if it ends up 10-15% that would be the projected Libertarian votes.

Mulitple posts demeaning the one candidate in a binary election is supporting the opposing candidate.

Multiple posts proclaiming how you are happy you won't vote for Trump enables others in swing states to not sack up and make a difference.

You are supporting the Hildabeast.

Just sayin.

 
and then fucking choke themselves.

Damn you trump supporters are looking more and more like fascists every day.

With an attitude like that, I don't blame them for not lining up to be abused.  You are obviously looking for a fight, not a debate.

No, I don't want to see Clinton win. That's why, much as I'd enjoy seeing a dozen or so of his more obnoxious cultists stroke out, I'll be voting for TOT (assuming he's still trailing here in Virginia).

Here's the thing.

You may suspect anything you want about trump.  Do it.  Be suspicious all you want.

HRC, you don't have to be suspicious about what she's up to.  She's said it, plain as day, during her campaign.

She wants, rather rapidly....

1)  Give illegals amnesty within the first 100 days
2)  Work on gun control as a primary issue until she got major movement on it.

So, when I'm given the choice between known shit sandwich and a sandwich of unknown quality......I'm going to bite the unknown sandwich because biting off on the other one has a known quality I don't desire.

Must have a bunch of cultists who don't believe the polls about the Orange Comb Over having the highest negatives ever.

In spite of OCO and his loyal cultists actions in the past week,   I remain

#NeverHillary

So, you're voting for Hillary.............noted.

#Nevertrump
#Neverhillary

#Gary Johnson 2016!

I'm all aboard the Trump Train.

Seeing all the butt hurt on social media and MSM feelz good man.

fixed it for you.....you're welcome

What's wrong with Johnson he has the best 2nd amendment record of the three

No.

He is voting for Johnson.

He is supporting the Hildabeast.

Providing support is worse than just voting.

They will be out IN FORCE if he loses, smug as fuck.

Meanwhile, Hillary will be fucking us all.

No matter what choice you make, you are still making a choice.

Not voting against Hillary is just as much not voting for trump....sure.....but if you have a choice of one or the other....not helping to keep one out of office, considering who one of them is.....is a choice you are making.

It's not like you don't know the stakes.  It's not like you don't know that enough votes to win are necessary and the left will be bringing every single voter to the polls as they can.  Even dead ones.

So yeah, knowing the stakes....not voting is still a choice you are making, which you are responsible for.

You only get 2 choices at the moment.  Picking the less of 2 evils doesn't make you responsible for what they do, especially when you aren't voting FOR them, you are voting against their opponent.

You are acting like this is something that will be held against you.  If hillary wins, THAT will have a much higher chance of following you around than if Trump wins and isn't all that great.

This is my only motivation to vote this cycle.

Precisely.  I'll vote against Clinton in spite of TOT and his turdlets, not because of them.

This and only this. Hillary WILL pack the court with two or three more Sotomyers if she wins. The Dems will then have a rubber stamp SCOTUS. There will be no point in challenging gun control laws or any other outrageous leftist bullshit that passes her desk. It will be a new dark age for anybody who values personal freedom and it will remain so for decades by which point there will be no turning it around. So vote for Johnson if you must but you and I both know he has zero chance of winning and a vote for him is a vote that could have went towards stopping Hillary.

Very true.  But if Trump wins, we can hopefully prevent the Court from turning liberal majority, and that is huge.  I said "hopefully" because I don't trust Trump, at all.  

Absolute ZERO chances of winning........but you can hold your head up high and revel in for voting for conscious as President Hildabeast's thugs forcibly remove your guns and ammo out of your house.

We need 10-20 Libertarians in Congress first to become a viable party with a legit chance of winning The Presidency. Until then any Libertarian candidate for POTUS is nothing more than a disruption to blocking Clinton from The White House.

He also wont win a single state and is therefore a wasted vote. May as well write in Cruz if you're going that route. It will do just as much good.

What's your name on DU?

What type of message is being sent to the "establishment" when a good portion of the party is either considering not voting for Trump or severely unhappy with him and are only voting for him because there are no other options?

Those who truly believe a third party candidate will never get elected are the reason for two horribly corrupted parties. And anyway, who are you to say if my vote “counts” or not? I don’t see you in the Electoral College.

Gary Johnson would rather have the Bernie voters than you, his running mate is as anti gun as Bernie, he is a joke, not a serious candidate.

A total of 87 when I voted.

By not helping him, you're helping the candidate running against him.

ZUIU

WHY DO YOU HATE AMERICA???

AND ENABLE HILLERY'S CONFISCATION OF OUR GUNS

ALONG WITH THE DESTRUCTION OF THE 2ND AMENDMENT???

This is one of the most right wing single issue forums I've ever seen, and still ten percent will not support this candidate.
I imagine more oppose him but are tired of the conversation.
Would any other man or woman have this kind of negative numbers here?
I,d like to know who if you think they would.

What he said.

I hope he kicks the shit out of that nasty bitch. Right after he wins the election.

I would love to see posts by all the members who support Hillary.  Because 100% that's EXACTLY what it is if you vote for a third party candidate, or just don't vote.  Gary Johnson may be the greatest guy ever but his chances of winning are so abysmal its not even worth mentioning.  Remember Ross Perot?  

Do I want Trump? not really.  But I'll take him over Hillary a thousand times over.

If you don't understand the importance of voting this election, and truly voting AGAINST Hillary and all the stupid sh*t she represents, I hope you enjoy 'Batin and watching "Ow My Balls" while America circles the drain and gets some progressive supreme court justices.

I want Hillary to lose and Pence to Win.

I'm going to vote for him. He can't be worse than pure evil.

Whole bunch of thirpers here in '08 and '12.  I don't remember names, but I'd guess that a lot of those are preaching the Trump-or-Clinton line now.

Voting against Trump is basically voting to say "I don't care about my gun rights, please ban/confiscate them."

Just as bad are the people who stay at home and don't vote, for whatever reason (they wanted a "real" conservative to win the primary, etc). Or those who vote for a third-party candidate (they have absolutely no chance of winning, you are literally wasting your vote and not helping the 2A cause whatsoever)

Am I a die-hard Trump supporter? No. But I am a supporter of the second amendment. THINK of the consequences if Hilary wins.

If you do not go and vote for Trump this election, you deserve to have your 2nd Amendment rights taken away.

False, the reason a third party will never get elected is because third parties are not well organized, and don't have enough population in enough states to have an ability to influence the electoral college in any other way than as a spoiler. The third largest party, the Libertarian party is extremely small.  There is not enough weight of voters to support it at the Presidential level. As a third party it's only sway is local and some state levels.  

 

I can tell you how much your vote counts, your vote is worth the voting population of your state split among the available electoral votes.  So, a very small fraction of a percent.

I would like to see Trump lose to Gary Johnson....

I don't necessarily want Trump to be president, but I definitely don't want Clinton and the Democrats to have the power.  One might crap on me and mine, the other definitely will and by the truckload.

Lots and lots of this.



Fuck that lying conniving cunt.



 

96 fuck tards as of now.  What a fucking shame

You asked for an answer.  It is long.  My apologies.

I do not want to see Clinton as President, but that does not mean that I want to see Trump become President.  Yes, I want Trump to lose.  I want both to lose.

Clinton will continue to push us along on the road to serfdom, leading us further toward state control of our economic livelihood.  She will continue to advance the notion of positive rights, placing certain government-given restrictions above the liberties that are our inherent birthright.  She will not make the world a better place by allowing the radiant light of our city-on-the-hill to cast aside darkness, but will instead create dark abysses by promoting foolhardy regime changes.

However, her shortcomings do not make Trump the answer.

When evaluating a candidate, I consider: (1) their positions on the issues; and (2) their character.  

Someone once told me that the only person who you will agree with 100% of the time is yourself.  He was right.  On part #1 I know not to let the perfect be the enemy of the good.  However, a candidate has to convince me at a minimum that they have some set of reasoned policy positions, preferably revolving around a central belief that corresponds to the ideals of individual liberty and limited government.  Those positions and belief have to be at least somewhat positively oriented towards my way of thinking on these matters.

Trump's positions have tended to be moving targets, leading me to believe that they are not at all thought-out and reasoned and do not spring forth from some unifying ideal. He has in the past supported those who fight hard against the positions and ideals that I would like to see and at times has, himself, supported ideas that I oppose.  I'm all for someone turning over a new leaf, but the vacillation of Trump combined with #2 (discussed below) leaves me unconvinced that this is what is going on.

Before someone says "go look at Trump's website it is full of stuff that sounds great" let me ask you the following question: which do you think is a better indicator of what someone truly believes, what they (or someone else) carefully crafted over many hours with an audience in mind and likely after considering whether it will sell well to that audience, or what they say off the cuff?  I personally think the latter is a better gauge of where one's head is really at and so let's just discuss a few of Trump's talking points.

Economic Protectionism - I tend to think that competition is good.  Competition drives down prices and spurs innovation and the making of products more desirable to consumers.  Assets are put to their highest uses and redundancies and inefficiencies are reduced.  You can read Bastiat for a more thorough discussion (he is an easy and pleasurable read), but in general summary free trade creates prosperity and raises everyone's standard of living.  Trump has advocated for protectionist policies that will raise the cost of goods coming from overseas.  Contrary to the rhetoric, this is not going to cause an enormous return of manufacturing jobs that have left, most of which have actually been lost to automation.  This will raise the price of consumer goods for everyone.  Those few who get new jobs making something domestically that was previously made more efficiently overseas will benefit as earners, but even they will be spending more for goods.  Rather than proposing yet another government control solution to a problem, perhaps Trump might consider that domestic policies with regards to labor and employment laws and other business regulations are what have put us into a self-made disadvantage by making our costs of production artificially high.

Immigration - Our immigration system is broken.  There is no doubt about that.  However, to the point of immigrants coming here and "taking jobs" such that we have to put Americans first I have to say that such a belief seems to belie a complete lack of faith in the competitiveness of the American worker.  If an American worker who has had all of the benefits of growing up here for some reason cannot compete with a person that grew up in a third-world country with no education and who doesn't even speak our language, then the immigrant isn't the problem.  This country was built on immigration by attracting the best and the brightest who risked all to come here with just the hope that by working hard and with a little luck they could succeed.  We should want to continue to draw talent from the rest of the world and even draw people who want to do the jobs that others reject.  Again, competition is good and makes us better.  

The Wall - If I don't trust the government not to use for nefarious purposes a registry of all firearms in the country then why the heck would I trust them to build a big prison wall that seals off our border?  As the logic goes, if things are so bad that citizens need to revolt we don't want the government having a list of who is armed.  If things are that bad that people want to flee, why would I want the government to wall me in?  If a registry will still not stop the bad guys from getting guns, how is a wall going to stop the bad guys from smuggling, tunneling, etc?  

The Constitution - Based upon his comments about the Constitution and responses in various discussions about policy proposals and the function of government I don't know that he has ever bothered to read the Constitution.

Guns - Since this is a gun site...  Trump says he will "cherish" and "defend" the Second Amendment in the same speech he says "my son has so many guns even I get a little worried sometimes."  Even the biggest gun grabbers always say they are going to respect the RKBA.  The devil is in the details.  If I generally don't trust that the "deal maker" Trump has any underlying fealty to the Constitution or its provisions then his only impetus for carrying out his vow to uphold the Constitution is political expediency and what is expedient today may blow a different direction in tomorrow's breeze.

I'll skip the more moving targets of things like tax reform, minimum wages, etc.

Part #2, character, is also an extremely important consideration.  By character, I do not mean a flamboyant personality, but rather one's apparent trustworthiness, humility, civility and self-restraint.  If I cannot believe a word coming out of someone's mouth, how can I trust them on part #1?  If one believes that they have all the answers as an individual they generally only hurt themselves.  If one with the force of government behind him believes he has all the answers, he imposes those answers upon all and when he is wrong all suffer.  And, those who think they have all of the right answers are precisely those who seek to impose those answers upon others.  See e.g., the socialists.  Civility and self-control are essential to self governance.  If all of us were civil and exhibited self-control there would be far fewer examples of bad behavior ripe for exploitation by those who seek control.  For someone who wields the power of the presidency, I would prefer they exhibit these characteristics.

Yet, Trump seems to lack in all of these qualities and instead exceeds in narcissism.  He wants control and the stroking of his ego, thinks he has all of the answers, and is willing to lie and do whatever it takes to get his way.

Trump changes his positions and makes horrible assertions all the time and then when called on it denies everything.  It is as though he is the head of the Ministry of Truth in Orwell's 1984, constantly changing the historical record in his own mind such that the old is purged and only the new is truth until it is later replaced by a new truth.

Trump is never wrong.  As he put it just the other night "I alone can fix it." In the first joint interview with Pence when asked about not being humble Trump's response to the reporter is (paraphrasing) "I am humble.  I am so humble that you couldn't even fathom how humble I am."  Yes, because telling the interviewer that you are so far above her mentally that she cannot fathom humility is really being humble.  In his rallies he constantly touts his great poll numbers and his "wins" and discredits or lashes out about losses.  By his actions and words he has assured me that he is not capable of admitting any shortcoming except when doing so advances his own ends in a moment of meaningless humility - much like when Clinton "takes responsibility" for her email scandal; taking responsibility means nothing when there are no consequences.  A show of humility when all is to be gained and nothing lost is mere manipulation for the advancement of ego and prestige.

And what of civility or self-control?  How can someone who feels the need to exact vengeance upon dissenters and critics through humiliation, smear campaigns and even civil legal actions be trusted to uphold and defend their liberty?  What sort of retaliation would Trump utilize if imbued with the power to direct the pursuit of criminal prosecutions?  

I fear that the answer to the last question is that Trump would use all tools at his disposal, irrespective of whether doing so is rightly within the power of the presidency.  

He has said he will target for retribution and put out of business individual companies that want to move jobs overseas.  No mention of a duly authorized law, just individual retaliation.  He has told us that he will attempt to prosecute journalists for reporting on him in unfavorable ways.  At least on this one he said he'll try to change the law.  He has told us that he will order the killing of non-combatant family members of terrorists.  On that last one, when asked in the March 3rd Republican debate about the possibility of soldiers refusing such orders, Trump responded:

"They won't refuse.  They're not going to refuse me.  Believe me.  ...  I'm a leader.  I've always been a leader.  I've never had a problem leading people.  If I say do it, they're going to do it.  That is what leadership is all about."

Now, I'm no terrorist apologist or anything of the sort, but that sort of mindset from Trump scares the hell out of me.  The whole aura of Trump is that of a populist strong man dictator: rally your troops and feed them well, telling them they're the greatest; smear your opposition; and consolidate power.  I've lived in countries run by strong-man dictatorships.  I hope to never do so again.  

A vote for Trump is not only a vote against Hillary and those contemplating a vote for Trump to beat Hillary must also know that a vote for Trump is, in fact, a vote for Trump.  I cannot vote for this man.  That leaves me with Gary Johnson.  Not a perfect fit, but acceptable.

To those who have read all of this and think that I'm just completely incorrect on Trump, I truly hope that you are right.  And, if you are I will gladly endure the pile-on.  I will not lie and disavow this post.  I will, however, ask you to note that I have been civil and self-controlled.  Before resorting to name calling and the like, consider whether it advances our great experiment in self-governance.  For those who cannot govern themselves will surely find themselves governed by others.  

To those who argue that "we know what Hillary will do as President and you only have some suspicion of what Trump might do as President, so vote for the chance of something good" I respond that this is precisely what I will be doing with my vote.  Even if Gary Johnson loses, if the Libertarian Party can garner enough support to trigger thresholds in elections laws and make themselves noticed with mainstream voters there may be a chance, albeit small, that we can have more than just two options each go-around.  The two major parties haven't exactly showed a willingness over the past 30 years to put forth presidential candidates that I find particularly helpful to the cause of limiting government and upholding individual liberties.  Perhaps a third option would give the Republicans some added incentive to do so.  If not, at least there might exist a third option if we are still at the point of voting for the President instead of being told who the anointed successor will be.

In conclusion - if Trump wins, I fear that we all lose.

This.  More at stake here than many comprehend.

They'll both be dead by the time the libertarian party has enough members to be effective.  So... hold your breath.

If we are at the point where one potential candidate has to save us from the SCOTUS, we are done

I want Hillary to lose.

That is all I am going to say on the matter.

Not happy with how things rolled-out.

There is no joy in the position *we* are in.

If folks want to gloat about Trumpcare, "bounceback" amnesty for illegals, and "no-fly--no-guns" gun control, that is up to them. They are showing their ass if they gloat about those liberal platform issues making it to the Republican platform...

But.

I want Hillary to lose. And that is all I am going to say about it right now.

My tongue is bleeding, I am biting it so hard. But I want HIllary to lose.

Yeah,

Hillary might appoint open-borders, anti-gun Democrats like Trumps sister to the Supreme Court. That would be bad.

It is my hope Hillary loses.