Is there any good reason why I shouldn't be voting for Gary Johnson if I the political issues I care most about are economic conservatism, capitalism and free enterprise?
If you don't want to be a cuck, for one
>>74568335
>Is there any good reason why I shouldn't be voting for Gary Johnson
he has no fucking chance
>>74568335
>pro-globalization
It's funny cause I got a 94% match with Johnson on the isidewith page, but I still wouldn't vote for him
>>74568335
Open borders.
>>74568493
I don't really care about globalization as long as capitalism is preserved. It's socialism and populist pandering that I can't stand, which is why I can't vote for Sanders, Clinton or Trump.
>>74568495
Again, I don't give a fuck about that as long as people can freely invest in, start and run businesses with as little government regulation and interference as possible.
>>74568805
Too bad there are already government regulations and structures in place that do regulate the economy. Trump would serve to deregulate protections on companies exploiting asian slave labor and would invoke protectionist policies for the American people. In a world where indian software developers work for literal pocket change, with vast disparities in currencies, purchasing power, and cost of living among different countries, do you really think open borders and completely unregulated trade is beneficial to the American people, or ANYONE other than the leaders of massive corporations?
Keep in mind, even a free trade stance would still have regulations for monopolies, which the US has established in practically every third world country.
>>74568335
He's a cuck candidate funded by the Kochs purely to spoil the ballot for Trump by splitting the Republican vote and handing the election to Hillary.
>>74569696
>free trade doesn't work because foreign goods are to cheap
wew
>>74568335
Because Austin Petersen will get the nomination, not Gary. Vote for him instead.
You know hat they say about big hands... big Johnson.
>>74568335
He is not a real libertarian. He wants you to bake the faggot cake.
>>74568335
See Ralph Nader:
In the 2000 presidential election in Florida, George W. Bush defeated Al Gore by 537 votes. Nader received 97,421 votes, which led to claims that he was responsible for Gore's defeat. Nader, both in his book Crashing the Party and on his website, states: "In the year 2000, exit polls reported that 25% of my voters would have voted for Bush, 38% would have voted for Gore and the rest would not have voted at all." (which would net a 13%, 12,665 votes, advantage for Gore over Bush.)
Also see Ross Perot.
Also see Spoiler Effect.
Johnson > Hillary > Trump
>>74569994
fucking this
He is a progressive that will allow SOME free market as long as it does not trigger minorities
>>74568335
wow, i used to care about national sovereignty and the value of culture having primacy over the almighty dollar but now I'm #feelingthejohnson
>>74568335
Demographics dumbshit. Your lolbertarian paradise will never happen if you import a bunch of people who vote democrat.
There are two spoilers in this race: shillary and the guy with the small hands.
>>74570099
>Hillary > Trump
Found the shill
>>74570133
A spoiler is someone who has no chance of winning but takes votes away from someone who would otherwise win, and who is closer to the spoiler than the alternative candidate.
So Ralph Nader was a spoiler for Gore, because he had no chance of winning and he was closer to Gore than to Bush.
And Ross Perot was a spoiler for HW Bush because he had no chance of winning and he was closer to Bush than Clinton.
Spoilers have recently given us the following two presidents:
Bill Clinton
George W. Bush
Without the spoilers, the election would have gone the other way.
Spoilers are just huge egos that fuck everything up.
>>74568335
If you have the time check this out and see what you think afterwards.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQIuHGbKckY
My only major fault but it is to fucking major for me to support him is his open borders views.
>>74570110
>value of culture having primacy over the almighty dollar
Well, this is where we disagree. I think cultural issues have almost no place in public policy. I also don't particularly care for nationalism except for the fact that America is, for all its faults, still the best country in the world to build a business from the ground up.
>>74570133
Without Johnson that poll is 45-42 Trump vs Clinton. It seems like he either pulls equally from both sides. Another poll indicated that he pulls more from Hillary.
And he hasn't even started campaigning yet. He has focused his staff's efforts on getting libertarians on the ballots.
Trump and Clinton?
>>74570598
Need to replace his name with "EGOMANIAC"
>>74570496
public policy needs to evolve out of the cultural zeitgeist, otherwise you get america as it is now. free enterprise only works when everyone's on an even moral and legal playing field -- other countries don't have our values, so they don't play by the rules and we get fucked. nationalism first. culture first. america first.
>>74568335
Because he is for open borders which would allow a flood of people in that don't support any of those things.
>>74568335
there is nothing good in letting people that already have more money than you lay claim to even more.
>people unironically voted for Johnson instead of McAfee
>>74570698
Done
>>74568805
But you would lose all of that with open borders, because because brown people vote overwhelmingly Democrat.
>>74570854
Johnson has no chance of winning, so he's not running for that reason. He's just running so he can bask in the attention, consequences be damned. Stroking his ego comes first. Everything else comes last.
Vote libertarian = split vote = liebrals win
Also, Peterson > MacFee > Johnson
>>74568335
not really, third party votes are just votes for whoever is leading at the time. The primary argument against this is usually that this very mentality is what makes that true, but that doesn't change the fact that it is still true.
>>74568335
Just vote Hillary you fuck. Be honest. Stop pretending like you don't know how a two party system works.
mfw all the 3rd grade johnson insults fail
>>74568577
>I don't really care about globalization as long as capitalism is preserved
Typical libertarian idiot.
This is what's most tragic, globalization is no longer even profiting average American, yet you still support it like good dogs.
>>74568400
you should vote for the candidate you feel will do the best job, that is how democracy works. you aren't picking horses on a Sunday you degenerate.
>>74568577
>I don't really care about globalization as long as capitalism is preserved
Literally a useful idiot
thx
>>74570922
This, and based on that fact alone that I will not vote for him, even as a Libertarian. Other lolbertarians here have said the same thing.
>>74568335
A vote for Gayry Johnsons is a vote for Crooked Hillary
>>74571115
No, voting for whoever you want is childish in the face of the oncoming series of supreme court justices, if you throw a bet on third party you could literally sell the entire country under the bus.
>>74568335
Two-party system sucks
It's like your citizens are too retarded to compare more than two candidates
...well, what can belarus say about elections anyway
>>74571192
The Monmouth pools tell otherwise
>>74571115
This is only true if you're not in a swing state.
>>74570826
I'd vote for him just because of his cyber security background.
>>74571115
You're advising willful ignorance.
Once you're aware of how the system works, you realize it's simply a matter of choosing the lesser of two evils.
Only a child could imagine otherwise.
This mother fucker wants what is happening in German and Scandinavia to happen to the USA. He wants to allow Muslims move here in droves. He wants to enable radical Muslims to infiltrate American in a way they cannot at this time.
>>74571447
What a truly glorious meme for this election cycle.
Bravo!
>>74571419
>Only a child could imagine otherwise.
Perhaps closed minded adults like you are why we have a two party system to begin with. Both of which have nominees that favor regulation over freedom.
>>74570355
This assumes that those who voted for the "spoiler" would have voted for a different candidate rather than not voting at all. This is a false premise
>>74569923
>standards of living rising in China
>state raises wages to avoid rebellion
>American manufacturers move to Vietnam and Malaysia like a swarm of locusts
This is already happening. What happens when US firms run out of countries with plentiful slave Labour willing to accept $1 a day? Prices go back up, or profits shrink, or both. But the economic damage in our country will already be done
>>74568335
Reminder that Reddit is promoting this guy right now to divert from Trump. It's just shilling.
>>74568805
Oh, right. Hello, Tarl. Have you been working hard on those gardens lately?
>>74571554
We have a two party system because we have a two party system, dumbass.
If you want to change it, change it, don't bitch me out for articulating obvious facts.
>>74568335
because he wont win
If you're in a blue or red state, you can vote however you want, because your vote will not matter. But if you are in a gray swing state, you have no choice. You must vote for Trump. Don't be a faggot.
>>74571504
Gayboy Johnson is a massive ultracuck, and I say that as someone who voted for Bob Barr in '08
>>74568577
good goyim
>>74571691
>this circular reasoning
try explaining how this comes about in some sort of coherent manner instead of bullshitting buddy boy, it's not that hard
>>74568335
Fuck off, Correct the Record. You divide and conquer tactics won't work here.
>>74571216
>>74571312
>>74571419
the fallacies in your logic are a self-fulfilling prophecy. voters, overly concerned with voting for the winner, end up electing someone they don't want. the train is not leaving the station, polls are manipulated statistics, you don't know who will win until the final ballots are counted. educate yourself on who you believe the best candidate will be and openly advocate for him/her prior to the election. when poll day comes, choose who you feel is right.
we fought against the establishment and served the epic meme of trump, now we must redeem our actions and do what is truly right: get our prophesied libertarian leader into office.
>>74571285
Yeah, those polls show that Johnson would hypothetically grub up 10% of the vote, probably more than half of the would come from likely Trump voters because dem-leaners think libertarianism is racist and sexist. In a close election decided by swing states, every vote stolen from Trump is a vote stolen for Hillary.
Luckily there's no way this cuck will even break 5% nationwide, just like he didn't in 2012, but it's the principle of the shilling which offends me
>>74571419
The system needs to change but retards like you think things will improve so long as you play the corrupt system, which is stacked against the people, the "right" way. You're fucking delusional and YOU are the problem.
johnson shills look like they get their material from facebook
>>74572033
Someone who is polling 11% will not win. All they will do is siphon votes away from the actual contenders and spoil for the candidate they are closest to, so it has the opposite effect of what you wanted.
That's the reality of it. Being hopey-dreamy about it doesn't change it.
>>74571652
Yeah, I saw it, and it is conjecture.
>>74569962
spending an awful lot of time thinkin about dudes dix there anon
>>74570033
>le kind of a badass meme
xD
>>74571763
we're winning Michigan faggot
Why not, if you live in a solid blue or solid red state?
Doesn't he get to be in the debates or get funding or something if he gets 5%?
>>74571702
Self-fulfilling prophecies sure are great!
>>74568335
Get out HillShill, this is a blatant attempt to try and split Trump's voting base on a Turkish Delight Internet Forum by having people vote third party.
>voting for Gary "we need to stop Iran because they fund ISIS" Johnsonberg
>>74570033
can we get one of him & pootie rubbin bellies together on horseback?
>>74572279
Conjecture based on exit polls. You can vote however you want, but you should be informed of the risks and honest about them before you do.
>>74568335
Who?
>>74571827
The founding fathers did not intend for either parties ("fractions") or campaigning (one stood for office, he did not "run," and only landowning white males could vote), so they accidentally created a system that is almost impossible for a third party to break into.
Even if fagboy Johnson got 40% of the vote, he would still most likely lose the electoral college in a three-way split
>>74572162
>stolen
>your vote belongs to Trump! How dare you steal it by voting for the person you agree with most
The only person with a ego problem is you.
>>74572549
>fractions
Factions, thanks autocorrect
>>74572572
I voted for Johnson in 2012, but Trump is a way better candidate than Romney. If you don't vote for him I think you're a retard.
Interesting thing about Nader is that after he spoiled the 2000 election and handed it to George W. Bush (a horrible disaster), Nader went on to run again in 2004, even though his poll ratings were even lower than in 2000. And he tried to run again in 2008. This egomaniac didn't care that he wouldn't win. He didn't care that what the consequences were of his run. The only thing that mattered was his ego strutting around, and fuck the consequences. His principles didn't matter. His policies didn't matter. Only his ego mattered, and all the spotlight and attention he would get. These people are fucking disgusting.
>>74572572
If they would've voted for Trump without King Cuck in the race, and if his entry throws it for Hillary, who will literally be the worst president in US history, then no fate is too harsh for those who voted Cuck party
>>74572465
Conjecture based on "what if reality wasn't really reality, then how would you act?". You might as well ask people who they would vote for if aliens invaded.
>>74572259
>polling 11% in May
>May
>M A Y
>A
>Y
there's no hopey-dreamy in taking action over the next five months for the future of your country.
further, you are contributing to the data modeling process that is being used to crystal ball our nation's politcal future. if we allow these models to become very accurate they will inevitably be gained by the members of everyone's favorite religion to further their agenda.
you're advocating being a number worshiping sheep. take control of your future. there is no shame in voting for a loser.
DAILY REMINDER THAT CLINTON IS PAYING SHILLS TO SHILL GARY JOHNSON ONLINE IN ORDER TO CHIP AWAY AT TRUMP'S SUPPORT AND SO THAT SHE CAN STEAL THE ELECTION
GARY JOHNSON IS AN OPEN BORDERS KEK WITH NO CHANCE OF EVER BEING ELECTED
>>74572911
I hope they put Johnson in the first debate. Trump will eat him alive. He won't be in the second debate.
>>74572797
>if and if and if and if
Yeah, and if I was a tap dancing unicorn on a bicycle it might affect who I voted for as well.
>>74572259
It's not about winning though, it is presenting your opinion on who you think should win. So you look at UKIP or a libertarian candidate while not winning but getting say 20% of the vote shows that 1/5th of voters think that your candidate is in their best interests.
This means that other parties should take notice and attempt to remake policies to snag that 1/5th of the vote. Basically if a large majority votes for a candidate that wants to limit spending but that person does not get in and a candidate can change their agenda to also include the limitations on spending then your vote wasn't in vein.
Your vote is your voice not a sporting bet.
>>74572847
Conjecture based on the evidence we have. Your conjecture that Nader voters would have not voted at all is based on ... nothing, and is in fact contradictory to the evidence we have. your conjecture is based solely on what you want to be true. You simply took your wish and said it was real.
>>74572794
I won't vote Johnson because his stated policies will result in a demographic shift toward people who don't want those policies, so it's counter productive.
My point is that you either win votes or you don't. If someone doesn't vote for you, it wasn't "stolen" because that vote never belonged to you in the first place.
>>74572794
This. Obama and Romney sucked, so I voted Johnson out of butthurt. It's not the same this time around.
>>74573181
My position is the null hypothesis, not conjecture. Your position is founded solely on conjecture. It doesn't matter that it was polled conjecture, it is still conjecture.
>>74573178
No, if you want to express yourself, you put a bumper sticker on your car. Voting is about the real-world practical outcome of your vote. You will either get Trump or Clinton. That's harsh reality. So you make your vote in such a way that you get the one of those you want most. A vote for Trump makes a Trump presidency more likely. A vote for Johnson makes a Hillary presidency more likely. That's all you need to know.
>>74572797
I hate this argument, and it just makes them more likely to protest vote anyway. Most people's votes are flat-out useless.
>>74573043
So what do you envision Mr Cuck? Gary gets 10% and Trump wins? Then what's the point?
>>74573493
It's conjecture based on evidence. And the null hypothesis is just as much conjecture as the alternative hypothesis. It doesn't have special status. It requires as much evidence as the alternative. You just don't think your hypothesis requires evidence. It does.
>>74569923
>slave labor should be allowed
Stop it leaf.
Vote for who you believe in. I believe in Trump. If you don't, you're probably a homosexual, but vote for who you believe in.
>>74568335
Sorry your 3rd party dream scheme crapped out, Bill Kristol. But stop pimping #FeelingTheJohnson as an alternative to your half baked bullshit.
>>74572033
yeah, naw, you're a cunt
>>74573662
It is not conjecture based on evidence, it is "evidence" based on conjecture.
The null hypothesis is that there is no connection between two things (having a third-party candidate and another candidate receiving less votes). Evidence is required to substantiate a connection, which these exit polls do not provide.
>>74573647
But it's true. Our system does not really support three or more candidates. It's far more realistic to try to subvert one of the two "big tent" parties, as Trump has successfully done
Elect libertarian-leaning Republicans in the primary like Rand and Ron Paul, if that's what you want, instead of throwing the election for the socialists/moderate neocon Democrats, whom you should in theory consider worse than even the least libertarian Republican
>>74573655
The point is that people gave their real opinions instead of trying play strategy with our political system.
>>74574038
There's no reason you can't do both. I'm not that scared of Gary Johnson voters, because there's not that many of them, most states are gonna be solid blue or red anyway, and even swing states it's pretty unlikely the difference between two candidates will be that small. I think they should vote Trump, but that you have to vote for one of the 2 parties is a retarded argument. One vote is not worth much.
>>74568335
>>74574015
Evidence is required to substantiate no connection too. Evidence is required to make any assertion. Otherwise your assertion is baseless.
>I just make shit up and believe it because I like it. I don't need any evidence for it!
Johnson voters, everybody. Complete retards.
As for the evidence that voters leaned toward Nader, it's based on self-report. It's not perfect, by any means, but it's the best evidence we have. So it should push our belief toward it, but not as much as if the evidence was perfect.
Meanwhile you push your belief all the way in the direction that has no evidence to support it. You're a complete fucking idiot.
>tfw /pol/ was pro-libertarian in 2008
>mfw now they support a jew cuck ex-democrat billionaire instead
>>74574385
What were the alternatives to Paul in 2008? McCain or Nigger?
>>74574385
sad times indeed
>>74568335
Besause youd be giving votes to hillary, friend.
>>74574341
No connection is the default assumption. It does not require evidence because it is literally impossible to prove that something doesn't exist.
And I'm not voting for Johnson. I never said I was. But by all means continue to spout fallacies.
The problem with the polls is not just that they are a self-report, it is that they asked respondents to speculate on their actions in a scenario that did not happen in real life.
>>74574517
what was wrong with McCain? the worst thing about him was Palin, but we'd probably have less of a SJW problem today if she had been paraded around more.
>>74574385
taken over by stormfront
