• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

CNN: Why is Gary Johnson still in the race?

ModerateGOP said:
So are you saying the constitution says that the Commander in Chief should IGNORE threats around the world??? Really????
Click to expand...

Try reading what he posted. I did, and didn't come away with that at all.
 
ModerateGOP said:
So are you saying the constitution says that the Commander in Chief should IGNORE threats around the world??? Really????
Click to expand...

No, I am saying that POTUS should govern in accordance with his oath of office, and I am saying that George Washington was quite right or Thomas Jefferson was quite right that the goal of foreign policy should be honest friendship with all nations and entangling alliances with none.

And as long as you're trying to put words in my mouth, I'm also saying POTUS and Congress should honor their oath of office and let Congress do the declaring of war.

Our recent history of military aggression around the world has not only been very expensive and unconstitutional, it has also been a miserable failure by any standard except a standard designed by a war profiteer.
 
Thoreau72 said:
No, I am saying that POTUS should govern in accordance with his oath of office, and I am saying that George Washington was quite right or Thomas Jefferson was quite right that the goal of foreign policy should be honest friendship with all nations and entangling alliances with none.
Click to expand...

So why does that mean a President shouldn't know what's happening in Aleppo?
 
Your Star said:
One of their core tenants is the legalization of marijuana. So why would they have an issue with their candidate supporting the legalization?
Click to expand...

What you even talking about? The libertarian party support legalizing pot because it's part of a larger belief system, not because it's a core tenant of the party.
 
Cephus said:
But the loony libertarians don't care about conflicts around the world, they're isolationists. They don't want there to be American interests anywhere but here. I don't care who climbs mountains, that has nothing to do with the ability to be President. Having a basic knowledge of current events though, absolutely does. Johnson is a moron.
Click to expand...

Sigh. Non-interventionism is NOT isolationism. Why is that so hard for conservatives to understand?
 
ModerateGOP said:
So why does that mean a President shouldn't know what's happening in Aleppo?
Click to expand...

I did not say he should not know what's going on in Aleppo, and I agree that if a candidate knows what's going on there it would be a good thing.

But if he "knows" like the Pentagon or the media "knows", then all he knows is propaganda.

If he knew the truth and SPOKE the truth, he would be instantly marginalized by our presstitute media.

As he was unaware of any part of it, apparently, could it be said that he was more interested in domestic issues than in foreign issues? If so, that might be a good thing. For the past 20 years or more, our foreign policy has been an expensive and unconstitutional disaster.
 
Thoreau72 said:
As he was unaware of any part of it, apparently, could it be said that he was more interested in domestic issues than in foreign issues? If so, that might be a good thing. For the past 20 years or more, our foreign policy has been an expensive and unconstitutional disaster.
Click to expand...

Uh Correction, he didn't even know it was a PLACE IN THE WORLD!!!! Let alone how it relates to the international relations of this country. I'm sorry, that is not something I'd want in a President.
 
Henrin said:
What you even talking about? The libertarian party support legalizing pot because it's part of a larger belief system, not because it's a core tenant of the party.
Click to expand...

Yes. They support the right that a person can put whatever into their body, as long as it doesn't harm others. Thus, they support the legalization of marijuana. It is one of their core tenants. Chill out on the anger their fellow.
 
Your Star said:
Yes. They support the right that a person can put whatever into their body, as long as it doesn't harm others. Thus, they support the legalization of marijuana. It is one of their core tenants. Chill out on the anger there fellow.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I felt my inner Grammar Nazi kicking in. :p
 
Brewdog said:
The libertarians get caught up in the debate as being the "Marijuana Party." Marijuana has very little to do with libertarianism. It's just that the other parties like to write off the libertarians as being dope smokers.

I don't smoke dope. Have no desire to. I know MANY libertarians that have no use for drugs. But we support your freedom to do it as long as it doesn't harm your neighbor. It's no one else's business if you want to smoke weed in your own home no more than it's any one else's business when I drink beer in my own home.

Being a libertarian means standing up for everyone's freedoms, not just the freedoms you like.
Click to expand...
:applaud: great post
 
Brewdog said:
He climbed Everest. That's more than Trump or Hitlery has ever accomplished.
Click to expand...

So did Sherpa Tensing. I wouldn't elect him to anything either. Great reasoning, however.
 
Wiggen said:
So did Sherpa Tensing. I wouldn't elect him to anything either. Great reasoning, however.
Click to expand...

PS I'm amazed that Johnson knew where Everest was, assuming the story is true of course.
 
Your Star said:
Yes. They support the right that a person can put whatever into their body, as long as it doesn't harm others. Thus, they support the legalization of marijuana. It is one of their core tenants. Chill out on the anger their fellow.
Click to expand...

It would appear I misunderstood you.

Btw, I wasn't angry. I do however see why you would think that.
 
ModerateGOP said:
Uh Correction, he didn't even know it was a PLACE IN THE WORLD!!!! Let alone how it relates to the international relations of this country. I'm sorry, that is not something I'd want in a President.
Click to expand...

Shame on him!

I think a POTUS who has run a state government for 8 years without ever running a deficit budget would be better than a POTUS who has overthrown legitimate governments, compromised security as she pleases, or a candidate who hasn't paid taxes in years while declaring several bankruptcies, assuming one is into traditional "conservative" policies and values.

But that's just me.
 
Thoreau72 said:
Shame on him!

I think a POTUS who has run a state government for 8 years without ever running a deficit budget would be better than a POTUS who has overthrown legitimate governments, compromised security as she pleases, or a candidate who hasn't paid taxes in years while declaring several bankruptcies, assuming one is into traditional "conservative" policies and values.

But that's just me.
Click to expand...

Better only goes so far in my book.

You can't really say he's better than Trump or Clinton if he doesn't know about a major foreign conflict happening around the world. People don't ask Trump or Clinton these questions because it's assumed they know about certain conflicts AKA Trump talks about the border/drugs building a wall. Clinton talks about the refugee crisis and the deals she made as Secretary of State.

Of course, if you only vote on that issue, well then I guess that's all that matters to you.
 
Roadvirus said:
Johnson's a threat to nobody but himself and the Libertarian Party. I mean....come on!! The LP claims to be the best alternative to our current 2-party system, yet they put up a member of the Cheech and Chong fanclub as their candidate?!
Click to expand...

Reefer Madness and everything else that flowed from it was a lie. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being a candidate who supports legalization, even a candidate who has smoked pot.



We're comfortable with a "recovering alcoholic" as President. We're comfortable with Presidents without addiction issues drinking occasionally (responsibly). Why should we be hypocrites and take issue with a stance on pot or prior use......dare I say, even current occasional responsible use?

Time to reject that arm of the government's propoganda. It's simply BS.
 
Im just happy Johnson is successful enough to be attacked like he is. It shows the LP is making gains.
 
Brewdog said:
Being a libertarian means standing up for everyone's freedoms, not just the freedoms you like.
Click to expand...


Tell that to the hard-line GOPers who claim to be libertarian.
 
Brewdog said:
Governor Gary Johnson cut state taxes 18 times in New Mexico and left the state with over a billion dollar surplus. Sure, he must be an imbecile and a kook.

You guys don't like libertarians. I get it. Because most Americans are uneducated idiots. That's why you can't understand ideas such as free markets, low taxes, and personal liberty.

You are the product of a government school system. You reap what you sow.
Click to expand...

I'm OK will libertarians. They're quite entertaining, and provide some comic relief. I could have a beer with Gary Johnson, and maybe give him some pointers on Mid-East geography. The problem comes in when some start to take them seriously.

Johnson is an ideologue, with extreme and unfounded notions about the workings of the world. Johnson's fundamental error is in thinking that the federal government is the same type of entity as a business or private person. It is not, in significant ways. His nutty ideas for eliminating all personal and corporate taxes, while instituting a regressive VAT of 23%, would crash the US economy within months, and bring in a new great depression. Elimination of the IRS and the Fed would take away some of societies major tools for regulating society, a void that would be quickly filled by transnational corporations, and foreign governments. America would become the 21st century equivalent of China in the 19th, weak, divided, impoverished, and open to myriad foreign interests.

In actuality, you cannot have either personal liberty, or free markets, outside of a strong public regulatory environment. Johnson's psychedelic applications of economics may have muddled through in the small and (apparently) compliant state of New Mexico, but they would be disaster on the national scene.
 
Ganesh said:
I'm OK will libertarians. They're quite entertaining, and provide some comic relief. I could have a beer with Gary Johnson, and maybe give him some pointers on Mid-East geography. The problem comes in when some start to take them seriously.

Johnson is an ideologue, with extreme and unfounded notions about the workings of the world. Johnson's fundamental error is in thinking that the federal government is the same type of entity as a business or private person. It is not, in significant ways. His nutty ideas for eliminating all personal and corporate taxes, while instituting a regressive VAT of 23%, would crash the US economy within months, and bring in a new great depression. Elimination of the IRS and the Fed would take away some of societies major tools for regulating society, a void that would be quickly filled by transnational corporations, and foreign governments. America would become the 21st century equivalent of China in the 19th, weak, divided, impoverished, and open to myriad foreign interests.

In actuality, you cannot have either personal liberty, or free markets, outside of a strong public regulatory environment. Johnson's psychedelic applications of economics may have muddled through in the small and (apparently) compliant state of New Mexico, but they would be disaster on the national scene.
Click to expand...

Not a VAT, a flat sales tax.
 
There's always some third-party goober in the race and Johnson is not a force to be reckoned with.
 
Fenton said:
Cuz Hilldogs such a horrible candidate.

Noticed the MSM hit him pretty hard for not knowing that " Allepo " was a City in Syria.
Click to expand...

Because having two Democrats running for the two dominant parties is so pitiful. So, do you prefer someone who is confused when shot with a gotcha question or someone who is a greedy, lying, self-centered liberal?

Donald Trump is less a Republican than Rachel Dolezal was a black woman.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom