Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Libertarian Thread (Was: Gary Johnson Thread) (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Maurile Tremblay
- Start date
Thank you Fennis. IF ONLY he could get an audience (maybe a debate) and get these numbers out there. Most importantly, IF ONLY people voted their convictions/beliefs and not the two party system.
Most of your single party voters, which seems to be over half of the voting population, are not going to fill out surveys like this.
Random
Footballguy
Candidates you side with...
86%
Ron Paul
on immigration, economic, domestic policy, healthcare, foreign policy, and social issues.
84%
Gary Johnson
on science, economic, domestic policy, healthcare, foreign policy, and social issues.
82%
Jimmy McMillan
on immigration, social, foreign policy, economic, healthcare, and domestic policy issues.
78%
Mitt Romney
on immigration, domestic policy, and economic issues.
64%
Barack Obama
on social and foreign policy issues.
86%
Ron Paul
on immigration, economic, domestic policy, healthcare, foreign policy, and social issues.
84%
Gary Johnson
on science, economic, domestic policy, healthcare, foreign policy, and social issues.
82%
Jimmy McMillan
on immigration, social, foreign policy, economic, healthcare, and domestic policy issues.
78%
Mitt Romney
on immigration, domestic policy, and economic issues.
64%
Barack Obama
on social and foreign policy issues.
joffer
Footballguy
problem is, from what i've seen he's not a great debater
I honestly have only seen him for his "cameo" in the one Republican debate. Based off interviews and TV appearances I have seen, he comes across as engaging and intelligent.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
He flubs and stammers a bit here:
I think he comes across as smug/flippant sometimes but I care more about policy than poetry.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
Cool to see the poll being distributed to those not looking in here.
Maelstrom
Footballguy
Thank you (and Brady Marino and MT) for some very valid points. I am not quite of the opinion that individual votes don't matter, I think (although it may be wrong based on what I'm seeing from the quiz) that most of the votes for a third party would likely come from 1 candidate over the other. Which in turn could influence the election in a close state (say Florida during the Bush-Gore race?)But the argument that getting enough Lib votes in the buckets makes it easier for them to get a stronger foothold next time because of the rules in place is a very strong reason. I have to go learn more about Gary Johnson now.
Brady Marino
Footballguy
Another article - http://reason.com/archives/2012/07/24/why-america-needs-gov-gary-johnson-in-th
Why America Needs Gov. Gary Johnson in the Presidential Debates
Two parties with the same bad ideas don't represent the extent of electoral choices in 2012.
Gene Healy | July 24, 2012
Last fall, GQ ran a profile of former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson, then a candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, under the headline "Is This the Sanest Man Running for President?" The piece noted that in 2003, Johnson scaled Mount Everest with a broken leg, and in 2005, broke his back paragliding off the highest mountain in Maui. "Sanest"? Well, maybe not.
But Johnson, now running on the Libertarian Party ticket, is certainly the most interesting candidate in the 2012 field -- and that's not an attempt to damn with faint praise.
Yesterday morning, I sat down with "Gov. Gary" to talk about what he hopes to achieve in this race.
The American electoral process almost guarantees third-party failure, says "Duverger's Law," coined by the French political scientist who pointed out that "The plurality (1 winner) voting system tends to lead to a two-party system."
But some of the main obstacles that third parties face are artificial, not structural. "The two old parties have gamed the system," Johnson charges. The Presidential Debates Commission, or CPD, the private group that serves as the gatekeeper for the nationally televised debates, imposes an arbitrary barrier of 15 percent support in three national polls before a candidate can be included. That rule, adopted in 2000, would have barred virtually every third-party candidate in American history. The fix is in, it seems.
Still, getting into the debates is one of Johnson's key goals, and he intends to "kick and claw and scrape" until he hits 15 percent or public pressure forces the CPD to lower the bar: "If I'm in the debate, then the world changes," he insists.
What about the "spoiler" charge -- or, as a Twitter follower of mine phrased it, "why does [Johnson] want four more years of Obama?"
He says he gets that a lot: "The implication of the question is that I'm gonna take votes away from all those ... anti-war, pro-gay marriage Republicans that are currently supporting Romney." Johnson admits that his candidacy hurts Romney in North Carolina, but insists, "I take more votes from Obama in New Mexico."
He's right: Last week the Public Policy Polling firm noted: "Interestingly [Johnson] hurts Obama a little bit more than Romney, pulling the President's lead down to 42-38."
Regardless, he adds, "to heck with all that -- you as a voter should vote your conscience," Johnson argued.
"Vote your conscience, not your fears" was a Ralph Nader slogan in 2000, for a Green Party presidential bid that earned Nader the enmity of liberals for allegedly helping deliver the presidency to George W. Bush.
How much you fear "spoiler" scenarios depends on how stark you consider the difference between 2012's major party standard-bearers. On Sunday, I spotted a minivan bumper sticker that read: "Jesus was a 'community organizer.' Pilate was a governor." Pretty stark!
But you could be forgiven if you don't see the difference between the technocrat who pioneered the individual mandate in Massachusetts and the one who took it federal as one of -- ahem -- Biblical proportions.
Meanwhile, Johnson is "the only candidate who doesn't want to bomb Iran. ... the only candidate who wants to repeal the Patriot Act."
And, as he made clear to me, the only candidate who's committed to abolishing specific agencies: the departments of Education and Homeland Security "for starters." As the final, catchall plank in the LP platform puts it, "Our silence about any other particular law, regulation ... [or] agency ... should not be construed to imply approval."
I don't know that "the world changes" if Johnson manages to claw his way into the debates. But the race would start to get interesting. And interesting is one thing that, right now, it's not.
Why America Needs Gov. Gary Johnson in the Presidential Debates
Two parties with the same bad ideas don't represent the extent of electoral choices in 2012.
Gene Healy | July 24, 2012
Last fall, GQ ran a profile of former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson, then a candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, under the headline "Is This the Sanest Man Running for President?" The piece noted that in 2003, Johnson scaled Mount Everest with a broken leg, and in 2005, broke his back paragliding off the highest mountain in Maui. "Sanest"? Well, maybe not.
But Johnson, now running on the Libertarian Party ticket, is certainly the most interesting candidate in the 2012 field -- and that's not an attempt to damn with faint praise.
Yesterday morning, I sat down with "Gov. Gary" to talk about what he hopes to achieve in this race.
The American electoral process almost guarantees third-party failure, says "Duverger's Law," coined by the French political scientist who pointed out that "The plurality (1 winner) voting system tends to lead to a two-party system."
But some of the main obstacles that third parties face are artificial, not structural. "The two old parties have gamed the system," Johnson charges. The Presidential Debates Commission, or CPD, the private group that serves as the gatekeeper for the nationally televised debates, imposes an arbitrary barrier of 15 percent support in three national polls before a candidate can be included. That rule, adopted in 2000, would have barred virtually every third-party candidate in American history. The fix is in, it seems.
Still, getting into the debates is one of Johnson's key goals, and he intends to "kick and claw and scrape" until he hits 15 percent or public pressure forces the CPD to lower the bar: "If I'm in the debate, then the world changes," he insists.
What about the "spoiler" charge -- or, as a Twitter follower of mine phrased it, "why does [Johnson] want four more years of Obama?"
He says he gets that a lot: "The implication of the question is that I'm gonna take votes away from all those ... anti-war, pro-gay marriage Republicans that are currently supporting Romney." Johnson admits that his candidacy hurts Romney in North Carolina, but insists, "I take more votes from Obama in New Mexico."
He's right: Last week the Public Policy Polling firm noted: "Interestingly [Johnson] hurts Obama a little bit more than Romney, pulling the President's lead down to 42-38."
Regardless, he adds, "to heck with all that -- you as a voter should vote your conscience," Johnson argued.
"Vote your conscience, not your fears" was a Ralph Nader slogan in 2000, for a Green Party presidential bid that earned Nader the enmity of liberals for allegedly helping deliver the presidency to George W. Bush.
How much you fear "spoiler" scenarios depends on how stark you consider the difference between 2012's major party standard-bearers. On Sunday, I spotted a minivan bumper sticker that read: "Jesus was a 'community organizer.' Pilate was a governor." Pretty stark!
But you could be forgiven if you don't see the difference between the technocrat who pioneered the individual mandate in Massachusetts and the one who took it federal as one of -- ahem -- Biblical proportions.
Meanwhile, Johnson is "the only candidate who doesn't want to bomb Iran. ... the only candidate who wants to repeal the Patriot Act."
And, as he made clear to me, the only candidate who's committed to abolishing specific agencies: the departments of Education and Homeland Security "for starters." As the final, catchall plank in the LP platform puts it, "Our silence about any other particular law, regulation ... [or] agency ... should not be construed to imply approval."
I don't know that "the world changes" if Johnson manages to claw his way into the debates. But the race would start to get interesting. And interesting is one thing that, right now, it's not.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
These 2 issues are very important to me and are actually things the President has some real control of. Cutting spending is another area that I like Gary Johnson on, with the understanding that he only has so much influence on making that happen.
I think a President's ability to cut federal spending is similar to a governor's ability to cut state spending. As governor of New Mexico, Johnson turned a budget deficit into a billion dollar surplus without raising taxes. The veto is a powerful tool to control spending.
Last edited by a moderator:
Biabreakable
Footballguy
I do think the budget and the debt are the most important issues in this election cycle. (really always but especially now) I also think Gary Johnson is the best candidate to vote for concerning these issues. That is why he will get my vote over Jill Stein. However Gary Johnson will not have a line item veto as President like he did as Governor. Congress still controls the purse strings so he will have to compromise at times to get legislation passed. I am optimistic that this would lead to some real progress and savings should Gary Johnson be elected. The more support he gets the more his ideas will gain influence even if not elected. Several of Ross Perot's ideas gained traction on both sides of the aisle following the 1992 election before being swept under the rug. We need more of that happening in our politics.
Drunken Cowboy
Footballguy
Cutting the New Mexico budget doesn't have the same effect on the world economy.
ren hoek
Footballguy
Well, nothing too shocking here.
http://www.isidewith.com/results/36594133
A lot of the questions in this assume that you prefer the existence of government at all, which I can't really do much about.
http://www.isidewith.com/results/36594133
A lot of the questions in this assume that you prefer the existence of government at all, which I can't really do much about.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
I noticed this option from the poll yesterday that I didn't see before.
What would this do?
What would this do?
Fennis
Footballguy
http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/91224/ron-paul-debt-ceiling-federal-reserveI noticed this option from the poll yesterday that I didn't see before.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
Very interesting. Thanks for the link.http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/91224/ron-paul-debt-ceiling-federal-reserveI noticed this option from the poll yesterday that I didn't see before.
FavreCo
Footballguy
Most of them can't read. They just ask some other cromagnon who is running in the party they were told to join.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
I get spammed all kinds of stuff from Newsmax too. Hows ur prostate doing? I wish I could get an email from Gary Johnson.'urbanhack said:He sure is buying email lists and spamming. I've now gotten 4 different emails from his campaign in the past 2 weeks. I've unsubscribed every time, yet I still get the emails.
Amused to Death
Footballguy
Stop unsubscribing. You're just proving your email is live. Live email addys get sold for a lot more money for the spammers. Never unsub from spam mail.'urbanhack said:He sure is buying email lists and spamming. I've now gotten 4 different emails from his campaign in the past 2 weeks. I've unsubscribed every time, yet I still get the emails.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2012/07/23/gary-johnson-could-appear-in-presidential-debatesThis would at least be more interesting than Moneybot vs Obama.
Dr. Awesome
Footballguy
He won't meet the 15% threshold. If he somehow meets the 15% criteria they'll merely change the requirements.Did you hear this in 1991?Stop unsubscribing. You're just proving your email is live. Live email addys get sold for a lot more money for the spammers. Never unsub from spam mail.He sure is buying email lists and spamming. I've now gotten 4 different emails from his campaign in the past 2 weeks. I've unsubscribed every time, yet I still get the emails.
Amused to Death
Footballguy
And yet the guy says he keeps unsubbing and getting moreDid you hear this in 1991?Stop unsubscribing. You're just proving your email is live. Live email addys get sold for a lot more money for the spammers. Never unsub from spam mail.He sure is buying email lists and spamming. I've now gotten 4 different emails from his campaign in the past 2 weeks. I've unsubscribed every time, yet I still get the emails.
Thanks for the reply though.
Maelstrom
Footballguy
If it is truly spam, then that may be true. Any legitimate newsletter you subscribe to will be following the LAW (Can-Spam ACT), and removing your email from their list appropriately. Considering the amount of publicity around political campaigns, I find it hard to believe that they would not do everything they can to abide by the law. That being said, unsubscribe forms are notoriously poorly maintained, and frequently don't work for technical reasons.And yet the guy says he keeps unsubbing and getting moreDid you hear this in 1991?Stop unsubscribing. You're just proving your email is live. Live email addys get sold for a lot more money for the spammers. Never unsub from spam mail.He sure is buying email lists and spamming. I've now gotten 4 different emails from his campaign in the past 2 weeks. I've unsubscribed every time, yet I still get the emails.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
I noticed there is a petition going around that is being sent to both parties requesting that Gary Johnson and Jill Stein be included in the debates. I signed it and shared with friends. The article I linked was referring to this and I am hopeful that the weight of signatures will get them to change their mind.
They really should be included in at least one debate. If Romney and Obama won't participate in a debate that includes Johnson and Stein, maybe Johnson and Stein should hold their own debate immediately after a Romney-Obama debate and answer the same questions. Would any station be interested in airing that, do you think?I noticed there is a petition going around that is being sent to both parties requesting that Gary Johnson and Jill Stein be included in the debates. I signed it and shared with friends. The article I linked was referring to this and I am hopeful that the weight of signatures will get them to change their mind.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
As far as the petition goes there has only been mention of the October debates in Nevada IIRC, so the 1st one. Not sure it would apply to following debates or not. I would much rather listen to Gary Johnson and Jill Stein than the other 2 candidates who will bring little substance to the conversation.They really should be included in at least one debate. If Romney and Obama won't participate in a debate that includes Johnson and Stein, maybe Johnson and Stein should hold their own debate immediately after a Romney-Obama debate and answer the same questions. Would any station be interested in airing that, do you think?I noticed there is a petition going around that is being sent to both parties requesting that Gary Johnson and Jill Stein be included in the debates. I signed it and shared with friends. The article I linked was referring to this and I am hopeful that the weight of signatures will get them to change their mind.
Wrighteous Ray
Footballguy
Maybe C-Span or some real niche station. I don't see it getting big ratings. Couldn't be as good as this debate'Maurile Tremblay said:
Biabreakable
Footballguy
Yes debating about semantics is going to be really interesting. Why don't you go piss up a rope and stop trying to belittle the democratic process?
Wrighteous Ray
Footballguy
I was just answering the question. A Johnson/Stein debate would not get any kind of sizable audience or get shown on a major network. I guess throwing in the link to the debate with the Obama impersonator was a bit snarky, but whatever.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
I think a lot of people should be interested in a debate on the issues instead of choosing between coke and pepsi that a debate of Moneybot vs Obama amounts to.Why do you want to stifle to democratic process? That makes me pretty angry that you would dismiss viable candidates who are on the ballot in every state and have every right to be part of the debates.
Wrighteous Ray
Footballguy
I'm stifling the democratic process by saying that nobody would watch an imaginary debate? I guess I'm more powerful than I thought.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
You are trying to influence others to agree that a debate including Gary Johnson and Jill Stein would not be interesting. I am not saying you will effective in doing this but it makes me angry that you would try.
Wrighteous Ray
Footballguy
You seem to have a lot of misplaced anger. I never said it would be uninteresting.
Fennis
Footballguy
I normally hate online petitions, in fact this is the first one I have signed.
Sarnoff
Footballguy
She only put this out there to get us to stop hassling her. I say we should bug them more.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
I generally feel the same way. Thanks for making an exception.
simey
Footballguy
I would like to see this happen. I'm an Independent, and I was leaning towards voting for Romney (although I agree with Obama on social issues), but now I'm strongly considering voting for Gary Johnson. I'd love to see him debate, but my guess is the people who run the networks view Johnson and Stein as interferences for Romney and Obama.
- that was my thought as well when I read the quote. I think a "Million Independents March" on CNN or NBC are needed instead though.
Jobber
Footballguy
Signed.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
Thanks Jobber. I wonder what totals are looking like now? Seems like a pretty steady stream of signatures each time I look.'Jobber said:
Similar threads
