Which Candidate Best Represents You and do You Intend to Support?

[Classic Liberal]

If we dont pool all our votes to one person, obama will win again. If we split our vote obama will win. Everyone needs to vote Romney so that obama deos not have a chance!

How about...Everyone needs to vote for Johnson, that way we don't have to worry about the US Constitution being trampled on for at least 4 years. And, some of the liberties that have been taken away by both Dems and Repubs can be restored.

 

[Yup!]

Not gonna happen.

Just sayin

I type this with all due respect to your ability to use your vote however you wish, and in no way do I wish to sway you from that choice, but in all honesty, I"m trying to figure out the logic here.

IF you agree that Pres. Obama needs to be voted out, why would you vote for someone who has little to no chance of beating Pres. Obama? Or do you firmly believe that enough votes can put Johnson into the Oval Office?

I haven't made my mind up yet as to how I'm going to vote, though at this point Romney is my front runner, based largely on my belief that he is the only candidate who can gather enough votes to win.

However, if Pres. Obama gets 1/2 the votes, and Romney and Johnson each get 1/4, Pres Obama wins re-election. So, in my case, for the sake of the country, I'm using my vote for the greater good, rather than hoping I hit a home run on a long shot candidate.

There is a lot to be said for your integrity to the process, and I truly respect that, but in my case, I'm willing to cave a little, to get a lot.

 

[buckstopshere]

I type this with all due respect to your ability to use your vote however you wish, and in no way do I wish to sway you from that choice, but in all honesty, I"m trying to figure out the logic here.

IF you agree that Pres. Obama needs to be voted out, why would you vote for someone who has little to no chance of beating Pres. Obama? Or do you firmly believe that enough votes can put Johnson into the Oval Office?

I haven't made my mind up yet as to how I'm going to vote, though at this point Romney is my front runner, based largely on my belief that he is the only candidate who can gather enough votes to win.

However, if Pres. Obama gets 1/2 the votes, and Romney and Johnson each get 1/4, Pres Obama wins re-election. So, in my case, for the sake of the country, I'm using my vote for the greater good, rather than hoping I hit a home run on a long shot candidate.

There is a lot to be said for your integrity to the process, and I truly respect that, but in my case, I'm willing to cave a little, to get a lot.

There's always an assumption that all of the votes a third party libertarian is going to get will come from people who would normally vote for a republican. That is simply not true.

It's just as easy to ask yourself, if you're unhappy with the current situation our country is in, what logic is there in voting for the same people who have screwed you over for decades. BHO is horrible, so was Bush, so was Clinton why keep giving these guys your vote? That's the definition of insanity right, doing the same thing and expecting a different result.

Someone up thread mentioned we all need to get behind someone so that we can beat BHO. I'm cool with that but why not get behind someone who actually has an agenda for liberty and cutting our debt? That seems logical to me.

Sorry to jump in, I know it wasn't aimed at me. I appreciated the sincerity of your post and felt compelled to respond.

Edit: just to give real world examples, here are some voters I know personally who are voting for Johnson this year who voted for someone else in 08

Best friends, 2 votes McCain, now Johnson
Cally cousins, 2 votes for BHO, now Johnson
Mom voted BHO, now Johnson
Grandparents 2 votes BHO, now Johnson
Close neighbor friends, 2 votes BHO, now Johnson
Me and the wife, 2 votes McCain, now Johnson

Also, all switched to Johnson from Dr Paul since he won't be on the ballot barring a miracle.

 

[Yup!]

There's always an assumption that all of the votes a third party libertarian is going to get will come from people who would normally vote for a republican. That is simply not true.

It's just as easy to ask yourself, if you're unhappy with the current situation our country is in, what logic is there in voting for the same people who have screwed you over for decades. BHO is horrible, so was Bush, so was Clinton why keep giving these guys your vote? That's the definition of insanity right, doing the same thing and expecting a different result.

Someone up thread mentioned we all need to get behind someone so that we can beat BHO. I'm cool with that but why not get behind someone who actually has an agenda for liberty and cutting our debt? That seems logical to me.

Sorry to jump in, I know it wasn't aimed at me. I appreciated the sincerity of your post and felt compelled to respond.

I agree completely, but I've yet to see a third party candidate get enough votes to register as anything but a spoiler. As a whole, the country is not able to rally behind a third party candidate in the numbers that would support a victory. If the polls were to ever show a three way tie, perhaps then I'd allow my personal opinion dictate my vote. Maybe I'm accepting defeat to easily, and in an effort to lesson the blow, willing to cave on some of my principals in hopes to win the lesser of two evils.

 

[Trading_Fool]

Why is it that no one realizes that the republican vote is the only one that is split. The vote is not for Obama, Romney, or Someone else. The vote is for obama or romney. It is a two party system. If you vote for someone else you reduce votes to the republican party and that split is what costs elections. All dems will vote for obama. They do not look at facts. They vote on what he ways and not what he will do. Be smart and vote with what you are most aligned with and not specifics that someone who will never get elected will promise.

 

[buckstopshere]

I agree completely, but I've yet to see a third party candidate get enough votes to register as anything but a spoiler. As a whole, the country is not able to rally behind a third party candidate in the numbers that would support a victory. If the polls were to ever show a three way tie, perhaps then I'd allow my personal opinion dictate my vote. Maybe I'm accepting defeat to easily, and in an effort to lesson the blow, willing to cave on some of my principals in hopes to win the lesser of two evils.

I believe there's not many more important personal opinions than your individual vote. Why not allow that to be your guide?

It took me a couple of election cycles to get to this point where I won't endorse anyone who wants to strip my freedom, the freedom of my children, and spend my beloved country into bankruptcy.

 

[Yup!]

Edit: just to give real world examples, here are some voters I know personally who are voting for Johnson this year who voted for someone else in 08

Best friends, 2 votes McCain, now Johnson
Cally cousins, 2 votes for BHO, now Johnson
Mom voted BHO, now Johnson
Grandparents 2 votes BHO, now Johnson
Close neighbor friends, 2 votes BHO, now Johnson
Me and the wife, 2 votes McCain, now Johnson

Also, all switched to Johnson from Dr Paul since he won't be on the ballot barring a miracle.

If Johnson was not an option, who would they vote for? Would they all Pick Romney? In my mind, that how I see it play out. If all of those votes would go to Romney instead of Johnson, then Romney has a chance of beating Pres. Obama.

I know its a silly question, because Johnson is an option, but for argument sake, allow me the latitude to remove it for just a moment to help me understand. I'm open minded enough to learn.

 

[buckstopshere]

Why is it that no one realizes that the republican vote is the only one that is split. The vote is not for Obama, Romney, or Someone else. The vote is for obama or romney. It is a two party system. If you vote for someone else you reduce votes to the republican party and that split is what costs elections. All dems will vote for obama. They do not look at facts. They vote on what he ways and not what he will do. Be smart and vote with what you are most aligned with and not specifics that someone who will never get elected will promise.

Faux news is not your friend

 

[Yup!]

I believe there's not many more important personal opinions than your individual vote. Why not allow that to be your guide?

It took me a couple of election cycles to get to this point where I won't endorse anyone who wants to strip my freedom, the freedom of my children, and spend my beloved country into bankruptcy.

And boy do I respect you for that! I honestly do.


I fear, that Pres. Obama has the greatest likelihood of stripping your freedom, and spending us into debt than the other three. If you agree with that, isn't anyone better than that, so why not rally to save the nation?

(again, asked as a question, not an attempt to sway your vote, or ask you to compromise your values)

 

[Trading_Fool]

If my thoughts are wrong, please correct me. The defense of the democratic vote has always been the one that is split. Libertarian, tea party. Please help me to understand

 

[buckstopshere]

If Johnson was not an option, who would they vote for? Would they all Pick Romney? In my mind, that how I see it play out. If all of those votes would go to Romney instead of Johnson, then Romney has a chance of beating Pres. Obama.

I know its a silly question, because Johnson is an option, but for argument sake, allow me the latitude to remove it for just a moment to help me understand. I'm open minded enough to learn.

I can't answer that for each of those that I listed but I have had that conversation with a couple.

My mom said she would vote for Romney. Cally cousins said BHO. Neighbors I have no idea but I would suspect BHO. Best friends would be Romney.

For me and my wife, if the ONLY choice we had was Romney or Obama, we'd vote no one.

 

[Yup!]

For me and my wife, if the ONLY choice we had was Romney or Obama, we'd vote no one.

Understood.

So your stance is clearly not to support someone you don't firmly believe in, but do feel that your lack of vote is essentially allowing the rest of the country to decide for you? In that case, you'd have no say, and simply be stuck with what the country wants, rather than taking a lesser stance and getting a 51% solution to your issues.

 

[mrjarrell]

If Johnson was not an option, who would they vote for? Would they all Pick Romney? In my mind, that how I see it play out. If all of those votes would go to Romney instead of Johnson, then Romney has a chance of beating Pres. Obama.

I know its a silly question, because Johnson is an option, but for argument sake, allow me the latitude to remove it for just a moment to help me understand. I'm open minded enough to learn.

If Johnson were not an option I would vote for the same candidate I voted for last time around. None of the Above.

I fear, that Pres. Obama has the greatest likelihood of stripping your freedom, and spending us into debt than the other three. If you agree with that, isn't anyone better than that, so why not rally to save the nation?

(again, asked as a question, not an attempt to sway your vote, or ask you to compromise your values)

You're working on the assumption that Obamney is relatively different than Obama. His history says otherwise. Both are progressives and would love to see guns banned. Obamney may very well be just as bad as the one you'd have him replace. I'll vote my principles and conscience and back a candidate with a proven track record. Why anyone would support Obamney, with his record, over Johnson, is beyond me.

 

[Classic Liberal]

Why is it that no one realizes that the republican vote is the only one that is split. The vote is not for Obama, Romney, or Someone else. The vote is for obama or romney. It is a two party system. If you vote for someone else you reduce votes to the republican party and that split is what costs elections. All dems will vote for obama. They do not look at facts. They vote on what he ways and not what he will do. Be smart and vote with what you are most aligned with and not specifics that someone who will never get elected will promise.

I am most aligned with Libertarians, so that is how I shall vote.

 

[Yup!]

If Johnson were not an option I would vote for the same candidate I voted for last time around. None of the Above.

You're working on the assumption that Obamney is relatively different than Obama. His history says otherwise. Both are progressives and would love to see guns banned. Obamney may very well be just as bad as the one you'd have him replace. I'll vote my principles and conscience and back a candidate with a proven track record. Why anyone would support Obamney, with his record, over Johnson, is beyond me.

Part of my Logic, is that Obamney in his first term will be less dangerous than Pres. Obama in his second term. Even if they share the same principals it will be a lot harder for Romney starting from Ground Zero, then in 4 years we work again to shape the country.

See my previous post about a vote for "No One"

 

[buckstopshere]

And boy do I respect you for that! I honestly do.


I fear, that Pres. Obama has the greatest likelihood of stripping your freedom, and spending us into debt than the other three. If you agree with that, isn't anyone better than that, so why not rally to save the nation?

(again, asked as a question, not an attempt to sway your vote, or ask you to compromise your values)

No need to qualify your intentions Yup. I see what you're about on here

If the country is sick with prostate cancer and needs to be saved, what's the best medicine?

Option A, just keep doing what you're doing and change your diet (BHO). This option will not save the country.

Option B, just keep doing what you're doing, change your diet, and take two aspirins every day. This will not save the country.

Option C, cut the f'n cancer out. This will save the country.

Maybe not the best analogy but in order to make the logic work that Romney will save the country, you first have to believe he will do so. I don't believe that. There isn't enough of a discernible difference between these guys so what will honestly be different?

These are my POV, YMMV

 

[buckstopshere]

Understood.

So your stance is clearly not to support someone you don't firmly believe in, but do feel that your lack of vote is essentially allowing the rest of the country to decide for you? In that case, you'd have no say, and simply be stuck with what the country wants, rather than taking a lesser stance and getting a 51% solution to your issues.

51% means I still have 49% of my problems.

It also assumes that I believe that any POTUS can represent 51% solutions. I'm more of the mind that the POTUS election is highly over rated and what's more important is local, state, and congressional.

 

[mrjarrell]

Part of my Logic, is that Obamney in his first term will be less dangerous than Pres. Obama in his second term. Even if they share the same principals it will be a lot harder for Romney starting from Ground Zero, then in 4 years we work again to shape the country.

See my previous post about a vote for "No One"

I don't see that, at all. Both have bad etched on their persona. Obamney has already come out in favour of ratcheting up wars and getting us further involved in conflicts we should be withdrawing from. He's as big a war monger as Obama, if not worse. Wars cost money and blood, neither of which we can afford anymore. Nope. The man has said nothing that would convince me to vote for him. Neither has Obama. My vote is valuable and mine alone to cast as I will. I'll be voting for the best qualified candidate for president. Shoot, I would likely have voted for Johnson if he was the gop candidate. Unfortunately, the rank file chose a dumbass who realistically is going to get beat by Obama. The gop have only themselves to blame for any losses.

 

[Yup!]

No need to qualify your intentions Yup. I see what you're about on here

If the country is sick with prostate cancer and needs to be saved, what's the best medicine?

Option A, just keep doing what you're doing and change your diet (BHO). This option will not save the country.

Option B, just keep doing what you're doing, change your diet, and take two aspirins every day. This will not save the country.

Option C, cut the f'n cancer out. This will save the country.

Maybe not the best analogy but in order to make the logic work that Romney will save the country, you first have to believe he will do so. I don't believe that. There isn't enough of a discernible difference between these guys so what will honestly be different?

These are my POV, YMMV

If B has a 51% chance of working, and C has a 5% chance of working, wouldn't prolonging your life by choosing B, be a better Option until someone comes up with a viable Plan D?

The real question is, can we increase the effectiveness of Plan C between now an Nov, given the stronghold that both A and B have on us. If all three options had an equal chance of implementation, I'd completely support your argument.

 

[Yup!]

51% means I still have 49% of my problems.

It also assumes that I believe that any POTUS can represent 51% solutions. I'm more of the mind that the POTUS election is highly over rated and what's more important is local, state, and congressional.

Indeed - Couldn't agree more, and at this level, a third party candidate actually has an equal shot of winning, which is why this is an effective strategy here.

But applying this strategy to the Presidential race doesn't work.