Skip to main content

View Diary: Republicans lose the fight to keep their Nader, Gary Johnson, off the ballot (305 comments)

Comment Preferences

    •  I do find the ones I'm talking to (27+ / 0-)

      that are Dems voting Johnson, are the low-information and cynical voters.  ::sigh::

      I would rather spend my life searching for truth than live a single day within the comfort of a lie. ~ John Victor Ramses

      by KayCeSF on Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 11:00:01 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  When I was low-information (18+ / 0-)

        I thought I liked Libertarianism.  Away with petty laws whereby one group imposes their will on others!  

        I'm glad I finally learned more (and now self-identify as firmly Progressive, thank you very much) but can see where people who know only that George Washington was against a two-party system and that Libertarians like "individual freedom and responsibility" might choose the L.

      •  try "ignorant" - that is more descriptive. sigh.. (8+ / 0-)

        if all the people who want "freedom FROM government" were given it overnight, they would flat out panic!

        •  Absolutely. (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          KayCeSF, Anna M, EthrDemon

          Government is part of the air they breathe and always have, to the extent that they have NO freaking idea what they and their family depends on from the government. (They also tend to forget that WE are the government, but that's another conversation.)

          Case in point. This week a strain of meningitis popped up in steroid shots for back pain.  An alert Dr. caught it, and reported it to the appropriate state government agency, which was then able to put a national alert in place in no time at all, AND of course, it was the government that tracked down the pharmacy that had sold the bad shots.  

          As it is several have died, several more are very sick.  BUT, can you imagine how long it would take to get alerts out and track down the source WITHOUT government?!  How many MORE lives would be lost, how many MORE people would have fallen ill?

          You can damn bet those libertarians would be screaming holy hell if one of their loved ones got a bad shot, and all they had to depend on was some prehistoric, pre-government plan.

          "A typical vice of American politics is the avoidance of saying anything real on real issues." Theodore Roosevelt.

          by StellaRay on Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 04:05:32 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  last count, 24 have died and hundreds have been (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            StellaRay, Larsstephens

            sick, more are most likely to be affected.

            how do we know?  the CDC, the government, the FDA - ALL government agencies involved in notification, tracking, fixing such problems.

            i wonder how all the libertarians will feel with e.coli, salmonella, bird flu, dead wine vines (moth), potholes, no traffic lights, no banking regulations, interest rates of 50% or more for a loan....

            there are more ways to "kill" people than compounded drugs (and, btw, the "court" removed compounding from the control of the fad, which is why this happened, imho).

            and, god forbid there be standards for "nutritional supplements" that would actually have to contain what they claim and do what they claim!  

            the government has always been a line of defense to protect us in so many areas - yet the libertarians don't want that help, until it affects them personally - then they scream GOVERNMENT IS BAD!

            i really don't get it - or, perhaps, i do.  it is the party of very selfish people who want everything for nothing... kinda like the gop we have now!

            •  What you said! (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              edrie, Larsstephens

              Except I tend to think of Libertarians as under informed, and naive,---same kind of people who spent months preparing for the Y2K bug---remember that?!

              These folks seem to have a video game view of life, where they're at the controls, and so who needs government?  

              Republicans, imo, are a different breed.  They want to reduce government to INCREASE the private sector's PROFITS.  They're really not so allergic to government---as libertarians tend to be---as they are greed driven to make every dime they can, no matter how it works out for the country.

              They want to privatize education, Medicare, SS, the post office and many other government agencies, because there's money to be made in them there hills! They are NOT, imo, driven by naivety or really even ideology---well at least not those who are running the show. They are driven by money, pure and simple.

              "A typical vice of American politics is the avoidance of saying anything real on real issues." Theodore Roosevelt.

              by StellaRay on Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 07:45:53 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  correction, thankfully - only 14 have died... nt (0+ / 0-)
    •  The dems voting for Johnson probably weren't going (30+ / 0-)

      to vote for Obama anyway.

      I have a friend who has been supporting Johnson ever since her "OMG Ron Paul!!11!!!" failed to overthrow the convention, which she honestly and truely expected to happen.

      She has been critical of Obama ever since he took office. Like literally, she was complaining he hadn't ended both wars and fixed the economy 6 weeks after inauguration. She refuses to aknowledge that troops are  out of Iraq and the draw down as begun in Afghanistan.

      She is a pro-choice, feminist union member. It's the most extreme case of cognitive dissonance I have ever seen. When you mention what libertarians would do to choice, unions, schools, etc she just claims that congress wouldn't let them do that stuff, but that they could end the wars. When I pointed out that Ron Paul voted to provide federal funds to mercenaries in iraq and that his position is not really ending the war, but privitizing it, she just stopped responding.

      The honest truth is, she was a Clinton partisan in 2008 and will not forgive Obama for beating her. She won't admit it that is the reason, yet she constantly complains that Clinton would have already ended the wars and turned things around.

      She's not a stupid woman, either. She's an intelligent, college-educated woman who has just gone so far down the rabbit hole that she can't see reality anymore.

      •  I found a whole raft of people (9+ / 0-)

        just like you describe. Call themselves "True Progressives" but don't understand what a Libertarian is.
        And many of them commenting on boards at Progressive sites, TruthOut, Buzzflash, CommonDreams, Alternet, et cetera.
        I'm more concerned that Johnson will hurt Obama than glad he'll scratch Rmoney. Johnson seems to be soaking up the Nadirites, giveing disaffected Obama supporters somewhere to go.
        Fortunately, his numbers are small and will stay small, it just means we need to get a couple more percent GOTV.

        •  Agree (0+ / 0-)

          My blood still boils when I think of how the Nadarites gave us GWB.  In that close of an election it was irresponsible and narcissistic imo.  

          These are the people that no one really satisfies, who are angry with the realities of American politics that haven't changed since the beginning of our Union, have no idea how to change it, or even an educated idea of the consequences of changing it, and so they chuff their vote to someone without a chance to win, while they nail down a GWB victory for the rest of us, 12 years of hell and still counting.

          SO MUCH could have been different post 2,000, but no, people just had to "express themselves" with a vote for an egotist who had and has no problem with the consequences of his never ending runs for the presidency for this country.

          "A typical vice of American politics is the avoidance of saying anything real on real issues." Theodore Roosevelt.

          by StellaRay on Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 04:19:00 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  In this case, though, (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            StellaRay, HeyMikey, Larsstephens, PDiddie

            Johnson is not a narcissist, as Nader was.

            And I think we have to realize that solid 3rd party candidates may not, in fact, draw as much from another party as they may draw voters into the system that might otherwise be disaffected. At least it gets them interested in the political system and otherwise in the habit of voting. To my mind, that's never a bad thing.

            No I am not supporting Johnson. I am no libertarian. Now, if Bernie Sanders were running as a socialist....

            Diversity may be the hardest thing for a society to live with, and perhaps the most dangerous thing for a society to be without - W S Coffin

            by stitchmd on Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 05:57:17 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Love me some Bernie! (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              stitchmd, Larsstephens

              But I have to say, if he had chosen to challenge Barack Obama in this election, as a third party or write in candidate, I would not vote for him.  Because I know he wouldn't win, and in the end, that would essentially be a vote for Mitt Romney.

              I come from the place where we must accept that our system has long been a two party system, for some very good reasons, and will certainly be so this November.  One of only two guys is going to win.  And I think it's incumbent upon every American citizen to make the best choice they can between those two guys---and hopefully some day, a guy and a gal, or two gals!  

              IF we want the freedom to choose from other than what the two parties offer, then we must start very low on the food chain, very local.  I'm a HUGE proponent of run off voting which is a whole other discussion, but essentially allows folks to have more choice, but in the end, insures there will be just two choices.

              For folks who favor a third or multiple parties, they don't seem to understand they're looking at elections where as little as 30% or LESS of the electorate elects the winner.  This is not a good solution to me.  In fact, it scares the shit out of me.

              "A typical vice of American politics is the avoidance of saying anything real on real issues." Theodore Roosevelt.

              by StellaRay on Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 07:16:29 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  Ten times (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Larsstephens, PDiddie

            Ten times as many Florida Dems voted for Bush as voted for Nader.  Ten times as many.  And never once do you hear a word of angry denunciation directed at them by Dem partisans.  I guess it's because by voting for Bush they proved they were "pragmatic centrists" not  "professional leftists".

            Ever get the feeling you've been cheated?

            by ActivistGuy on Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 06:15:08 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I take your point. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              HeyMikey, Larsstephens

              I'm unaware of this statistic, and would have appreciated a link, but I'll take your word for it.

              However, it doesn't change the fact that Nadar got enough votes to have changed the trajectory of the 2000 race, radically, and that we can assume most of those were disillusioned Democrats.  I'm not aware of any libertarian love for Nadar.  In fact the opposite, as he is dedicated to more government regulation, not less.

              Some might have voted for Nadar, who wouldn't have otherwise voted at all.  True.  But we'll never know the exact break downs.  But imo, one thing's for sure. Third party spoilers are not good for this system.  They wick votes AWAY from the choice we really have---one of two candidates, at the loss of one of them.

              And at best case, worst case scenario, if they actually win, as Jesse Ventura did as a third party candidate in Minnesota's election for governor, they win a MAX of 30-33% of the electorate.  This is far from a mandate, and leaves 70% of the electorate feeling unsatisfied.  And if there are MORE than 3 parties, the percentage of the electorate who decrees the winner goes down from there.

              Of course, when it works for us, we like it.  But we never know when it's going to work against us.  As I said in a comment above, a workable solution to freedom of more choices is run off voting, which allows choice at the entry level, but winnows down to two candidates in the end.

              It's not just a matter of two parties, per say, it's the fact that a two party system results in a victory that at least half the nation agrees with.  

              "A typical vice of American politics is the avoidance of saying anything real on real issues." Theodore Roosevelt.

              by StellaRay on Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 07:30:00 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  ActivistGuy is missing the obvious. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Larsstephens

                The Dems who voted Bush must've been on the right side of the Democratic range. They were more or less centrists. I can sorta understand how a (low-info) centrist could think, "Gore is better on issues A, B, C, but Bush is better on D, E, F. And D, E, F are more important to me, so I'm voting Bush."

                The Dems who voted Nader must've been on the left side of the Dem range. Hard to see how they could possibly think Bush was better than Gore on any damn thing.

                Gore was the lesser evil. Obama is the lesser evil. I will vote the lesser evil, and I will damn sure turn out to vote, and if we don't get the greater equal I will be grateful.

                "The true strength of our nation comes not from the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals." - Barack Obama

                by HeyMikey on Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 08:59:18 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

      •  In 2008 (8+ / 0-)

        On my way into work every day, I had to pass a house that had a huge Clinton banner on the fence on MacArthur Blvd just outside of DC.  Then, the day after the DNC formally nominated Obama, that sign came down.  The day that the RNC nominated McCain, a new banner came up, which simply said "Sarah!" (and nothing regarding McCain).

        It's about time I changed my signature.

        by Khun David on Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 01:29:25 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Feminicism is the new racism. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ThatPoshGirl, Khun David

          I, too, have a friend who proudly told me that--following a vote for Reid--she voted for every woman on the ticket.  I always research the judges and stuff and there were 2 women who were absolutely unqualified but my friend was very pleased with herself.
          Lots of Obama haters are, in fact, just people who are still pissed off about Hillary.  The same friend has mercilessly put Obama down from week 4.  Just like PoshGirl describes.  

          "Strange times are these in which we live when old and young are taught in falsehoods school. And the one man that dares to tell the truth is called at once a lunatic and fool" - Plato.

          by rainmanjr on Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 02:58:02 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  And If Hillary Gave Them Marching Orders? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Khun David

            "Go vote for President Obama or else!"

            What would they do?

            Time is an enormous, long river, and I’m standing in it, just as you’re standing in it. My elders are the tributaries, and everything they thought and every struggle they went through & everything they gave their lives to flows down to me-Utah Phillips

            by TerryDarc on Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 04:12:08 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  She's basically tried. (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Khun David, HeyMikey, Larsstephens

              Hillary has voiced her thanks and urged her fans to support Obama.  They simply won't.  Somehow it's just beyond their ability to actually listen to her.

              "Strange times are these in which we live when old and young are taught in falsehoods school. And the one man that dares to tell the truth is called at once a lunatic and fool" - Plato.

              by rainmanjr on Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 05:52:17 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  God what an ignorant comment (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            ActivistGuy

            and it's "feminism," clueless one.

            Diversity may be the hardest thing for a society to live with, and perhaps the most dangerous thing for a society to be without - W S Coffin

            by stitchmd on Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 05:58:59 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  stupid means that you are not capable of learning. (5+ / 0-)

        ignorant means that you are unwilling to learn.

        your friend is ignorant.

      •  Gee, nobody like that 'round here...nt (4+ / 0-)
      •  I've noticed that too. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ThatPoshGirl, Larsstephens

        He's the libertarians' silver medal.

        "The government of the many, not the government of the money" - Nancy Pelosi

        by Americantrueandblue on Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 03:23:22 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I was a Libertarian in my mispent youth (6+ / 0-)

      I'm trying to work on ways to counter that, so that others don't share my fate. :)

    •  Its the pot talking (12+ / 0-)

      Most of the otherwise liberal people I know who like Gov. Johnson like him on one issue: marijuana legalization. There is a significant number in this single issue voter block. I live in New Mexico, where my main memory of him comes from the time he tried to reward his campaign contributors with a "buffalo hunt" of the Ft. Wingate herd, which otherwise needed to be relocated. These were creatures so docile you could hand feed them. You could literally hunt them with an apple in one hand and a 45 in the other. It was one of the douchebaggiest things I have ever heard of, designed soley to allow his richest contributors a chance to get their buffalo certificate from the Safari Club.

      Incidentally, two days ago, I met a guy who swore that Johnson was going to win the presidency. He didn't mention pot, he thought that he deserved it because he had climbed Mt Everest. Seriously.

    •  My only question to Libertarians is ... (4+ / 0-)

      Please give me one example of Liberterism that's worked, ever? Somalia doesn't count ;-)

      End of discussion.

      But, 1 person did say if people weren't, you know, such people, then yadda-yadda. I asked him to let me know when that happens.

      •  Barcelona 1936-1937 (0+ / 0-)

        and the CNT-FAI.  

        Ever get the feeling you've been cheated?

        by ActivistGuy on Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 06:20:28 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  There's a big difference between (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          slampros

          what libertarians like Gary Johnson believe in and and anarcho-syndacalism. The primacy of individual property rights is one of the foundations of libertarianism.   The CNT explicitly supported seizing of the means of production by workers.  The assets were seized in the name of the people of Spain. The CNT’s ultimate aim was to create a democratically planned, socially-owned economy.  This is not libertarianism.  

    •  Libertarian is Latin for selfish (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      TerryDarc, nanorich, Laconic Lib

      Really.  Libertarians are the anti-John Donne Party, the Yes-I Am-An-Island Party.

      The scientific uncertainty doesn't mean that climate change isn't actually happening.

      by Mimikatz on Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 03:01:57 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Well Put! (0+ / 0-)

        Or the Simon and Garfunkel Party?

        A winter's day
        In a deep and dark December;
        I am alone,
        Gazing from my window to the streets below
        On a freshly fallen silent shroud of snow.
        I am a rock,
        I am an island.

        I've built walls,
        A fortress deep and mighty,
        That none may penetrate.
        I have no need of friendship; friendship causes pain.
        It's laughter and it's loving I disdain.
        I am a rock,
        I am an island.

        Don't talk of love,
        But I've heard the words before;
        It's sleeping in my memory.
        I won't disturb the slumber of feelings that have died.
        If I never loved I never would have cried.
        I am a rock,
        I am an island.

        I have my books
        And my poetry to protect me;
        I am shielded in my armor,
        Hiding in my room, safe within my womb.
        I touch no one and no one touches me.
        I am a rock,
        I am an island.

        And a rock feels no pain;
        And an island never cries.

        But this is irony not support for this view.

        Time is an enormous, long river, and I’m standing in it, just as you’re standing in it. My elders are the tributaries, and everything they thought and every struggle they went through & everything they gave their lives to flows down to me-Utah Phillips

        by TerryDarc on Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 04:17:18 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Isn't Johnson popular with stoners? (0+ / 0-)

      For if there is a sin against life, it consists perhaps not so much in despairing of life as in hoping for another life and in eluding the implacable grandeur of this life. - Albert Camus

      by Anne Elk on Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 03:11:50 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site