I agree, puzzlelady. When Johnson was interviewed recently he said some things about favoring a carbon tax (it was a tax, not a fee regardless of the label) and I came out against him because of those comments. He has since retracted those comments and I think he is sincere. His choice of Weld as VP is more troubling to me than any other of his acts, but I support Johnson. He is infinitely better than HRM Donnie or the other statist candidate, Clinton.

Good grief, you people are overreacting without full context and information. Gary Johnson is NOT advocating a carbon tax. See here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2nOxl...

At FreedomFest2016 in Las Vegas, moreover, he made a case that CO2 is good for plants. He is the real thing, an honest man. That he is not a slick performer like the hard-boiled politicos is actually a virtue. I spoke with him in Vegas, and he vowed to remain honest. He has been a Libertarian at heart and in his principles since 1971.

Except for the three or four of you on this thread with a clear vision that Johnson is the best and only choice (thanks, db), y'all might want to rethink your misplaced emotional firestorms and restore your original appreciation of Gary Johnson.

Being a better liar. Interesting decision method. Hasn't worked before; won't work this time either.
Rational is far superior to rationale.

Voting is a crap shoot. Rationales for voting or not voting are myriad.

But, as my best friend's mom said a long time ago: "I vote for the SOB that tells me the lies I want to hear." Trump's lies are way better than the Hildebeast's........

Didn't say a word about not voting.
"Voting on principle for a candidate with a history of pro-free-market, non-looting policies is not consent."

Not voting for either will not stop the looting. Not voting does nothing but assuage your conscience. Voting for Hillary will guarantee to increase looting; voting for Trump MIGHT slow it. I'll vote for the "might" versus the "guarantee" because those are the only choices.

Choosing to vote for a looter/lesser-evil in fear of an alleged greater evil is giving consent to being looted by evil. We have the result of this today because most "conservatives" have held their noses and voted in fear instead of based upon their principles for the past 30+ years.
Einsteain's definition of insanity applies to voting for a lesser evil: Repeating the same action and expecting a different result.
Voting on principle for a candidate with a history of pro-free-market, non-looting policies is not consent.

Exactly.

Life has lots of unsavory choices, consent notwithstanding, but we make the choice anyway.

Participation does not imply consent.

I, too, doubt the tariffs, see that as a negotiating tool. However, I think instead of threatening tariffs on American companies that move manufacturing overseas, he should emphasize, one, they are there due to US government polices and that those polices will be changed.

"One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors." Plato

Sad, but still better than all alternatives at this point.

Same excuse used to put statists in office for the past 30 years. Didn't work before; will not work now. Just wasting your vote and consenting to looters. Its exactly what the looters want.

"Fear of Hillary is not a reason to vote for another bad candidate" Yes, it is.

His running mate seemed to be much more establishment oriented and less libertarian

Good evening OA,
Why can't we get suitable candidates to
Run for President?
Seems a fix has been in for years.
Respectfully,
Dobrien

One vote doesn't really matter when it's mob rule anyway. Supporters of Hillary know she gets away with offering government favors in exchange for votes and money, and they want the goodies she offers

No.
Just about that time I opened my first store, and 11 or 12 hours per day didn't leave much time for anything else. When I got to the point where I could finally take a breath, I started thinking about my family and expanding the biz. Activism of any kind too a back seat for the next 15 years.
By the way, I should not have started my first post with "Today."

Thanks, Herb. Did you get involved in founding the party ?

I just posted from experience. After Rand said we couldn't use her name (we called ourselves "The Ayn Rand Society") a group of us were so pissed off that we started looking around for other Randoids and got interested in this new thing called Libertarianism. What I posted was from my personal experience and things may have changed since then. However, the comment by Johnson flooded the old memory banks with that experience.

Looking forward to a future with more rational problems to solve and the ability to implement the solutions based on individual free will.

Johnson wants to cut taxes, and reduce the size of the federal government. He did this in New Mexico. He DID this. One of his biggest concerns is the national debt. It is unsustainable. You are criticizing him for pushing free market carbon tax. He is not. HE IS NOT. If there is anything absolutely wonderful about him, is that he listens and thinks. This from Reason Magazine. http://reason.com/blog/2016/08/26/lib...

What "passes" for libertarianism?? According to whom? You are blaming libertarians for what non-libertarians say it means to be libertarian? Unless I have misunderstood, that is complete rubbish and not worthy of your intelligence, Herb. I'd appreciate it if you can provide an objective explanation.
Do you have a verifiable source for this conclusion that you can share? When you say "liberal" concepts do you mean the Democrat definition of "liberal", or the original definition that still exists everywhere else in the world ?
Johnson's statements since he became the candidate have been anything but libertarian, and imo (without having taken a statistically valid poll ;^) an overwhelming majority of libertarians -those who understand what it means to be "libertarian" as opposed to those who claim to be libertarian without any understanding of it- do not support Johnson's non-libertarian and anti-free-market proposals. I suspect they are stunned by the stupidity Johnson has shown with this proposal.

the future probably contains alternatives which only
the science-fiction authors and thinkers may be
envisioning today. . cloning is just around the corner
and progeny can now be created in vitro ... and maybe
also by more exotic means. . the idea just struck me
that a transgender candidate would be even more
novel than the female candidate. . brave new world. -- j
.