johnson
A Libertarian is fiscally conservative and socially liberal. Get government out of the bedroom, bring an end to the drug war and let's stop with these military interventions.

Samantha Bee (talking over the recording)
Sounds reasonable, so I had Gary walk me through a checklist of what it means to be Libertarian.

Gary Johnson
Legalize marijuana. I would not have bailed out the auto industry. I support a woman's right to choose. I would abolish guaranteed government student loans and I would abolish the Department of Education.

Samantha Bee
Here's the thing with Libertarians: I support basically every other thing you say.

Gary Johnson
I believe in free markets. The model of the future should be Uber-everything. Uber accountant, Uber lawyer, Uber doctor.

Samantha Bee
I can't wait to pay surge pricing mid-colonoscopy.

Samantha Bee (talking over the recording)
But the free market seems to be going Gary's way. He'll be the only third party candidate on the ballot in all 50 states and he's already polling at 10%. So who is the real Gary?

Samantha Bee
Your campaign slogan is "Google 'Gary Johnson' and find out."

Gary Johnson
Google "Gary Johnson". This is really objective.

Samantha Bee
And yet you have a name they would give someone in witness protection.

Gary Johnson
You know, there are a lot of Gary Johnsons.

Gary Johnson
Who is Gary Johnson?

Gary Johnson
Just google him

Samantha Bee (talking over the recording)
So I googled "Johnson" - oops, safe search on - and it turns out that he was a popular two-term governor of New Mexico in the 90s where he balanced the budget and murdered some wood. Also, he's climbed Mount Everest and bikes while sexy. But is he ready for the big leagues?

Samantha Bee
Let's take a look at an image from your campaign website. What sound were you making when this photo was taken. Ngaaaaaaah!

Gary Johnson
I looove youuuuu. Doesn't that show gravitas?

Samantha Bee
Make that face right now.

Gary Johnson
[attempts to recreate the facial expression in the picture]

Samantha Bee
What are you doing? Why? You know, kids will do anything with photos. They can put anything in there. So easy to turn that G into an H.

Gary Johnson
[whispers] Gravitas.

Samantha Bee (talking over the recording)
But Gary's biggest strength seems to be that he's not the worst.

Samantha Bee
You've got a real advantage over Trump and Hillary because you're not really disliked, you're just not known. All you really have to do now is shut up and look pretty.

Gary Johnson
[starts laughing]

Samantha Bee
Shhh. Just look pretty.

Gary Johnson
Ok. Just be liked.

Samantha Bee (talking over the recording)
And it turns out Gary being Gary is pretty amazing. His mind is as free as his markets.

Samantha Bee
What was your most recent job before running?

Gary Johnson
I was the CEO of Cannabis Sativa, but I am making a pledge that I would not be consuming marijuana as President of the United States. I am actually a really disciplined cat.

Samantha Bee
You're a cat? Panther-like?

Gary Johnson
Uh, may I share one of my high school nicknames with you?

Samantha Bee
I'm dying to hear what it was.

Gary Johnson
Jaguar. Jaguar Johnson?

Samantha Bee
Whaaat?

Gary Johnson
Pshh.

[A picture of Johnson's face photoshopped on a Jaguar's body is shown for a few seconds]

Samantha Bee
Do you think you're presidential enough to get elected?

Gary Johnson
I-, I am-, I do not- I am a round peg in a square hole when it comes to the perception of what you're supposed to be running for president.

Samantha Bee (talking over the recording)
Still, when your choices are a peg that's been squaring herself since she was five [a video of Clinton is playing in the background] and a peg that's just fucking the hole for the fun of it [a video of Trump is playing in the background], Gary's realness is pretty refreshing. He just wants everyone to live free.

Samantha Bee
If you could be anywhere but the campaign trail right now, where would you be?

Gary Johnson
Rock climbing.

Samantha Bee
Well, lucky for you, I'm a witch. [snaps]

[Samantha Bee and Gary Johnson suddenly appear on a training wall for rock climbers]

Samantha Bee
Oh my God!

Gary Johnson
Awesome!

Samantha Bee
How the fuck did you rope me into this?

Gary Johnson
How the fuck have you gotten us so high never having done this before and isn't it exciting? I mean, it's just so in the moment. [Johnson leans in to kiss Bee on the cheek] Oh yeah, nothing's more in the moment.

Samantha Bee
Gary Johnson. I hate to say this: I think you're too freaky-deaky to be our president.

Gary Johnson
I think this is what you want in a president.

Samantha Bee (talking over the recording)
This Libertarian is ready for America.

Gary Johnson
Vote for Gary Johnson!

Samantha Bee (talking over the recording)
But is America ready for the Libertarians? We'll find out next week when we visit their convention.

Samantha Bee
What sorts of people show up at the Libertarian convention?

Gary Johnson
You're gonna find really wonderful, well-meaning, well-spoken people and then people that are just batshit crazy.

Samantha Bee (back in the studio)
We'll be right back.

I don't know whether Samantha Bee is supposed to be a shitty journalist or a shitty comedian, but after watching this sham of an interview, I'm not surprised that she never managed to get any of the major presidential candidates to sit down for an interview with her. This was a major chance for Johnson to look like a reasonable alternative to Trump and Clinton, but instead he only ended up looking like a lunatic on par with John McAfee.


That just might be because he is a fucking lunatic.

Atheism is NOT a Religion. It's A Personal Relationship With Reality!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Minimalist's post
05-07-2016, 12:04 AM (This post was last modified: 06-07-2016 12:00 AM by Thumpalumpacus.)
RE: 3rd option for POTUS
(04-07-2016 10:45 AM)Heatheness Wrote:  
(04-07-2016 10:32 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  Given that this is the attitude towards third-party options that most Americans, the two-party system will never face a challenge.

A peaceful challenge, that is.

A third-party vote is not necessarily thrown away.

That is possibly true, IDK but in my opinion it is a throw away vote if it has no chance. To each their own but I'll not do what I consider a throw away vote on my one chance to voice my say.

Edited: Again to each their own.

(I took out the "ymmv" because I later thought it kind of sounded snotty and that was not my intent.)

Well, the reason I don't consider it a throw-away is that given enough third-party votes, a message is sent: change your game or be sent packing. The Dems certainly heard that with Perot's candidacy (granted, not a third-party, but polled strong as an independant before his Big Waffle). They united behind Bill Clinton even though he was quite a bit more centrist than most of them, and tugged party politics in America to the right.

I hope that enough Libertarians vote to give Johnson a stage on which he can present a sensible alternative to the two parties. And even though I'm quite a bit to the right of the Greens, I hope that they can find a candidate/leader who can have the same effect. Whether my choice wins or loses, I'm fine with it, so long as democracy has had a vigorous workout.

As matters stand, it doesn't. Both major candidates are beholden to class or moneyed interests, and perhaps both, and I don't feel they represent my nation's interests very well at all on the world stage, which is POTUS's job. Both in my eyes seem to increase, not decrease, the likelihood of yet another foreign war; both represent Pax Americana, with all the financial and international-relations difficulties that entails. Clinton is sounder on domestic issues, which sways me somewhat if I think my vote can be meaningful in the sense you hold of that term.

I would love to see my vote help Johnson into the Oval Office, but I'm sure that won't happen. That being the case, if my vote is needed to help keep Trump out of office, I will wield it in that capacity. Otherwise, I will do as I have done in almost every election the last two-plus decades, and vote my conscience ... which I wish more Americans would do, without regard to the thought that they will "get it right" for picking the winner of the horse-race.

Because, in my opinion, they only thing we will ever get with that mindset is more of the same.

ETA: "YMMV" wouldn't have sounded "snotty" to me. It only signifies disagreement, to me, and our disagreements never rise to that sort of sarcasm. I wouldn't have known it was in there had you not mentioned it, either. Now I'm buttraged!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Thumpalumpacus's post
05-07-2016, 12:20 AM (This post was last modified: 05-07-2016 12:35 AM by Thumpalumpacus.)
RE: 3rd option for POTUS
(04-07-2016 12:50 PM)Heatheness Wrote:  Repubs in the here and now are fundy run and I would not in any way risk the progress of the country, particularly the progress of women, to a chance they might get that opportunity to fill those spots with more Scalia's. Just not happening.

Actually, I think Trump's success in the primary is testimony to the demise of the fundy-Christian domination of Republican politics that they held for twenty-five or so years.

Between the three factions of Republicans -- big business, Tea Partiers, and fundies -- I think the latter are the weakest. Not to say they don't wield influence, and not to say a standard-issue Republican wouldn't play to their biases (as Kasich did with his pro-life stance even though he was a moderate in most other ways) -- but their power is greatly diminished since Citizens United gave the nod to Big Business involvement in politics.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Thumpalumpacus's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: