What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

***Official Third Party/Independent*** Presidential Candidacy Thread (1 Viewer)

dparker713 said:
Maurile Tremblay said:
If a pollster asks you whom you're voting for and you answer Gary Johnson, it will probably be the biggest statistical impact you ever have on politics in your life.

Johnson is polling around 13% right now, and he needs to hit 15% to get into the debates. Sample sizes are often 400-1000, so he needs only 8-20 more people per poll to name him.
Click to expand...
Is it 15% in one poll once or is there a specific poll or a specific date?
Click to expand...
Here is what I found on one site

The Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) requires that candidates poll at 15 percent in five national surveys leading up to the three scheduled debates and that they garner enough spots on state ballots to chart a path to the White House.
Click to expand...
It doesn't say which 5 surveys/polls... Just 5 National. :shrug:

 
If they got John Scott to be an NHL all star as a journeyman enforcer why can't we do the same with the president?  Or is that how we ended up with Trump already?

 
 



Can Jill Stein Lead a Revolution?


The Green Party candidate wants disillusioned Bernie Sanders supporters to join her—not Hillary Clinton.


PHILADELPHIA—Jill Stein takes public transportation to the Democratic National Convention. On the day after Hillary Clinton made history as the first woman to win a major party presidential nomination, the Green Party presidential candidate is on the subway en route to the Wells Fargo Center. Adoring fans spot her on the way over and demand selfies. A heavily tattooed woman complains to Stein: “It’s been a Hillary party the whole time. It’s like brainwash, like waterboarding. It’s awful.”

Stein is in high demand. The populist progressive tells me that after Bernie Sanders endorsed Clinton two weeks ago, effectively ending his insurgent campaign for president, a lot more people started paying attention to her campaign. “The floodgates opened,” Stein says. “I almost feel like a social-worker, being out there talking to the Bernie supporters. They are broken-hearted. They feel really abused, and misled, largely by the Democratic Party.”

It’s hard to miss the anger and frustration. At the start of the week, Sanders supporters took to booing the mere mention of Clinton’s name at the convention. Dozens of die-hards even staged a dramatic walkout after Clinton won the nomination. Stein insists she feels their pain.“I think the Democratic Party is really struggling right now,” she says. “It’s become a zombie party.”

The Green Party candidate styles herself as a successor to the Sanders campaign. And she has been making the rounds in Philadelphia in the midst of the Democratic convention. When Sanders supporters protested Clinton’s nomination, Stein was spotted in the crowd. On Tuesday, she showed up at a Bernie-or-Bust rally in downtown Philadelphia, reminding the crowd: “Whatever happens, you know my campaign is here. We are going to continue this movement.” ...
Click to expand...
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/07/jill-stein-third-party-bernie-sanders/493292/


Dr. Jill Stein at the DNC "Bernie or Bust Rally" in Philadelphia







 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Third party presidential candidate guide


According to a May Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, almost half of registered voters would consider a generic third-party presidential nominee. A Gallup poll from September 2015 found that 60 percent of Americans want there to be a third-party, tied for the highest level since Gallup started asking the question in 2004.

So who are your third party presidential options in 2016? Here they are, organized by the number of votes they got in the 2012 election.

...

**********************************************************************

Constitution Party — Darrell Castle

Party's 2012 vote total: 122,389

Castle served as a Marine during the Vietnam War. He has been a lawyer for more than 25 years, working on consumer bankruptcy, personal injury and social security/disability and workers' compensation. Darrell Castle and Associates is based in Memphis, Tenn., with four other firms across the midwest. Castle and his wife founded Mia's Children Foundation in 1998, a Christian mission project in Romania focused on homeless gypsy children. Castle spent two terms as chair of the Constitution Party of Tennessee and was the party's vice presidential candidate in 2008. That year, the Constitution Party earned 200,000 votes and came in fifth.

Policy Positions:

  • Claims to be 100 percent pro-life, and promises to veto any bill that would give federal funding to Planned Parenthood or other abortion providers.
  • Would repeal the Federal Reserve Act, allowing lenders and borrowers to set their own interest rates. Castle says this would end bailouts: "I would remind the banks that there would no longer be a Federal Reserve to lend to them in an emergency so if a bank gets in trouble, it's on its own."
  • Wants the United States to end its membership in the United Nations. "The very existence of the U.N. is an affront to liberty and human dignity," Castle says.
Age on Election Day: 67 or 68

Education: East Tennessee State University (Political Science and History), Memphis State University (Juris Doctorate)

Family: Married to Joan Castle (one daughter)

Birthplace: Kingsport, Tenn.

Current Residence: Germantown, Tenn.

Religion: Christian

Vice Presidential Nominee: Scott Bradley, an independent business owner from Utah.

**********************************************************************

Independent American Party — Farley Anderson

Party's 2012 votes total: 122,389 (Virgil Goode ran as both the Constitution Party nominee and the Independent American Party nominee)

Anderson ran as an independent for governor of Utah in 2010, coming third with 2 percent of the vote. He was formerly a Republican, serving as a precinct chair in 1991. Anderson owned a publishing company for five years until 2010.

Vice Presidential Nominee: [unknown]

Policy Positions:

  • Wants to repeal the Federal Reserve Act, limit taxation to the methods allowed for in the original Constitution and eliminate the national debt with a balanced budget.
  • Wants a "strong defense establishment" and says American military shouldn't be committed to international organizations (such as NATO or the U.N.).
  • Believes in Judeo-Christian heritage, and that "it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and to humbly implore His protection and favor."
Age on Election Day: 60

Education: Weber State University (Oral Communications)

Family: Married (Helen), 11 children (Tamsyn, James, Adam, Dawna, Levi, Heather, Joshua, Sarah, Sam, Ben, Emily)

Birthplace: Ogden, Utah

Current Residence: Paradise, Utah

Religion: Latter-day Saints

****************************************************

Party for Socialism and Liberation — Gloria La Riva

Party's 2012 vote total: 9,399

La Riva is the executive vice president of the Pacific Media Workers Guild, Communications Workers of America, Local 39521. She ran for governor of California twice, mayor of San Francisco once and president once, all unsuccessfully. She has also produced videos like "Heroes Not Looters" in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. La Riva calls the U.S. embargo against Cuba a "blockade" and won Cuba's Friendship Medal for her support of Cuba.

Policy Positions:

  • Wants a "decent-paying job" to be a legal right, with a $20 an hour minimum wage and a "living income" guaranteed for those who can't work.
  • Would shut down all U.S. military bases around the world, bringing all "troops, planes and ships home" and using the military budget for other needs.
  • Believes in "free, safe, legal abortion on demand."
Age on Election Day: 62

Education: Brandeis University

Family: [Unknown]

Birthplace: Albuquerque, N.M.

Current Residence: San Francisco

Religion: [Unknown]

Vice Presidential Nominee: Eugene Puryear, an activist from Washington D.C.

*******************************************************************************************************

Socialist Workers Party — Alyson Kennedy

Party's 2012 vote total: 4,117

Kennedy works at Walmart in Chicago. She has been a socialist since the 1970s and has fought for union rights for decades. Kennedy, formerly a coal miner herself, has been particularly active fighting for union rights for coal miners. She also ran as the party's vice presidential nominee in 2008 and for the U.S. Senate in Illinois in 2010.

Policy Positions:

  • Wants a minimum wage of $15 an hour, guaranteed full-time work and union rights.
  • Opposes U.S. wars, like the former war in Vietnam and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
  • Wants a "government-funded public works program to create jobs and build schools, medical, child care and recreation centers, replace crumbling infrastructure and other things working people need."
Age on Election Day: 65 or 66

Education: [Unknown]

Family: [Unknown]

Birthplace: Indianapolis

Current Residence: Chicago

Religion: [Unknown]

Vice Presidential Nominee: Osborne Hart, a Walmart worker from Philadelphia.

***************************************************************************

Prohibition Party — James Hedges

Party's 2012 vote total: 518

Hedges is a former member of the United States Marine Band who now volunteers in various ways in his community, including by running a recycling program and curating the print shop at a living history museum.

Policy Positions:

  • Opposes the production, transportation and sale of all drugs, including alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, cocaine and heroin (except for medicinal use, as regulated by the Food and Drug Administration), but supports programs that would help tobacco farm and vineyard owners to switch to alternative crops.
  • Opposes free trade: "We will impose balancing tariffs on all goods imported from countries whose wage scales, labor benefits, and environmental protections are not similar to our own."
  • Favors a balanced budget amendment to the federal constitution.
Age on Election Day: 78

Education: University of Iowa (Musical Performance), University of Maryland (Master's in Geography)

Family: Married (Carolyn)

Birthplace: Iowa City, Iowa

Current Residence: Fulton County, Pa.

Religion: [Unknown]

Vice Presidential Nominee: Bill Bayes, owner of a manufacturing business.

*****************************************************************************

Veterans Party of America — Chris Keniston

Party's 2012 vote total: [wasn't formed until 2014]

Keniston served in various roles in the Air Force from 1996 to 2010. He's now a small business owner, having founded FOD Gear, which specializes in veteran-centric and patriotic apparel. Keniston has also worked in manufacturing. Keniston is the third generation of veterans in his family, dating back to his grandfather's service in World War II.

Policy Positions:

  • Wants to secure the southern border by working with state governors and legislatures, and also feels that security along the Canadian border is a serious concern.
  • On education, wants to "terminate all federal endorsement or preferential funding of the existing Common Core curriculum with extreme prejudice."
  • Believes in "non-interference in global affairs." Says the U.S. has been viewed as a bully, which is a disservice to our "global identity."
Age on Election Day: 45

Education: Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University (Professional Aeronautics)

Family: Single (was married in 1995 until a 2001 divorce, then married from 2004 until his wife passed away in 2016)

Birthplace: Washington, D.C.

Current Residence: [Unknown]

Religion: [Unknown]

Vice Presidential Nominee: Deacon Taylor, an Army veteran and currently a construction consultant.
Click to expand...


Just bumping this with McMullen getting in. These are the candidates as I see them right now (not in any order, yet, I just enjoy this stuff):

 
Last edited by a moderator:
So - Evan McMullin has a campaign website up.

About Evan McMullin


Evan McMullin, a former CIA operative, business professional and House GOP Policy Director, is a candidate for President of the United States of America.

Evan McMullin was born in Provo, Utah on April 2, 1976 to David McMullin, a computer scientist, and Lanie (Bullard) McMullin.










He graduated from Auburn High School in Auburn, Washington, and earned a Bachelor’s degree in International Law and Diplomacy from Brigham Young University (BYU) and a Master’s of Business Administration from The Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania.

Evan served as a Mormon missionary in Brazil and Volunteer Refugee Resettlement Officer in Amman, Jordan on behalf of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.

On September 11th, 2001 Evan was in training at CIA Headquarters in Langley, Virginia. He completed his training and repeatedly volunteered for overseas service in the Middle East, North Africa and South Asia, spearheading counterterrorism and intelligence operations in some of the most dangerous places on earth.

Having completed his CIA service, in 2011, McMullin transitioned to the Investment Banking Division at Goldman Sachs in the San Francisco Bay Area, where he worked with companies in several industries, including technology, energy, consumer goods, biotech, industrials and real estate on capital raising projects and mergers and acquisitions.

In 2013, McMullin joined the House Committee on Foreign Affairs as a senior advisor and later became the chief policy director of the House Republican Conference.

He declared his candidacy for President of the United States on August 8, 2016, saying “In a year where Americans have lost faith in the candidates of both major parties, it’s time for a generation of new leadership to step up. It’s never too late to do the right thing, and America deserves much better than either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton can offer us. I humbly offer myself as a leader who can give millions of disaffected Americans a better choice for President.”
Click to expand...














 
Last edited by a moderator:
So Jill Stein continues to alienate liberals. Her footsie with anti-vax and her parties support of homeopathy make her look stupid and antiscience

 But now she has added fluffing Putin, saying Donald isn't that bad and calling Sanders a traitor. Whose votes exactly is she trying to get?

She can go #### herself. Total loss as a representative of liberal values. I would sooner vote Hillary and that simply isnt going to happen.

 
NCCommish said:
So Jill Stein continues to alienate liberals. Her footsie with anti-vax and her parties support of homeopathy make her look stupid and antiscience

 But now she has added fluffing Putin, saying Donald isn't that bad and calling Sanders a traitor. Whose votes exactly is she trying to get?

She can go #### herself. Total loss as a representative of liberal values. I would sooner vote Hillary and that simply isnt going to happen.
Click to expand...
It's funny. Like a lot of people, Green is closer to my values than any of the other parties, but i feel the same way about a Green Party convention as i do a Toby Keith concert - bombing one would be the most efficient way of getting rid of people i can't stand.

Anyone want to make the case for the leftist buzzword that is Jill Stein?

 
wikkidpissah said:
It's funny. Like a lot of people, Green is closer to my values than any of the other parties, but i feel the same way about a Green Party convention as i do a Toby Keith concert - bombing one would be the most efficient way of getting rid of people i can't stand.

Anyone want to make the case for the leftist buzzword that is Jill Stein?
Click to expand...
I really don't get some of the allegedly liberal people I see support her. Can't stand her. They make Johnson out to be an idiot for brain locking on Allepo. They let her fluff Putin and Trump with little to no comment. They let her play footsie with junk science and don't call her out when that is actually idiotic. 

I'm sorry but I refuse to support someone because I am "supposed" to. Her rhetoric just pisses me off on a regular basis.

 
NCCommish said:
So Jill Stein continues to alienate liberals. Her footsie with anti-vax and her parties support of homeopathy make her look stupid and antiscience

 But now she has added fluffing Putin, saying Donald isn't that bad and calling Sanders a traitor. Whose votes exactly is she trying to get?

She can go #### herself. Total loss as a representative of liberal values. I would sooner vote Hillary and that simply isnt going to happen.
Click to expand...
I had thought about starting a Stein thread a while back but decided against it when some of her statements/actions were too weird. Namely the Putin love and the trutherism innuendo come to mind first. I didn't see the part about Sanders but if so yeah that's horrible.

Thing is a true progressive, rational voice was needed in this race and it's apparent we're not going to get one here.

 
 

How Evan McMullin Could Win Utah And The Presidency



It’s unlikely, but far from impossible

With the election only weeks away, Hillary Clinton appears to have the lead and the momentum. As of this writing, the FiveThirtyEight polls-only forecast gives her around an 87 percent chance of winning — up from around 55 percent in late September – and that may not have fully absorbed the fallout of Trump’s lewd video, debatable debate performance or the daily deluge of fresh scandal jeopardizing his candidacy.

But if Clinton doesn’t run away with this, there is another candidate who may also have seen his chances of becoming president skyrocket. The third-most likely person to be the next president of the United States: Evan McMullin.

It would take a fascinating scenario — in which much of the technical detail of how we select presidents comes into play — for McMullin to be sworn in as the 45th president, but the chances of its happening are slim, not none. Indeed, his chances of at least making things very interesting may be as high as 1 to 3 percent — about the same as the odds of the Cubs’ coming back to beat the Giants on Monday.

If you’ve never heard of this person, you’re not alone.1 With #NeverTrumpers2 failing to get Mitt Romney, Sen. Ben Sasse of Nebraska or any other high-profile Republicans to enter the race, the task to mount a conservative challenge fell to McMullin, a little-known, 40-year-old former CIA officer.

According to the bio on his website, he served in the CIA for about a decade, and spent time in investment banking, as an adviser for the House Committee on Foreign Affairs and as policy director for the House Republican Conference. On the issues, McMullin has taken fairly orthodox Republican positions, including supporting free trade. He has been critical of Trump on immigration, refugees, anti-Muslim rhetoric and on temperament and fitness to be president.

The idea that an independent candidate could swoop in to win has been largely dismissed, on the grounds that any conservative-leaning third-party candidate would be more likely to hurt Trump than Clinton, thus making a Clinton victory more likely. But McMullin may have one advantage that other second-tier candidates do not: Utah.

His path to the presidency basically looks like this:

  1. Win Utah
  2. Deadlock the Electoral College
  3. Win in the House

Step 1: Win Utah


For step 1, his chances are arguably pretty good. Perhaps there has been no more dire sign that the Trump campaign is struggling than a recent Deseret News poll showing Trump in a dead heat with Clinton in the highly conservative state. But with both major-party candidates getting only 26 percent, the real bombshell is the third-place finisher.

McMullin is already polling within striking distance of the leaders, despite his much lower name recognition. Another recent poll showed McMullin a bit further behind, but with Trump still only getting 34 percent of the vote to McMullin’s 20 percent.

The FiveThirtyEight model has just been updated to include McMullin in Utah (Nate Silver will have more on how we did that), presently giving him a 3.4 percent chance of winning based on current polling, with the “now-cast” giving him a 9.7 percent chance if the election were held today. But there are a number of reasons I’d be significantly more bullish on McMullin’s chances in his home state.

First, McMullin is a Mormon, and while Utah is a deep red state, the heavily Mormon population has not embraced Trumpism. In the Utah Republican Caucuses in March, Trump finished in 3rd place with just 14 percent of the vote.

Meanwhile, in those same caucuses, the candidate whom Mitt Romney announced he would vote for — Ted Cruz — received 69 percent of the vote. It’s hard to overstate Romney’s popularity and influence in Utah, and his endorsement could easily put McMullin over the top. (Oh, and McMullin is reportedly using a Romney email list already.)


Step 2: Deadlock the Electoral College


And now we get to the heart of the issue: Utah could be enough.

While McMullin essentially has no chance of winning the election outright, Utah’s six electoral votes could be enough to block any candidate from winning 270 in the electoral college, thus sending the election to Congress.

While people speculate about “ties” every cycle, this election may give us our best chance for the equivalent in a long while, though the chances still aren’t good. The model currently puts the chances of a tie at just 0.4 percent — but that is without giving McMullin much of a chance in Utah. Our polls-only forecast estimates about a 1.7 percent chance of Trump’s winning 269-275 electoral votes, including Utah (polls-plus has it as high as 2.4 percent). Any of those would be enough that flipping Utah into McMullin’s column would deadlock the Electoral College.

An interesting point about that number is that it’s relatively insensitive to how far Trump is behind. Of course, a close race would be ideal for McMullin, but the chances of the election finishing within the margin of Utah in late September when it was close were still only around 3.1 percent. Essentially, if the race is close, it’s a narrow band between a clear Clinton victory and a clear Trump victory. But if the race isn’t close, it’s a narrow band in the upper range of possible Trump rebounds. So while the odds of a Trump victory have plummeted, the odds of a McMullin miracle — assuming he wins Utah — remain somewhat steady.


Step 3: Win in the House


After that, the 12th Amendment dictates that the top three presidential vote-getters’ names are sent to the incoming House, with each state delegation getting one vote. The top two electoral-vote-receiving vice presidential candidates are sent to the Senate.

The Republican Party, of course, enjoys a significant edge in House delegations and controls 33 of the 50 states. While most project them to lose seats in the election, the scenario we’re interested in — in which Trump rebounds to win nearly half of the electoral votes — would probably not be the disaster it would take for the Republicans to lose nine delegations.

Fortunately for McMullin, Republicans haven’t shown Trump a lot of loyalty. Unprecedented numbers of congressional leaders have already abandoned their nominee – and that’s under the working assumption that Clinton is the only alternative.

Moreover, it takes an outright majority at this stage for a candidate to win. Based on known defections, somewhere around 35 congressmen are already anti-Trump (to varying degrees), including a majority of Utah’s delegation, and a majority of the Republicans in Nevada’s.

So let’s say the Democrats pick up a couple of states in the election, while Utah and Nevada go for McMullin and persuade a few other Republican states to join them right away, such that the breakdowns goes something like – with 26 needed to win — 19 delegations for Clinton, 23 for Trump and eight for McMullin.

Now what? Unlike the Electoral College, the House doesn’t just give up — they get to keep going until Inauguration Day. At that point, if the House delegations are still deadlocked, the vice president becomes president.

Meanwhile, the vice president would likely be known. Since the Senate can only choose between the top two candidates (presumably Kaine and Pence), it would take a perfect tie for them to remain deadlocked.

So here’s the rub: Whichever side loses in the Senate might have good reason to make a deal with a McMullin contingent in the House. That is, if Kaine is VP and the McMullin contingent holds fast, the party-loyal Republican coalition may be pressured to accept McMullin as better than Clinton (who would win if McMullin states sided with the Democrats) or Kaine (who would become president if the House remained deadlocked). While if Pence wins in the Senate, the Democrats may be pressured to accept McMullin rather than Trump or Pence — especially if they make deals for political appointments or legislative commitments. While this may sound shady by U.S. norms, it’s not unlike what happens in parliamentary systems around the world.

The upshot, however, is a bit bizarre. If you’re pro-McMullin or anti-Trump enough that this scenario excites you, congrats. But unless you’re in Utah or other states come into play, there’s not much you can do about it. If McMullin cuts into the Trump vote enough to give Clinton plurality wins in potential red states, her victory is assured.

In other words, if McMullin gets too strong, he could literally cost himself the election. The only route to the presidency McMullin can take must be navigated on the back of a dark horse.
Click to expand...
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-evan-mcmullin-could-win-utah-and-the-presidency/
 
McMulliin is getting my vote in Oregon.  Third party or conservative vote is wasted here anyway.  Might as well vote for a person I have some respect for.

 
How To Vote When There’s Nobody To Vote For


How do you vote in an election when there is no lesser of two evils? Here are four things to keep in mind as you think about going to the polls on Tuesday.
How do you vote in an election when there is no lesser of two evils?

We’re used to having to make a tough choice between candidates we don’t like. But what do we do in a year when there is no basis for making that decision? What about a year when it’s a choice between one pathological liar and another, and between one believer in government power and another?


1) Vote for none of the above.


Some have suggested adding a “none of the above” option on the ballot, and if it gets enough votes, we get a do-over election. The only real problem with this idea is the risk that “none of the above” would win every single time.

But we already have a “none of the above” option. Show up to vote, but leave the presidential ballot blank. Find something else to vote for. If anybody is looking—and they’ll be hashing out the voting statistics of this election for years—then you will be counted as someone who was engaged with politics and showed up to register your views, but who found all the presidential options lacking.


2) Pursue your political values down the ballot.


Executive power is growing out of control, and that’s likely to get worse under both of the major-party candidates on the ballot this year. But we are still far from being a dictatorship, and the presidency is not the only office with any power. If none of the presidential candidates represent your values, then find somebody or something on the ballot that does. Look at congressional, state, and local races and referendums.

I’ll be showing up to vote to re-elect my congressman, Dave Brat, the libertarian college professor who unseated establishment candidate Eric Cantor in the Republican primaries two years ago. I don’t think Brat is at risk of losing, even in a Democratic “wave” year, which this isn’t. But I’m looking forward to being able to vote for something of which I affirmatively approve.There are no other races on the ballot; there’s no Senate election for Virginia this year, and state and local elections are held on odd-numbered years. But there are a couple of amendments to the state constitution, including one about “right to work” protections which I will probably vote for.

The most likely outcome on Tuesday is that Hillary Clinton will win the presidency, and she and President Obama have been trying to use this election to roll back big Democratic losses in Congress and state legislatures. The best way to restrain the power of a President Clinton and limit the damage from her victory is to keep the state and national legislatures under the control of the opposition party.


3) Choose your protest vote carefully.


You can always choose smaller “third party” candidates as a protest vote. No, it won’t make a difference to the outcome of the election, but it will have the same impact as a “none of the above” vote. It will help deprive the winner of any sense of having a mandate.

I don’t think you should bother with a write-in vote, or at least don’t rely on it as a way of sending a message to anyone but yourself. Write-ins are too diffuse, dividing too small a vote among too many different names. (I doubt more than a handful of people will follow my idea of voting for the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man.) I have never heard of a write-in campaign being noticed in any way.

Third-party candidates are a better option to register a protest, but be wary. Yes, it can serve as a protest vote, but it can also serve as a vote of approval, not just for the specific candidate, but for the fringe party itself, which can have real practical effects.

That is why I won’t be voting for the Libertarian candidate. Whatever the merits and demerits of Gary Johnson, my vote would not help him because he’s not going to win. But it might help the Libertarian Party. If their presidential candidate gets 5 percent of the vote—just above where he is right now in the polls—the party meets the threshold to receive federal funds in the next election cycle. A government-funded Libertarian Party would be deeply ironic, but they’re not ruling it out.

So a vote for Gary Johnson is a vote to give the Libertarian Party millions of dollars to spend on who knows what candidate in the future. Consider the experience of the Reform Party in 2000, after Ross Perot’s performance in 1996 gave them a big pot of federal funds that was up for grabs. Their 2000 primaries were mobbed by opportunists ranging from Pat Buchanan to David Duke to some guy who believed in transcendental meditation—and, you guessed it, Donald Trump.

If there’s one year the Libertarian Party has proven that they don’t deserve that kind of support, this is it. This was their best opportunity in the party’s entire existence, a year in which the public pretty much despises the candidates for both major parties. Yet the Libertarians couldn’t get their act together and come up with a winning candidate or a winning strategy. If the Libertarian Party can’t succeed this year, they will never succeed. Their political experiment is over, and they deserve less money and attention in the future, not more.

The only option left for me is to vote for Evan McMullin, who is on the ballot in Virginia. No, he has no chance of winning anywhere outside Utah, but if I’m going to cast a futile protest vote—and I haven’t decided on that yet—then I might as well do it for someone whose personality and policies I mostly like.


4) Go on strike.


Then again, who says you have to vote at all? You can always stay home, not out of apathy, but as a way of going on strike against dysfunctional political system. Low turnout is a form of protest vote with a long history.There are those who will insist that it’s your civic duty to vote. But didn’t your fellow citizens have a responsibility in the primaries to pick candidates who aren’t rotten? If you voted in the primaries for somebody better than these two clowns, you have already discharged your responsibilities as a citizen. If everyone else decided back then to run the country into a ditch, you have no obligation to help them decide which side of the road to crash off of.

Ignore the people who tell you the danger of a Hillary Clinton administration means that it is irresponsible to withhold your vote from their favored candidate over some mere personal qualms about your “principles”—which some people on the Right now consider to be irrelevant. This gets the whole idea of the American system backwards. You don’t answer to the candidate or the parties. They answer to you.

You don’t have to explain why you won’t support a candidate. The candidates have to explain why you should support them. It’s up to them to make you want to vote for them, to offer you an important policy goal, evidence of good character, or at the very minimum some kind of compelling personal narrative that makes you trust them just a little bit not to mess everything up.

If they can’t do that—and man alive, what a disaster that has been this year—then you can just stay home. There is nothing more American than deciding that none of the rotten people who are running deserve your vote.

That’s the final answer for what to do when there’s no one to vote for: forget about this year’s election and work hard to help us get better options next time.
Click to expand...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
VandyMan said:
I don't expect anything to come of this, but...

Jill Stein Files FEC Complaint Against Trump, Clinton for Illegal Super PAC Coordination
Click to expand...
Don't know a whole lot about it, but if the Dyspeptic Duo are being as wreckless with this reg that was so strictly & publicly adhered to just one cycle ago as they are with all other election tradition & decorum, well goodonya Jill (never thought i'd say that). If any President-elect deserved to begin their term under indictment, it's whichever of these two.

 
matuski said:
Every time I hear this guy I like him more.

Disagree on some of his stances on social issues... but generally competent, confident, knowledgable guy.

He appears to be a rational conservative... wish I knew more.

May have to write him in here in TX.
Click to expand...
I quite like him myself.  He's a little vague on religion and I'm always a little wary of religious conservatives (not entirely sure if he is one) but he seems like a rational, normal, dare I say GOOD candidate for president.  My vote will be for Gary Johnson as I lean more libertarian than straight conservative, but McMullin would probably be my 2nd choice.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Did my part :hifive:  

Ended up going with Johnson.  I feel like Evan M. could be an option in the future, but he needs to walk closer to the center on social issues and healthcare for me.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

AAAll-Stars
Official "Weekend at Bernie's" Sanders President Thread
Replies
4
Views
465
MikeIke
MikeIke
(HULK)
Dave Berry's Year in Review
Replies
2
Views
1K
Joe Summer
J
T
***Official New Orleans Thread***
25 26 27
Replies
1K
Views
55K
Ministry of Pain
Ministry of Pain

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top