Gary Johnson

[Cheyenne]

I'm convinced that American voters do not just expect to be lied to, they insist on it.

I noticed something about very sucessfull real estate seller's agents versus buyer's agents. People were more likely to give the listing to the smarmy, used-car, salesman type. I think they assume the crooked one will magically get them more money. Buyer's agents came across as genuine and sincere. Buyer's agents tend to starve.

I think you are correct.

 

[toubab]

I'm convinced that American voters do not just expect to be lied to, they insist on it.

I noticed something about very sucessfull real estate seller's agents versus buyer's agents. People were more likely to give the listing to the smarmy, used-car, salesman type. I think they assume the crooked one will magically get them more money. Buyer's agents came across as genuine and sincere. Buyer's agents tend to starve.

When people need to hire a lawyer, especially a criminal lawyer or a divorce lawyer, they want the meanest, crookedest son of a bitch available on their side, not on the other party's side. They don't choose Mr. or Mrs. Nice Guy, who couldn't tell a lie to save a life, to represent them. They want to win, no matter what it takes. That's where we are in this election. At least that's where the Democrats are. And they will win, unless the Republicans, many of them, stop bemoaning the fact Mr. Nice Guy isn't available to represent them, and start thinking about winning, whatever it takes.

 

[patient1]

One of the PACS supporting Johnson has come out with a new ad aimed at those who are voting against Clinton or Trump rather than for them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLAh3pui-CI&feature=youtu.be

 

[PeteHulbert37]

One of the PACS supporting Johnson has come out with a new ad aimed at those who are voting against Clinton or Trump rather than for them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLAh3pui-CI&feature=youtu.be

I saw that. I think it was done very well!

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Yes, I saw the ad too!

Nicely done. Maybe he can still make that debate threshold.

 

[patient1]

Yes, I saw the ad too!

Nicely done. Maybe he can still make that debate threshold.

I certainly hope so. I met him once. He's the most unpretentious and sincere politician I've ever met.

The trouble with the debate qualification is multifold. 1) Once they announced the polls to be included in the official average, those polls stopped polling. 2) The polls don't include him in the first question as a multiple choice among Clinton, Trump and Stein. It's a simple Clinton or Trump. You have to insist 2 or 3 times "Johnson" to be recorded as such, rather than "other". 3) Likewise, the news networks which sponsor the official national polls don't report the Johnson % on their broadcasts, as if he were an equally valid choice.

All of that said, with legal pressure challenging the tax status of the Commission on Presidential debates as being bi-partisan, rather than non-partisan, and some other polls which indicate a 2/3rds majority would like to see him included, there could be an accommodation.

As Gary posted today-

"What if Democrats believed in democracy? What if Republicans believed in competition?

Then they would join the 76% of Americans who want a third voice in the debates."
https://www.facebook.com/govgaryjohnson/videos/10153318561859364/

For that matter, I could see Trump daring Hillary to let Johnson and Stein on the stage with similar words.

 

[neci]

i would love to have gary johnson in the debates. the addition of jill stein's voice would be perfect for a well rounded discussion of issues facing americans today.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I certainly hope so. I met him once. He's the most unpretentious and sincere politician I've ever met.

The trouble with the debate qualification is multifold. 1) Once they announced the polls to be included in the official average, those polls stopped polling. 2) The polls don't include him in the first question as a multiple choice among Clinton, Trump and Stein. It's a simple Clinton or Trump. You have to insist 2 or 3 times "Johnson" to be recorded as such, rather than "other". 3) Likewise, the news networks which sponsor the official national polls don't report the Johnson % on their broadcasts, as if he were an equally valid choice.

All of that said, with legal pressure challenging the tax status of the Commission on Presidential debates as being bi-partisan, rather than non-partisan, and some other polls which indicate a 2/3rds majority would like to see him included, there could be an accommodation.

As Gary posted today-

"What if Democrats believed in democracy? What if Republicans believed in competition?

Then they would join the 76% of Americans who want a third voice in the debates."
https://www.facebook.com/govgaryjohnson/videos/10153318561859364/

For that matter, I could see Trump daring Hillary to let Johnson and Stein on the stage with similar words.

If they thought that BIG Johnson would take more votes from Trump than from Hillary, imho, you would be seeing some significant, Perot-like, coverage, but they want the pot-head anti-war vote to stay in the Hillary camp...

Bill likes following the smoke trails.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

i would love to have gary johnson in the debates. the addition of jill stein's voice would be perfect for a well rounded discussion of issues facing americans today.

She's not ready for the big time. She just flew to the wrong city for a rally...

 

[patient1]

If they thought that BIG Johnson would take more votes from Trump than from Hillary, imho, you would be seeing some significant, Perot-like, coverage, but they want the pot-head anti-war vote to stay in the Hillary camp...

You are probably right about that.

I know the journalists have their biases. It's hard to be informed and not have an opinion. I sort of hoped most would have enough professional integrity to keep their thumbs off of the scale. That they would have believed that with enough information the majority of voters would reach the same conclusions, and that if they haven't it's due to a lack of information and analysis on the part of the press.

Some such as the Chicago Tribune and Richmond Post-Dispatch seem to think that the choice between Unethical and Unqualified is Unacceptable, and have endorsed Johnson even though they are in Democratic states.

But we are taking about the same Democratic Party which was revealed by WikiLeaks to have it's thumb on the scale in it's own primaries, and colluding illegally with the Washington Post. As it happens The ABC/Washington Post poll a month ago is the outlier at 8% in the debate qualifying polls, and it stopped polling since then. Without them the average would be 10.75% with an average margin of error of 3.5%. Pretty close if the polls would start polling again. Johnson's recent growth is in Millennials, the largest generation, and they are more costly to poll because they don't have land lines.

But, I'll reserve final judgement until we see if Johnson is included or excluded from the debates.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I'm telling you, in the past, they have at least tried to maintain a facade of impartiality, even though we know that was not true (Candy Crowley) but in this election cycle, some of them have been so horrified by the success of an outsider who will actually call them out and punish them for their behavior. they have openly taken sides writing that as offensive as he is to them, how can they cover him objectively...

This movement (towards what I believe is the drive to one-party rule and the end of the messy business of politics and actually trying to reason with the people whom they think have no business in voting, because they are stupid) has been gaining momentum ever since FOX news rose up in the ratings by being a slightly-right counter to their slightly-left bias. That seemed to, if not give it a green light, at least give an amber light to open advocacy reporting.

 

[NOIRTRASH]

If they thought that BIG Johnson would take more votes from Trump than from Hillary, imho, you would be seeing some significant, Perot-like, coverage, but they want the pot-head anti-war vote to stay in the Hillary camp...

Bill likes following the smoke trails.

Johnson and Stine draw votes from Hillary.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Johnson and Stine draw votes from Hillary.

I think they do.

If you cannot vote for the Chicago criminal enterprise and you cannot vote for Trump, then you have few choices...

 

[RobDownSouth]

So much Gary Johnson self-delusion in this thread.

Shakin' mah head.

 

[Conager]

i would love to have gary johnson in the debates. the addition of jill stein's voice would be perfect for a well rounded discussion of issues facing americans today.

If there ever was a year to expose the ridiculous premise of don't vote for Kronos this is it. I see very few bumper stickers this season; the only bumper stickers i've been seeing have Hillary on them with anti-hillary sayings. I just saw one that said life's a bitch don't vote for one with an unflattering Hillary picture on it. That's hardly a ringing endorsement of trump.

If third party candidates really and truly cannot be elected, then what's the harm in including them in debates? If they're going to raise issues- both candidates should be willing to address whatever issues third-party candidates raise and their ideas should triumph if their ideas are superior.

 

[patient1]

If third party candidates really and truly cannot be elected, then what's the harm in including them in debates? If they're going to raise issues- both candidates should be willing to address whatever issues third-party candidates raise and their ideas should triumph if their ideas are superior.

Well spoken!

 

[toubab]

If there ever was a year to expose the ridiculous premise of don't vote for Kronos this is it. I see very few bumper stickers this season; the only bumper stickers i've been seeing have Hillary on them with anti-hillary sayings. I just saw one that said life's a bitch don't vote for one with an unflattering Hillary picture on it. That's hardly a ringing endorsement of trump.

If third party candidates really and truly cannot be elected, then what's the harm in including them in debates? If they're going to raise issues- both candidates should be willing to address whatever issues third-party candidates raise and their ideas should triumph if their ideas are superior.

The harm, as I'm sure you know, is they might get people to use their brains instead of automatically voting D or R.

 

[patient1]

All of that said, with legal pressure challenging the tax status of the Commission on Presidential debates as being bi-partisan, rather than non-partisan, and some other polls which indicate a 2/3rds majority would like to see him included, there could be an accommodation.

As Gary posted today-

"What if Democrats believed in democracy? What if Republicans believed in competition?

Then they would join the 76% of Americans who want a third voice in the debates."
https://www.facebook.com/govgaryjohnson/videos/10153318561859364/

For that matter, I could see Trump daring Hillary to let Johnson and Stein on the stage with similar words.

i would love to have gary johnson in the debates. the addition of jill stein's voice would be perfect for a well rounded discussion of issues facing americans today.

Maybe my prediction is coming true sooner than I thought! The source has released rumors that didn't come to pass before. I am seeking confirmation.

http://www.smobserved.com/story/201...-johnson-not-allowed-to-participate/1894.html

"Donald Trump Will Not Debate Hillary, if Gary Johnson not Allowed to Participate

In what is no doubt a brilliant tactical step, the Donald goes for broke and holds out for the participation of Johnson

The Donald Trump for President 2016 campaign has announced that it will pull out of the September 26 schedule debate between democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton and Republican nominee Trump, unless third-party candidates Gary Johnson and Jill Stein are also allowed to participate.

This is a tactical move believed by most analysis to help Trump because the third-party candidates seem to pull more from Clinton's support then they do from trumps.

The requirement that presidential candidates average at least 15 percent support in national polls in order to participate in the presidential election debate stage is “probably too high,” Sen. Bernie Sanders said Sunday morning."

The article continues with background and analysis. I really think this is Jill's only chance this year.

 

[toubab]

Maybe my prediction is coming true sooner than I thought! The source has released rumors that didn't come to pass before. I am seeking confirmation.

http://www.smobserved.com/story/201...-johnson-not-allowed-to-participate/1894.html

"Donald Trump Will Not Debate Hillary, if Gary Johnson not Allowed to Participate

In what is no doubt a brilliant tactical step, the Donald goes for broke and holds out for the participation of Johnson

The Donald Trump for President 2016 campaign has announced that it will pull out of the September 26 schedule debate between democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton and Republican nominee Trump, unless third-party candidates Gary Johnson and Jill Stein are also allowed to participate.

This is a tactical move believed by most analysis to help Trump because the third-party candidates seem to pull more from Clinton's support then they do from trumps.

The requirement that presidential candidates average at least 15 percent support in national polls in order to participate in the presidential election debate stage is “probably too high,” Sen. Bernie Sanders said Sunday morning."

The article continues with background and analysis. I really think this is Jill's only chance this year.

Even if Trump is considering such a thing, which wouldn't surprise me, I'm absolutely certain the RNC will put tremendous pressure on him to get in line and drop the idea. There's no way Hillary or the DNC would even consider it for a second, of course.

We have a carefully constructed political duopoly in this country that has been in place for a very long time. Both the RNC and the DNC will do everything in their power to keep it that way.

 

[underguy1]

Bring back the League of Women Voters to run the debates. I say.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/League_of_Women_Voters

 

[toubab]

Bring back the League of Women Voters to run the debates. I say.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/League_of_Women_Voters

Wikipedia: "The League sponsored the United States presidential election debates in 1976, 1980 and 1984. On October 2, 1988, the LWV's 14 trustees voted unanimously to pull out of the debates, and on October 3 they issued a press release condemning the demands of the major candidates' campaigns. LWV President Nancy Neuman said that the debate format would "perpetrate a fraud on the American voter" and that the organization did not intend to "become an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American public.""

 

[underguy1]

Wikipedia: "The League sponsored the United States presidential election debates in 1976, 1980 and 1984. On October 2, 1988, the LWV's 14 trustees voted unanimously to pull out of the debates, and on October 3 they issued a press release condemning the demands of the major candidates' campaigns. LWV President Nancy Neuman said that the debate format would "perpetrate a fraud on the American voter" and that the organization did not intend to "become an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American public.""

Exactly.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Even if Trump is considering such a thing, which wouldn't surprise me, I'm absolutely certain the RNC will put tremendous pressure on him to get in line and drop the idea. There's no way Hillary or the DNC would even consider it for a second, of course.

We have a carefully constructed political duopoly in this country that has been in place for a very long time. Both the RNC and the DNC will do everything in their power to keep it that way.

No, if the RNC truly wants to win, they would back their candidate's play and start chirping loud and long...,

What's Hillary afraid of? A Libertarian? Someone who will take votes from us? We're not afraid to take him on!

How's she going to take on Putin and Xi?

She didn't even go to Mexico!

Our ally!!!

 

[PeteHulbert37]

If there ever was a year to expose the ridiculous premise of don't vote for Kronos this is it. I see very few bumper stickers this season; the only bumper stickers i've been seeing have Hillary on them with anti-hillary sayings. I just saw one that said life's a bitch don't vote for one with an unflattering Hillary picture on it. That's hardly a ringing endorsement of trump.

If third party candidates really and truly cannot be elected, then what's the harm in including them in debates? If they're going to raise issues- both candidates should be willing to address whatever issues third-party candidates raise and their ideas should triumph if their ideas are superior.

Very well said!

 

[toubab]

No, if the RNC truly wants to win, they would back their candidate's play and start chirping loud and long...,

What's Hillary afraid of? A Libertarian? Someone who will take votes from us? We're not afraid to take him on!

How's she going to take on Putin and Xi?

She didn't even go to Mexico!

Our ally!!!

The goal of maintaining the political duopoly would seem to be paramount to both sides of the duopoly. Much more important than deciding which of its two figurehead candidates wins a particular election. Even a presidential election.