Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   And he's a significant candidate why? (re: Gary Johnson)
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


(2)
Message 1 of 13 (791879)
09-24-2016 11:15 PM


Gary Johnson says that climate change is nothing to worry about because the sun will eventually expand and swallow the earth.
Gary Johnson Wants to Ignore Climate Change Because the Sun Will Destroy the Earth One Day – Mother Jones
In billions of years the sun is going to actually grow and encompass the Earth, right? So global warming is in our future.
This was a statement he made back in 2011, but it's been resurrected and he has decided to stand by his statement.
[T]he critical question is whether the politicians' efforts to regulate, tax and manipulate the private sector are cost-effectiveor effective at all. The debate should be about how we can protect our resources and environment for future generations. Governors Johnson and [Libertarian vice presidential nominee William] Weld strongly believe that the federal government should prevent future harm by focusing on regulations that protect us from real harm, rather than needlessly costing American jobs and freedom in order to pursue a political agenda.
He was on Real Time with Bill Maher in July and when asked if he had a plan to combat climate change, he said no, but he then later said in August that he would be in favor of a carbon tax...and then later denounced it:
I have determined that, you know what, it's a great theory, but I don't think it can work, and I've worked my way through that.
But then again, the sun is going to swallow the earth, so why bother?
Johnson is pulling a significant portion of his voters from younger voters, who are also more likely to be concerned about climate change.
Why is he a significant candidate again?
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Add "(re: Gary Johnson)" to topic title.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Phat, posted 09-25-2016 2:23 AM Rrhain has replied
 Message 4 by anglagard, posted 09-25-2016 10:20 PM Rrhain has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


(1)
Message 2 of 13 (791880)
09-25-2016 2:23 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Rrhain
09-24-2016 11:15 PM


Why?
The only thing I see is he will get the protest vote over the other two candidates.
No way can a third party even win in this country, however.

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
Whoever trusts in his own mind is a fool, but he who walks in wisdom will be delivered.~Proverbs 28:26

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Rrhain, posted 09-24-2016 11:15 PM Rrhain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Rrhain, posted 09-25-2016 7:56 PM Phat has not replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 3 of 13 (791883)
09-25-2016 7:56 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by Phat
09-25-2016 2:23 AM


Re: Why?
Oh, I don't think he's actually going to have a chance to win, but his presence in the election will have an effect upon the election. In 2012, the vote for those under 30 broke for Obama 60-37.
According to the McClatchy poll in August, Clinton is only pulling 41% of the youth vote. Trump is trailing Johnson and Stein at 9%, but that means 39% are voting for someone other than Clinton. Quinnipac's poll from a few days ago puts Clinton at 31% which is the largest percentage, but it's still below 50%.
The under-30 vote was 18% of the total vote in 2008 and 19% in 2012 and it's because they broke as hard as they did for Obama that he won (Florida, Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Ohio would have gone to Romney if the youth vote had been split.)
I understand that candidates are flawed, there's no perfect candidate, there will always be the need for a compromise, etc. But when a candidate directly opposes positions that you claim to be significant in such a stupid manner, how can you vote for them? Is the need for a political temper tantrum really that great? How do people vote against their own interests?

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Phat, posted 09-25-2016 2:23 AM Phat has not replied

  
anglagard
Member (Idle past 836 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 4 of 13 (791884)
09-25-2016 10:20 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Rrhain
09-24-2016 11:15 PM


Well, You Asked
Rrhain writes:
Johnson is pulling a significant portion of his voters from younger voters, who are also more likely to be concerned about climate change.
Why is he a significant candidate again?
You asked, and the answer is reasonably simple.
First, Gary Johnson is absolutely wrong on not just climate change but also income inequality - I hope we can agree on that point.
(Also, would you liberals please stop wimping out - it's global warming just like it's deferred compensation, not entitlements and liberal. not progressive - damn chickenshits bowing to Rupert Murdock).
However, "climate change" (ugh) is but one of many issues, albeit the most important one. How about the others?
As I said before Johnson is completely wrong about the second most important issue - namely income inequality. There is an easy fix in simply taxing capital gains and dividends at an equal or greater rate than earned wages - problem largely (but not completely for everyone) solved.
So will Hillary Clinton support this first step? I have heard nothing.
Wars of choice are expensive, they hurt the US wage earner and kill those of
every age and gender. Johnson and Jill Stein are against wars of choice, Clinton - ahem - Libya, Iraq, who knows where else. Thank God Bernie Sanders was not the President of Honduras for he would be homeless now at best and his nation would now be the murder capitol of the world for the next few years.
Millennials don't just think black lives matter, they even extend such compassion and empathy to (heaven forbid) Central Americans, who incidentally due to Clinton, among others (yeah, you too Obama), are responsible for a large part of illegal immigration from people fleeing the chaos they themselves created. Unlike the idiot who gives the color orange a bad name and falsely blames it on Mexico - it's not Il Duce it's Ill Douche.
Some may be selling but millennials ain't buying.
Gary Johnson will flat-out veto any and every bill until the budget is balanced, unlike Republicans who balloon the budget deficit to pay off their rich contributor buddies or Democrats who - while making an effort - also fail at elementary school math.
Gary Johnson will end the incarceration industrial complex, Bill Clinton, with Hillary's blessing, helped create it. Sheet - Johnson smokes weed, love to share some of Colorado's finest with him.
I lived in New Mexico when Gary Johnson was the Governor. Best damn Governor the state ever had. He really hates corruption and even had the leader of the State Senate arrested for taking bribes. I have only voted for a Republican for a major office three times in my life and this one is the one I am most proud of.
Millennials don't like corruption either and they are certainly more against it than Boomers or Xers have shown.
Most importantly to Millennials, Johnson is genuine like Bernie Sanders, he is not a fake or phony, unlike traditional bribe-taking politicians.
There is even more, but Rrhain, you are quite intelligent, I think you get the point. Some Millennials take the entirety of their concerns and weigh the balance to see which side tips the scales. In the end, I think most will vote for Clinton because, rightfully so, Trump is the worst scum since Sarah Palin.
As for me I agree with my daughter. If Clinton is within the margin of error for the state poll, I will hold my nose and vote for her just to keep the criminal con man (who belongs in prison, but money buys justice - another thing Millennials hate) Trump from winning. Other than that it's Jill Stein all the way even though I am appalled by her inability to call the anti-vax people what they truly are - child murderer enablers.
Or I may just go full Millennial and write in Bernie. Ball's in your court Jill.

Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider. - Francis Bacon

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Rrhain, posted 09-24-2016 11:15 PM Rrhain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by ramoss, posted 09-25-2016 11:17 PM anglagard has not replied
 Message 6 by Rrhain, posted 09-26-2016 9:00 PM anglagard has not replied

  
ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 5 of 13 (791889)
09-25-2016 11:17 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by anglagard
09-25-2016 10:20 PM


Re: Well, You Asked
Gary Johnson privatized prisons which is the exact opposite of 'breaking the incarceration industry'. He wants to privatize social security He wants school vouchers. He wants to get rid of the ACA. He wants whether to follow roe vs wade up to the individual states.. same for the public accommodation laws.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by anglagard, posted 09-25-2016 10:20 PM anglagard has not replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


(2)
Message 6 of 13 (791918)
09-26-2016 9:00 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by anglagard
09-25-2016 10:20 PM


Re: Well, You Asked
Actually, Clinton does have a tax plan for the rich. Even Elizabeth Warren has signed off on it. It isn't treating capital gains as ordinary income, no, but that you don't know about it is not due to her not having a plan.
That said, Johnson recently doubled down on his inanity regarding global warming saying that the solution is for us to colonize other planets: "We do have to inhabit other planets. The future of the human race is space exploration."
PZ Myers had some good questions for that "plan":
  • Which planet do you think will be more habitable than Earth after Libertarian laissez faire policies get done with it, Venus or Mars?
  • If neither of those two, which planet do you propose as the new homeworld for humanity?
  • I assume that you acknowledge that some terraforming of this new home will be required. Since that would require the investment of a substantial portion of Earth’s resources to accomplish, over centuries to thousands of years, before we see any return on the investment, do you think the free market is capable of driving the greatest public works project in all of human history?
  • Let us pretend you have a real habitable extraterrestrial planet in mind. How do we get there? By we, I mean the 7 billion people now on Earth. Or do you imagine this is more of an opportunity for the few incredibly rich people, while everyone else boils, fries, broils, or fricassees on Abandoned Earth?
  • How do you reconcile the fact that you oppose closing coal plants because it would cost the economy too much, while proposing a solution that is immensely more expensive, currently impracticable, and requires allowing this lovely blue planet to choke on our waste? This does not sound at all cost effective.
  • You seem to regard natural resources as fungible. Are you capable of empathizing with people who might love pieces of this Earth so much that they don’t see any possibility of substitutions? I don’t think we should surrender the Galapagos Islands, the Olympic Rain Forest, the Great Barrier Reef, or any of the millions of treasures we ought to be protecting. Do you also see your children as interchangeable, so you’d have no problem giving one up if we provided a replacement of equal or greater value?
I get the feeling it's really coming down to two things:
1) Johnson is in favor of legalizing marijuana.
2) Clinton Derangement Syndrome.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by anglagard, posted 09-25-2016 10:20 PM anglagard has not replied

  
1.61803
Member (Idle past 1504 days)
Posts: 2928
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004


(5)
Message 7 of 13 (791984)
09-29-2016 10:50 AM


Well I wont vote for Gary Johnson.
He does not favor socialized medicine and wants to repeal the
Affordable Care Act. He seems to be sort of a fringe politics nutter.
I won't vote for Trump because I do not feel he is qualified for the job...oh and he seems to be a nutter.
Hillary seems to be the only sane choice. I want someone who will help the middle class and she says she wants to do that. I realize how naive that sounds. I do hope she sincerely adopts some of Bernies ideas.
Bernie Sanders was my guy. Bernie would of shaken up Wall street and the to big to fail banks. He most likely would of of been a ineffectual president with a conservative run congress though.
So imo voting for Hillary despite ones reservations is most important if only to keep the Donald out of the white house.
Edited by 1.61803, : No reason given.

"You were not there for the beginning. You will not be there for the end. Your knowledge of what is going on can only be superficial and relative" William S. Burroughs

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by NoNukes, posted 09-29-2016 4:35 PM 1.61803 has not replied
 Message 9 by Tanypteryx, posted 09-29-2016 10:05 PM 1.61803 has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(2)
Message 8 of 13 (791993)
09-29-2016 4:35 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by 1.61803
09-29-2016 10:50 AM


Bernie Sanders was my guy. Bernie would of shaken up Wall street and the to big to fail banks. He most likely would of of been a ineffectual president with a conservative run congress though.
Exactly. If you really want to see Wall Street shaken up, please cast some votes for some great Congressman over the next couple of elections. Otherwise, Hilary won't even get a chance to show whether she is sincere about adopting anything Sanders proposed.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King
I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson
Seems to me if its clear that certain things that require ancient dates couldn't possibly be true, we are on our way to throwing out all those ancient dates on the basis of the actual evidence. -- Faith

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by 1.61803, posted 09-29-2016 10:50 AM 1.61803 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by Taq, posted 09-30-2016 10:40 AM NoNukes has not replied

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 4344
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.9


(4)
Message 9 of 13 (791998)
09-29-2016 10:05 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by 1.61803
09-29-2016 10:50 AM


He does not favor socialized medicine and wants to repeal the
Affordable Care Act. He seems to be sort of a fringe politics nutter.
I think you are far too kind.........he's a total flaming pile of shit nut job.
I won't vote for Trump because I do not feel he is qualified for the job...oh and he seems to be a nutter.
In this case you have an excuse for not being more expressive. The words to accurately describe this level of disgusting insanity have not been invented yet, but I bet before the election is over that someone will invent the perfect description of donald little hands.
So imo voting for Hillary despite ones reservations is most important if only to keep the Donald out of the white house.
It will be worth it to see heads explode at fox when she is elected.

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python
One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie
If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by 1.61803, posted 09-29-2016 10:50 AM 1.61803 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by anglagard, posted 10-05-2016 7:40 PM Tanypteryx has seen this message but not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


Message 10 of 13 (792011)
09-30-2016 10:40 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by NoNukes
09-29-2016 4:35 PM


NoNukes writes:
Exactly. If you really want to see Wall Street shaken up, please cast some votes for some great Congressman over the next couple of elections. Otherwise, Hilary won't even get a chance to show whether she is sincere about adopting anything Sanders proposed.
That is the fly in the ointment. Republicans have used their control of statehouses to give themselves an edge in redistricting. If you add up all races, more people vote for Democratic congressional candidates than they do for Republican candidates , yet Democrats hold a minority of seats. Presidents can't write laws, so outside of military action and law enforcement there is little that a President can do when it comes to domestic policy.
Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by NoNukes, posted 09-29-2016 4:35 PM NoNukes has not replied

  
anglagard
Member (Idle past 836 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


(1)
Message 11 of 13 (792155)
10-05-2016 7:40 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Tanypteryx
09-29-2016 10:05 PM


Have to Agree
Tanypteryx writes:
I think you are far too kind.........he's a total flaming pile of shit nut job.
Recent Aleppo moments seem to indicate your analysis is correct.
I don't know what happened - early onset Alzheimer's, hanging out with a bad crowd (Libertarians), lack of positive role models - anyone's guess.
He was a great governor (guess you had to be there), but now the dude has lost it.
Sheesh, say a few positive things about the guy that may influence the stance of millennials and he does everything to embarrass you.
Meanwhile Clinton kills Trump in debate and even grudgingly adopts some of Bernie's ideas (hopefully with some sincerity - please no more unnecessary wars).
Prediction: Johnson and Stein 3% or less. Clinton 55% or better.
But then what do I know, my last post indicated I thought Johnson was still sane.
Edited by anglagard, : embarrassed by spelling error.

Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider. - Francis Bacon

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Tanypteryx, posted 09-29-2016 10:05 PM Tanypteryx has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Rrhain, posted 10-06-2016 2:14 AM anglagard has not replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 12 of 13 (792156)
10-06-2016 2:14 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by anglagard
10-05-2016 7:40 PM


Re: Have to Agree
anglagard writes:
quote:
But then what do I know, my last post indicated I thought Johnson was still sane.
And his latest missive: His ignorance regarding international politics is a good thing because politicians who know where the countries are and who the leaders are cause wars because they know where to send the troops.
You know what? The fact that somebody can dot the i’s and cross the t’s on a foreign leader’s geographic location then allows them to put our military in harm’s way.
I get the anti-war sentiment. But the idea that being involved in international affairs is some sort of "gateway" to war is foolish.
What got into him? I think it's the marijuana.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by anglagard, posted 10-05-2016 7:40 PM anglagard has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by Taq, posted 10-06-2016 5:24 PM Rrhain has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


Message 13 of 13 (792169)
10-06-2016 5:24 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Rrhain
10-06-2016 2:14 AM


Re: Have to Agree
Rrhain writes:
And his latest missive: His ignorance regarding international politics is a good thing because politicians who know where the countries are and who the leaders are cause wars because they know where to send the troops.
That almost makes sense in Libertarian logic. They have always wanted a weak government, so perhaps they think that inept politicians are a way of achieving that goal. If prisoners got to vote on who the guards are, I am sure the winners would be both deaf and blind.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Rrhain, posted 10-06-2016 2:14 AM Rrhain has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024