New Gary Johnson Ad: You ARE Libertarian!

[RobertNashville]

I don't know about that. Many people just don't want to throw their votes away and see people like Oblamo voted into office. If there was a viable third party candidate I'd vote for him/her. Tom Clancy wrote in one of his novels about the President, congress, and supremes all dying from a Japanese pilot crashing a fully fueled 747 into the capital during the State of The Union Address, and the character Ryan became president. He made a lot of changes that I would have agreed with had it been reality. That's pretty much the only viable way to get a 3rd party into the whitehouse, but don't forget you'd also need a third party congress to boot.

You may be right but I think it goes a lot further than just Obama and I wasn't just thinking of this particular election year.

Aside form the occasional local race now and then when has a libertarian candidate ever gotten serious votes? I don't think very many if any...they've certainly not garnered any significant on a nationwide basis...I really think the libertarian viewpoint doesn't garner the votes because the view just doesn't resonate with very many people. However, I don't know of any way to prove that and I don't know of any detailed study of the issue either.

[RobertNashville]

So the superpac millions spent on Romney ads over the next couple of months, combined with a full-frontal 24/7 pro-Romney assault on Fox news and talk radio-- That kind of wanton gratuitous overexposure won't repel you from voting Romney--

HOWEVER, occasional internet GJ videos (which no one even has to watch unless they intentionally click the play button) are so excessive that they would drive a fella crazy? How does that even make sense?

By that logic, the way to elect GJ is for libertarians to swamp all forums with rabid Pro-Romney and Pro-Obama videos. All the excessive Pro-Romney and Pro-Obama videos will make people so pissed at Romney and Obama that they will vote GJ out of spite?

I can't address the world media or what politicians pay for to put ads on media...I thought that would have been apparent.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

I can't address the world media or what politicians pay for to put ads on media...I thought that would have been apparent.

So if I start posting daily rabid Pro-Romney ads on TGO, I could make you so mad at Romney that you would vote for GJ?

[RobertNashville]

So if I start posting daily rabid Pro-Romney ads on TGO, I could make you so mad at Romney that you would vote for GJ?

No; I'd just be mad at you. ROTFLMAO

[E4 No More]

You may be right but I think it goes a lot further than just Obama and I wasn't just thinking of this particular election year.

Aside form the occasional local race now and then when has a libertarian candidate ever gotten serious votes? I don't think very many if any...they've certainly not garnered any significant on a nationwide basis...I really think the libertarian viewpoint doesn't garner the votes because the view just doesn't resonate with very many people. However, I don't know of any way to prove that and I don't know of any detailed study of the issue either.

I think that it's a lack of marketing. It takes a lot of marketing ($$$) to win an election. I would guess that the majority of Americans have no friggen idea what the Libertarians stand for. Heck, I'd wager many of them don't know what the D's and R's actually stand for as evidenced by the copious examples of people saying that they are voting for Oblamo without being able to give one solid answer as to why. My daughter started to do that during the last election cycle. I asked her why she wanted to vote for Oblamo to which she said, "He just speaks to me!" It took quite a lot of time with her stating her beliefs and me pointing out that Oblamo didn't agree with said beliefs that she eventually voted for McCain.

[plank white]

So if I start posting daily rabid Pro-Romney ads on TGO, I could make you so mad at Romney that you would vote for GJ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=n3IDXGqKN2Q

Does this count ?

[RobertNashville]

I think that it's a lack of marketing. It takes a lot of marketing ($$$) to win an election. I would guess that the majority of Americans have no friggen idea what the Libertarians stand for. Heck, I'd wager many of them don't know what the D's and R's actually stand for as evidenced by the copious examples of people saying that they are voting for Oblamo without being able to give one solid answer as to why. My daughter started to do that during the last election cycle. I asked her why she wanted to vote for Oblamo to which she said, "He just speaks to me!" It took quite a lot of time with her stating her beliefs and me pointing out that Oblamo didn't agree with said beliefs that she eventually voted for McCain.

I'm sure money is part of it...I mean, spend enough money and you can probably make a significant number of people believe night is day and up is down.

Maybe I'm in the minority as I actually know what I believe and I know I'm a conservative and not an libertarian!

[daddyo]

No one forces you reply to my posts (posts not directed to or referencing you) yet you do...funny how that works.

I'm aware of that; I was just pointing out to you that no one's beating you over the head with anything.

You have a choice whether to watch them or not. If you know what the subject matter is, and you watch it anyway, it seems to me a little intellectually dishonest to claim that you're being "beaten over the head" with them.

[mav]

Just an observation. Why is it when anyone posts something positive about a third party candidate, someone has to come in and -1 each post? It is good to have disagreements, but come on. Sheesh.

BTW, I +1'd each post that was showing -1.

[E4 No More]

I'm sure money is part of it...I mean, spend enough money and you can probably make a significant number of people believe night is day and up is down.

Maybe I'm in the minority as I actually know what I believe and I know I'm a conservative and not an libertarian!

I wasn't meaning you specifically, if that's what you thought. I was speaking generally. Kind of like the people who say they vote democrat because their parents vote democrat, and their grandparents vote democrat....

[E4 No More]

Just an observation. Why is it when anyone posts something positive about a third party candidate, someone has to come in and -1 each post? It is good to have disagreements, but come on. Sheesh.

BTW, I +1'd each post that was showing -1.

I don't up or down anyone's posts. Everyone's got opinions, and if the entire world thought the same way it'd be a pretty boring place.

[plank white]

No one forces you reply to my posts (posts not directed to or referencing you) yet you do...funny how that works.

And I usually don't reply to you anymore at all but you get the " " For all the -1s you have sent my way today

[RobertNashville]

I'm aware of that; I was just pointing out to you that no one's beating you over the head with anything.

You have a choice whether to watch them or not. If you know what the subject matter is, and you watch it anyway, it seems to me a little intellectually dishonest to claim that you're being "beaten over the head" with them.

True. To be a bit more clear, what has gotten a bit pedantic is that they get posted as if a little video is a reasonable substitute for substantive content - it's almost as if we've lost the capacity for original thought and dialogue so we get three-minute videos instead.

It might be different if any of these videos actually had something new to say or presented a new viewpoint but they don't.

Edited August 9, 2012 by RobertNashville

[daddyo]

It might be different if any of these videos actually had something new to say or presented a new viewpoint but they don't.

All the more reason for you to ignore them, eh?

[Guest Lester Weevils]

[media=]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=n3IDXGqKN2Q[/media]

Does this count ?

Hi plank. I don't think that one will win many Romney votes. Excellent soundbite propaganda. Given skill, intention and plenty of archival footage, you can make a saint into the devil himself. A mere wishy-washy slightly-vapid wannabe leader doesn't have good odds surviving the technique. Shooting point blank at the broad side of a barn.

That video was supposedly constructed in his spare time by a fairly mediocre drummer. If so, the fella might ought to give up drumming and get a gig at some political consulting agency. DNC or RNC would pay good money for talent like that. Maybe Romney would pay good money for him to lay off. Kinda like the gov paying farmers not to grow crops.

Because everyone knows that libertarians are rare as hens teeth, tis odd that so many "fanatics" post libertarian propaganda. If libertarians are such a minority, and given that fanatacism is well-distributed among political persuasions, it makes you wonder, where are all the amateur videos from ordinary-citizen RomneyBots? Assuming that there are ten RomneyBots to every PaulBot or JohnsonBot, shouldn't there be ten times as many amateur RomneyBot propaganda videos posted on TGO? Wouldn't we expect such a glut of amateur RomneyBot propaganda videos that PaulBot and JohnsonBot videos would be harder to find than needles in a haystack?

No; I'd just be mad at you. ROTFLMAO

Thanks Robert. I guess it is a complicated issue, because you said re RP/GJ, "I've see so many touting RP/GJ that I would have a difficult time voting for either of them even if I otherwise would have." OTOH you would only get mad at me for posting rabid pro-Romney videos, but your intent to vote Romney would be unshaken?

No big deal. No one is logically consistent and I suspect it is impossible to be logically consistent. I don't pretend to be. Maybe a case of "dog don't like the dog food". If the dog don't like the dog food, then giving him more of the same doesn't make him like it any better. On the other hand a big enough ad budget seems capable of selling about any kind of rancid product to at least a large plurality of ordinary people.

It doesn't take much exposure to make me sick of hearing a talking head or politician. I get so sick of hearing them that I have to turn it off even if I happen to agree with the guy. Made infinitely worse if the speaker is prone to the spouting of banal, information-free tripe and catch-phrases. On the other hand repetition sells. It is puzzling. That's the reason politicians and talking heads keep repeating the same stupid phrases like brain-damaged parrots. Because it works. Strange. You would think that the campaign with the biggest ad budget would lose from people getting sick of the overexposure. But the big budgets usually win even when the voters complain loudly about wall-to-wall advertisements.

[RobertNashville]

...Thanks Robert. I guess it is a complicated issue, because you said re RP/GJ, "I've see so many touting RP/GJ that I would have a difficult time voting for either of them even if I otherwise would have." OTOH you would only get mad at me for posting rabid pro-Romney videos, but your intent to vote Romney would be unshaken?

It was just my (apparently failed) attempt at humor.

[RobertNashville]

And I usually don't reply to you anymore at all but you get the " " For all the -1s you have sent my way today

Actually Mr Plank, before your post (above) I had given you one "-1" (for the anti-Romney pic) but hey, if you want to have a "-1" war we can do that; at least it will provide a bit of a diversion.

Edited August 9, 2012 by RobertNashville

[plank white]

[TMF]

Anyone change who they're voting for yet?

[plank white]

Actually Mr Plank, before your post (above) I had given you one "-1" (for the anti-Romney video) but hey, if you want to have a "-1" war we can do that; at least it will provide a bit of a diversion.

Actually Mr. Robert The moment all the post in the thread started showing up with -1s I viewed your rep page on your profile "Before" anyone evened them out so yes it was you ...and no Im not gonna get in a -1 battle with you a simple will suffice . Edited August 9, 2012 by plank white

[Guest FIST]

I did a little research on third party viability. The consensus seems to be that once a third party issue is a big enough deal for either R or D to notice, then R or D tries to suck the third party in by taking up the issue.

This could be seen a few different ways,

1. Smart political strategy. You take up the issue and steal the wishy washy supporters and reduce an opposing power base at the same time.

2. The third party has waivered just to be absorbed into the collective two party's system but at the same time getting support for their issue.

3. Failure of the party to stand by its beliefs.

All of these outcomes are at least partially responsible for the failure of third party's to create traction. I believe as others have stated it takes a "bottom up" approach. Since this is my belief it is therefore a waste of my vote if I choose an R or D. So my options are, don't vote, or vote third party. Either is a wasted vote in some circles but if I chose to waiver on this I'm No different than the wishy washy voters being absorbed. Maybe the issue truly lies in a vast majority of the population not really believing that a third party canidate can win, but I don't believe that's the case. I think the vast majority doesn't have the intestinal fortitude to stand up for themselves and demand what this country needs. Less political bull, more results.

I'm still waiting for somebody to give me a reason to not vote third party. The following don't count due to the fact they are flawed in their reasoning, argument, and result.

1. It's a vote for Obama (whatever you say) (commie/Marxist, got it, thanks)

2. There's no chance of victory (if there on the ballot there's a chance)

3. You suck at math (Ok)

4. Your stupid and I don't like you (No I'm not, you are)

Please, someone give me a reason to vote R or D. Please.

[stick1]

how about pick a winner

[RobertNashville]

Actually Mr. Robert The moment all the post in the thread started showing up with -1s I viewed your rep page on your profile "Before" anyone evened them out so yes it was you ...and no Im not gonna get in a -1 battle with you a simple will suffice .

I give out plenty of reputation points, + and - 1s...so what?

When you post an insulting, ant-Romney "F*CK TEH BILL OF RIGHTS" pic is it really a surprise that someone might take offense?

[RobertNashville]

how about pick a winner

I already have, Mitt Romney Edited August 9, 2012 by RobertNashville

[RobertNashville]

...I'm still waiting for somebody to give me a reason to not vote third party. The following don't count due to the fact they are flawed in their reasoning, argument, and result.

At least for this election, the answer is easy; the reason not to vote third party or for anyone other than Romney is to ensure that nothing is done that makes it easier for the communist to remain in office and finish the job he's started to fundamentally transform America by...

• Granting amnesty to criminals who come here illegally, stay here illegally and work here illegally and costing taxpayers billions of $$$ in public assistance, draining our educational system of funds and filling up our prisons AFTER they've killed someone or done something nearly as bad while concurrently and purposely refusing to stop the invasion of illegals crossing our borders every day.
  
• Forcing religious institutions to pay for things their faith is diametrically opposed to
  
• Eradicating the work for welfare system that successfully moved almost 50% of the prior recipients off the welfare rolls; turning it back into a way of life for people.
  
• Spending a $Trillion a year we don't have by borrowing and/or printing it - those chickens ARE going to come home to roost and it isn't going to be pleasant
  
• Socializing our healthcare system so that it's as bad as the rest of the world and which is totally unaffordable even if it were a better system
  
• Socializing major industry
  
• Killing the coal, oil and other domestic energy production
  
• Will go after our firearms at every opportunity (you know, those silly folks to cling to their guns and their religion)
  
• Will appoint two or three for four supreme court justices who are just as socialist/communist as he is
  
• Refuses to prosecute voter fraud and intimidation conducted by the Black Panthers but goes to war with any state that opposes a federal program/mandate
  

I could go on but I think the point is clear. Voting for anyone other than Romney does nothing to get this America-hating communist out of office and may, to some extent at least, serve to keep him in office...why would I need any other reason to vote for Romney???

Edited August 9, 2012 by RobertNashville