The second part of the pre-recorded Libertarian Presidential Forum will air on Stossel tonight at 9pm Eastern on Fox Business Network.
Last week some people didn't realize the debate was on, so here is your warning.
Candidates:
Gary Johnson (Tacking left to please voters, total cuck)
John McAfee (Badass, Criminal, makes a lot of sense)
Austin Peterson (Asshole, Rejects the NAP, but not bad)
No streams yet (obv).
LP press release about debates: https://www.lp.org/news/press-releases/libertarian-presidential-debate-to-air-on-stossel-show-in-april
FBN article: http://www.foxbusiness.com/features/2016/03/31/fbn-s-john-stossel-hosts-libertarian-presidential-forum-featuring-johnson-mcafee-petersen.html
Reason article: http://reason.com/archives/2016/04/06/libertarian-presidential-debate-free-to
The Federalist article: http://thefederalist.com/2016/04/04/the-libertarian-presidential-debate-was-a-little-noticed-breath-of-fresh-air/
Washington Times: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/mar/13/inside-the-beltway-john-stossel-to-moderate-libert/?page=all
>Who designs fucking newspaper sites? It's a terrible layout
I completely forgot.
Again.
Thanks, OP.
AUSTIN PETERSEN RISES
>>70349806
I'm going to see Harcore Henry tonight though so I won't be around to make a timely debate thread. Somebody has to carry the torch.
Hopefully Johnson isn't such a cuck this time. It's entertaining but it's fucking ridiculous
Part 1 full: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6OpWb979rjs
Part 1 first half: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnmEaRonHnQ
Part 1 second half:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAVChB-6WW4
I got all 3 in a 4% range on I side with so I'll just support McAfee because he's metal as fuck
>>70351021
Guy got tortured in Belize
None of these cucks will make America great again. Sage.
Is Mcafee still in 3rd?
Proof libertarian party is cucked imo.
>>70353210
quality contribution
>>70353484
the LP is cucked. Hopefully Johnson will get knocked off. And McAfee likely won't make it that far because of the criminal shit
>>70353210
>Implying that Libertarianism isn't what 99% of people actually want. The only reason people want Trump is because they're too scared to vote for a party that isn't Rep or Dem.
>inb4muhwastedvote
>not actually doing something useful with your vote like getting a decent party some support.
I just watched the first one a couple days ago, it wasn't bad. However I feel they don't have enough time to answer their questions, considering most people don't understand the libertarian side of what they are saying.
Is this going to be on TV, or will I have to stream it?
>>70351893
That is a completely subjective definition of common sense by the way.
>>70353749
Never mind, just checked and it will be aired tonight. I can't say I would vote for any of them, but I enjoy listening to them anyway.
>>70353210
REEEEE
>>70353749
on FOX Business. Which isn't on basic cable. So there will have to be a stream. Last time the youtube one sucked and somebody found one about 10 min in, don't know what on. I watched it online with xfinity
and the worst part was that cuck buzzer
>>70353901
I might vote for Petersen. After last time, no way will I vote for Johnson. I support Trump for the reasons Christopher Cantwell lays out but my vote is going to either the libertarian or a Ron Paul write-in
Reminder that a vote for a third party is a wasted vote/vote for Hillary
Still haven't forgiven you for helping Obama get re-elected
>>70349993
>Based spined pig pet
Is that animal name really Porcupine? Is it really the mascot of libertarianism?
>>70354169
As someone who is only vaguely learning about the 3 libertarian candidates, why are you leaning on Petersen, and what did Johnson do to make you not like him? I watched the debate and Johnson did seem very far on the left side of the libertarian idea, I think. So I'm still not sure what to think.
>>70354323
Considering the Repblican party will probably split if Trump doesn't win, and the Democratic one might also if Bernie gets more standard delegates and loses, I don't see why people shouldn't vote for who they want if you end up getting 2 independents (trump, bernie) in addition to the Repub and Demo.
And someone correct me here, but is it true if the libertarian party gets so many votes during the main election, they will be allowed to debate with the other 2 next election?
>>70354547
Yes, and kind of.
The Porcupine is unofficially the mascot of American libertarians, at least.
>>70354736
>I vote for what I believe in!
We don't have time for your ideals. You didn't vote for shit in 2012 except help Obama get in. A large amount of people will never forget about that.
>>70354169
Peterson is like the epitome of an autistic, pompous, and narcissistic douchebag. He's the combination of every parody of libertarianism that you can think of.
At least Johnson is somewhat pragmatic and humble
>>70354323
>>70355386
Fuck off Trumpette. Shouldn't be shilling on facebook or something?
>>70355386
Libertarians were only 0.99 percent of the vote. Mitt Romney only won 47.32. of the popular vote and Barack Obama won 51.19 percent. Obama would have won even with all of the third party vote going to Mitt Romney.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2012#Ballot_access
How about you pick yourself up from your boot strap and take responsibility for your party instead of blaming other people for your party's failures.
>>70354323
>>70355386
>>70355730
Here's a best chart of the popular vote of Obama, Romney, and Other, which includes Gary Johnson and other third parties. On a quick scan it looks like every state and DC safely leaned Romney or Obama, even when factoring the Other vote, except Ohio.
Ohio is worth 18 electoral votes. It had 50.1% of the popular vote going to Obama, 48.2 to Romney, and less than 2% to Other. Gary Johnson received 0.89% of the popular vote. Even if all the libertarian vote went to Romney, he would only have 49.18% of the popular vote. Let's go even further and say all votes for the Constitution Party went to Romney. Adding only 0.15% of the votes would bump Romeny to 49.33%. The other third parties are the Green Party, the Socialist Party, "Others", and an Independent.
Note: It's uses the 2012 popular vote results for its own purposes. Ignore the right side of the chart and focus on the 2012 election results.
>>70357357
Ohio source
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election_in_Ohio,_2012
>>70354323
>>70355386
>>70355730
>>70357406
>>70357357
he actual electoral vote in 2012 was 332 EV for Obama and 206 EV for Romney. Ohio is worth 18 EV. Let's add Ohio for Romney anyways. He now has 224 and Obama 314. You need at least 270 EV to win the presidency. Obama still won the 2012 election.
>>70349352
I will never support lulbertardians until they realize that there are objectively destructive actions that should be stopped.
>inb4 muh freeedumbs!!!
>>70357787
Have some sauce.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2012
>>70353664
>isn't what 99% of people actually want.
It really isn't. Too many socialists in this country.
1. Your presidential preference for the Libertarian Party
2. Is drill hair best hair?
>>70362009
1. Austin Petersen
2. Yes
>libertarian debate
what, are they debating which one of them is the least relevant?
>>70360874
Yeah but they're only socialists because it's the popular meme right now. Most of them would agree with Libertarian ideas but they get shamed by the few retards who actually think socialism is a good idea and they just keep their mouth shut. But a lot of people are getting sick of that so I wouldn't be surprised if Libertarianism picks up within the next couple years as a serious force.
Someone else periodically bump the thread.
Don't forget to create a thread dedicated to the actual debate at 9 PM Eastern Time. Remember to add streams.
>>70362537
Bump it yourself nigger wtf.
I was extremely disappointed by the first debate since the current Libertarian candidates are ever-so lackluster. I felt that John McAfee sometimes gave weak, meandering responses even though I do like him otherwise —particularly his persona. Gary Johnson's introduction seemed more appropriate for an Ok Cupid profile and he's a cuck on issues such as discrimination, and Austin is a faggot. Is this seriously it?
>>70362746
I was gone during that time period. Now I'm back.
>>70364450
>Is this seriously it?
Welcome to the American Libertarian Party.
>>70349352
>the second part of the debate
Haha
Also, I was super stoked when Gary Johnson said he agreed with banning burqas 2 months ago. But he went and reversed it 1 day later. I'd still vote for him if there's no good candidates, but lost all excitement for him I had left.
>>70364450
>>70366347
>the Kochs ditched the Libertarians to do something substantial with the Republicans
>Leftists highjack the party and libertarianism in general
Libertarianism pretty much died when the paleocons did. It's kinda making a comeback with Tom Woods and Ron Paul reviving the Rothbardian sect but I don't have too much hope
>>70366603
>>70366720
It's become apparent that Johnson is one of those "socially liberal, fiscally conservative" libertarians and definitely not in the paleolibertarian camp
>>70366720
I don't give a shit if it's libertarian, I just happy he said something against Muslims. If he said "It's not libertarian to ban it but Muslims still suck" or something, I would be a lot happier. I just think it's a mistake right now to be too liberal and PC when the winds are blowing the other way.
>>70362009
1. Jeff Deist
2. It's pretty good
>you're doing Gods work bumping this thread anon
>>70357357
>>70357406
>>70357787
So what you are saying is barely nobody voted for them, and it almost makes the difference between Romney winning or Obama winning
And this whole thread wants even more people to vote Libertarian.........
So you are basically Hillary Clinton shills
>>70366984
I consider myself "socially liberal, fiscally conservative", but still have some leanings toward nationalist/Trump camp. For example, I think banning Muslims might be too extreme but to write it off as bigoted and unfair just helps the Democrats. There's nothing that extreme about having rules on who can immigrate or not.
>>70367241
I'm voting Trump. And there's no reason to assume all those Libertarian voters would have voted Romney or Trump. Some of them are Democrats. I don't think third parties help the Dems, unless there was a state where the third party votes plus the GOP vote could have helped win over the Republicans. It's just another way of making the GOP listen to you. If the Tea Party promised to vote Republican in every election regardless if their demands were heard, nobody would have listened to them cause they would have no balls.
>>70367245
The problem with the "socially liberal, fiscally conservative" concept is it makes it sound like you don't really have principals and just want the best of both worlds.
It is more accurate to say that libertarians support liberty, natural rights, etc.
I also support Trump, although I won't vote for him or anybody else who doesn't align with my ideas. I support him for the reasons Chris Cantwell supports him;
>25% of government employees say they will quit
>Liberals vow to leave country
>Can't be worse than Bush/Clinton/Obama on foreign policy
>Opposes immigration and may actually deport people/enforce current laws
I disagree with a lot of his policies like surveillance, killing civilians, and tariffs but the decline of western civilization needs to be slowed, at the least. Mises himself praised fascism for saving Europe from socialism
>>70367784
SJWs are socially liberal.
>>70367832
I think it's a good advertising phrase, but it's becoming outdated. "Socially liberal, fiscally conservative" was true 10 years ago when the biggest issues were gay marriage and weed being legal. Now they want laws punishing traditional America to further push their views.
>>70367784
the platform is and should be liberty. "socially liberal fiscally conservative" puts an unjust box on libertarianism that obscures the reasons we want those things. We don't want social liberalism because of muh feelz like progressives
>>70368133
exactly. Not to mention it kinda gives the lefties the upper hand by inviting them to our camp
Livestream anyone...need to watch it..watched first part
I like Petersen and Mcafee btw...Johnson is too left for me..I don't like him at all. I understand that he is the frontrunner in the party
>>70368276
it comes on at 9. No streams yet as far as I know. Last time youtube streams sucked. Watch it with cable provider on the Fox site if you can
seriously question;
who gives a fuck what these losers have to say?
best case scenario they fragment the voting base enough to hand swing states to democrats
Are lolbertarians really this dumb?
>>70366831
>Tom Woods and Ron Paul reviving the Rothbardian sect
It's because of people like this that I was so disappointed by the Libertarian Party debate. My experience with contemporary libertarians is derived predominately from anarcho-capitalists and minarchists —who are generally more eloquent than the three party candidates. It's a fringe-ideology, yet my impression of the party is that it is occupied by those with fetishes for moderation —watering down the philosophy and causing it to appeal to those who are better suited voting for the Democratic Party anyway. I can't take them seriously if they lack such confidence in their own ideology.
I noted that Austin created the website Libertarian Republic, which hosts wonderful articles such as: "Our Boobs Are Not The Problem", "Seriously, Where Are All the Libertarian Women?", and incessant complaints about Trump.
It's still a better movement than anything we have in the U.K. I like Nigel Farage (who is also friends with Ron and Rand Paul), but his greatest concern is currently the EU (understandably so).
>>70368492
liberal has multiple meanings sadly
>>70368829
>everyone who doesn't agree with me supports Trump hurr durr
answer the question fuckface
None of these guys (or any libertarian candidate) have ever gained widespread traction for a presidential campaign.
All they do is suck votes away from candidates who could actually win
why waste your vote?
You might as well just give it to hillary, the most authoritarian of any candidate
Alright sweet, looking forward to it..kinda boring friday but at least the debate will be interesting
>>70369139
>three nobodies with the basically same ideologies debating
>interesting
wew
>>70369092
>All they do is suck votes away from candidates who could actually win
This is a myth, at least for the 2012 presidential election. Most of America is polarized.
See
>>70355730
>>70357357
>>70357406
>>70357787
>Why waste your vote?
If the Libertarian Party receives 5% of the national vote they will be granted automatic ballot access in the presidential election and federal funding. At 15% they will be eligible in the general election presidential debates.
Might have to flee to the U.S depending on who is the nomine! I'm looking for an exit strategy, Europe is lost, I got a good financial statement and I'm a worker..I'm not mexican or muslim..please accept me lol!
>>70369409
>If the Libertarian Party receives 5% of the national vote they will be granted automatic ballot access in the presidential election and federal funding. At 15% they will be eligible in the general election presidential debates.
being as they are stuck at under 1% of the vote and the movement is dying
>even rand paul will most likely lose his seat due to his homestate support vanishing
why bother?
even 0.89% of the vote could help decide a close competition like we will see this year in PA and VA
Why not actually put your vote towards opposing the candidate who wants to challenge your constitutional rights instead of shooting for a percentage you will never reach?
>>70369409
Also, the "you'll cost Trump the election" thing doesn't hold water since most states are blue and red. It's a possibile your vote actually matters depending on your circumstances, but probably not. I live in NY, which is solid blue, and I'm gonna still vote Trump, but if it was Kasich I'd vote Gary Johnson without a moment's hesitation. It's not like I'm gonna hand the election to Hillary, she'll win no matter what.
I do think if you live in a contested state you should think more carefully but the "you'll hand the election to a democrat" stuff is just GOP propaganda. For most voters it's simply not true.
>>70368778
>>70353210
Anons, virtue does not capitulate.
Just because Trump isn't a 'cuck' (i.e. doesn't endorse extremist dignity and victim morality) doesn't make him any less of a civil authoritarian..
Whoever wins, we lose. Neither side really has a good representative of political liberalism. A vote against progressive politics, or a vote against the status quo, these are not always working for something better.
>>70369833
>Why not actually put your vote towards opposing the candidate who wants to challenge your constitutional rights instead of shooting for a percentage you will never reach?
No offense, but you're one to talk since Trump general spent all year ridiculing Jeb and Rato while giving the Shedevil a free pass.
>>70369959
>virtue
kek, right
All you fucks just pick and chose what parts of libertarianism you actually believe in
How many of you cucks support open borders?
How many support absolute free trade despite currency manipulation of out trade partners?
How many really support abolition of child labor laws?
You are all fucking hypocrites, learned that from the randlets
>>70370509
>meme
sure kiddo
ONE
HOUR
Austin Petersen is insufferable.
>>70349352
>pre-recorded
What's the point?
