• 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!

Gary Johnson

Would You Consider Voting For Gov. Gary Johnson?


  • Total voters
    36
GOP Candidate Gary Johnson


Libertarian Candidate Gary Johnson


From serious candidate to hipster candidate with flip flops and a 'cooool' college kid message. Crowd surfing, chilling at Occupy Wall Street, just in general became a populist. Their Youtube campaign commercials were embarrassing. I still voted for him. Probably will again. I just want him to be a serious candidate realistically focusing on campaign issues. NO expectation of him winning, but if he were to draw well, he could put at least a few elected representatives in play.


Yeah, I think I can agree.

One thing to bear in mind though: he did switch parties entirely. With that comes a radical change in strategy. Just a fact in politics. He didn't change positions, mind you, but a change of some sort was necessary imo. The GOP voting base and the LP voting base are very different. Libertarians tend to attract younger voters while Republicans tend to attract older voters. So it shouldn't come as a surprise that he's trying to come across as more laid back and "cool" as opposed to acting uptight like during the GOP primaries. But I do think he took it a liiitle too far last election, which would definitely be an area he should improve for the upcoming election.
 
I voted for Johnson last time too, and will again most likely...

The Republicrats never put up any viable candidates for President. I do vote for some Republicans for other offices, but that has been less frequent every election - they have simply gone far too neocon/fascist. The Democratic Party is a complete disaster from top to bottom - nothing to vote for there.

If a Libertarian isn't on the ballot for a given office - I'll likely just pass on voting for the office altogether. I live in Wisconsin, and had voted for Scott Walker for County Executive in Milwaukee (when I lived there), and had voted for him for Governor - but I didn't vote for him in the last election, I voted for the Libertarian.
 
Yeah, I think I can agree.

One thing to bear in mind though: he did switch parties entirely. With that comes a radical change in strategy. Just a fact in politics. He didn't change positions, mind you, but a change of some sort was necessary imo. The GOP voting base and the LP voting base are very different. Libertarians tend to attract younger voters while Republicans tend to attract older voters. So it shouldn't come as a surprise that he's trying to come across as more laid back and "cool" as opposed to acting uptight like during the GOP primaries. But I do think he took it a liiitle too far last election, which would definitely be an area he should improve for the upcoming election.

Take heart... I'm not young, lol ;)
 
I voted for Johnson in 2012 and would vote for him again. In 2012 with the two major parties I lost faith in one candidate and didn't trust the other. In fact I do not trust either of the two major parties to do what is right for America. They are only interested in doing what is good for their party and to heck with everything else.

yup.. but meh, 100 million Americans still buy into the fables they are told about the ruling parties working on their behalf.
 
Gary Johnson has tossed his hat in the ring for 2016 as a Libertarian Party candidate. Thoughts?

No. My pecking order is:

1. Christie.
2. Bush/Romney
3. Romney/Bush

Then it becomes a muddle. If Walker can prove himself I might give him consideration. If not I'll probably vote for Clinton. But never for Johnson, Paul, or any libertarian, quasi or otherwise.
 
And the overwhelming vast majority of the voting populace always picks one of the "Big 2". Boy, that sure works out, doesn't it?

Because third party platforms simply do not appeal to the majority of the voting populace. Most third parties are very similar to the "Big 2" with one or two elements blown completely out of proportion.
 
yup.. but meh, 100 million Americans still buy into the fables they are told about the ruling parties working on their behalf.

And apparently, you buy into the fable that third parties are worthwhile. Go figure.
 
oh, I didn't know it was a truth that 3rd parties are worthless.

hmmph..ya learn something new every day.

By all means, show us where third parties have demonstrably changed a damn thing, ever. We'll wait.
 
i agree, i didnt say no one should vote for him i was just pointing out him winning is virtually impossible in 2016.
Unfortunately, while its sad, i dont think the people will make that change on voting on a president alone.

Over the last couple of elections I've asked people that don't follow politics who they voted for and why. Many have stated that the person they voted for was the only name they recognized. smh
 
Because third party platforms simply do not appeal to the majority of the voting populace. Most third parties are very similar to the "Big 2" with one or two elements blown completely out of proportion.
Historically, if a third party or independent candidate does come up with something popular one or both of the Big 2 co-opt it.

But really, why should the Big 2 change when they know they've got your vote regardless how bad they screw up?
 
Historically, if a third party or independent candidate does come up with something popular one or both of the Big 2 co-opt it.

But really, why should the Big 2 change when they know they've got your vote regardless how bad they screw up?

Then you're still not telling us how any third parties are that worthwhile. They appeal to a minuscule number of people and anything good that they come up with gets taken by one of the bigger parties, leaving the only differences as pointless, worthless nonsense. Sorry, not impressed.
 
Then you're still not telling us how any third parties are that worthwhile. They appeal to a minuscule number of people and anything good that they come up with gets taken by one of the bigger parties, leaving the only differences as pointless, worthless nonsense. Sorry, not impressed.
We've been through this before. I knew you wouldn't be impressed. You'll vote for the same ol' same ol'... again... and be unhappy about it... again.

You'll get what you deserve.
 
yup.. but meh, 100 million Americans still buy into the fables they are told about the ruling parties working on their behalf.

I am not so sure about that. I think most independents buy the idea that the two major parties push that voting for a third party is a wasted vote as they can't win. So you get a lot of people holding their nose voting for the lesser of two evils or the least worst candidate. Regardless of who wins among the two major parties, you are going to get a business as usual winner who owes his heart and soul to special interests, lobbyists, corporations, big money donors, and the like who gave their tens of millions to them.

We will continue to have the best government money can buy.
 
And that actually made a difference in how things were done how?

A glacier moves one ice atom at a time. One day it will. Chances are we won't be around, but...........
 
Everyone on this board is missing Gov. Walker flying under the radar--just as Priebus wants him to .

That may be true, but at the moment most people are considering who they are told to consider by Corpgov's two ruling parties, Bush and Clinton. In the end Corpgov will own the final candidates from both parties.

The system is rigged and as long as Americans buy into it it will continue to be rigged until we use the system to beat the system.

No matter, once again Corpgov will expect most voting Americans to hold out their hands. Corpgov, as always, will place a warm turd in each voter's left hand and and another one in each voter's right hand. Next they'll ask each voter which turd they like. Sadly most Americans will dutifully decide between the turds they are given. As for me the two party Corpgov can keep their turds. I'll vote for the candidate who best represents my views.
 
To those who say "why vote third party if they will lose"? Well, why vote at all in a state where the outcome of the election is all but certain. I am from California, a solidly blue state. It is almost a statistical certainty that the electoral votes of CA will go to the Democrat. Why vote for either of the major parties if the outcome is so clear? Instead, I cast my protest vote, showing my dissatisfaction with the two major parties. Does it change the outcome? No. But if I voted Republican or Democrat, that wouldn't have changed the outcome either. At least voting third party my vote actually says something.
 
That may be true, but at the moment most people are considering who they are told to consider by Corpgov's two ruling parties, Bush and Clinton. In the end Corpgov will own the final candidates from both parties.

The system is rigged and as long as Americans buy into it it will continue to be rigged until we use the system to beat the system.

No matter, once again Corpgov will expect most voting Americans to hold out their hands. Corpgov, as always, will place a warm turd in each voter's left hand and and another one in each voter's right hand. Next they'll ask each voter which turd they like. Sadly most Americans will dutifully decide between the turds they are given. As for me the two party Corpgov can keep their turds. I'll vote for the candidate who best represents my views.

The RNC Chief, Reince Priebus, is from Wisconsin and is Walker's ace-in-the-whole.
Priebus has an ironclad grip on the RNC, as seen with the GOP nominating Senate candidates NOT from the TEA party--such as Akin and Mourdock.

Walker just spent the weekend with the Koch brothers in Palm Springs after being invited to the Adelson summit in Vegas last March.
Both anti-Union billionaires love Walker.

Walker has appeal to all sectors of the GOP--a new face for POTUS--two things the other candidates don't have--IMHO of course .
 
By all means, show us where third parties have demonstrably changed a damn thing, ever. We'll wait.


a 3rd part brought an end to slavery and brought the union into and out of a civil war that has fundamentally changed the entire nation.

anything else?
 
To those who say "why vote third party if they will lose"? Well, why vote at all in a state where the outcome of the election is all but certain. I am from California, a solidly blue state. It is almost a statistical certainty that the electoral votes of CA will go to the Democrat. Why vote for either of the major parties if the outcome is so clear? Instead, I cast my protest vote, showing my dissatisfaction with the two major parties. Does it change the outcome? No. But if I voted Republican or Democrat, that wouldn't have changed the outcome either. At least voting third party my vote actually says something.



I vote 3rd parties, but it's never a protest vote... I always vote for those whom align with me the closest.... not who will win, not who is the lesser evil... just those whom I agree with.

the 2 parties, and their supporters, seem to believe that our votes belong to them by default and it's somehow "bad" if we don't give it to them.... **** em', my vote is mine, it goes exactly where i want it to.... it never belonged to the GOP or the Dems... or even the LP
sure, in the grand scheme, my vote didn't win the day.. or even come remotely close.
but that's not the point of voting though.. the point is casting for those whom you want to represent you, nothing more, nothing less.

me voting for Dems or the GOP is nonsensical.. I don't want them representing me .so why on god's green earth would I vote for either of them?
 
Back
Top Bottom