Without using the words "drugs" or "war", tell me why you support Gary Johnson

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guns Guns Guns
  • Start date Start date
G

Guns Guns Guns

Guest
Without using the words "drugs" or "war", tell me why you support Gary Johnson

:)
 
That's easy.

1) Johnson is the only candidate who will actually balance the budget. While Romney would spend slightly less than Obama (and I stress *SLIGHTLY*), both would continue to run a horrible deficit for the next four years adding to the national debt.
2) Same Sex relationship equality. Romney is against it, and while Obama talks a big game in the regard, has done not one damned thing to resolve this civil inequity.
3) FAIR TAX - Goodbye to the income tax. Goodbye to the Corporate tax laws. Hello to market freedom and millions of new jobs.
4) He's a straight shooter, and hasn't flip flopped all over the planet like Obama and Romney
5) More EXECUTIVE experience than both of the mainstream candidates combined. Two terms (8 total years) as governor.
6) The two-party system is broken and out of touch with the system. We need more choice in elections. While I acknowledge Johnson ran as Republican both for governor and for the presidency before changing to the Libertarian party, he NEVER ran with the party lines, and always spoke his mind about the difference in opinion between himself and the party.

I could keep going.

Oh, and just because you said not to... DRUGS and WAR!
 
\\((|))// said:
Very well-stated.

Does he have any chance of winning?
Click to expand...

In my opinion, the chance is still there. It all hinges on his success with the current Anti-trust lawsuit against the CPD (Commission on the Presidential Debates). If Johnson can make it on the debate stage, he will attract voters from both sides of the aisle. I could see a very close 3 man race. If he doesn't make it into the debates, then he will most likely pull in only 8-10% of the popular vote, because most people in America haven't even heard of him. He is on 47 ballots already, (he was on 50, but Romney's campaign filed lawsuits against 3 states to remove him, and now it's in litigation which Mr. Johnson thinks will come out in his favor)

The main stream media generally doesn't give much (if any) coverage to "3rd party" candidates, so it's difficult to get name recognition and have your voice heard. I honestly believe that if he was getting equal coverage, he would already be a serious contender.
 
zombienerd said:
That's easy.

1) Johnson is the only candidate who will actually balance the budget. While Romney would spend slightly less than Obama (and I stress *SLIGHTLY*), both would continue to run a horrible deficit for the next four years adding to the national debt.
Click to expand...

No, he wouldn't. It is impossible to balance the budget in four years without pissing off an enormous number of people. Even if Congress went along with it, he would be voted out of office in '16. Social Security and Medicare alone account for 2/3rds of current revenue.

I like Johnson, but the idea that he would balance the budget in four years is pure fantasy.
 
Voltaire said:
No, he wouldn't. It is impossible to balance the budget in four years without pissing off an enormous number of people. Even if Congress went along with it, he would be voted out of office in '16. Social Security and Medicare alone account for 2/3rds of current revenue.

I like Johnson, but the idea that he would balance the budget in four years is pure fantasy.
Click to expand...

I don't think Johnson would care about pissing off an enormous number of people.

He was known as "Governor Veto" in his home state of New Mexico, vetoing over 750 bills in his time in office. When he took office, there was a steep deficit, but when he left office, they were running a BILLION surplus.

He has stated he would cut 43% from medicare and medicaid. Social Security would be covered by increasing the retirement age and rolling SS payments into the Fair Tax (if he could get it passed). There would be no more payroll deductions of any kind.

I am a realist, I realize that the President only has so much power, and he cannot, alone, force a budget. He can, however, veto every single bill that comes across his desk until they submit a balanced budget. Overriding a veto isn't exactly easy unless it's a widely bipartisan item.
 
@$$#0!3troll said:
As is the idea that Johnson will win the election...
Click to expand...

You are changing terms after the fact. You asked...

Does he have any chance of winning?
Click to expand...

Then you ridicule as pure fantasy "the idea that Johnson will win the election." That has no connection to anything anyone said. Your strawman is a fantasy.

If you want to nitpick then you need to be more detailed.
 
\\((|))// said:
LOL, you suck at debate.

Where's the strawman?

Johnson has as much chance of becoming president in 2012 as you have of forming coherent challenges.
Click to expand...

I explained where the strawman was. No one presented the "idea" that he was going to win. The question was does he have a chance. The original answer was accurate. You do understand chance and probability, right. Who I am kidding, of course, you do not.
 
To answer the question, because I don't think Jill Stein, Joe Maddon or Calvin Collidge really stand much of a chance.
 
zombienerd said:
I don't think Johnson would care about pissing off an enormous number of people.

He was known as "Governor Veto" in his home state of New Mexico, vetoing over 750 bills in his time in office. When he took office, there was a steep deficit, but when he left office, they were running a BILLION surplus.

He has stated he would cut 43% from medicare and medicaid. Social Security would be covered by increasing the retirement age and rolling SS payments into the Fair Tax (if he could get it passed). There would be no more payroll deductions of any kind.

I am a realist, I realize that the President only has so much power, and he cannot, alone, force a budget. He can, however, veto every single bill that comes across his desk until they submit a balanced budget. Overriding a veto isn't exactly easy unless it's a widely bipartisan item.
Click to expand...

The problem is we are electing a President not a dictator and he would have no chance of getting that through congress. That is why I say no matter who wins in November we are still fucked as a country. The winner only determines how fast we get there
 
\\((|))// said:
No, thanks.

I wonder if Mickey Mouse will get more votes...

Good luck with that.
Click to expand...

Man, you are slow. I am not the one that believes in the Pollyanna fairytales of ObamaRomney nor do I put much value into each camps ridiculous nightmares. Our country faces real problems. Until we stop the idiotic divisive game of finger pointing and blameshifting we are rudderless. We need to start actually dealing with the reality that we are ALL going to have to shoulder some of the blame and the burden.

Listen to David Stockman. You think he does not know what he is talking about on SS? Or maybe your brother bravo will say he is really just a socialist with his ideas about the banks being too big? You want a resume. That man has one. He knows what he is talking about and people on all sides tune him out and slander him.
 
zombienerd said:
That's easy.

1) Johnson is the only candidate who will actually balance the budget. While Romney would spend slightly less than Obama (and I stress *SLIGHTLY*), both would continue to run a horrible deficit for the next four years adding to the national debt.
2) Same Sex relationship equality. Romney is against it, and while Obama talks a big game in the regard, has done not one damned thing to resolve this civil inequity.
3) FAIR TAX - Goodbye to the income tax. Goodbye to the Corporate tax laws. Hello to market freedom and millions of new jobs.
4) He's a straight shooter, and hasn't flip flopped all over the planet like Obama and Romney
5) More EXECUTIVE experience than both of the mainstream candidates combined. Two terms (8 total years) as governor.
6) The two-party system is broken and out of touch with the system. We need more choice in elections. While I acknowledge Johnson ran as Republican both for governor and for the presidency before changing to the Libertarian party, he NEVER ran with the party lines, and always spoke his mind about the difference in opinion between himself and the party.

I could keep going.

Oh, and just because you said not to... DRUGS and WAR!
Click to expand...

He is also vehemently again the NDAA, and would work to repeal it. Few bills have been passed that are as unconstitutional as this one.
 
WinterBorn said:
He is also vehemently again the NDAA, and would work to repeal it. Few bills have been passed that are as unconstitutional as this one.
Click to expand...

It should be interesting to watch Johnson "work to repeal it". How's he going to do that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top