Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by freedomforall 3 years ago
    Voting in fear for a statist who will increase the size of government is not rational or objectivist. Sacrificing your principles in fear is not objectvist. Consenting to statist rule in fear is not objectivist.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Bethesda-gal 3 years ago
      So do your statements mean you advocate not voting in this election ?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by freedomforall 3 years ago
        No, my past comments make clear that I support Gary Johnson based on his libertarian policies, past action as NM Governor, honesty, and ethics. Neither of the DemRep candidates have any of those admirable qualities. Virtually everyone who advocates voting for those two candidates gives only one reason: fear of the prospective actions of the other DemRep candidate.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by Bethesda-gal 3 years ago
          As much as I agree that Gary Johnson seems like the most honest of the choices, I do not agree with his, and libertarian, open border policies, especially in light of terrorist infiltration concerns. While he may have been great as gov., I've learned that that does not necessarily mean they're ready for the big leagues. But I respect anyone's choice.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by freedomforall 3 years ago
            I don't agree with Johnson on that issue either. However, I think if some of Johnson's other programs are enacted, that issue could diminish to insignificance. That is a more likely solution to the issue than anything realistically proposed by other candidates.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by term2 3 years ago
      One could say that voting at all is a mistake in a mob rule election. The mob picks the candidates anyway, and then votes the worst one in.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by freedomforall 3 years ago
        Not a mistake when one chooses to vote for another choice (Gary Johnson) that shows reason, ethics, supports the constitution and free markets, promises to reduce government size and power, and promises to end the (income) tax on productivity. The Demrep mob choices are lacking those qualities and promise bigger, more powerful, intrusive government.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by term2 3 years ago
          You have a point, but I think that Johnson is very conflicted intellectually. For example, he speaks highly of Hillary, wants to decriminalize weed, but thinks its ok to tax it.

          He would be better than any of the other candidates, but given the crooked system, would never get elected in this cycle.

          First thing to do is make the system fair. At this point its so corrupt that I really dont know where to start. Things like the electoral college are real obstacles to candidates not in the two party system. Maybe internet voting, and anyone can run and be selected on the ballot. Maybe the top vote getter is president, and the second top voter is VP. I am not really sure, but the current system sucks
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  WilliamShipley 3 years ago
          It really depends on whether you want to vote to send a message or to attempt to choose the next President.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by  $  CBJ 3 years ago
            Realistically my vote will not choose the next President. It will, however, send a message. If I vote for Trump or Hillary I'm implicitly sending a message that I'm happy with the two-party system and wish it to continue. If I vote for Gary Johnson I'm sending the opposite message.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 years ago
              " If I vote for Trump or Hillary I'm implicitly sending a message that I'm happy with the two-party system and wish it to continue. "
              This will be easy to do if my second-choice candidate (Clinton) is clearly going to win/lose by a landslide. If it's a dead heat and Johnson's far behind, I would have a hard time not doing every bit a can to help Clinton win.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by 3 years ago
              you are sending a message, just no one is hears it. Not voting at all also sends the message you are not happy. So what?

              I too will work to make the Libertarian Party more viable next time around and/or pull the post-Trump Republican Party toward Rand Paul, but in the meantime Hillary Clinton is a disaster too big to ignore.

              An anti-liberty Supreme Court is simply too high of a price for any message. That is the objective reality.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by  $  CBJ 3 years ago
                You think that Trump will appoint a pro-liberty Supreme Court. He supported the Kelo decision upholding eminent domain "100 percent"! That is the objective reality.
                http://reason.com/blog/2015/10/06/don...
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by 3 years ago
                  I think Trump will appoint better Justices than Clinton, hands down. The way Trump utilized the Supreme Court's faulty eminent domain was shameless, deserving of condemnation. He is a very flawed candidate. But it is not like he had a hand in appointing the tyrants that perverted things with Kelo.

                  Let's not forget that Hillary is an eminent domain supporter as well and, in addition, is very hostile to both the First and Second Amendments.

                  I don't expect Trump to earn better than a D grade at protecting individual rights, but Hillary is a certain F.

                  I am not pro-Trump. My support for him is motivated because I am firmly Never Hillary. It is like playing, "Let's Make a Deal". I will gladly take what is behind the door rather than go home with what I know to be a diarrhea-plagued jackass.

                  That is the objective reality.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by  $  CBJ 3 years ago
                    Since my vote won't affect the outcome, I will vote for the candidate closest to my political views and make the best of whatever the other voters decide.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 3 years ago
          When the realistic choice is between red and blue, you ask how can it be a mistake to choose green? After all, we all agree the virtues of green are much better. What about objective reality and reason?
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by freedomforall 3 years ago
            Objective reality is that choosing Red or Blue has resulted in shrunken liberty, manipulated markets, a currency worth 1/3rd of its value a generation ago, an opressive fascist-socialist state, no privacy, a corrupt elitist con-gress, a constitution shredded by every president, small towns invaded by illegal aliens, men, women, and children shot and burned to death by federal agencies, public education destroyed, health care too costly to be useful, CEOs using emminent domain for personal gain, etc.
            Sure, don't learn from your mistakes, just repeat them... again.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by 3 years ago
              Ok, if you deny objective reality, you make perfect sense.

              I would only suggest that those who voted for Gary Johnson in 2012 did not effect anything. Until the Libertarian Party is built into a viable entity, you might as well vote for Popeye. I don't like it either.

              But, it is what it is. If you can stand Hillary Clinton, go ahead and vote Johnson, if it makes you feel good.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by  $  CBJ 3 years ago
                How is the LP going to become a viable entity unless it runs candidates and people vote for them? Every new party has to start somewhere - the Republicans did. If we can keep our vote totals growing, the Libertarian Party will become more viable over time.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by  $  CBJ 3 years ago
            Let's turn that question around. How can you bring the two-party duopoly to an end if you consistently vote for one of its candidates and urge others to do the same? Realistically?
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by 3 years ago
              In my view, no significant change will occur until there is a widespread understanding of why government doesn't work and how more freedom, less regulaton, laissez-faire economics, ending the drug war and other liberty-producing measures empower people to attain a better futures while generating a more prosperous harmonious society.

              As Ayn Rand often pointed out, this is a philosophic battle. We have to relentlessly educate and persuade. Reason is a powerful weapon and if given an open forum will prevail.

              Until libertarian ideas are widely understood and accepted, political maneuvering will likely be futile and our ideas will be seen as fringe.

              No fruit is worth much until it ripens.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by  $  CBJ 3 years ago
                No fruit is worth anything if it is not given a chance to ripen. And no “widespread understanding” will occur if we abandon the political arena to the statists and looters, and only allow ourselves to educate the public by other means. The “open forum” you speak of must include the political forum as well as academic ones. Libertarian ideas are much more widely understood, discussed and accepted now than they were 45 years ago, and that is due in no small part to unrelenting outreach efforts by the Libertarian Party during that time.

                As to my original question, you did not answer it. How can you bring the two-party duopoly to an end if you consistently vote for one of its candidates and urge others to do the same? Or do you think we can achieve liberty while leaving the two-party system in place while freezing out any others that might arise?
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by ewv 3 years ago
      Voting for a partial statist is rational when the other one is worse and more dangerous. Don't divorce principles from reality. One of them is going to win and there is nothing you can do to change that. The election is about which one of the two will win, not endorsing or sanctioning the one you vote for.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by freedomforall 3 years ago
        That is the excuse that has been used for 25 years. If we use that rationale then statist DemReps will always win and there is no peaceful answer. It is not rational to ignore past results and repeat what has failed.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  CBJ 3 years ago
    RE: “Gary Johnson is not a player and those who use their vote to send messages are heard by no one.”

    In every presidential election, people are told that they are “wasting their vote” if they vote for the Libertarian candidate.

    As one who has voted for every Libertarian presidential candidate since 1972, I think the exact opposite is true. By voting for my principles, my votes over the years have had far more impact than if I had allowed the two “establishment” parties to dictate my choices.

    Consider this: no matter how you have voted for President in the past, your vote has never made a difference in the outcome. Nor will it do so in the future. Even if you live in a “swing state” that could go either way, your lone vote will not spell the difference between victory and defeat for either establishment party candidate.

    So if you can’t change the election outcome, why vote at all? The answer is that by voting Libertarian, you will be adding to the vote totals of the only party that consistently supports individual freedom. And those vote totals matter – the establishment parties pay close attention when a significant number of voters break with the two-party system, and they will often modify their stands on certain issues to protect their base and prevent further defections.

    On the other hand, if you vote for the “lesser of two evils,” you are saying in effect, “I support the political status quo. I have faith in the two-party system, and I’m not interested in supporting candidates from other parties, even if they have fresh ideas that I agree with. I don’t like either of the two establishment party candidates, but I will vote for Establishment Party Candidate X because he is not quite as bad as Establishment Party Candidate Y.” This truly is a waste of your vote, and does nothing to advance the cause of freedom.

    Voting Libertarian will put the establishment parties on notice that you are not satisfied with the candidates they offer, and unless they come up with better choices they will not earn your vote in the future.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 3 years ago
      Allow me to address your points:

      First, you make the case that voting makes little difference, but that voting your principles matters because it encourages the establishment parties to modify their positions toward liberty issues. But, what is your evidence for this? Did your vote for Ron Paul modify the stands of George W Bush? Did it cause the establishment to embrace Rand Paul? Really, what is your evidence? I will rethink my position if you can demonstrate some tangible benefit to voting for a candidate certain to lose, but I think this is a feel-good rather than an intellectual position.

      Then, you put forward that voting for the “lesser of two evils” is a vote for the status quo. That is certainly not a necessary conclusion. Consider a fighter pilot whose plane has just taken enemy fire. He/she is now confronted with having to either parachute into shark-invested waters or go down with the plane. Not making a choice does not save the pilot from the consequences of the default option. How much that pilot prefers walking on the beach to choosing either of the realistic options is not relevant. Deciding to parachute into shark-invested waters is not a proclamation of approval for sharks, any more than picking Trump over Clinton is an approval of the system. Both are simply recognitions of reality and an attempt to make the best possible choice. Of course, one can always find a better impossible choice.

      I think we would both agree that America is in a bad place, far removed from the beautiful liberty-loving vision of our founders. However, I would rather lament just how dire our situation is while protecting myself with a firearm that has bullets in it which, as my opinion piece puts forward, will no longer be Constitutionally protected if Hillary picks the next lawyer on the Supremes.

      You must realize that either Trump or Clinton will be the next president. It would be hard to consider yourself an Objectivist if you do not make that consolation to reality. Just like for the fighter pilot, not making a choice does not save you from a choice being made.

      Sadly, libertarianism is not on the ballot. Therefore, the best we can do is to go with the guy running against the establishment of both corrupt parties and the mainstream media.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  CBJ 3 years ago
        Re: “I will rethink my position if you can demonstrate some tangible benefit to voting for a candidate certain to lose.” I can give you a current example, and although it is interparty rather than national, it applies to the general election also. Millions of Democrats voted for Bernie Sanders even after it was mathematically certain that he would lose to Hillary Clinton. The depth of his support forced her to pivot toward a more “progressive” agenda than she would have proposed otherwise. In a close general election such as this one, Gary Johnson’s 8 to 10 percent support is being noticed by both major-party candidates, and you can bet that they are both going to attempt to appeal to his supporters to consider voting for them instead. (And by the way, Johnson appears to be drawing more votes from Clinton than from Trump, so you should be pleased that Gary is in the race.)

        The fighter pilot you mentioned has two choices. Most people in the voting booth have four or more. The fighter pilot’s choices will crucially affect the outcome for him. Your vote will not. But your vote will affect the overall totals, however slightly, and those totals will be studied by those politicians preparing for the next round. A vote for the candidate closest to your beliefs will (slightly) influence the policies promoted by the next group of candidates. Plus it will give moral support to those in the trenches fighting for liberty on the political front.

        I agree that Trump is a decent second choice. But I prefer to vote for my first. The outcome of the election will be the same either way. And to paraphrase what you said, “It would be hard to consider yourself an Objectivist if you do not make that concession to reality.”
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by term2 3 years ago
          Your conclusion that the election outcome will be the same either way is not right. It depends on how many people take the choice you are making. Look how close it was with bush vs gore. Its going to be very close this time too, and Trump needs every vote. Johnson doesnt need any votes
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by  $  CBJ 3 years ago
            Trump does not need every vote. Any vote for Trump in California, for example, is "wasted" according to your standards. Your vote in the Bush vs. Gore election would not have changed the outcome, even in Florida. Gary Johnson needs votes, and the total number of votes he receives from all states does matter. If he gets 5 percent or more nationally, you can bet that the major-party politicians will notice, and they will attempt to appeal to those voters in the next election.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by term2 3 years ago
              they didnt pay attention to ross perot. they wont pay attention to Johnson. They arent paying attention to him at all in the media- that tells you something right there. They are all pounding on Trump because he IS the threat to the liberal and crony establishment. THAT should tell you a lot right there.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by  $  CBJ 3 years ago
                Re: "They arent paying attention to him at all in the media- that tells you something right there." It would tell me a lot if it were true. But it isn't. The Chicago Tribune, a major newspaper, has just endorsed Gary Johnson, joining major newspapers in Richmond, VA, Winston-Salem, NC, and Manchester, NH.
                http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/30/politic...
                Johnson and Weld have hosted several Town Halls on major cable news channels. He and Jill Stein are regularly included in network newscasts reporting the latest poll numbers. Gary Johnson and the Libertarian Party are getting plenty of media attention.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by term2 3 years ago
                  what I meant was that the two major parties are ignoring him because he isnt a threat at all. Libertarians have always gotten a little bit of attention from the media and some support, which they should get actually. Johnsons poll numbers have gone down during this election period also.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by  $  CBJ 3 years ago
                    Johnson may not be a threat to win, but he's certainly a threat to influence the outcome, just as Ralph Nader did in 2000.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by term2 3 years ago
                      as long as the votes for him dont result in Hillary winning, I think its ok. If it turns out that Hillary wins , and votes for Johnson could have stopped that, I will be upset and be vindicated.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Posted by  $  CBJ 3 years ago
                        If Hillary wins (unlikely in my view) don't blame it on Gary Johnson. The polls indicate he is drawing more votes from Hillary than from Trump. In a close race Johnson's presence could even make a Trump victory possible.
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by term2 3 years ago
                          I would find it a bit strange for a Hillary supporter to switch to Johnson. If its true, hey, thats great. But she is so crooked and such a supporter of cronyism and socialism that a switch to Johnson would seem incongruous.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                          • Posted by  $  CBJ 3 years ago
                            It's not that Hillary supporters are switching to Johnson. It's that Johnson is receiving votes from people who would vote for Hillary if their only choice was her or Trump. For instance, many Sanders supporters who like his foreign policy but not his economics have switched to Johnson. Many other Democrats who dislike Hillary but would never vote for a Republican are also in Johnson's camp. A lot of Johnson's votes would go to Hillary, possibly reluctantly, if he weren't in the race. You're welcome.
                            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                            • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 years ago
                              " A lot of Johnson's votes would go to Hillary, possibly reluctantly"
                              I surly would have. I was a strong supporter of Clinton during the primary. I did not think Johnson had a chance at that time. I did not want Sanders to get the Democratic nomination mainly b/c he's socialistic.

                              I can still remember seeing the poll that showed Johnson at 8%. "OMG, he has a chance." He's a moderate libertarian, a nerd, admires Secretary Clinton, gray hair, involved in startup businesses, optimistic, dresses business casual with pink shirts... he's the candidate most similar to me I've ever seen at that level and probably the most similar to me in policy ideas and even physical appearance (well, if I laid off the Taco Bell, I would look like him).
                              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Rex_Little 3 years ago
        The fighter pilot analogy fails because his options are determined by the laws of nature and his choice from among those options determines the outcome. In this or any other election, the outcome will be the same no matter who I vote for, and I don't get a prize for picking the winner. So why is a vote for Johnson any more of a waste than one for Hillarump?
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by term2 3 years ago
        Exactly. I am voting for Trump not because he is an objectivist, but because he is the least bad "statist". Hillary is the posterchild for corruption and cronyism, and is worse at that than anyone I have seen. Its amazing that people actually vote for her, except for her crony partners of course. The vast masses dont have the money to "pay" her, and therefore wont be able to take advantage of her paying out government favors. They are stupid to think they can play without paying, and they dont have the resources to pay.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by term2 3 years ago
      Voting libertarian in THIS election is like not voting at all. The only anti-establishment candidate this time around who has a snowball's chance in hell to actually make some sort of different is TRUMP.

      TRUMP essentially hijacked one of the two major parties for his anti-establishment message. Who else has come close to THAT??? If there ever was a message to send to the establishment, this is IT.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  CBJ 3 years ago
        A vote for Trump could mean many things: an anti-establishment message, a party-line vote, a lesser-of-two-evils vote, or actual support of Trump. A vote for Gary Johnson is more clearly an anti-establishment vote and an anti-two-party-system vote.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by term2 3 years ago
          I was always listed as Libertarian and will reregister as Libertarian after this election. Johnson just isnt a good charismatic candidate though. Trump really hijacked the repub party, which I think is cool. They were so much like the democrats there was no choice in the past.

          Just so you know, I dont agree with a number of things Trump is suggesting- such as increasing tariffs (money goes to the govt !!!), but I definitely dont want more syrian refugees until we make sure they arent terrorists (look what happened to France and Germany when they were humanitarian to the syrian refugees), and I like the corporate tax reductions so its worth it to expand my business. Trump is not a panacea- I dont think he can increase jobs by the amount he is suggesting, and he isnt going to be able to do anything but slow down corruption and cronyism
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by  $  CBJ 3 years ago
            And then what? Assuming Trump wins, we'll still be stuck with a two-party duopoly during his term and after he leaves office. After 45 years of effort, the Libertarian Party is poised to achieve the biggest vote totals in its history, and that matters to the fate of the nation going forward. Now is not the time to be scared into a vote for political expediency, especially if you live in a non-swing state.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  TomB666 3 years ago
      Living as I do in Illinois where Mike Madigan (Speaker of the IL House) already has the total votes counted, I can see the logic of your idea. I personally do not like Johnson, but since my vote is only symbolic anyway, why not vote for the party!
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 years ago
      "Voting Libertarian will put the establishment parties on notice"
      When Johnson started polling > 5%, I started thinking he really could win, esp if there were some scandal. Now I'm thinking that's less likely, sadly because he says things that sound odd on TV.

      I agree with what you say about a lone vote not deciding and politicians paying attention to voting numbers, but if it's right on the edge between Clinton, who I think is a great candidate but one that is not interested in reducing the size of gov't or the power of the exec branch and Trump; it will be hard to vote for Johnson.

      I'm still hoping for an unlikely upset that makes Johnson win the election.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  CBJ 3 years ago
        I would like that too, but neither your vote nor mine will affect the outcome. So you might as well vote for the person you would like the majority to vote for. The more votes Johnson receives, the more the politicians will listen.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • -1
      Posted by ewv 3 years ago
      Voting for one of the two candidates who will win does not support the status quo. It is an attempt to influence which one will be in power over us because it still makes a difference, not a sanction of his policies or the status quo. The status quo is here and is not subject to voting.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  Thoritsu 3 years ago
    I live in MA. My vote is irrelevant. Therefore, I will vote for Gary Johnson, because anyone is better than Hillary (even Putin), and even though Gary Johnson has his warts, Gary Johnson is better than Trump. Period.

    The assertion that a vote for a third party will be heard by no one, is completely false. It is already heard by two parties mortally afraid that real ideas can make there way into discussion, and their strategy to slip inappropriate positions (e.g. restrictions of social freedom) in under the cover of other more important platforms. US reaction to this crap is why Trump won the republican ticket, and Rubio et al are not wiping the floor with Hillary. We should be duped by the same strategy that go us this idiot (who I hope winds, BTW) yet again?

    Fool me one, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • -2
      Posted by ewv 3 years ago
      Johnson is not going to influence what Hillary or Trump do. At most they will pander during the election then do what they would anyway.

      Gary Johnson and Bill Weld are 'liberal' Republicans who can't coherently defend anything. They are embarrassing flakes who undermine a politics of individualism in any degree of association with it. Few care what these incoherents say now, and thankfully, after the election no one will. They are not sending any kind of coherent "message" for you to participate in "sending". If your vote doesn't matter because MA will vote for Hilary then your vote doesn't matter, period. Don't make it worse.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  Thoritsu 3 years ago
        Perhaps they are flakes. Perhaps they are seeking the ground that sells. They may be disenfranchised republicans. However, their positions are better than HIllary's or Trump's, and like Hillary or Trumps, they will do whatever they want anyway, which I think is better than Hillary or Trump.
        I choose to use my vote to support the message that the two party system has failed us, and further, the concept of Libertarianism is appealing (whether or not Johnson/Weld have espoused it). This message is not to Hillary or Trump. This message is for the two parties and the rest of the people.

        Your statement sounds justifiably angry, but illogical. Who are you voting for?
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by jconne 3 years ago
    The choices are terrible and the arguments from all sides here I find not compelling. Here are some of my observations:

    1. Clinton is a dishonest collectivist. In her debate she talked about investing in ... the middle class? Investing here means using stolen money to buy votes from that fraction of the electorate. There was no mention of individual rights and our government formed by us to secure our rights. No principles.

    2. Trump is a dishonest, authoritarian, cronyism advocate. Now I don't fault a business person defending themselves against government abuse by lobbying. I don't fault them taking advantage of any technique to protect themselves from "legal" theft. But Trump wants to punish speech by the media and free trade by businesses. That's fascism - you supposedly own your property but the government dictates its use and disposal. This especially applies to the means of production. Like with Clinton, there was no mention of individual rights and our government formed by us to secure our rights. No principles.

    3. in the Republican primaries this year, at least two of the rejected candidates mentioned the issues of rights , so there is some visibility.

    4. If your vote for either of the two front runners is of no consequence in your state, like in California, making a protest vote is definitely appropriate.

    5. Johnson is flawed but much better that the front runners. He has the concept of individual rights. He is not an anarchist as were the LP founders. As governor of NM, he vetoed hundreds of bills that were anti-individual rights and profligate spending. He disappointingly accepts anthropomorphically caused catastrophic global warming that requires government intervention. He is still a reasonable protest vote.

    6. And finally, there's the the issue of populating the SCOTUS. History demonstrates that both parties choices have been mixed at best. Eg. property rights and Kelo a decade ago. Free speech for the successful and Citizens United. Roe v Wade and a woman's right to her body. Net Neutrality - precluding classes of service like the post office and express shipping; airplane cabins with two to four classes of service at different price points.

    No one except Objectivists seems to get that RIGHTS refer to freedom of action and never the "right" to the product of another persons' labor. This includes food, clothing, shelter, roads, education, health insurance, health care, etc.

    So I recommend voting your values including as a protest vote and accepting the sadly lacking best the field has to offer.

    Cultures have changed over history and we need ours to. ARI is studying the lessons of history on culture change through education of next generations and the current technology-based best ways of reaching people, especially young people. Let's do all we can to advance our cause. If anyone here has not seen the changes in attitude at ARI over the last few years under Yaron Brook's leadership, I recommend you look again. See the OCON 2016 site and the description of the talk, "Objectivist Movement 2.0" (Not Objectivism 2.0! :-) ).

    Another major advancement is the work of Jean Moroney (Binswanger) on the human interaction, communication, respect, listening, objective communication and thinking discipline. Also see the work of Greg Salameri.

    And then there's the morphing of "The Undercurrent" into "STRIVE" see http://striveclubs.org for the college context. This has the leadership development focus as well as the intellectual development focus I have been encouraging for decades.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Choose2Think 3 years ago
      On the mark. Our choice, between a facist and a socialist, is unacceptable. I will be true to my principles and vote for the very flawed Johnson. This election, wherein Trump and Clinton are equally reviled by 80% of voters, presented the Libertarian Party with an unprecedented opportunity that we squandered by nominating Johnson. What the hell happened?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by JohnConnor352 3 years ago
        Choose2Think
        I think the reason Johnson was selected was twofold. One, he had the only thing even close to name recognition. Two abortion. With an election between a woman president and a man who is famously known to be a womanizer, I think that those in the Libertarian party feared giving additional ammo to that existing problem. I would be willing to bet some people who even would prefer a pro life over a pro choice candidate chose Johnson over Austin Peterson for that very reason.
        As those who know me enough on this forum already know, I, like Ayn Rand, am staunchly pro-choice, and I'm glad Johnson was selected over the next most popular candidate Austin Peterson for those two primary reasons.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  CBJ 3 years ago
          Reason number three was experience. There are numerous mainstream voters supporting Johnson who would never consider voting for an articulate, ideologically pure candidate to the highest office in the land if he or she had little or no significant experience in government at the state level or higher. Johnson and Weld were both popular, two-term governors, giving them credibility in the eyes of the general public. I think the Libertarian Party made a smart choice.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 years ago
            "I think the Libertarian Party made a smart choice."
            Even radical libertarians should want the LP to nominate a moderate who has a chance of winning, assuming they want to win. I suspect Johnson hopes if elected he could get Congress to freeze nominal spending roughly at present levels, which is like 2%/yr real decrease. That's not very sexy compared to dreams of reducing gov't to 19th century levels, but it's absolutely HUGE. It's a permanent "fiscal cliff", the kind of thing that the D/R duopoly would consider beyond the pale. If he is elected, next year it will actually be a question for mainstream debate: Do we want more/less gov't spending and power?
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by DancingDon 3 years ago
    Vote for the lesser of two statist evils?

    When presented with a "choice" between hemlock & strychnine, I will not lend legitimacy to my execution by cooperating in the process. If I am to be poisoned, the executioners will have to hold me down, pry my mouth open and pour it in themselves over my screaming objections.

    But on the other hand, if poisoning is inevitable maybe I should at least choose the less noxious tasting one? So maybe I'll vote for Trump, as his antics may at least be a bit more amusing to watch as Rome burns.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by ProfChuck 3 years ago
    While Trump makes me uneasy Hilary terrifies me. Hillary is fundamentally dishonest and hypocritical and Trump is easily distracted by trivia. Is Trump an ideal candidate? Far from it. But when one considers the alternative "The Donald" is clearly the only game in town. Sadly, we are faced not with who will do the most good but who will do the least harm. I think the answer to that is obvious.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  CBJ 3 years ago
      In every recent election we supposedly have been presented with a binary choice of which candidate will do the "least harm". But least harm = harm. As long as the two-party system controls the country this will continue to be the case, until liberty in America ceases to exist altogether. A Libertarian vote is a vote to dismantle the two-party system and allow the voters a wider range of choices.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by term2 3 years ago
        Maybe you dont care about the next 4 years, but I certainly do. It makes a big difference to me. So far Obama took away medical care and made it 3x more expensive (monthly premiums). Hillary will up the minimum wage to $15 and ruin many small businesses, including mine. Voting for Johnson does nothing to protect me from the ravages of Hillary.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  CBJ 3 years ago
          Voting for Trump will not protect you from the ravages of Hillary either, since your vote won't change the outcome. And Hillary is unlikely to get her "progressive" agenda through Congress.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by term2 3 years ago
            Perhaps if all the people who dont like Hillary as a choice DO vote and do it for Trump, it will change the outcome. Hillary will get her $15/hr minimum wage and her tax hikes and single payer medical through. She will spend more than Obama and let in thousands and thousands of syrian refugees.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by  $  CBJ 3 years ago
              And if all the people who dont like Trump as a choice DO vote and do it for Hillary, it will change the outcome. Not going to happen, because too many people dislike both Hillary and Trump. Gary Johnson is a reasonable alternative for such voters, and according to the polls his presence in the race benefits Trump, not Hillary.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by JohnConnor352 3 years ago
    Sorry, but only two of those reasons were actual endorsements. And the Supreme Court argument falls flat. Look at the GOP nominee Chief Justice John Roberts and his support of Obamacare. Many moderate judges were appointed by Democrats. You never know what a justice is going to do once they are on that bench. That's a weak argument.
    Economics? Trumps supports Tariffs and starting trade wars. That will spell disaster for consumers who will only see prices on nearly everything rise.
    The third is that Hillary is corrupt. Yeah, so is Trump. He calls his ability to "take advantage" of existing laws to give him a leg up on others a positive. It shows that he not only doesn't oppose cronyism, but that he supports it!
    The final, if you really want someone who will FIGHT the establishment... Vote for Gary Johnson. He's not perfect, but literally no one running is. Or honestly ever will be. But he is the only one who at least claims to support the cause of Liberty.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 3 years ago
      If you don’t know what kind of Supreme Court Justice Hillary Clinton would appoint you are not paying attention. She is about as anti-gun and anti-free speech as you can get. Trump has put out a list of candidates approved by the Federalist society, a pro-Constitution entity. While there is no guarantee what any lawyer will do when appointed a powerful position like the Supreme Court, NOTHING AT ALL indicates for Clinton here.

      2. Granted trade policy of both candidates is cockeyed. So are Hillary’s spending plans (free college, etc). Trump’s tax cuts will provide incentives for business to stay or relocate in the United States as well as spur economic growth.

      3. Hillary’s corruption and malfeasance would put a normal person behind bars. Even Comey as much as admitted that. The same cannot be said of Trump.

      4. Hillary complains that Trump has paid no tax in some years, but it is HER and her ilk that makes the rules. Trump only plays the game. Don’t blame him for outwitting the system. Applaud his acumen. Besides, taking advantage of the tax code is not cronyism. Cronyism is about selling out taxpayers to give special treatment to friends and HRC is the queen of this. Unless you embrace cronyism with both arms, you should be all out against the Clintons.

      5. Gary Johnson is an irrelevancy. Deal with it. A vote for him in 2016 will send the same strength message that a vote for Eric Haas did in 1960.

      6. You don't have to like or even respect Trump to deem him a better choice than Hillary Clinton.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  CBJ 3 years ago
        And you don't have to like or even respect Gary Johnson to deem him a better choice than Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump.

        Regarding point 5: Eric Haas of the Socialist Labor Party received 1 vote in every 1500 in 1960. Gary Johnson received 1 vote in every 100 in 2012, and is on track to receive 1 vote in every 20 in 2016. Big difference.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 3 years ago
    He's right.
    The USA is truly on the brink. If Trump loses, the country formerly known as the United States of America will cease to be, and will be the same in name only. By the end of 4 years it will have become a socialist state in totality and the Republican Party as well as all other parties will no longer be strong enough to ever regain a majority. This will lead to the one party system of a dictatorship. We've seen it happen over and over. Goodbye Columbia.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  Radio_Randy 3 years ago
    Four compelling reasons to vote for Trump:
    1. Never Hillary!
    2. Never Hillary!
    3. Never Hillary!
    4. Never Hillary!

    I'm going for the "sure" way to beat Clinton...THAT is voting my conscience (thank you, Ted Cruz, for that advice).
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by bsmith51 3 years ago
    ...and the danger of Hillary being elected (from my btother):

    Yesterday I saw and heard Hillary Clinton make this cryptic declaration:

    “It’s not just my name on the ballot. Every issue you care about – think about it, because in effect it’s on the ballot, too. The next 40 days will determine the next 40 years.”

    We all know that she refers to the Supreme Court.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  allosaur 3 years ago
    Yes, yes, yes and yes.
    And goofy Gary is a LINO.
    Mr. Imperfect Bad Hair Day is all the old dino sees left to vote for and he may be this country's last chance.
    The USA needs a fireman to the rescue and we need one now.
    Me dino ain't someone who will ever rejoice over making some hollow self-righteously Objectiivist point by sitting back and letting the Republic of the United States burn the rest of the way down.
    Do not delude yourselves into thinking some beautiful Objectivist phoenix shall then magically arise from the ashes with everyone reading Ayn Rand.
    We'll be lucky if our half-starved children aren't all goosestepping and prayerfully chanting praises to some Chairman Chucklehead like that stupid punk who runs North Korea. .
    And such an outcome may arise from the ashes quicker than that.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by bassboat 3 years ago
    The reason to vote for Trump is SCOTUS. If SCOTUS is handed over to Hillary the rest of it matters little.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  AJAshinoff 3 years ago
      Having seen/heard Trump throughout the years (grew up in NY) there is absolutely no guarantee he will appoint anyone better, more Constitutional, less activist than what HC will certainly do. In fact, he can bold face lie about anything and do it sincerely. Rest assured he will do what it takes to win. What he does once he wins will be self serving. As long as his interests align with the country we'd be fine. If his interests conflict with the nation , with his people in place, we're screwed.

      Hope for change is what DT is peddling and thats not reason enough to be complicit.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by chad 3 years ago
    I don't think a vote for any party will produce any different results. Trump has shown that he is about purchasing influence, he bought the Clintons when Bill was in office. He has used the 'law' to get the property of others (eminent domain) by convincing local 'authorities' that they would collect more taxes from his business than that of private property owners. He has never failed to use the system to his benefit and never once fought against collectivism, except when it did not benefit him. Voting for either (any) is voting for the same, the only difference is what lie they will tell you to get elected. I agree with Mark Twain; "If voting actually accomplished something do you think they would let you do it?" (May be somewhat paraphrased)
    The only vote that counts is when you can vote not to participate by refusing the governments demand for your property. Listen to what the 'conservative Republicans' say about Obamacare; "We must repeal and replace it." A promise to give you back the same pig with lipstick and tell you everything is now different.
    As far as thinking you exert some kind of influence on those who see all others as slaves to the state, no matter how loudly you complain do you think the slave masters will realize a mistake has been made and decide to change their position? The only mistake they will realize is to realize they haven't sold the majority on being slaves. Keep asking the slave masters for permission to be free, I don't think you will ever be granted your wish.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by tdechaine 3 years ago
    Omitted is the complete unpredictability with Trump, plus all his negative policy ideas. He is a pragmatist who will do whatever he feels like in the end. I don't want to vote for someone who so badly represents the "capitalist" side and is so despicable a person. And I don't want to vote for a Libertarian - and a bad one at that. So I say no vote.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by TomSwift 3 years ago
    I am constantly amazed by grown adults who actually contemplate voting for Trump. The man is such a fundamental waste of skin, it is bizarre that people still attempt to justify him as a legitimate candidate. If you don't want to vote for Clinton, fine. Vote for Johnson. He is still orders of magnitude better than a knuckle-dragging mouth breather like Trump. Work to destroy the Republican Party as it has become a cesspool of religious wackos and fear-mongers and help it rise as a new party, or work to get the Libertarians ahead.

    I have never met a Trump supporter, or at least someone who admits they are a supporter, because admitting such a thing is to admit you are not a rational thinker and completely hate your country. Do Americans who support this buffoon actually visualize him as President? Just picture it for a second. Do you really want someone who has failed at pretty much everything he has attempted and is a compulsive liar as your President? The first insulting tweet he gets from some guy in Pakistan and he will send in the troops. He man is an embarrassment to the ideals of what America should be.

    Sorry, I have met a Trump supporter. An ex-student of mine who on Facebook also goes on about how 9/11 is a hoax and how the Jews are controlling everything with their holocaust hoaxes. Kind of says it all.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 3 years ago
      If you want a chance at remaking the Republican party, voting for Trump makes the most sense. If Hillary wins, the mushy moderate “told you so” Republican establishment of Bill Kristol and the other “Never Trumpers” will reassume leadership of the party. If Trump wins, the party is up for grabs, with the mushy moderates on the outside looking in. In that scenario, Rand Paul types have some chance to be empowered. All you are advocating is a Hillary Clinton presidency and a continuation down the path of certain demise.

      I am willing to let the rest of your comments implode, as all irrationality does.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  CBJ 3 years ago
        If you want a chance at remaking the Republican Party, voting for Gary Johnson makes the most sense. If the Republican Party is truly "up for grabs", a strong libertarian presence outside the party will influence Republican policymakers as they attempt to make their party more appealing to the voters at large.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 3 years ago
          It would make great sense as long as Trump wins. But if Hillary wins, the Supreme Court is screwed, the future of Libertarian Party matters less and the old "I told you so" Bill Kristol mushy moderates retake the party.

          Yes, build up the LIbertarian Party or try to remake a new Republican Party into a voice for liberty. Just vote for Trump in 2016. Don't subvert your self-interest and your children's future just because he strikes you as an arrogant ass.

          Thomas Sowell said that electing Donald Trump is to play Russian Roulette with America's future. He is right. But he also said, electing Hillary Clinton is putting a gun to your head and then pulling the trigger.

          At least with Russian Roulette, you have a chance. Sowell is right. I don't like it either, but it is what it is.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo