GOP moves to keep Gary Johnson off the ballot

reply to post by Iron7


Ouch.. I didn't know that. That hurts his odds of getting my vote as I think we should stay out of their business so we don't get dragged into the middle east anymore.

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by seabag

 

The object of a race is to win. Honestly, why would the GOP do anything to hurt their own chances?

I'd expect the same thing from the DNC if the Green Party were running a serious candidate.

Except that the DNC didn't do that. They would certainly argue to their members why they shouldn't vote for Ralph Nader, but they wouldn't do such dirty tricks.

Because, though they are far from perfect, the Democratic Party as a general organization is, today, much less ruthless and vicious and unwilling to do as many deeply evil things for their own benefit.

It's well known that right before the day of voting there are robo-calls to Democratic voters which sound official saying---falsely----that their polling place has changed, or that they are ineligible or some other BS.

There is no remotely quantitatively comparable dirty trick from the Democratic side towards Republicans.

What I see today is that Democrats complain about what Republicans actually do or are, and Republicans frequently complain about their imagination of what Democrats do or are.

Witness arguing with an empty chair, and the hysterical paranoid propaganda which circiulates on right-wing chain emails. Virtually all is untrue.

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


Well he is better in the sense he wants to cut foreign aid to them (and all)

but he still spoke very highly of them.

And to the guy that said single-issue voting is wrong, it doesn't matter anyway because the whole thing is a puppetshow

As outrageous as it is, maybe we can look at it as a good sign. It is much how I look at the over reaction, hype, infiltration, demonizing of the Occupy movement... they are scared ****less. Johnson (who has my vote even though he is more conservative than I like, he's more Libertarian than the entire GOP/Dem party's combined), has zero chance of winning, yet 'they' act as if both are a grave threat.

I think the GOP is beginning to realize, even though they won't back-step an inch, that they are losing true Conservatives and that a notable amount of votes for Johnson may cause people to go "hmm" for a second and may rethink some things next election (if we haven't broken out into civil war by then). I would not be surprised if Democrats lose a notable amount of votes to Johnson as well, in fact I'm sure of it. Occupy though it has been cut off at the knees did awaken a lot of Liberals and Leftists to Obama's/Dems BS. I wonder how Dems will react to this? Will they use it to point out how dangerous the GOP is becoming or will they silently let the GOP be the bad guys and hope they succeed?

We need our Liberty back first and foremost, until we get it back we are paralyzed. The TPM and Occupy both served a great purpose in this regard.

Originally posted by Kali74
As outrageous as it is, maybe we can look at it as a good sign. It is much how I look at the over reaction, hype, infiltration, demonizing of the Occupy movement... they are scared ****less. Johnson (who has my vote even though he is more conservative than I like, he's more Libertarian than the entire GOP/Dem party's combined), has zero chance of winning, yet 'they' act as if both are a grave threat.

I agree.

Good to see ya Kali, BTW.......


Gary has my Vote also.

Originally posted by seabag
Yet another obvious attempt by the GOP to silence conservatives!! With Ron Paul successfully shut out of the race, the GOP is now aiming at its next target – Gary Johnson.

In recent weeks, with the full support and legal assistance of the Republican Party, Johnson’s ballot status has been challenged in Michigan, Pennsylvania, the District of Columbia, Iowa and now Ohio.

Ron Nielson, senior advisor to Gov. Johnson, said in a statement released Friday, “The national Republican Party may not want to publicly acknowledge the presence of a true fiscal conservative in this race, but they are certainly taking Gov. Johnson seriously enough to engage in a concerted campaign to get his name off ballots in key states before voters even get a chance to vote.

“In states across the nation, Republican operatives, lawyers, and in some cases, elected officials, are filing frivolous challenges to Governor Johnson’s ballot status. They know that even if their challenges fail, fending them off is a drain on our resources and a distraction from the real issues in this campaign. We don’t have hundreds of millions of dollars to throw around, nor do we have the Republicans’ endless supply of lawyers.
“We have dealt with many challenges in this campaign from the major parties, who clearly don’t want voters to have a viable third option in this election, but this attack on voting rights and democracy is over the top.

Johnson

This is just more proof that the GOP seeks to marginalize conservatives. This attack against Johnson seems more like a Chicago-style election stunt Obama would pull rather than something from the GOP. I’ve never been so disappointed in the party I once called my own.

What say you, Johnson supporters? Where is the outrage?

It's there. I was warming people up to Gary Johnson before Ron Paul officially quit. I let my friends back in IA know about this. Most of which were Paul supporters and we LOOOVE the fact that as hard as they tried to shut it down, RP still won Iowa.

Originally posted by Kali74

I think the GOP is beginning to realize, even though they won't back-step an inch, that they are losing true Conservatives and that a notable amount of votes for Johnson may cause people to go "hmm" for a second and may rethink some things next election

BINGO! This is exactly what I have been saying. They are scared to death I think that Romney will lose because of people defecting and going to the Libertarian party. Well, the GOP should have seen that coming years ago.

reply to post by seabag


They want their next Wall Street Puppet Obamney to win.
Then when they destroy the country, than can say the American People are responsible for it, for electing them.

Monsters the lot of them.

reply to post by seabag


After 911, nothing surprises me anymore. The GOP will do any and everything to achieve their agenda.
Hopefully with enough awareness on the subject, it will become to big to ignore.
Didn't know to much about Gary Johnson till lately. After researching him a bit, he definitely has my vote.

reply to post by seabag


Yes. This is a shared opinion from republicans. When I told a friend of mine that GOP stripped Maine of delegates so that they couldn't vote for Ron Paul, she answered with, "Well Obama goes to Mexico and brings illegals back to vote for him."

I was floored.

It's the world we live in. Simple thinkers where truth is not self-evident.

AAC

reply to post by MidnightTide


I am not in total agreement, although I understand your point. I am not happy with Obama, but I am quite sure I will be totally unhappy with Romney. Since Romney represents what I just saw happen at the GOP convention, which imo is a criminal organization that should be dismantled, I will never vote for that party again until the leadership is uprooted and the crimes acknowledged. I don't care how many liberty candidates try to reinvent the party at this point.

Without a viable 3rd party option like Gary Johnson, Obama will get my vote if anything to ensure Romney never gets elected. Yes Romney is a mirror of Obama in many instances, but in many more they are nothing alike. Both advocate big government control, Obama's plans though attempt to protect individuals as much as possible from corporate powers. Romney on the other hand will give corporate powers unbridled authority and leave the individuals defenseless, wrapped in a cloak of freedom. Government was instituted for the protection of individuals, not corporations or groups of individuals. Neither candidate understands this, but at least if I'm going to be bent over I'll choose the candidate that uses lube.

reply to post by Kali74


I agree. The tea party and occupy movements were both different sides of the same coin. One side advocated that government was the problem. The other side advocated that corporation influence on government was the problem. Both are right and are basically on the same side. Our system is entirely corrupt, and the system is designed to allow that corruption to work unseen within. Until we become united in understanding that different people see the problem from different angles, but it is indeed the same problem, we will be able to fix this mess.

reply to post by Iron7


Well that may just be him playing to the party. I think we should cut aid to them and let them handle their wars. I think we could have supported them, but when they started manufacturing nukes behind the kennedy admins back I think that should have ended our military and financial support. Either have us and our arsenal backing you, or let your secret nukes protect you. They had their cake and ate it.

I imagine if Johnson doesn't support aiding them financially he probably doesn't support sending our troops and bombs either.

reply to post by ExPostFacto

I agree. The tea party and occupy movements were both different sides of the same coin. One side advocated that government was the problem. The other side advocated that corporation influence on government was the problem. Both are right and are basically on the same side. Our system is entirely corrupt, and the system is designed to allow that corruption to work unseen within. Until we become united in understanding that different people see the problem from different angles, but it is indeed the same problem, we will be able to fix this mess.

I think you’re absolutely correct about this….nothing will get fixed until the warring factions build a bridge and work together on the most important issues.

The problem is we have some fundamental differences and some big hurdles to overcome before that happens. Kali and I have thrown the issues around a few times and I think she’d agree that forging commonality isn’t going to be easy!

reply to post by seabag


We have to stop viewing issues as right or left issues, is how I see it. Until then we are dead in the water. Understanding that government was designed to protect individuals, not corporations or groups of individuals, then we can clearly view the issues that affect individuals. Regulations on corporations can indeed be scaled back, but in doing so their liability must not be protected by government departments insulating those corporations from fault due to negligence (e.g. The cap on liability for oil companies who pollute our water). The goal is not to prevent business from making its own decisions, but to protect people from businesses who operate with the knowledge that they can make whatever mistakes they please and their damages are a fixed cost that will not put them underwater (e.g. The Bailouts).

When corporations can realistically write the laws, the individual gets screwed. This seems to be both the TPM and Occupy Movements arguments in a nut shell. Whether it be unfunded wars and contracts to corporations or unfunded welfare, the result is the same, the people end up paying and the corporation gets the downstream benefit of all welfare and contracts issued through government. The people become less able to support themselves, and they turn to the government for help. But it is broke and we can't keep operating this way. The key question is what to cut. The simple answer is anything that doesn't directly hurt an individual, not a group of individuals. This would be corporate welfare first, and government contracts which would necessarily involve downsizing our government and taking care of our most needy citizens first.