Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Johnson/Weld - Why the hell not?

Johnson/Weld - Why the hell not? (Page 3)
Thread Tools
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 29, 2016, 12:18 AM
 
I thought this was interesting:
TAYLOR: We think that libertarians have gone down the wrong road on this issue. How you feel about the role of government or individual liberty has nothing to do with how you should feel about atmospheric physics. The reality is, is that the climate is changing, that change is being driven by industrial emissions and that imposes risk. And this is a straight up risk management exercise and the best means of addressing this risk, in our opinion. is to price carbon and harness market actors and price signals to sort out when, where, how to reduce emissions rather than have regulators and EPA do that job. I think that’s a really free-market position, but it’s the one that’s a little heterodox in my community.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Sep 29, 2016, 10:08 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
God bless Freakonomics, they have a transcript.
Ten Signs You Might Be a Libertarian - Freakonomics Freakonomics

It looks like I misheard his explaining standard L positions as espousing them himself.
So, Libertarianism fails an (and I quote) "rigged" market test, therefore Libertarianism fails by its own most important metric?



Hint: Libertarianism's beloved market metric doesn't have the word "rigged" in it. It uses a different word... for all intents and purposes an explicitly opposite word.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Sep 29, 2016, 10:13 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
I thought this was interesting:
Perhaps this is a knee-jerk reaction, but the question with cap and trade is getting China to buy into the reindeer games. They'll go along with it the same way they go along with IP law.

What leverage does the world have over China? Trade sanctions? Like that's going to happen.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 29, 2016, 10:15 AM
 
I'm probably stupid this morning but you need spell things out for me here.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Sep 29, 2016, 10:22 AM
 
I'm stupid every morning.


First post:

Libertarianism functions on free markets. The very core of the philosophy is other types of markets, such as rigged ones, don't provide good results.


Second post:

Cap and trade won't work because China will say "no", and we're too dependent on them to respond in any way other than "oh, okay then... got any more of that cheap shit?"
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 29, 2016, 10:55 AM
 
First post: If their ideas were appealing they would have been adopted by the parties. The closest we have gotten is Ted Cruzs bonkers tax plan, and as far as I can tell, regular people have no interest.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 29, 2016, 03:10 PM
 
Gary is doubling down on his gaffe. Welcome to being as terrible as the establishment parties!
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Sep 29, 2016, 04:01 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
First post: If their ideas were appealing they would have been adopted by the parties. The closest we have gotten is Ted Cruzs bonkers tax plan, and as far as I can tell, regular people have no interest.
Most of their domestic policy is fairly evenly spread out amongst the existing parties, though often not as extreme.

One party is pro-choice, pro-Mary Jane, and pro-homo (or pro-mo).

One party is pro-gun rights, pro-cutting taxes, and pro-scaling down social services.

Libertarian foreign policy doesn't appeal because it's ****ing batshit.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Sep 29, 2016, 04:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Gary is doubling down on his gaffe. Welcome to being as terrible as the establishment parties!
Yeah... poor Weld.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 29, 2016, 04:58 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Most of their domestic policy is fairly evenly spread out amongst the existing parties, though often not as extreme.

One party is pro-choice, pro-Mary Jane, and pro-homo (or pro-mo).

One party is pro-gun rights, pro-cutting taxes, and pro-scaling down social services.

Libertarian foreign policy doesn't appeal because it's ****ing batshit.
That's kind of the point, isn't it? Libertarianism brings extremism to the table and outside of taxes no politicians advocate it, and all around most of the populace has no interest in it.

It HAS failed the market.

(Regarding 2, that will require more research than I'm willing to do to discredit an irrelevant candidate)
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Sep 30, 2016, 08:14 AM
 
Now it's my turn to be confused.

The proposal put forward was if Libertarianism had market value the major parties would have adopted their stances.

The Libertarians were pro-gay and pro-dope, like, in the 90's. Member how the Democrats had to "evolve" themselves to get there?

What about the Tea Party? Nuke the social conservatism, what do you have left? Libertarianism.

It was theorized if libertarianism had value it would have been adopted by the other parties. That's exactly what happened.


Has all the bitching about FPTP been rescinded? It only negatively affects third parties if they're not Libertarians? FPTP is a free market, and not one which inordinately benefits the two parties?
     
RobOnTheCape
Senior User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Martha's Vineyard
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 30, 2016, 08:34 AM
 
What the GOP and Libertarian parties have in common is that each parties VP candidate is smarter than the candidate for Pres - or certainly appears so.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Sep 30, 2016, 09:37 AM
 
Though, when it comes to the Presidential candidate with the most googly eyes, the Libertarians win hands-down.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 30, 2016, 05:49 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Now it's my turn to be confused.

The proposal put forward was if Libertarianism had market value the major parties would have adopted their stances.

The Libertarians were pro-gay and pro-dope, like, in the 90's. Member how the Democrats had to "evolve" themselves to get there?
Arriving at the same conclusion does not indicate arriving via the same route. Libertarians arrive at the from an argument of constitutional freedom and anti-government regulation. Liberals arrived there from, "Hey, gays are people and deserve equal rights."

Originally Posted by subego View Post
What about the Tea Party? Nuke the social conservatism, what do you have left? Libertarianism.
The tea party is also a fringe that would die completely without that social conservatism. I do agree many of them are libertarian leaning, though.

Originally Posted by subego View Post
Has all the bitching about FPTP been rescinded? It only negatively affects third parties if they're not Libertarians? FPTP is a free market, and not one which inordinately benefits the two parties?
The argument put forth in the podcast was they failed in the intellectual and social free market, not electoral.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 30, 2016, 11:01 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Yeah... poor Weld.
Gary Johnson’s VP: I’m Not Sure Anyone’s More Qualified Than Clinton to be President | Mediaite

I have a feeling libertarians won't be nominating him in 2020.
     
RobOnTheCape
Senior User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Martha's Vineyard
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 1, 2016, 03:50 PM
 
I saw the clip, and it was part of a long thought, and he's not incorrect, just perhaps something someone running in one party would ever say about another. Nevertheless, Weld was the governor of my state some years ago, and I forgot just how bright a guy he is. It seems Weld needs to be by Johnson's side to save him on a regular basis, and clearly comes off as being able to make more cogent points every time he speaks.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Oct 2, 2016, 11:20 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Arriving at the same conclusion does not indicate arriving via the same route. Libertarians arrive at the from an argument of constitutional freedom and anti-government regulation. Liberals arrived there from, "Hey, gays are people and deserve equal rights."
I feel this analysis is partially based on the Libertarian's ideological purity thing. It's philosophy uber alles. Gays are supported as a side effect of the philosophy.

The thing is, as someone who believed "gays are people and deserve equal rights" before it was popular, that the Libertarian philosophy was consistent with my belief was one of the things which attracted me to it.

Away from the Democrats, who should have known better.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 3, 2016, 11:02 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I feel this analysis is partially based on the Libertarian's ideological purity thing. It's philosophy uber alles. Gays are supported as a side effect of the philosophy.

The thing is, as someone who believed "gays are people and deserve equal rights" before it was popular, that the Libertarian philosophy was consistent with my belief was one of the things which attracted me to it.

Away from the Democrats, who should have known better.
But that ideological purity is the defining aspect of libertarianism. It's what leads to the extreme positions and distasteful policy. To try and separate it from their positions is burying your head in the sand.

I have no excuse for the democrats.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Oct 3, 2016, 11:58 AM
 
Is there something inherent in libertarianist philosophy which makes ideological purity the default, or does the party have a dbag problem?

I wouldn't argue the party has ideological purity as a defining characteristic, but I don't think the philosophy made them that way.

The party is a bunch of dick-wavers. At most one can say the philosophy attracts an inordinate amount of them for some reason, but the philosophy didn't make them that way.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 3, 2016, 12:32 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Is there something inherent in libertarianist philosophy which makes ideological purity the default, or does the party have a dbag problem?

I wouldn't argue the party has ideological purity as a defining characteristic, but I don't think the philosophy made them that way.

The party is a bunch of dick-wavers. At most one can say the philosophy attracts an inordinate amount of them for some reason, but the philosophy didn't make them that way.
Suposedly it was more reasonable back in day (i.e. Calling for national living wages and such). I think you're on the right track here. An extremist position on the ideology leaves a limited subset of people who will find it beneficial. Hence, an inordinate amount of white dudes flock to it. It's funny, men without religion turn into libertarians, but women without religion turn into liberals. Why?
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Oct 3, 2016, 12:39 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
(i.e. Calling for national living wages and such)
This is the big irony of the more ideologically pure forms of libertarianism. Those would actually kind of work as long as they tack this massively socialist policy on top of it.

Which gets you to this weird place where pure libertarianism plus a living wage somehow has a lot in common with anarcho-communism.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 3, 2016, 02:56 PM
 
Ron Paul said Gary Johnson isn't a true libertarian and is voting stein?!
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Oct 3, 2016, 03:01 PM
 
Well, I said Bernie is the true Democrat, and am voting for Johnson.

Me and gramps are off the meds.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Oct 3, 2016, 03:04 PM
 
Obligatory.

     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 3, 2016, 03:25 PM
 
To me that makes Ron Paul more nut bag than libertarian. Stein is crazy pants.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 3, 2016, 06:15 PM
 
Why is Stein crazy pants? I think of her more as Bernie Sanders-lite.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Oct 3, 2016, 06:20 PM
 
The smears I've heard are anti-wifi and anti-vax.

Not sure I buy into those.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 3, 2016, 07:36 PM
 
I've heard that about her. If true, she's a moron.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 4, 2016, 12:50 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
The smears I've heard are anti-wifi and anti-vax.

Not sure I buy into those.
https://twitter.com/drjillstein/stat...30945679380481
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Oct 4, 2016, 08:01 AM
 
Her assessment isn't exactly wrong, but her conclusion is.

That said, lots of people are against nuclear power. They're wrong, but it's common.

Common enough we haven't built a new (coff, coff... safer) one in decades.


The coughing was from coal dust.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 4, 2016, 08:32 AM
 
Okay, that is crazy.
     
andi*pandi  (op)
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 4, 2016, 08:57 AM
 
she raises a few good points though:

Remember when crooked Trump Foundation gave $25K to FL's AG, who then decided not to investigate Trump University?
– Dr. Jill Stein (@DrJillStein)
October 3, 2016
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 4, 2016, 09:29 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Her assessment isn't exactly wrong, but her conclusion is.

That said, lots of people are against nuclear power. They're wrong, but it's common.

Common enough we haven't built a new (coff, coff... safer) one in decades.


The coughing was from coal dust.
This is spin pure and simple. She's fearmongering nuclear power. That's the common thread on a lot of her positions - unscientific fear. Vaccines, GMOs, etc.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 4, 2016, 04:08 PM
 
Johnson is really trying to spin his Aleppo response as a positive. His latest comments are ridiculous. It's also s troubling attempt to spin a lack of knowledge as a positive.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2016, 02:04 PM
 
“This is not the time to cast a jocular or feel-good vote for a man whom you may have briefly found entertaining,” says the Libertarian vice presidential nominee
I have a feeling Weld will not be welcome with the libertarians in 2020.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2016, 04:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
This is spin pure and simple. She's fearmongering nuclear power. That's the common thread on a lot of her positions - unscientific fear. Vaccines, GMOs, etc.
All I'm saying is...

1) Unscientific fear of nuclear power is like, in the membership requirements for team granola.

2) That nuclear plants can be WMDs is a halfway legit point.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2016, 04:28 PM
 
ME: She's crazy
YOU: She's not really
ME: *lists reasons why*
YOU: Well you gotta be crazy in that crowd
ME:
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2016, 05:42 PM
 
Perhaps this is a meaningless distinction, but I put the anti-nuke people in a slightly different category, because it's a straight-on emotional reaction. There's not a lot of conspiracy shit involved.

It's dumbass position. I don't know if it's exactly crazy.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2016, 06:38 PM
 
Oh goody, I get you to agree to the facts so now you disagree on semantics.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2016, 08:07 PM
 
She seems to be generally conspiracy friendly. Big red flag.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Oct 27, 2016, 04:04 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Oh goody, I get you to agree to the facts so now you disagree on semantics.
You'll take what you get and like it!

What makes anti-vaxxers crazy is that every anti-vaxxer has been vaccinated, along with everyone they know.

I have a bit more sympathy for people with whom the intricacies of particle physics are lost.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 27, 2016, 08:49 PM
 
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...-mcmullin-utah
“He’s ensuring that Hillary Clinton will win Utah. You know what? He is what he is, and I begrudge no one for entering the race,” he said.

The Libertarian candidate added of his rival: “I think that he is splitting the Republican vote. And Utah being predominantly Republican, I think he’s splitting the vote, that Hillary will actually win the state.”

Johnson dismissed the suggestion that he was using the same “spoiler” argument that has been used against third-party candidacies such as his own. “I’m not labeling it spoiler, I’m just telling you what I think the reality is,” he said.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2016, 03:01 AM
 
Wait for it...

     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 1, 2016, 11:23 AM
 

The reporter flinches.

Makes me wonder if he uses marijuana to control some crazy temper.

Anyway, another nail in the this guy is clueless column.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Nov 1, 2016, 12:22 PM
 
I'd flinch too.

"For a second I thought he was going to stab me, but then he just talked about pot."
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Nov 1, 2016, 12:26 PM
 
It also sorta reminds me of...

"I love when women lick my feet"
"The question was is this your handwriting"
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 1, 2016, 12:39 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I'd flinch too.

"For a second I thought he was going to stab me, but then he just talked about pot."
Oh I'm not faulting the reporter-just highlighting how unexpected that mood change was
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Nov 1, 2016, 12:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Oh I'm not faulting the reporter-just highlighting how unexpected that mood change was
Gotcha...

It was quite remarkable how serene he was the microsecond before flipping his shit.
     
andi*pandi  (op)
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 1, 2016, 12:48 PM
 
There was a cut there, didn't you see it?

I'm not sure this really counts as bad against him.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 1, 2016, 12:52 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I'd flinch too.

"For a second I thought he was going to stab me, but then he just talked about pot."
Oh I'm not faulting the reporter-just highlighting how unexpected that mood change was
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:29 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,