Why Rand Paul Supporters Should Vote for Gary Johnson

LatinsforPaul said:
So you're giving up on your values so that you can feel better in voting for a winner. And when Trump loses, how will you defend your vote then?
Click to expand...
it is most likely a no vote on hillary. I will vote to stop her as well. If Johnson is sitting get where Trump is i would vote Johnson. Still don't like them but like them 10000 times better than hillary
 
puppetmaster said:
it is most likely a no vote on hillary. I will vote to stop her as well. If Johnson is sitting get where Trump is i would vote Johnson. Still don't like them but like them 10000 times better than hillary
Click to expand...

I have no issue with those who want to stop Hillary and therefore will vote for Trump. But to push Trump on this site as if here were a conservative, libertarian, liberty minded, constitutional, paleocon, or even a moderate candidate is simply not true. Trump is a liberal who is just slightly to the right of Hillary. Though I understand where you are coming from by stopping Hillary, I cannot pull the lever for Trump because I strongly feel he would be more of an authoritarian President than Hillary. I am very very afraid of Fuhrer Trump. I will be voting for Gary Johnson even though he does not posses the ideal libertarian beliefs I would like to see in a candidate. He is the Libertarian Party nominee and I would like to see the Libertarian Party grow in numbers this election.
 
LatinsforPaul said:
So you're giving up on your values so that you can feel better in voting for a winner. And when Trump loses, how will you defend your vote then?
Click to expand...
One I was not going to vote. I did not in 2012.

Two I am not giving up any principles I hold. I vote for those that I think are good people. They do not have to agree with me.

Before I even consider voting for someone they have to have a chance of winning. Elections are not always won I know that and will not feel bad if we lose.
 
silverhandorder said:
They do not have to agree with me.

Before I even consider voting for someone they have to have a chance of winning. Elections are not always won I know that and will not feel bad if we lose.
Click to expand...

^This. This is the problem with the American voter.

This thinking is what allows the media to select our politicians. This is the thinking that allows connected politicians to use the media for their benefit. This is what keeps the two-party (see, one party) system in place.
This is the reality we are facing, folks. They've already won.
 
LibertyEagle said:
A political party is not elected to office. A person is and Johnson sucks. Clear now?
Click to expand...

You support Trump, on here, and think Johnson sucks? Your opinion is invalid.

Ender said:
Why do people dislike Johnson? I'm not too familiar with him but do agree on the majority of his positions:

http://www.ontheissues.org/Gary_Johnson.htm

And real answers please- I'm looking to understand- not insults.
Click to expand...

They just like to argue for the sake of argument. There is a large contingent that seemingly wants the LP and liberterians to remain a circle jerk debate society and not become a viable party.
 
This is a sale I can't make to the Rand converts - I've sold folks on Rand, or rather, Rand has sold himself to those folks -I just had to point them to Rand and maybe answer some questions. I could not do "full disclosure" with GJ and expect to make the sale, I'd have to be dishonest.

Please don't force me to make the sales pitch. :toady:
 
If Gary is going to say he's pro-choice, then he has to admit the choice he is for is death by abortion. The baby, then, has no right to life at all. Again, he does not think about the most essential rights. He is looking at government as a grantor of rights, not the protector of rights.

Viability is a very subjective line in the hospital. With all the medical support available these days, many, many babies are being born very early and are living full and healthy lives. Johnson is not a doctor, so it is not up to him to determine whether a child is viable or not, and he is then asking for more government to intrude on that process.

And who pays? If Johnson is truly pro-choice and believes it is the mother's choice, then he also has to say it is the mother's responsibility to pay for whatever she decides to do. It should never fall on a taxpayer, so it should never happen in a county-, state-, or federally funded facility. She can deliver the baby in a public or private facility and put it up for adoption (perhaps at the adoptive parents' expense) or she can abort the baby and pay for it herself. In a private facility. What she cannot do is go into a Planned Parenthood, or any kind of publicly funded facility and ask for termination.

Pregnancy is not a disease. It is a choice that is made when sexual activity takes place. If there is a choice to be made, it should be made on the preventative side, not the termination side.
 
Last edited:
He's not going to appeal to hard-line pro-lifers. I don't like this aspect of him myself. But he may still seem like the better choice this election because he believes it should devolve to the states.

Most notably, the pro choice stance will allow him to steel votes from Hillary.
 
Johnson won't steal votes from Hillary. People who support Hillary have never heard of Gary Johnson.
 
euphemia said:
Johnson won't steal votes from Hillary. People who support Hillary have never heard of Gary Johnson.
Click to expand...

You may wish it weren't so, but polls have already demonstrated that Johnson can take as many or more votes from Hillary as/than he does from trump.

This forum has shown evidence that the very people who are drawn to trump are repulsed by Johnson and vice versa. That's not to say that if you don't like trump you'll like Johnson.

Johnson doesn't cater (get it? cater? as in cakes?) to paleos, socons and alt-rights. He will snatch up moderate liberal and moderate conservative (and many moderate conservatives are considering Hillary) votes to the extent that he gets media exposure.

Johnson knows, because he's been in this game a long time that the people who will most forcefully cut down a libertarian in his tracks are other libertarians. How? By asking stupid litmus test questions in debates designed to make them look like insensitive selfish Ayn Rand caricatures. Johnson has done brilliantly at navigating that minefield without tarnishing his image except among a few cranky and insignificant right-wing idealogues. Now he's onward to the general with a shrewdly chosen VP who's a savvy fundraiser of considerable reputation and name recognition.
 
I don't think it is wrong to expect a candidate for POTUS to be a principled man.
 
euphemia said:
I don't think it is wrong to expect a candidate for POTUS to be a principled man.
Click to expand...

As RP has pointed out, there are principled liberals (maybe Naomi Wolf or Glenn Greenwald at times), there are principled conservatives, there are principled and honest people of every political stripe. I haven't seen anything to indicate that Johnson is in the habit of going against his own principles or misrepresenting himself as something he's not. That's not to say he hasn't on occasion, but he doesn't have the profile of the unprincipled fake. You don't agree with his brand of libertarianism and that's understandable. He has a few principles I don't agree with, but that's about all I can condemn him for. He's also taken on something pretty thankless and has had to withstand a lot of vitriol to do it. He doesn't have a great chance of winning and has had the courage to fight his way to a candidacy that isn't likely to earn him anything tangible except another chalked up election loss.

Contrast this with trump and Hillary - there is nothing principled or genuine about what they're selling to the American people. They're just going for the gold.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Brian4Liberty
Speaker Johnson SLAMMED For Bloated Spending Bill!
Replies
3
Views
5K
Anti Globalist
Anti Globalist
Swordsmyth
Johnson Fires Pro-Ukraine Intel Committee Chairman
Replies
0
Views
155
Swordsmyth
Swordsmyth
Matt Collins
Rand and Booker introduce anti-asset forfeiture bill
Replies
0
Views
817
Matt Collins
Matt Collins
Occam's Banana
NV - court shuts down police abuse of federal loophole for civil forfeiture
Replies
1
Views
2K
oyarde
O
susano
Mike Johnson declares war on conservatives
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
Brian4Liberty
Brian4Liberty
Back
Top