IGX

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLAh3pui-CI[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGD8gJt7weU[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPw7iu5S_e4[/youtube]

who is likely to benefit more when you vote for the libertarian guys--donald or hillary?

It would depend on your state, but I think he's taking votes from both now. In any case, the group that sponsored the first ad is trying to avoid that problem.

dead man walking wrote:who is likely to benefit more when you vote for the libertarian guys--donald or hillary?

Me.
It's my fucking vote.

There's an idea that libertarian and libertarian-ish candidates pull from the GOP, but at worst they appear to pull equally from both major parties. It's been a while since I looked at the exact stats but with Perot in '92, his voters generally voted for Democratic Senate candidates and Republican governors or something like that. They weren't guaranteed Bush voters (as the myth goes) by any measure.

Haven't looked too much into it yet, looking at presidential polls before Labor Day is kind of like looking at baseball standings before Memorial day, but do seem to remember some polls showing Johnson doing very well in 30 and under or so. To the point of being #1 in that bucket in I think it was Colorado. So I think Hillary. I think the weed legalization, gay rights, more socially liberal stuff is a bigger deal for conservative Republicans than the fiscally conservative stuff is for liberal Democrats.

The Ginger Beard Man wrote:

dead man walking wrote:who is likely to benefit more when you vote for the libertarian guys--donald or hillary?

Me.
It's my fucking vote.

Same.

I looked up poll results and 60% of registered Democrats and Republicans think they both suck. It bothers me that such a large number would go and vote for the lesser evil when they are likely better represented by a third party candidate.

If this election was to chose a babysitter I feel like my choice is between someone who is a child molester, someone who was convicted on child porn charges and someone who is a genuinely good person. I know the good person is going to be unavailable to watch my kids at the last minute but I will be damned if I will ask the other two.

What's that Hitchens quote about valuing less what a person thinks and valuing more how they think?

Johnsons libertarian platform has flaws like any other but the man's quality of honesty, thoughtfulness and moral rigor outstrips the alternatives by miles. Neither of the other two can touch that.

It's a two party system. Go ahead-- throw your vote away!!!!!

If enough people back Johnson then this robs the winner of a mandate. Will also signal the two Parties that "business as usual" isn't going to cut it in the future.

At the end of the day

At the end of the day

At the end of the day

Freki wrote: I think the weed legalization, gay rights, more socially liberal stuff is a bigger deal for conservative Republicans than the fiscally conservative stuff is for liberal Democrats.

In large part this is because neoliberal economics has just become the accepted way of the world since Clinton. The wildest proposals (such as they are today) from the left are even couched in policy rather than ideology - "single-payer healthcare is cheaper than our system" rather than "COMRADES, MAKE MEDICINE FROM THE BLOOD OF THE WEALTHY."

The average person knows that Obama and Hillary aren't pinkos waiting to unleash their Marxist-Leninist plot to rape our women - which is why the Fox News narrative essentially only resonates with the small percentage of angry old white people who watch five hours of it a day.

Even when one does have a disagreement with the economic model (of either a neoliberal Democrat or a Johnson), liberals can ignore it because regulation and taxation are harder to see the immediate effects of vs. social issues. As a social justice issue, legalizing weed has more immediate (and perhaps more profound) effects on black Americans than anything relating to welfare.