So I really don't like Hillary (what sane person sends death warrants via email from their phone?), and I don't really like Trump too much (seriously, it's getting more and more difficult to believe the "he's totally not a racist" speel in light of his comments on the judge)
So I might have to go with Gary, despite my disagreements about things like him completely dodging questions with regard to the non aggression principle and the US constitution.
Like literally:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6URUQlgqsE
Why is this a bad idea, people who probably would want to gas the candidate I would prefer to vote for if they could?
>>76912822
>in light of his comments on the judge)
Trump said the judge is biased against him because he's Mexican, which is probably true and completely reasonable.
>>76912822
>seriously, it's getting more and more difficult to believe the "he's totally not a racist" speel in light of his comments on the judge
You're definitely stupid enough to vote Libertarian
>>76914680
1/10
please try harder, faggot.
>>76912822
>in hight of his comments on the judge
If you run a campaign on the illegal activities of Coca Cola and publicize and try to ban the harmful effects of Coca Cola as per already existing laws that the establishment isn't enforcing, then someone tries to get to you with a semi-bullshit legal action on something unrelated and merely HAPPENS to assign a judge who pledges his political allegiances to Coca Cola, is part of several organisations promoting Coca Cola, volunteers for Coca cola on the weekends and makes it very, very clear that the guy really fucking loves Coca Cola, you are well in your rights to protest.
Detailed, if somewhat long, but based video on the subject:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9XMioUUa3E
>>76915288
but the courtcase has jack shit to do with his campaign and the judge is legal so not really a problem.
>>76914920
If he'd led with "this judge is a member of mexican nationalist organizations that want the South West to be colonized and returned to Mexico" or even fell back to that it'd be a little bit more believable. He didn't and has not (to my knowledge) done either of those though.
>>76912822
get out of my country spic
>>76912822
>im throwing my vote in the dumpster
its like voting for the green party up here, AT MOST they get one seat in the house of commons, but thats it
>>76915416
Basic conflict of interest remains.
>seriously, it's getting more and more difficult to believe the "he's totally not a racist" speel in light of his comments on the judge
Why do you care about a candidate's personality? It's policy that matters.
>>76915416
He's not arguing that the judge is illegal.
He's saying that the judge is biased against him because he's Mexican, and Mexicans are racist against Trump.
>>76915596
only if you assume that all mexicans make decisions solely based on their ethnicity, which we have absolutely no evidence of here.
>>76914680
>>76914972
He's right tho
White judges are said to be biased during a white on black crime
Why not the judge on Trump case where Trump is against illegal mexican which the judge's group is fighting for.
They are only humans, unless robots become judges.
>>76912822
>Bernie faggot thinking of doing a complete 180 on every single Bernie policy to vote Libertarian
Yeah okay lmao
>>76915644
>Mexicans are racist against Trump.
think you got that backwards buddy. many mexicans may not like trump but that hardly makes them racist against him.
>>76912822
fuck off shill
he was right about the judge
if a black guy had a white judge that was affiliated with the K KK would you call the black guy a racist for pointing that out?
back to red dit JI DF
>>76915644
All that Trump U data must have some juicy dirt, for Donnie to go after Da Judge so hard...
>>76915738
judges are given a lot of leeway in determining if they should step aside. clearly he doesnt see it as an issue.
>>76915738
This is called "projection".
>>76912822
>speel in light of his comments on the judge
Anon open your eyes. Open your mind! Do not let confirmation bias cloud your vision.
>>76915722
>only if you assume that all mexicans make decisions solely based on their ethnicity
Watch the video and the sources it links. The grounds for the complaint isn't simply that the guy is Mexican, but that he actively pledges allegiance to Mexico, illegal immigrants, and I am not sure if it is this video or some other material I've read on this, but there is a case made that the guy is actually involved in what is effectively the legal wing of La Raza.
In any case there is plenty of evidence of pro-illegal immigration stances from the man, he simply cannot be an objective and neutral judge in this situation. Even if it is just someone you barely, but personally know on trial you are not supposed to get involved precisely because of this, the case IS very much tied into Trump's politics, which clash with the views the judge happily declared on his own.
Again, a clear conflict of interests, which disqualifies the judge.
>>76916224
>he simply cannot be an objective and neutral judge in this situation.
why? this case has jack shit to do with what you're talking about. it turns out that liberal judges get conservative plaintiffs and the other way around. you dont get to replace to judge in your trial just because the two of you have different political beliefs.
>>76916403
https://youtu.be/E9XMioUUa3E?t=8m28s
The point is made just here, expressed by a former Attorney General.
>>76916567
>45 minutes
yeah no thanks. if you cant actually explain it then you have no actual argument. carry on, faggot.
>>76912822
You can vote for who you want, but make sure your facts are straight first.
http://gotnews.com/ay-carumba-death-certificate-papa-judgecuriel-proves-new-york-times-lying-u-s-citizenship/
That judge is an anchor baby with two illegal parents, so it is well within Trump's rights to find a different, unbiased judge. Also, Johnson is for completely open borders, which is insanity considering the spics burning flags in San Jose because someone they don't like holds a rally, as well as their waving mexican flags on American soil.
But, it's your vote. Use it how you will.
>>76912822
You know if you're voting libertarian you're actually helping Hillary, right?
>>76916403
>this case has jack shit to do with what you're talking about
The judge is biased against Trump. The case involves Trump. It has everything to do with him.
>>76916684
>the judge is a legal us citizen and so it is well within Trump's rights to find a different, unbiased judge
ok, nigger.
>>76916667
I gave you the specific answer to your point, a quote from a former Attorney General at 8:28 in that video. The rest of it is relevant and follows up on that point, but it does answer your 'why' pretty fucking well.
>>76912822
Bernie is about as polar opposite from libertarianism as you can get.
That said, the party has done a pretty quick change in policies to attract disenfranchised voters from both sides.
>Johnson supporting gun control
Leaves a sour taste in my mouth.
Besides, Libertarian economic policies would probably be worse for the country than the TPP.
>>76912822
Don't fucking give up. Between Scary Clinton and DRUMPF, I'm writing in Bernie anyway, I hope he'll run third party!
>>76916809
Anchor baby, goy. Anchor baby. That means he's biased as crap. Illegal parents, illegal family. I wouldn't send my family packing across the border either, even if they were breaking the law.
>>76916809
>anchor baby
>>76917062
Well thank gosh for that. I thought our SCOTUS's just gave up during that amendment and since. That really clarifies things.
>>76916822
the AG aint talking about this case that was just a general statement and the judge has been known to remove himself when he believes he cant be impartial. i dont really see the problem here other than idiots assuming that someone who holds different political views than you cant be impartial in a case that has nothing to do with politics.
>>76916976
>That means he's biased as crap.
how so? this case has nothing to do with anchor babies.
>>76917251
Dude. Did you even read the article? Illegal. Parents. You don't think that promotes even the tiniest bit of bias? You're being delusional, goy.
>>76912822
Perhaps /pol/ can explain this.
What is wrong with having an opinion? Or is it just having an opinion that isn't left leaning? Do you hate Christians? You're a thinking, intelligent person. Do you hate Muslims? Racist. Hate white people? You're supporting your people. Hate Mexicans? You're racist. Hate straight people? You're supporting the LGBT community. Hate gay people? You're a bigot.
Why is some hate okay and other hate isn't?
>>76912822
Racism is the only sane human ideology.
>>76917289
>You don't think that promotes even the tiniest bit of bias?
not towards a fraud cause that has nothing to do with illegals. there's absolutely nothing in our laws that requires judges to recuse themselves for holding differing political opinions than the other parties.
>>76915772
It's more of a protest vote imo, little different from the "Republicans" picking actual (policy wise) republicans to vote for Trump
>>76917414
picking over***
>>76915784
>many mexicans may not like trump but that hardly makes them racist against him.
>>76917375
Everyone in this country knows who Trump is. Everybody. Have you served juror duty yet? I know a guy who was taken off jury duty because he had had a passing acquaintance with the individual in question. In this case, not only does he know who Trump is, he knows what Trump wants to do with illegals like his parents. If that doesn't promote bias, it means the judge isn't human. The nature of the case doesn't matter at all.
>>76917375
>first year political science major
You sure about that?
>>76917466
whats that got to do with trump? doesnt say anything about it.
>>76917194
>that was just a general statemen
It's almost like it's a principle, isn't it? You know, those things that should apply universally?
And it's not just about acutal impartiality. Perhaps the judge can be impartial, but the rule of thumb is that if it COULD be seen as questionable partiality, you have a duty to get out of that case because it harms not just the case, but public perception of the justice system.
The slide after, or maybe the one after that mentions some of the examples the judge in question has done just that in the past.
Now, if you are someone who was a member of political groups being pro-illegal immigration, who has made their political views abundantly clear, going up against a candidate for POTUS who is running on a platform of enforcing the laws this guy clearly opposes, not only is there a case for the guy being genuinely incapable of being objective, but we don't even need go that far, as all that is needed is for it to APPEAR that way.
>>76917498
funny. i dont see anything in their about you having to recuse yourself for having differing political opinions.
>>76917375
>>76916808
The judge is also a member of the hispanic bar association which is boycotting Trump
http://us4.campaign-archive2.com/?u=df9a27c10b6d6ba38ba001440&id=f8a4a02241&e=cd8fc1ccd9%0A
>>76915866
>>76915722
>A judge with ties to La Raza and the Democratic presidency is somehow not biased towards Donald Trump
>>76917744
>thinks its a good idea to let people only be tried by judges with the same political beliefs.
have fun when marxists start wrecking capitalist institutions. gonna be fun watching them demand a marxist judge to try them.
>>76917861
Did you dumb fucks not learn anything from the USSR?
If the US or any Western country turns commie in my lifetime, I'll be at a serious risk of dying of laughter.
