Johnson: The GOP Is a Dying Party. That’s Why I’m Running Against Trump

[RootBeerExplosion]

Hey guys -- I don't have many posts but I used to be here all the time during the 2012 primary (I went by "Toast"). I've been stopping by again more or less daily for the past few months and all I have to say is... Really? Trump? The guy who's only remotely libertarian position is his opposition to the Iraq War -- usually voiced in the same breath as his rabid support for torture, expanding the war against ISIS, enacting trade wars, and ramping up the police state at home.

I hardly recognize the place. Seems pretty misnamed now sadly. Ron would be ashamed of the Trump supporters here.

 

[RJ Liberty]

Hey guys -- I don't have many posts but I used to be here all the time during the 2012 primary (I went by "Toast"). I've been stopping by again more or less daily for the past few months and all I have to say is... Really? Trump? The guy who's only remotely libertarian position is his opposition to the Iraq War -- usually voiced in the same breath as his rabid support for torture, expanding the war against ISIS, enacting trade wars, and ramping up the police state at home.

I hardly recognize the place. Seems pretty misnamed now sadly. Ron would be ashamed of the Trump supporters here.

Thank you. Anyone purporting to support Trump in the name of "liberty" is either conning him/herself or is just dishonest. Above, I gave a rather extensive list of Gary's liberty positions. After months of requests, I'm still waiting for a list of Trump's liberty positions. Crickets.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Anyone purporting to support Trump in the name of "liberty" is either conning him/herself or is just dishonest.

And what is your view on those who want to force someone to do something they don't want to do by aiming the barrel of a government gun at them in the name of Liberty, like your boy Johnson is running on? What do we call those guys? True to Liberty, honest injuns?

I call them traitors.

 

[Anti-Neocon]

The sad thing is that non-libertarian Trump has a bolder platform than Johnson, when it should be the other way around.

Yeah, "bold" on destroying our Constitutional protections listed in the Bill of Rights.

When did I ever claim I decided which direction to vote based on "boldness"? This isn't Herman Cain Forums.

Very bold...

 

[RJ Liberty]

I believe I mentioned about 50 of Johnson's positions, above, that I support. If you scroll up, you'll see them.

 

[Natural Citizen]

I believe I mentioned about 50 of Johnson's positions, above, that I support. If you scroll up, you'll see them.

You still haven't acknowledged my 1. Why? It's a rather important one. It's fundamental.

Do you approve of Gary Johnson's acknowledgment that, yes, his position is that he would force X to provide Y for Z at the barrel of a government gun? Yes or no? Fitty fitty shot here, man. Do you have the courage to answer the question? If not, then, it's okay. I don't blame you. And I'll not think the lesser of you for it. But if you do, then, I'd suggest that you really, really, really think it through before answering given that you've been arguing against others from a position of Liberty.

 

[RJ Liberty]

Yeah, "bold" on destroying our Constitutional protections listed in the Bill of Rights.

When did I ever claim I decided which direction to vote based on "boldness"? This isn't Herman Cain Forums.

Very bold...

Yep. Being "bold" is in no way a liberty position.

 

[RJ Liberty]

That is totally preposterous. He had an interview on Joe Rogan a few months ago that lasted about 3 hours, and I pretty much agreed with everything he said. For 3 hours. Certainly there were some un-said things and there are some issues I break away from him on, but he is a libertarian who believes in low taxes and small government. He is against the bailouts and quantitative easing and all of Obama's wars, including the war on drugs which is horribly damaging to our country domestically. To say he is worse than Obama is completely ridiculous.

It is ridiculous, but Euphemia is in the Trumpster Dumpster. She's even started campaigning for Melania, talking about how "gracious" and beautiful Melania was during her ripped-off speech.

 

[puppetmaster]

I trust Johnson as much as I trust trump......very little. Both are more trustworthy than hillary

 

[RootBeerExplosion]

You still haven't acknowledged my 1. Why? It's a rather important one. It's fundamental. Do you approve of his position of forcing X to provide Y for Z at the barrel of a government gun ? Yes or no? Fitty fitty shot here, man. Do you have the courage to answer the question?

Of course Johnson was wrong on the cake issue, and I agree -- freedom of association is important. Johnson will not become president, however, and disallowing businesses to discriminate based on race/sexual orientation/etc. is simply something most people believe in nowadays, unfortunately. That will not change soon, and making an issue out of that would be pointless. As r3volution 3.0 said above, Gary's just a vehicle. He can and is attracting people to libertarianism, as imperfect a libertarian as he is.

Do I wish someone like Ron Paul was the LP nominee instead? Definitely. But what I would like doesn't really matter. Trump will neither grow libertarianism nor shrink the government. The people on here falling for his BS are naive fools.

 

[P3ter_Griffin]

Why not start a poll on the matter Natural? Maybe you'd be surprised by the results. I've seen it happen quite a few times where someone comes back from a long break from RPF... having been debating people on FaceBook or whatever, and they completely misjudge the dedication for liberty among the RPFers (Trumpsters/Alt-right aside.. and even some of them). This ain't some leftist libertarian site... if you need to be told such.

 

[RootBeerExplosion]

Yep. Being "bold" is in no way a liberty position.

what you dont support trump u cuck /s

 

[Natural Citizen]

Why not start a poll on the matter Natural?

Because I'm hands-on. I like debating the old fashioned way. Man-to-Man. It's more respectable.

This ain't some leftist libertarian site... if you need to be told such.

We have a candidate being openly promoted on a site which prides its mission on promoting the principles of Individual Liberty and the candidate openly states that he would force X to provide Y for Z at the barrel of a government gun. And he'd do so under the banner of Liberty. That's a fundamental naw naw. A major one.

Respectfully, I don't need to be told anything of the sort. The circumstance, however, speaks for itself.

 

[RJ Liberty]

what you dont support trump u cuck /s

Haha!

 

[P3ter_Griffin]

Because I'm hands-on. I like debating the old fashioned way. Man-to-Man. It's more respectable.



We have a candidate being promoted who openly states that he would force X to provide Y for Z at the barrel of a government gun. And under the banner of Liberty.

Respectfully, I don't need to be told anything of the sort. The action speaks for itself.

Alright, so you guys are in agreement about the principles of liberty but you disagree on how to proceed forward. It seems like the constructive thing to do would be discussing how best to proceed forward. And with all due respect, 'your plan sucks' is not constructive.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Alright, so you guys are in agreement about the principles of liberty but you disagree on how to proceed forward. It seems like the constructive thing to do would be discussing how best to proceed forward. And with all due respect, 'your plan sucks' is not constructive.

Well, I don't know that we're in agreement or not in terms of that fundamental principle. That's why I keep popping my mouth off about it.

If we're going to make our case for something on the back of Liberty, then, there must be realistic agreement on Liberty's fundamental principles. Which is that it isn't libertarian at all to force X to provide Y for Z at the barrel of a government gun and if one does force X to provide Y for Z at the barrel of a government gun, then, liberty cannot and will not be had at all.

If we can get that out of the way, then, we can wing it in an honest way. I detest deception, P3ter_Griffin. It leads to coercion.

 

[RootBeerExplosion]

Alright, so you guys are in agreement about the principles of liberty but you disagree on how to proceed forward. It seems like the constructive thing to do would be discussing how best to proceed forward. And with all due respect, 'your plan sucks' is not constructive.

Aye.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Aye.

Respectfully, you aren't "you guys." You just came into this discussion.

Noted, though, that you do agree that his position is wrong. Thanks.

 

[P3ter_Griffin]

Well, I don't know that we're in agreement or not in terms of that fundamental principle. That's why I keep popping my mouth off about it.

I doubt you could find 100% consensus anywhere, but I do believe this forum is as close as your gonna get. If I may suggest, approach it in a manner that is not an attack on Gary Johnson.

Time spent doubting each others dedication to liberty is time spent not addressing how best to achieve it! It tends to lower the level of discussion where the basics are discussed rather than solutions.

 

[Natural Citizen]

I doubt you could find 100% consensus anywhere, but I do believe this forum is as close as your gonna get. If I may suggest, approach it in a manner that is not an attack on Gary Johnson.

Time spent doubting each others dedication to liberty is time spent not addressing how best to achieve it! It tends to lower the level of discussion where the basics are discussed rather than solutions.

Respectfully, I don't consider promoting a candidate whose position, by his own admission, is contrary to the foundation for the very principles of Individual Liberty itself to be a dedication to Liberty. I see it as patently opposite of acceptable dedication to Liberty. And I will attack it vigorously every time I see. To ignore it would be a disservice to the cause of Liberty itself. The basics are what need to be realized again. Because if we lose sight of the basics, then, we lose our power to defend the principles of Liberty itself. Johnson's position is a patent demonstration that he has lost sight of the basics. In fact, I don't personally subcribe to the notion that he ever possessed them in the first place. His admitted position is one that is most dangerous to the cause of liberty because his position is contrary to its fundamental principles and his position empowers Liberty's most dangerous aggressor. Men with guns sent from the government to force X to provide Y for Z against his will.