WebFire;1313702 wrote:Money. You are forgetting the money.

Not really. Money mostly sits on the sidelines early on. If Gary Johnson could have sold his message better the money would have come.

gut;1313708 wrote:Not really. Money mostly sits on the sidelines early on. If Gary Johnson could have sold his message better the money would have come.

You are not voting for Mitt Romney because he is Mitt Romney. You are voting for Mitt Romney because he is not Barack Obama. You are part of the problem.

justincredible;1313725 wrote:You are not voting for Mitt Romney because he is Mitt Romney. You are voting for Mitt Romney because he is not Barack Obama. You are part of the problem.

Actually, I am voting for Mitt Romney. I think he's very qualified. If he wasn't, then I'd have to decide if he was worse than the failure that needs to be fired.

What kind of bogus poll did you post anyway? Gary Johnson was never on the radar. See, you're insisting that the candidate that IN YOUR OPINION was the best and got creamed in the primaries is still the best candidate. You are participating in the consensus process only if you get your way, which is childish.

isidewith.com

America sides with Johnson more than Romney. Unfortunately for America the RNC wanted a fucking puppet.

So who are you voting for for Congress? Who are the libertarian candidates you are writing in?

gut;1313742 wrote:So who are you voting for for Congress? Who are the libertarian candidates you are writing in?

I'm voting for Scott Rupert.

gut;1313729 wrote:Actually, I am voting for Mitt Romney. I think he's very qualified.

Definitely more so than the inept fraud the MSM sold the sheeple 4 years ago.

gut;1313729 wrote:If he wasn't, then I'd have to decide if he was worse than the failure that needs to be fired.

Sadly that is true too. However, I will admit that if I felt that Romney was less qualified to be POTUS than Obama, I most definitely would have voted for Johnson or Paul if he had been on the ballot.. Fortunately Romney is easily far more qualified for the job than Obama.

gut;1313729 wrote:What kind of bogus poll did you post anyway? Gary Johnson was never on the radar. See, you're insisting that the candidate that IN YOUR OPINION was the best and got creamed in the primaries is still the best candidate. You are participating in the consensus process only if you get your way, which is childish.

That's been the reaction across-the-board with the libertarians particularly this election. I'm stunned at how the Paulbots think it's fine and dandy to use the "R" moniker and resources in the primary process to try to sell your libertarian message. But when you fail to get support, then "the Repubs are assholes" and you grab your ball and run home to mommy rather than support the winner and live to try again another day.

Because Paul lost and Paul decided not to run as an independent, all the libertarian QQ-ers decided Gary Johnson was their new hero. Apparently Gary's sandbox has better toys?

gut;1313742 wrote:So who are you voting for for Congress? Who are the libertarian candidates you are writing in?

I don't think you have to write in libertarian candidates for congress. At least in my district they are on the ballot. It's just that no one cares.

Con_Alma;1313778 wrote:I don't think you have to write in libertarian candidates for congress. At least in my district they are on the ballot. It's just that no one cares.

Because most people don't pay attention and just vote for the party line. That's fine. I would guarantee if you put the views of candidates on ballots instead of party labels, more people would vote libertarian. People are so indoctrinated with the two party system and the illusion of choice, it will take absolute failure before people get out of this mindset.

But congratulations on electing a president and congress members who won't do a thing to address the real issues. I hope it makes you feel better because you won.

pmoney25;1313784 wrote:Because most people don't pay attention and just vote for the party line. That's fine. I would guarantee if you put the views of candidates on ballots instead of party labels, more people would vote libertarian. People are so indoctrinated with the two party system and the illusion of choice, it will take absolute failure before people get out of this mindset.

But congratulations on electing a president and congress members who won't do a thing to address the real issues. I hope it makes you feel better because you won.

???

What the heck are you talking about? I don't vote on feelings and I can guarantee you that who I vote for won't "win" today.

My post was more geared towards general public than you. My apologies.

I would guarantee if you put the views of candidates on ballots instead of party labels, more people would vote libertarian.

I would guarantee that if the libertarians would lose their smug superiority attitude, and realize that they are not going to be able to sell their agenda in entirety to the people of this country....and work within an existing party....they could get a lot accomplished. As of now, they are like a man who just sits around feeling sorry for themselves and enjoying the misery. Boo Hoo...everything is rigged against me. If only they 'put candidates views on the ballot'....you know what... THEY DON"T!

Frankly I'm disappointed with Ron Paul, who really made a good showing in the primaries and had an opportunity to take Libertarianism into the mainstream and begin to turn the Republican Party. Instead, he/they just stepped on their **** and settled back into the same routine that has got them nowhere. I really don't know what you think you will accomplish with 15% of the vote...let alone 5%. Maybe you'll have the satisfaction that in your mind you are voting for what you believe in, but in the end you have accomplished nothing.

I'm sorry, I hope you don't take this personally, pmoney etal....I admire your convictions, but I think the liberatarians have gone about it the wrong way for a long time.

HitsRus;1313797 wrote:....and work within an existing party....

Haha, really? I say it's impossible. Hell, they wouldn't even let Paul talk at their convention unless he played by their rules.

HitsRus;1313797 wrote:Frankly I'm disappointed with Ron Paul, who really made a good showing in the primaries and had an opportunity to take Libertarianism into the mainstream and begin to turn the Republican Party. Instead, he/they just stepped on their **** and settled back into the same routine that has got them nowhere. I really don't know what you think you will accomplish with 15% of the vote...let alone 5%. Maybe you'll have the satisfaction that in your mind you are voting for what you believe in, but in the end you have accomplished nothing.

I'm sorry, I hope you don't take this personally, pmoney etal....I admire your convictions, but I think the liberatarians have gone about it the wrong way for a long time.

I disagree. I have laughed for many elections now, when the parties get on TV and say how bad and unqualified the other candidates are in their party. Then when they don't get the nomination, all of a sudden they support and endorse the candidate they just talked shit about! Fuck that! Stand up for what you believe in. Ron Paul did that.

Are people still really upset about those who chose Gary Johnson? Get over it.

I personally wouldn't get upset about who anyone votes for. Just like I can vote for whomever I want for whatever reason I want, so that can they.

Con_Alma;1313842 wrote:I personally wouldn't get upset about who anyone votes for. Just like I can vote for whomever I want for whatever reason I want, so that can they.

/Con_Alma'd

I'd much rather see Romney win than Obama but ONLY because I'm tired of the Obama nuthuggers. They are seriously the worst.

HitsRus;1313797 wrote:I would guarantee that if the libertarians would lose their smug superiority attitude, and realize that they are not going to be able to sell their agenda in entirety to the people of this country....and work within an existing party....they could get a lot accomplished. As of now, they are like a man who just sits around feeling sorry for themselves and enjoying the misery. Boo Hoo...everything is rigged against me. If only they 'put candidates views on the ballot'....you know what... THEY DON"T!

Frankly I'm disappointed with Ron Paul, who really made a good showing in the primaries and had an opportunity to take Libertarianism into the mainstream and begin to turn the Republican Party. Instead, he/they just stepped on their **** and settled back into the same routine that has got them nowhere. I really don't know what you think you will accomplish with 15% of the vote...let alone 5%. Maybe you'll have the satisfaction that in your mind you are voting for what you believe in, but in the end you have accomplished nothing.

I'm sorry, I hope you don't take this personally, pmoney etal....I admire your convictions, but I think the liberatarians have gone about it the wrong way for a long time.

I don't feel sorry for myself. I know that regardless of what happens my life will change very little. I will also not feel miserable tomorrow as I dont feel miserable today. You say we should align ourselves with a party. Which one?

You are also right, my vote today will really not mean in anything at this moment. But just like with any movement, things do take time and start with small victories. I am sure there were people who didn't want to revolt against the British and I am sure there were people who didn't want slavery to end either. It may not even happen in 2016. However more younger people are Fiscally Conservative, Socially Liberal and Anti Interventionist. Also, there are quite a few candidates out there who are running for local, State and Federal office who are more libertarian leaning that are running as republicans and that is fine. I don't agree 100% with every libertarian point of view. I would be open to taking small baby steps to get things changed. The problem is that the Republican party is going the opposite direction. Big Spending and Big Government is not just a Democrat problem.

I take no offense to anything you say or feel good about any admiration you may have. Freedom to me means being able to voice my opinion and feel proud about it regardless if I am in the minority or the majority.

HitsRus;1313797 wrote:Maybe you'll have the satisfaction that in your mind you are voting for what you believe in, but in the end you have accomplished nothing.

Hopefully the Mayans were right and we won't have to go through this bullsht again in 2016.

fish82;1313884 wrote:Hopefully the Mayans were right and we won't have to go through this bullsht again in 2016.

This would be okay.

fish82;1313884 wrote:Hopefully the Mayans were right and we won't have to go through this bullsht again in 2016.

I concur. Every four years is worse than the previous four.

Excellent article in the WSJ today from a man who's been a libertarian since the beginning. Basically said put on your big boy pants, focus on building coalitions within the party that closest aligns to your views, and don't give away the election to the party that LEAST supports your view.

They think they're enlightened, they think they're special and unique - like nobody else has thought of this the past 40 years. Reality is enlightened people know when to make a stand and when to make a compromise, and you don't try to build a coalition and make your stand in the 11th hour.

But it's fascinating to me that the libertarians won't compromise at the polls when, even if their teeny minority did get elected, they couldn't accomplish anything without compromise. Must be why the movement has failed to get any real traction.

gut;1314013 wrote:Excellent article in the WSJ today from a man who's been a libertarian since the beginning. Basically said put on your big boy pants, focus on building coalitions within the party that closest aligns to your views, and don't give away the election to the party that LEAST supports your view.

They think they're enlightened, they think they're special and unique - like nobody else has thought of this the past 40 years. Reality is enlightened people know when to make a stand and when to make a compromise, and you don't try to build a coalition and make your stand in the 11th hour.

But it's fascinating to me that the libertarians won't compromise at the polls when, even if their teeny minority did get elected, they couldn't accomplish anything without compromise. Must be why the movement has failed to get any real traction.

Get over it.