Gary Johnson 2016 over the hillaries(hillary/trump)!!Spread the websites far and wide

[speciallyblend]

These 2 sites are cross linked if any media wants to interview site creator please im me. thank you kenny, GARY JOHNSON over the hillaries(hillary and trump(hillary with a phallus)) www.hitlary.com and www.trumphoon.com feel free to main page this and sites mods? if you like, We need to defeat trump and hillary or we will all need lots of lube as they F US!! GARY JOHNSON 2016 the only option unless you love big government loving authoritarians!!

 

[William Tell]

 

[speciallyblend]

non issue when compared to forced extortion healthcare, spying on americans and failed foreign policy so bake the f in cake or don't open. if that is your issue then yeah i can deal with that. bigger issues then baking a cake Gary johnson over authoritarians like trump/hillary . if you want perfection then you run or ask jesus to. I'll bake the nazi cake if you won't i guess i will vote for trump or hillary now since you have to bake a cake/s so baking a cake is a deal breaker eh? i can find a long list of better deal breakers with liars like trump or hillary both liberals. Gary Johnson over the hillaries(trump/hillary)

 

[LibertyEagle]

 

[dannno]

I agree the cake baking thing is kind of a minor issue - in principle is a pretty important issue but he doesn't want to make things worse, he is just going with the status quo of businesses serving people without discriminating based on race, religion, sexual orientation, etc.. I agree with GJ it is currently a "black hole" issue that would likely lose the election for a candidate.

The two big issues are his stances on the TPP and also that Hillary is innocent or whatever.. oh, and I don't think he is very good on immigration considering that it is currently a highly subsidized government program.

But he is very libertarian on about 90% of the issues. I will still probably vote for him. I would rather have a libertarian who is a little bit of a globalist than an authoritarian leaning nationalist.. although I think we may be better off with Trump than Hillary, I'm not 100% certain on that, but there is good reason to think he would be.

Nationalism may be preferable to socialism, nationalism is a reaction to all of the forced and subsidized multi-culturalism that is having a lot of negative impacts on western society. But nationalism is not optimal, it's not a solution, more like self defense.

 

[Working Poor]

I wish Ron's people would get solidly behind Johnson. We might be able to make a difference if we did. There is no way Trump or Hillary is going to be good.

 

[Thor]

I like these 2 sites... nice how they show the flaws of each candidate and lead into a better choice.... Johnson might not be a perfect Libertarian, and might not be better than Dr Paul, but he is the best shot we got at changes we want. Finally.

And if enough people out there hate both Hitlary and Trumphoon (and there are a BUNCH who hate BOTH) we might actually stand a chance of winning. (Yes, got to poll a little higher and got to get into the debates. No debates, no chance.) But we can't be internally divided over cake baking and stupid stuff like that.

Need to share these sites....

 

[Natural Citizen]

...in principle is a pretty important issue...

Yep. To ignore that particular issue is akin to acting contradictory of the primary fundamental principle of Individual Liberty itself.

 

[Natural Citizen]

non issue when compared to forced extortion healthcare, spying on americans and failed foreign policy so bake the f in cake or don't open.

You're patently wrong about that. And it's a reckless assessment in scope.

While I agree with you that the issues you've provided for comparison are critical, they are not beyond the critical scope of the former. Not today. Not tomorrow. Not any day.

 

[Suzanimal]

I wish Ron's people would get solidly behind Johnson. We might be able to make a difference if we did. There is no way Trump or Hillary is going to be good.

I wish the LP would nominate a candidate I could feel good about voting for....

 

[Thor]

Yep. To ignore that particular issue is akin to acting contradictory of the primary fundamental principle of Individual Liberty itself.

You're patently wrong about that.

So it is much better to say "He is not good enough. So we will continue to bitch and moan and let Hitlary or Trumphoon get elected because Gary is just not pure enough." SMFH

Here in lies the idiocy of most libertarians. It has got to be 100% pure, or we will pout.

Here is a better idea, let's get a quasi-libertarian elected this time, so next time, a more pure libertarian has a fucking chance after America has warmed up to the idea a little....

 

[Thor]

I wish the LP would nominate a candidate I could feel good about voting for....

I agree... however, we need to expose Americans slowly, and 2, 2 terms REPUBLICAN Governors are a good stepping stone.

let's get a quasi-libertarian elected this time, so next time, a more pure libertarian has a $#@!ing chance after America has warmed up to the idea a little....

 

[Natural Citizen]

So it is much better to say "He is not good enough. So we will continue to bitch and moan and let Hitlary or Trumphoon get elected because Gary is just not pure enough." SMFH

Here in lies the idiocy of most libertarians. It has got to be 100% pure, or we will pout.

Here is a better idea, let's get a quasi-libertarian elected this time, so next time, a more pure libertarian has a $#@!ing chance after America has warmed up to the idea a little....

I'm not talking about elections. I'm talking about the fundamental principle of American philosophy. Specifically, the foundation of its moral code. To minimize the terms of controversy to "bake my cake" and proceed to push that issue aside is to ignore the relevance of the primary fundamental principle of Individual Liberty itself.

The issues that the op placed into comparison with it in order to minimize it are essentially nothing more than products of ignorance to it.

 

[Thor]

I'm not talking about elections. I'm talking about the fundamental principle of American philosophy. Specifically, the foundation of its moral code.

The issues that the op placed into comparison with it in order to minimize it are essentially nothing more than products of ignorance to it.

It is unfortunately a process to convert most Americans to what we recognize. And while Johnson is not perfect, he is a good stepping stone. It is either that, or still continuing to complain. I liked McAfee better, but Johnson is a good bridge and has a better chance to make a change in our direction. So I agree with the OP. who cares about baking a cake. It is one issue that some of us see as a flaw, but if he can win the hearts of millions to advance the overall goal, I am willing to run with it.

 

[Natural Citizen]

It is unfortunately a process to convert most Americans to what we recognize. And while Johnson is not perfect, he is a good stepping stone. It is either that, or still continuing to complain. I liked McAfee better, but Johnson is a good bridge and has a better chance to make a change in our direction. So I agree with the OP. who cares about baking a cake. It is one issue that some of us see as a flaw, but if he can win the hearts of millions to advance the overall goal, I am willing to run with it.

Yeah, like I said, I'm not reserving focus on the election cycle. And my interest in the thread was specific to what was minimized. I think the best course, in scope, is to go back to nuts and bolts and get on the same page there. The election can't and won't drive practical terms of controversy now. The only fruit it's providing is divide and conquer. Look around.

So, then, principle and philosophy. That's where I'm at. And likely where I'll focus most of my energy if I salvage the patience to remain around here.

But to minimize the particular issue that was brought into question is a big deal. That's the big one. Again, it's the primary fundamental principle. That's a no no of the highest law.

 

[P3ter_Griffin]

I'm not talking about elections. I'm talking about the fundamental principle of American philosophy. Specifically, the foundation of its moral code. To minimize the terms of controversy to "bake my cake" and proceed to push that issue aside is to ignore the relevance of the primary fundamental principle of Individual Liberty itself.

The issues that the op placed into comparison with it in order to minimize it are essentially nothing more than products of ignorance to it.

'American philosophy'.... gtfo. A philosophy is either true or it is not. And for the fundamental moral principle of your philosophy being God, every single one of your 'quotes that support the principle' was a quote from a fallible individual. Quit puffin your chest, boy.

 

[Thor]

Yeah, like I said, I'm not reserving focus on the election cycle. And my interest in the thread was specific to what was minimized. I think the best course, in scope, is to go back to nuts and bolts and get on the same page there. The election can't and won't drive practical terms of controversy now. The only fruit it's providing is divide and conquer. Look around.

So, then, principle and philosophy. That's where I'm at. And likely where I'll focus most of my energy if I salvage the patience to remain around here.

But to minimize the particular issue that was brought into question is a big deal. That's the big one. Again, it's the primary fundamental principle. That's a no no of the highest law.

I agree, and disagree. I think the election cycle can give a lot of exposure and bring in a lot of new eyeballs. So both are important. And I am willing to bypass some principle to win eyeballs to bring more people over, and then sharpen principle. Because the principle first approach has been tried since 1971, and here we sit...

 

[Natural Citizen]

'American philosophy'.... gtfo. A philosophy is either true or it is not. And for the fundamental moral principle of your philosophy being God, every single one of your 'quotes that support the principle' was a quote from a fallible individual. Quit puffin your chest, boy.

One time I'll let you do that. Once.

 

[Natural Citizen]

I agree, and disagree. I think the election cycle can give a lot of exposure and bring in a lot of new eyeballs. So both are important. And I am willing to bypass some principle to win eyeballs to bring more people over, and then sharpen principle. Because the principle first approach has been tried since 1971, and here we sit...

Yeah, I know. Just need to go about it the right way, though. We're too fragmented.

 

[P3ter_Griffin]

One time I'll let you do that. Once.

Is that because the founders told you to give me one chance, or Him? hahahaha