Johnson Swelling

[89Hen]

Where did I EVER say that voting for Johnson was a "bad thing"?

I figured it was implied since all you do is bitch about folks voting for the guy. So really you are just bitching because you have nothing better to do. Have a glass of cranberry juice and chocolate bar, that should ease you until this terrible feeling passes in a few days.

Not quite accurate, but who really cares? It's really a case of me laughing at the people that think voting for Johnson is sending a message. It's not.

[Skjellyfetti]

89Hen in 2012:

Nobody will remember Gary Johnson's name in four years and he has left no impact on this or future elections.

http://www.championshipsubdivision.com/ ... 42#p716653

[89Hen]

Where did I EVER say that voting for Johnson was a "bad thing"?

OK that made me laugh, 89.

I still love how people think voting for Johnson is somehow cool or smart. It's neither.

That's a stretch Flaggy. It's not cool, nor smart, nor anything. It's a wasted vote, just like my wasted non-vote. Are you guys really this obtuse?

[89Hen]

I still love how people think voting for Johnson is somehow cool or smart. It's neither.

It's cute.

Johnson voter in 8 years: "Hey, remember that cute moral stand I took in 2016 than put Hillary in the White House and fucked our country over for the past decade and for the rest of our lifetimes? It felt so good. I showed them!!"

FINALLY!!! 93 gets it. This really isn't rocket science guys.

[Skjellyfetti]

It's cute.

Johnson voter in 8 years: "Hey, remember that cute moral stand I took in 2016 than put Hillary in the White House and fucked our country over for the past decade and for the rest of our lifetimes? It felt so good. I showed them!!"

FINALLY!!! 93 gets it. This really isn't rocket science guys.

But, I thought Gary Johnson couldn't get enough votes to make an impact in the election?

[89Hen]

89Hen in 2012:

Nobody will remember Gary Johnson's name in four years and he has left no impact on this or future elections.

http://www.championshipsubdivision.com/ ... 42#p716653

And I would encourage you and anyone to read the rest of that thread. It rings true.

[93henfan]

89Hen in 2012:

Nobody will remember Gary Johnson's name in four years and he has left no impact on this or future elections.

http://www.championshipsubdivision.com/ ... 42#p716653

We may still remember him in 2020 due to the gaffe machine he became in September 2016.

[Skjellyfetti]

89Hen in 2012:



http://www.championshipsubdivision.com/ ... 42#p716653

And I would encourage you and anyone to read the rest of that thread. It rings true.

Baldy on suicide watch?


Dude is still clinging to some worthless clickbait poll on Drudge Report that shows Trump is winning the election. Won't be on suicide watch until Nov. 8

[93henfan]

FINALLY!!! 93 gets it. This really isn't rocket science guys.

But, I thought Gary Johnson couldn't get enough votes to make an impact in the election?

I know you're not talking to me, but I certainly never said that. And worse, he is going to have a worse impact on Trump, which I've said for a year now, to the heckling of our far more learned and sophisticated posters like Ivytalk. They just know better than some dumb hick from Slower DE.

[Skjellyfetti]

Ok. So, you think Gary will be at fault for a Hillary presidency.



Will the idiots who nominated Trump be at fault for a Democratic Senate?

[93henfan]

Ok. So, you think Gary will be at fault for a Hillary presidency.

I'd need to see the final results in the swing states (or any other state where Trump votes + Johnson votes > Hillary votes + Stein votes, but Hillary wins). I think that's a reasonable criteria. In that scenario, I think it would be undeniable that Johnson sealed that state's victory for Hillary.

[Ivytalk]

That's your opinion. Writing yourself in or leaving the ballot blank are morally defensible options, I suppose, but this year there's no better way to support a limited government/socially tolerant view, with some critical mass, than voting for Johnson.

Provide your weighted interest to those two (is one more important to you than the other?). Is it 50/50?
If it isn't 50/50, do the leading candidates (DJT and HRC) oppose each other on these two points, and which one leans more to your lean?

Why even bother with this analysis? I know that Clinton is an unreconstructed statist and intolerant of all who disagree with her social views. Trump is a weathervane on both (nobody's ever called him a conservative), and unfit to hold public office. I'll take my chances with GJ, thank you very much.

[Ivytalk]

But, I thought Gary Johnson couldn't get enough votes to make an impact in the election?

I know you're not talking to me, but I certainly never said that. And worse, he is going to have a worse impact on Trump, which I've said for a year now, to the heckling of our far more learned and sophisticated posters like Ivytalk. They just know better than some dumb hick from Slower DE.

I'm getting tired of that "dumb hick" schtick, 93. Both major campaigns are attacking Johnson, and polls show that he's taking support from both sides, not just Trump: disillusioned millennials who were for Sanders, and college-educated GOP whites who can't stomach Trump. In fact, if anything, the attacks on GJ from the Clinton camp -- from Obummer on down -- have been more vitriolic. You're just flat-out wrong on your main premise.

[Ivytalk]

Ok. So, you think Gary will be at fault for a Hillary presidency.

I'd need to see the final results in the swing states (or any other state where Trump votes + Johnson votes > Hillary votes + Stein votes, but Hillary wins). I think that's a reasonable criteria. In that scenario, I think it would be undeniable that Johnson sealed that state's victory for Hillary.

Sure it's deniable. See my last post. You can't assume that Johnson and Stein draw from completely different pools of voters.

[kalm]

Provide your weighted interest to those two (is one more important to you than the other?). Is it 50/50?
If it isn't 50/50, do the leading candidates (DJT and HRC) oppose each other on these two points, and which one leans more to your lean?

Why even bother with this analysis? I know that Clinton is an unreconstructed statist and intolerant of all who disagree with her social views. Trump is a weathervane on both (nobody's ever called him a conservative), and unfit to hold public office. I'll take my chances with GJ, thank you very much.

Ivy is nailing it here.

Johnson wants to back off on foreign policy, understands and has lived the entreprenuerial spirit of America, wants to limit government, but...had great success as a chief executive running government. He's far and away the best candidate...unless you really like the status quo or Trump and think duopolies are swell.

Talk about unsmart and uncool.

[89Hen]

I'd need to see the final results in the swing states (or any other state where Trump votes + Johnson votes > Hillary votes + Stein votes, but Hillary wins). I think that's a reasonable criteria. In that scenario, I think it would be undeniable that Johnson sealed that state's victory for Hillary.

Sure it's deniable. See my last post. You can't assume that Johnson and Stein draw from completely different pools of voters.

Not according to Obama.

[93henfan]

I know you're not talking to me, but I certainly never said that. And worse, he is going to have a worse impact on Trump, which I've said for a year now, to the heckling of our far more learned and sophisticated posters like Ivytalk. They just know better than some dumb hick from Slower DE.

I'm getting tired of that "dumb hick" schtick, 93. Both major campaigns are attacking Johnson, and polls show that he's taking support from both sides, not just Trump: disillusioned millennials who were for Sanders, and college-educated GOP whites who can't stomach Trump. In fact, if anything, the attacks on GJ from the Clinton camp -- from Obummer on down -- have been more vitriolic. You're just flat-out wrong on your main premise.

I don't think I am. Millenials will buck up for their girl in November. That's what naive young people do. They put flowers in their hair and vote liberal. They are frightened about this hateful racist old white guy from New York that calls fat women fat.

[93henfan]

I'd need to see the final results in the swing states (or any other state where Trump votes + Johnson votes > Hillary votes + Stein votes, but Hillary wins). I think that's a reasonable criteria. In that scenario, I think it would be undeniable that Johnson sealed that state's victory for Hillary.

Sure it's deniable. See my last post. You can't assume that Johnson and Stein draw from completely different pools of voters.

And you can't assume that they don't. I am just basing things on history.

But again, I went to public school.

[Ivytalk]

Sure it's deniable. See my last post. You can't assume that Johnson and Stein draw from completely different pools of voters.

And you can't assume that they don't. I am just basing things on history.

But again, I went to public school.

So did I. High school, at least.

[93henfan]

Lot of Hillary Republicans getting riled up in here. Cha ching.

[Ivytalk]

Sure it's deniable. See my last post. You can't assume that Johnson and Stein draw from completely different pools of voters.

Not according to Obama.

So? Since when has Barry Soetero turned into Larry Sabato or Michael Barone?

[Skjellyfetti]

Why do you think Millennials like Clinton?

They voted overwhelmingly against here in 2008 and they voted overwhelmingly against her this primary season.

Clinton is being carried by the older, establishment type Democrats who have been voting D for decades and can't change. That's not millennials (though, they seem to be an easily scapegoated).

[89Hen]

Why do you think Millennials like Clinton?

They voted overwhelmingly against here in 2008 and they voted overwhelmingly against her this primary season

Because she's up against Trump, not Obama or Sanders now. It's not a matter of liking.

[Ivytalk]

Why even bother with this analysis? I know that Clinton is an unreconstructed statist and intolerant of all who disagree with her social views. Trump is a weathervane on both (nobody's ever called him a conservative), and unfit to hold public office. I'll take my chances with GJ, thank you very much.

Ivy is nailing it here.

Johnson wants to back off on foreign policy, understands and has lived the entreprenuerial spirit of America, wants to limit government, but...had great success as a chief executive running government. He's far and away the best candidate...unless you really like the status quo or Trump and think duopolies are swell.

Talk about unsmart and uncool.

That conservative bastion, WaPo, did a hit piece on GJ today. They sent a reporter or two to New Mexico to get state legislators' comments on GJ's governing style as governor. On the one hand, they said that Johnson was fundamentally disengaged as to policy matters, with a 5-minute limit on most discussions. But he trusted his gut. Some legislators didn't like his vetoes. But all called him honest, and a budget hawk. What's not to like, given the duopoly candidates?

[93henfan]

Why do you think Millennials like Clinton?

They voted overwhelmingly against here in 2008 and they voted overwhelmingly against her this primary season.

They had charismatic liberal alternatives in Obama and Bernie. Now all they have left making promises of free tuition and racial appeasement and melting of firearms and the first woman president and puppies and kittens and flowers is Hillary, and she will get their vote in November. Believe that.