[andi*pandi]

For those engaging in protest votes, who think both major candidates are crooks, liars, sociopaths etc... may I present these two reasonably competent governors, who would probably do a decent job and be mellow as **** while doing it?

https://www.johnsonweld.com/
Libertarian ticket could spoil Clinton party (Opinion) - CNN.com
Libertarian: Trump has 'a screw loose' | Politics - WCVB Home

If all those who say they can't win, vote for em, guess what, they can.

Myself, I haven't decided.

[The Final Dakar]

I still find it incredibly amusing that the libertarian ticket is two former republicans.

[andi*pandi]

The libertarians are somewhat miffed about that as well. I know some republicans would say Weld at least was a RINO (explain otherwise how a republican got elected in democrat-achusetts).

[The Final Dakar]

Yes the libertarians at the convention were less than enthused. I believe the argument was that nominating these two in such a year might give the party credibility it lacks on the national stage.

[BadKosh]

We really don't need mellow, we need HONEST LEADERS.

[andi*pandi]

Psst, "mellow" was a drug reference, libertarians are pro pot.

I don't believe anyone has impugned their honesty. Two-term governors. Must have been doing something right?

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

Must have been doing something right?

Maybe it was rigging elections.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

We really don't need mellow, we need HONEST LEADERS.

Ken M?

[Paco500]

My issue with Johnson is that while I like about half of what he advocates, half of his platform horrifies me. Unfortunately, that half that horrifies me (deregulation of everything, isolationist, defunding public education, etc) is the only stuff that has a chance of actually being enacted. End the war on drugs? Will never pass congress. Gut environmental legislation? No problem! Scale back government snooping/patriot act etc? Not gonna happen. Tax breaks to big business? You got it!

[andi*pandi]

I think a lot of the extreme ends of the libertarian platform would not get enacted in 4 or even 8 years. I think it would take more libertarian legislators to defund public education, downsize the military, etc.

[subego]

Originally Posted by Paco500 

My issue with Johnson is that while I like about half of what he advocates, half of his platform horrifies me. Unfortunately, that half that horrifies me (deregulation of everything, isolationist, defunding public education, etc) is the only stuff that has a chance of actually being enacted. End the war on drugs? Will never pass congress. Gut environmental legislation? No problem! Scale back government snooping/patriot act etc? Not gonna happen. Tax breaks to big business? You got it!

I'm going to focus on one point. It's not meant as rejection of your others.

Can't the President just throw down with, say, the NSA?

[Paco500]

Originally Posted by subego 

I'm going to focus on one point. It's not meant as rejection of your others.

Can't the President just throw down with, say, the NSA?

Maybe I'm just jaded, but I think the culture of government snooping is an unstoppable force. I doubt a president could stop if even if (s)he wanted to.

[subego]

Okay... but he could put a hurting on it I imagine.

[subego]

In trying to answer some of your other concerns I came across this on his website.

"The environment is a precious gift and must be protected. Governors Johnson and Weld believe strongly that the first responsibility of government is to protect citizens from those who would do them harm, whether it be a foreign aggressor, a criminal — or a bad actor who harms the environment upon which we all depend.

Consistent with that responsibility, the proper role of government is to enforce reasonable environmental protections. Governor Johnson did that as Governor, and would do so as President."

Do you think he's trying to sell us a bill of goods here? Honest question.

[andi*pandi]

I believe him, sure.

What say you to 3 person debates, assuming Trump deigns to appear and Hillary doesn't drop dead by then?

[subego]

I personally think he should be in the debate.

[puts on "political strategist" hat, stolen from Huggie Bear's closet]

Which person on the stage other than Johnson does that most help?

[Paco500]

Originally Posted by subego 

In trying to answer some of your other concerns I came across this on his website.

"The environment is a precious gift and must be protected. Governors Johnson and Weld believe strongly that the first responsibility of government is to protect citizens from those who would do them harm, whether it be a foreign aggressor, a criminal — or a bad actor who harms the environment upon which we all depend.

Consistent with that responsibility, the proper role of government is to enforce reasonable environmental protections. Governor Johnson did that as Governor, and would do so as President."

Do you think he's trying to sell us a bill of goods here? Honest question.

In a word, kinda. Given everything we know about him, I believe he has respect for the environment. But I believe he has more respect for the 'free market.' Later in the position statement you quoted, he says things along the lines of:

Originally Posted by Gary

Johnson does not, however, believe the government should be engaging in social and economic engineering for the purpose of creating winners and losers in what should be a robust free market.

and further

Originally Posted by Gary

In a healthy economy that allows the market to function unimpeded, consumers, innovators, and personal choices will do more to bring about environmental protection and restoration than will government regulations driven by special interests. Too often, when Washington, D.C. gets involved, the winners are those with the political clout to write the rules of the game, and the losers are the people and businesses actually trying to innovate.

Even the 'regulated' market has managed to bring us fracking, and deep water horizon. The notion that removing modest (in comparison to the problem) green energy subsidies will somehow lead to greater environmental protections is madness.

I'm not arguing that the current regime of government subsidies to sectors such as solar, electric cars, etc is perfect, but it's a damn site better than nothing.

[The Final Dakar]

I listened to an interview with him and when he said the government duty to protect extended to the EPA is was intrigued as I never heard anyone approach it from that angle before.

Whether or not its lip service I couldn't make head or tails of. The entire libertarian ideology (and the gradient within it) makes it very hard to read.

[Paco500]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

I listened to an interview with him and when he said the government duty to protect extended to the EPA is was intrigued as I never heard anyone approach it from that angle before.

Whether or not its lip service I couldn't make head or tails of. The entire libertarian ideology (and the gradient within it) makes it very hard to read.

I don't think it's necessarily lip service. I do however feel strongly there is an inherent conflict between an unregulated free market, libertarian style personal freedom/property rights, and protecting the environment.

I could be mistaken, but I think where there are inevitable conflicts between these two ideals, Johnson would side with free-market/personal freedom over the environment.

[andi*pandi]

personal freedom: I can dance naked on my property! with my sheep friends!
public welfare: Just don't make us look. Put up a fence or something.

personal freedom: I can dump chemicals all over my property!
public welfare: Um, those chemicals leach into the public water supply downhill. Stop it.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

personal freedom: I can dance naked on my property! with my sheep friends!
public welfare: Just don't make us look. Put up a fence or something.

personal freedom: I can dump chemicals all over my property!
public welfare: Um, those chemicals leach into the public water supply downhill. Stop it.

Economic freedom: look unless you let us dump those chemicals it'll be too expensive to stay in business and think of all the homeless people there will be without those jobs. Why do you hate people?

[Chongo]

Oops.
Gary Johnson asks: 'What is Aleppo?' | TheHill

[andi*pandi]

Well, libertarians are for less foreign intervention in any case.

[The Final Dakar]

...and we still can't be sure he's less informed than Donald trump.

[P]

Originally Posted by subego 

I personally think he should be in the debate.

[puts on "political strategist" hat, stolen from Huggie Bear's closet]

Which person on the stage other than Johnson does that most help?

Clinton. Right now the gap is tightening because Republicans are falling in line. If Johnson shows up and is everything those Republicans really wanted, they go from Trump to Johnson. I read that AMA with him, he sure sounds like mainstream Republican in his responses.

[subego]

Buuuut... the conventional wisdom is Trump does better the more players there are on the stage.

[andi*pandi]

Well, with 8 players he certainly stood out and was memorable. Whether that will be of value in a group of 3... where hopefully the discourse is more about policy and less about 3rd grade insults and genitals, we'll see.

[OAW]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

Oops.
Gary Johnson asks: 'What is Aleppo?' | TheHill

To be utterly clueless about the "ground zero" of the largest military conflict in the middle east is just .... bad.

OAW

[The Final Dakar]

For Johnson this is disqualifying. For Trump it'd be a Tuesday.

[RobOnTheCape]

That is what is so bizarre. We have become numb to Trump's lack of understanding of the issues, duality, and boorish behavior, thus we look at Trump saying this and shrug. Johnson on the other hand and I see articles asking whether he should step aside. Maybe Weld should switch to the Pres candidate.

[OAW]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

For Johnson this is disqualifying. For Trump it'd be a Tuesday.

And that is the scariest thing about this election. Trump supporters literally do not care that he is grossly incompetent and abjectly unqualified.

OAW

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

For Johnson this is disqualifying. For Trump it'd be a Tuesday.

Originally Posted by OAW 

And that is the scariest thing about this election. Trump supporters literally do not care that he is grossly incompetent and abjectly unqualified.

OAW

You can say the same about the Cintons' supporters. They know about all the corruption, lies, and unethical/criminal activities, and don't care.

[OAW]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

You can say the same about the Cintons' supporters. They know about all the corruption, lies, and unethical/criminal activities, and don't care.

Only if one relies upon false equivalence as a debate tactic.

OAW

[Chongo]

Then don't. Don't equate Trump being an asshat with the unindicted criminals that are the Clintons.

[OAW]

You mean like the "corruption" you spoke of about the Clinton Foundation in the other thread?

My point is that there is no comparison between a negative perception on that issue alone which, quite frankly, was rooted in a fundamental misunderstanding of how that organization is structured to repeated, demonstrably false statements that seem to routinely come out of Trump's mouth. Or Trump's abject incompetence in foreign policy. The man had no clue what the nuclear triad was. He's repeatedly talked about "we should have took the oil" of Iraq and Libya even though that would have violated the Geneva Convention. And just yesterday he made statements about how the current military generals would be gone if he was elected ... because he simply doesn't grasp the fact that senior military officials aren't political appointees that get swapped out when a new POTUS takes office! The GOP spent MILLIONS in taxpayer money going after the Clintons over Whitewater. And after a years long investigation the special prosecutor came up with nothing criminal. Not even close. They didn't even make any money on the deal. The only thing notable that was uncovered was that Bill Clinton was getting head in the Oval Office from a young intern. While every single member of the GOP leadership behind that witch hunt was involved in an extramarital affair and/or molesting young male students themselves.

So I'll have to simply disagree here. Trump is NOT just an "asshat". He has proven himself to be dangerously incompetent. And no amount of "distaste" for the Clintons can alter that fact.

OAW

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by OAW 

You mean like the "corruption" you spoke of about the Clinton Foundation in the other thread?

My point is that there is no comparison between a negative perception on that issue alone which, quite frankly, was rooted in a fundamental misunderstanding of how that organization is structured to repeated, demonstrably false statements that seem to routinely come out of Trump's mouth. Or Trump's abject incompetence in foreign policy. The man had no clue what the nuclear triad was. He's repeatedly talked about "we should have took the oil" of Iraq and Libya even though that would have violated the Geneva Convention. And just yesterday he made statements about how the current military generals would be gone if he was elected ... because he simply doesn't grasp the fact that senior military officials aren't political appointees that get swapped out when a new POTUS takes office! The GOP spent MILLIONS in taxpayer money going after the Clintons over Whitewater. And after a years long investigation the special prosecutor came up with nothing criminal. Not even close. They didn't even make any money on the deal. The only thing notable that was uncovered was that Bill Clinton was getting head in the Oval Office from a young intern. While every single member of the GOP leadership behind that witch hunt was involved in an extramarital affair and/or molesting young male students themselves.

So I'll have to simply disagree here. Trump is NOT just an "asshat". He has proven himself to be dangerously incompetent. And no amount of "distaste" for the Clintons can alter that fact.

OAW

Hilary is either brain damaged or stupid. She can't tell the FBI sorry, don't recall because of head trauma, then say her health is fine. And no (C) in not for cookie.
Not only did Bubba get head, he lied about it, committed perjury before a grand jury, and suborned perjury. He had to surrender his law license. Hillary is responsible for intimidating into silence women who accused Bubba of sexual improprieties. She ran the "Bimbo eruptions team"
Then there was all the shenanigans that went on when Hillary was at the Rose Law firm. She represent clients who had business for state agencies and Bubba funneled work to Rose. One of her client wasTyson foods who was responsible for contaminating a watershed and river.

Trump is a rank amateur when compared to the Clintons.
Clinton Crime Family Exposed | Clinton Memorial Library

Don't forget, it appears Hillary committed perjury in her testimony before Congress.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by OAW 

And that is the scariest thing about this election. Trump supporters literally do not care that he is grossly incompetent and abjectly unqualified.

OAW

Actually I was referring to media. Johnson got told that to his face on Morning Joe.

The fact is Trump is the beneficiary of lowered expectations. Same reason he can say multiple things most people would consider campaign killing for a typical candidate. That said, I don't think we've realized that the bar for what has excusable has moved quite a bit in this era of polarization.

[OAW]

^^^

I don't know if it's the "benefit of lowered expectations" as much as it is the "benefit of being a ratings goldmine". So Trump gets a pass even though he's clearly unqualified. Johnson is just .... Johnson. A relatively obscure candidate for the Libertarian party. AKA Republicans who want to be able to legally smoke weed and screw hookers. So for him ... not so much.

OAW

[Cap'n Tightpants]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

And no (C) in not for cookie.

That's the mother of all face palm moments, right there. WTF?

[Chongo]

And no, (C) is not for Cookie

Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants 

That's the mother of all face palm moments, right there. WTF?

Hillary said she coudn't remember signing this as a result of her concussion.


That must by the reason she "doesn't recall" this email exchange:

[Paco500]

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

... where hopefully the discourse is more about policy and less about 3rd grade insults and genitals, we'll see.

At the end of the day, all discourse is about genitals.

[Chongo]

Snip

[andi*pandi]

There are several threads for debating Clinton or Trump. Unless it relates to Johnson, keep it out of this thread plz.

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

Snip

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

There are several threads for debating Clinton or Trump. Unless it relates to Johnson, keep it out of this thread plz.

Moved

BTW, Johnson and Stein are also eliminated for the same reason.

[subego]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

The fact is Trump is the beneficiary of lowered expectations.

Likewise, his opponents, by virtue of painting Trump as out over his skis, raise themselves to a higher standard. What goes around comes around.

[subego]

Originally Posted by Paco500 

In a word, kinda. Given everything we know about him, I believe he has respect for the environment. But I believe he has more respect for the 'free market.' Later in the position statement you quoted, he says things along the lines of:
and furtherEven the 'regulated' market has managed to bring us fracking, and deep water horizon. The notion that removing modest (in comparison to the problem) green energy subsidies will somehow lead to greater environmental protections is madness.

I'm not arguing that the current regime of government subsidies to sectors such as solar, electric cars, etc is perfect, but it's a damn site better than nothing.

If there were a snowball's chance in hell of him getting elected, I think it'd be fair to ask for specifics.

Libertarians seem more likely than most to aggressively assert their ideological purity, and the resultant policy can be pretty batshit. I would hope any real Libertarian contender doesn't fit in that category.

If I was asked to take a whack at energy policy special interests, green subsidies would be low on the list. At the top are those who are anti-nuclear.

I'd take a more gentle course with green subsidies (once I've gotten to them... oil subsidies would come first). What will ultimately make green options feasible is being economically competitive with oil. I think it's in our best interest to fund research into technology which will make green options competitive. I'm a little more wary of "making" non-competitive options more competitive by throwing subsidies at them. That seems like pissing money away.

[Cap'n Tightpants]

Originally Posted by subego 

Likewise, his opponents, by virtue of painting Trump as out over his skis, raise themselves to a higher standard. What goes around comes around.

Yep, they paint him as incompetent or corrupt and they're just as bad as (or worse than) he is.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by subego 

Likewise, his opponents, by virtue of painting Trump as out over his skis, raise themselves to a higher standard. What goes around comes around.

A higher standard of knowing what Brexit and the Nuclear Triad is?

I mean, at the end of that day either someone has the requisite knowledge for the presidency or they don't. Whether that matters because of their politics is a different matter.

[P]

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

Well, with 8 players he certainly stood out and was memorable. Whether that will be of value in a group of 3... where hopefully the discourse is more about policy and less about 3rd grade insults and genitals, we'll see.

Also he was always the front runner in the GOP debates. He isn't now - he is (by poll average) some 3-5 points behind. I think Johnson would attack Clinton and Trump equally, while Trump will focus his anger on Clinton and Clinton herself can get both of the others with one swing in some cases.

[subego]

An interesting take on the Aleppo incident.

It actually distinguished Johnson as the one candidate who can make a mistake and then cop to it like an adult.

Well, you know... an adult who isn't an egomaniac, or one who needs the FBI to be asking before they give a straight answer.