They went with Trump. They are retarded.

Don't look at me. I've been bashing libertarians long before this electoral cycle. I would take Romney or Kaisch over a libertarian every day of the week. And don't flatter yourself. Libertarians aren't any more important today then they were two years ago. It's just the two most unlikable candidates in history pushing people towards GJ because they don't realize he's just as bad and his policies are even worse.

Guess my post was misunderstood. The libertarian candidates are two of the nuts I was talking of looking past.

(09-28-2016 09:29 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 08:54 PM)Smaug Wrote:  I'm used to righties hating on libertarians, but this from the lefties is a new one on me. Guess it's Madam Secretary who's getting votes siphoned away.

B.
O.
O.

H.
O.
O.

That's what happens when you run a pro-drugs, pro-open borders, anti-military, anti-law enforcement, pro carbon tax President and a pro gun control vice president on your ticket.

Lmao. According to at least on Libertarian here that's "pretty much what Republicans are supposed to be." Possibly dumber than the Democrats.

Sent from my SM-J700T using CSNbbs mobile app

(09-28-2016 10:06 PM)Paul M Wrote:  They went with Trump. They are retarded.

...and Johnson and Weld aren't even close to conservative.

And I've yet to say they are. Have made a point of saying I look right past them.

The libertarians have a problem running bad candidates. For some reason, the Republicans decided to try and out nut them this time.

Well, you run who you have! I don't think they have a lot to work with ...

Harmon,

Well, then you and the six others can vote for those platforms.

They're not ok with me, though. So I and the other 99.9% of the country will ignore those platforms.

(09-28-2016 11:25 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

Quote:Mr. Johnson, a former Republican governor of New Mexico, is probably best known for saying, “What is Aleppo?” when asked about the embattled Syrian city during an MSNBC interview. Voters considering him will want to know what his party really stands for. It opposes most federal spending, including on public education and college assistance. It opposes the income tax, including on the richest Americans.
The Libertarians believe health care should be handled by the private sector — goodbye, veterans’ hospitals — and would end Social Security. The party is devoted to free trade and dislikes any international trade treaties, including those that protect workers. The party is against all forms of foreign aid and military assistance, and a direct attack on the United States is the only instance in which Libertarians favor a military response.
Mr. Johnson draws less than 10 percent in the polls that include the third-party candidates. If pollsters included him in their surveys every time, he says, he’d be doing better, though not as well as, say, Mickey Mouse. “Mickey would be at 30 percent,” he said on PBS on Thursday.
Ms. Stein, the Green Party candidate, is a Harvard-trained doctor and environmental activist. She is running on a “Power to the People Plan,” which she says “creates deep system change, moving from the greed and exploitation of corporate capitalism to a human-centered economy.” She wants the federal government to “buy” all existing student loan debt, at a cost of about $1.3 trillion. That’s about one-third of what the entire federal government spent in 2015 — on everything. On top of that, she would also throw in free public university education. These proposals are so off-the-charts unaffordable that they would never pass any Congress, regardless of which political party held a majority.
Ms. Stein proposes to slash military spending in half and close every United States military base on foreign soil — some 700, including bases used in the war on terrorism, as bulwarks against Russian and Chinese aggression and as staging areas for humanitarian assistance to victims of war and disaster. That would send an isolationist message to our allies that would rival Mr. Trump’s. Ms. Stein polls at around 3 percent.

Ouch!
When put that plainly, it really is no wonder why the vast majority of people aren't sympathetic to their views.

The Johnson part of that is full of lies so big that Joseph Goebbels would be embarrassed to be associated with them. Basically, it attributes to Johnson some of the more far-out positions taken by the most extreme libertarians. It does identify at least some of them as libertarian party positions rather than Johnson positions, but you're supposed to read over that and not pick up on it. And they're libertarian extremist positions, not libertarian party positions. But whoever is the author is obviously more interested in doing a smear job than being attentive to facts.

I have no intention of even considering a vote for Stein, so I have no idea whether the part that discusses her is accurate or not. Given the extent of lying in the Johnson part, I would tend to believe that the quoted materials are equally false regarding her.

All Libertarians are extreme, compared to reasonable policy.

I doubt that anyone who clearly identifies himself/herself as a Libertarian would be just fine keeping the VA open, for example. You'd be a regular ol Republican, then.

I guess you could call an Anarcho-Capitalist an "extreme Libertarian".



Sounds to me that Johnson is really a Republican, who is just running under the LP banner because he knows he would never have a chance of winning the Republican nomination.

Or perhaps, the old-school Republicans are trying to convert the LP into an old-school Republican party, with the extremists having taken over the current Republican Party??