• 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!

Did the Libertarian Party score a "victory" in the election?

Did the Libertarian Party score a "victory" in the election?

  • Total voters
    27
radcen

radcen

Phonetic Mnemonic ©
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 3, 2011
Messages
34,817
Reaction score
18,576
Location
Look to your right... I'm that guy.
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
Did the Libertarian Party score a "victory" in the election?

According to this source, the Libertarian Party (LP) ticket of Gary Johnson & William Weld had 3.27% of the popular votes cast cast for them. Considering that the LP usually gets <1%-ish, can this spike in votes be considered a "victory" of sorts?

Or, is it just an anomaly considering the magnitude of the crap sandwich we had to choose from otherwise?
 
Last edited:
We may joke and jeer at the depravity of the Republican and Democratic Parties, but once you see what the libertarians have to offer, one can at least say Donald Trump's clownish behavior doesn't extend to actually wanting to wear a clown suit.

libertarian-convention-strip.jpg


160531_POL_Vermin.jpg.CROP.promo-xlarge2.jpg


politicslibertarian2.jpg
 
Not really. They were scoring well early on...but could not take advantage of it.

And considering how hated the two main candidates were...they did not do as well as I thought they would.

Part of it was Johnson, I am afraid. I still think he was by far the best candidate...but he said/did a few odd things during the campaign that even made me scratch my head. Plus, he is a slightly odd fellow. Not bad...just different.

In the end, so long as the Libertarian Party clings to the 'every-man/woman-for-themselves' idea - they will never attain real power. You simply cannot win with a platform of little/no welfare and entirely relying on the private sector/charity to help those that need it. Especially now when well over 40 million Americans are on food stamps.
Sure, the welfare system is messed up right now...but the government HAS to look after those that cannot look after themselves...including healthcare (to some extent).
Until the Libertarian Party embraces this...they will NEVER attain power in any remote form.
 
radcen said:
Did the Libertarian Party score a "victory" in the election?

According to this source, the Libertarian Party (LP) ticket of Gary Johnson & William Weld had 3.27% of the popular votes cast cast for them. Considering that the LP usually gets <1%-ish, can this spike in votes be considered a "victory" of sorts?

Or, is it just an anomaly considering the magnitude of the crap sandwich we had to choose from otherwise?
Click to expand...

If anything, this election has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that under the current system Independent candidates for a presidential election are totally worthless as far as winning goes. They are a protest vote only with the best possible outcome in being taking the election away from one candidate and handing it to the other (not that I'm saying that actually happened in this election). With both main candidates having the highest negatives in history and third parties winning only a combination of maybe 5% of the vote, a third party candidate will never win the presidential election. If they want any legitimacy at all they are going to have to win lower contests first before hoping to reach the major leagues.
 
radcen said:
Did the Libertarian Party score a "victory" in the election?

According to this source, the Libertarian Party (LP) ticket of Gary Johnson & William Weld had 3.27% of the popular votes cast cast for them. Considering that the LP usually gets <1%-ish, can this spike in votes be considered a "victory" of sorts?

Or, is it just an anomaly considering the magnitude of the crap sandwich we had to choose from otherwise?
Click to expand...

In Bold.
 
radcen said:
Did the Libertarian Party score a "victory" in the election?

According to this source, the Libertarian Party (LP) ticket of Gary Johnson & William Weld had 3.27% of the popular votes cast cast for them. Considering that the LP usually gets <1%-ish, can this spike in votes be considered a "victory" of sorts?

Or, is it just an anomaly considering the magnitude of the crap sandwich we had to choose from otherwise?
Click to expand...

As someone who is no friend of the Libertarian Party - they should be very proud of increasing their vote by a factor of three times. If they can do that again, they will be up to almost 10% next time.
 
Nope. If they couldn't get the 5% vote this time around, they never will. The Libertarians are losers, always have been, always will be.
 
radcen said:
Did the Libertarian Party score a "victory" in the election?

According to this source, the Libertarian Party (LP) ticket of Gary Johnson & William Weld had 3.27% of the popular votes cast cast for them. Considering that the LP usually gets <1%-ish, can this spike in votes be considered a "victory" of sorts?

Or, is it just an anomaly considering the magnitude of the crap sandwich we had to choose from otherwise?
Click to expand...
Nope, because Gary Johnson decided to turn his newfound attention into a clown-show instead of an opportunity to spread his message.
 
DA60 said:
Not really. They were scoring well early on...but could not take advantage of it.

And considering how hated the two main candidates were...they did not do as well as I thought they would.

Part of it was Johnson, I am afraid. I still think he was by far the best candidate...but he said/did a few odd things during the campaign that even made me scratch my head. Plus, he is a slightly odd fellow. Not bad...just different.

In the end, so long as the Libertarian Party clings to the 'every-man/woman-for-themselves' idea - they will never attain real power. You simply cannot win with a platform of little/no welfare and entirely relying on the private sector/charity to help those that need it. Especially now when well over 40 million Americans are on food stamps.
Sure, the welfare system is messed up right now...but the government HAS to look after those that cannot look after themselves...including healthcare (to some extent).
Until the Libertarian Party embraces this...they will NEVER attain power in any remote form.
Click to expand...

MacAfee is so much better than Johnson when it comes to messaging.
 
radcen said:
Did the Libertarian Party score a "victory" in the election?

According to this source, the Libertarian Party (LP) ticket of Gary Johnson & William Weld had 3.27% of the popular votes cast cast for them. Considering that the LP usually gets <1%-ish, can this spike in votes be considered a "victory" of sorts?

Or, is it just an anomaly considering the magnitude of the crap sandwich we had to choose from otherwise?
Click to expand...

No not at all . . . but I do think it's awesome that "other" candidates got like 5% I think. That's a win for everybody that wants to see the two party system fade but we still lose cause trump won and I would say the same thing if hillary won. At least it seems that way on the service, ask me again in 4 years.
 
reinoe said:
MacAfee is so much better than Johnson when it comes to messaging.
Click to expand...

Plus he isn't a ****ing faker like Johnson and is like 1000% times cooler.
 
DA60 said:
Not really. They were scoring well early on...but could not take advantage of it.

And considering how hated the two main candidates were...they did not do as well as I thought they would.

Part of it was Johnson, I am afraid. I still think he was by far the best candidate...but he said/did a few odd things during the campaign that even made me scratch my head. Plus, he is a slightly odd fellow. Not bad...just different.

In the end, so long as the Libertarian Party clings to the 'every-man/woman-for-themselves' idea - they will never attain real power. You simply cannot win with a platform of little/no welfare and entirely relying on the private sector/charity to help those that need it. Especially now when well over 40 million Americans are on food stamps.
Sure, the welfare system is messed up right now...but the government HAS to look after those that cannot look after themselves...including healthcare (to some extent).
Until the Libertarian Party embraces this...they will NEVER attain power in any remote form.
Click to expand...

Because why? You sunset welfare programs and call it a day. It's not like liberals made their programs impossible to end.

And frankly people need to give up the idea it is acceptable to pillage the treasury for their own personal benefit and parties should not be encouraging that kind of behavior.
 
Henrin said:
Because why? You sunset welfare programs and call it a day. It's not like liberals made their programs impossible to end.

And frankly people need to give up the idea it is acceptable to pillage the treasury for their own personal benefit and parties should not be encouraging that kind of behavior.
Click to expand...

Because of something called 'ethics'.

If you have to ask why...then clearly you will not understand the answer.


Good day.
 
DA60 said:
Because of something called 'ethics'.

If you have to ask why...then clearly you will not understand the answer.


Good day.
Click to expand...

Welfare programs are not ethical.
 
No. The party shot itself in the foot. Johnson will I hope forever vanish from the politcal realm. The Libertarian party COULD have made gains. 10-12 percent would have been a realistic goal. People WANTED to vote for someone other than the two primary party douchebags. And then...he opened his mouth.
 
radcen said:
Did the Libertarian Party score a "victory" in the election?

According to this source, the Libertarian Party (LP) ticket of Gary Johnson & William Weld had 3.27% of the popular votes cast cast for them. Considering that the LP usually gets <1%-ish, can this spike in votes be considered a "victory" of sorts?

Or, is it just an anomaly considering the magnitude of the crap sandwich we had to choose from otherwise?
Click to expand...

It's not a victory considering the public had to hold their noses for both Hillard and The Donald.
 
Lord of Planar said:
It's not a victory considering the public had to hold their noses for both Hillard and The Donald.
Click to expand...

Yeah. If anything, this should have been the election with the highest vote total for third parties and they should have won a few states. The fact that they did not do either cannot be called a victory in any way. In fact, it was a bigger loss than Hillary's.
 
Cephus said:
Nope. If they couldn't get the 5% vote this time around, they never will. The Libertarians are losers, always have been, always will be.
Click to expand...

They are not just losers here, they are losers everywhere on earth. There is not a nation anywhere in the modern world with a libertarian government.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
They are not just losers here, they are losers everywhere on earth. There is not a nation anywhere in the modern world with a libertarian government.
Click to expand...

And the crazy libertarians refuse to accept that. They live in a fantasy world.
 
radcen said:
Did the Libertarian Party score a "victory" in the election?

According to this source, the Libertarian Party (LP) ticket of Gary Johnson & William Weld had 3.27% of the popular votes cast cast for them. Considering that the LP usually gets <1%-ish, can this spike in votes be considered a "victory" of sorts?

Or, is it just an anomaly considering the magnitude of the crap sandwich we had to choose from otherwise?
Click to expand...

I'm one who voted for Johnson because of the crap sandwich. If either of the major parties had a decent candidate, I would have voted for him. I would have voted for almost any other Republican against Clinton and voted for almost any other Democrat against Trump.

Actually, 3.27% isn't bad for a candidate or party which had no money, no media coverage, ran no political ads that I know of, had no name recognition, that almost no one ever heard of except the very politically astute, they had nothing, zero, zilch. Yet received 3.27%. The Libertarian Party had never until this election even reached one percent of the total vote. But when you throw in the fact that all third party candidate came close to gaining 5% of the total vote, that confirms the crap sandwich.

But the third party candidates may have had a hand in determining the winner. In Michigan, Clinton lost by 13,000 vote. Third party candidates polled approximately 225,000 votes. In Wisconsin Clinton lost by 27,000 votes, third party candidates polled 138,000. Pennsylvania, Clinton lost by 57,000 votes, third parties received 192,000.

Bottom line though, no victory, just a crap sandwich. Now a victory would have been if Gary Johnson and the Libertarians had received 5% of the total vote and would be able to receive federal matching funds for 2020.
 
Did the Libertarian Party score a "victory" in the election?
Click to expand...

no third party that i know of scored a victory in this election. i find that to be unfortunate. our choices have been artificially limited.
 
Moderate Right said:
Yeah. If anything, this should have been the election with the highest vote total for third parties and they should have won a few states. The fact that they did not do either cannot be called a victory in any way. In fact, it was a bigger loss than Hillary's.
Click to expand...
It needed to be better than Perot's 18% in 1992.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom