Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire A vote for Johnson is a vote for Trump

Vote against Hillary-- that means-- vote for Trump

Actually if you read up on it, Perot didn't have much impact.

Daddy Bush was cratering against Clinton on his own with his tax plan.

But that doesn't take away from the fact that there isn't any way voting for Johnson hurts Hillary

Anyone that wants to vote for Johnson out of principle, I'm all for it

I just don't agree with your principles

mainly you endorsing open borders.

both wings of the demo-publican consortium will join forces to keep a third party out of the debates. and why not, it's only in their self-interests to do so.

a lot of third party folks will flow to the Greens this time around, likely. no, not the libertarians, the Greens.

"I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun."

-Donald J. Trump

Don't be stupid! All these never Trump guys are playing with fire. Hillary would be an absolute nightmare. Why take the chance on four years of hell.

Pretty simple, ain't it? Trump wasn't my choice, but he's the nominee. I have no problem voting for him.

I kind of figured you for a libertarian..in insult intended. Though Ron Paul ran GOP, he always struck me as more libertarian also.

There's a distinct difference between the Austrian economics libertarians and the Libertarian Party.

The Libertarian Party is known as the "beltway Libertarians". They're loons.

The Austrian Economics libertarians are more ideological than political. They're most aligned with the Von Mises institute and include Ron Paul, Lew Rockwell, Tom Woods, and Jeff Deist.

https://mises.org/

You might want to hold your water on that. Presumptive at this point. He can be robbed and then we will have a 3rd party run.

That also would be disastrous.

Ron Paul has said he will vote Libertarian...

Who's voting Libertarian? I'm suggesting voting for a history of action that suggests a candidate can do the job well rather than a history of failure or no history at all. Damned if I'm voting based on what comes out of their mouths. Even Johnson, who is generally too forthright for his own good, is trying to say some of the appropriate things these days. Glad he's actually trying to win, but it's just more proof you have decide on past actions rather than statements.

Clinton turns things to disaster. Trump hustles people for money. Johnson ran a state well.

Rand Paul has said he will support the Republican nominee, while his father will support the Libertarian ticket — more so for what it stands for than for who's on the ticket.

“I just can’t, you know, say I’m really enthusiastic about the ticket. But the Libertarian Party stands for the nonaggression principle, and that means that you and I cannot use aggression to get our way, and you can’t use the government to get your way by using force,” he said on C-SPAN. “And that principle is sound on the Libertarian Party, and the more votes they get, the more votes there will be for the nonaggression principle, and that’s as far as I go because I’m a just little bit frustrated with all the individuals running and the discussion going on.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/rand-paul-ron-paul-trump-224591#ixzz4CE7g9HJW

If there is a third party run-- Hillary wins
Who really wants that?
Oh wait--- maybe the Establishment?

Perot hammered Bush more than he did Clinton during the campaign. He attacked Bush while Clinton was trying to win his nomination. He made the national debt a bigger issue than Clinton ever would have.

Perot pulled votes from both sides, but he set the stage for Clinton to win.

Not if Hillary goes down the tubes and the Dems split left and far left.