Gary Johnson is the only candidate who has been re-elected. Neither Romney nor Obama have ever been re-elected to anything. Think about that for a second. Also, you want real world business experience? Gov. Johnson started going door to door looking for handyman jobs to earn money while a college student, he built that into a large construction company with 1,000 employees. That's real world business experience. Check him out, would be an excellent President. http://www.garyjohnson2012.com
Overall Accomplishments during 2 terms as Governor 1995-2003
Left office with New Mexico as one of the only four states in the country with a balanced budget
Left New Mexico with a budget surplus
Used Line Item Veto thousands of times to trim the budget
Vetoed 750 bills during his time in office; more than all other governors combined
Cut over 1,200 government jobs without firing anyone
Created more than 20,000 new jobs
First New Mexico Governor to challenge education status quo and propose statewide voucher program
Restored State General Fund reserves to more than $222 million from a low of $28.1 million
Limited annual state budget growth to 5.0% during eight years in office
Cut taxes 14 times while never raising them—a first for New Mexico
Vetoed 32% of the total number of bills submitted for his signature
Then maybe people should educate themselves, Jerry instead of taking what is being fed to them.
All last night showed me was how incredibly the same these two are. Anyone who watched that and didn't come to the same conclusion, just doesn't want to believe it.
More voters would know who they are if they had been included in the debates as they properly should have been. They're the two most prominent alternatives to the Republicrats.
Phil, please take care on assessing how people educate themselves. I mean, you probably consider yourself "well-educated" on the candidates yet you still make comments that other "well-educated" people view as outrageous.
Those that want to sit on the national stage need to earn it. Johnson and Stein have not done that. Again, it is 23 October and who are they?
Who doesn't make outrageous statements for the candidate they support and against the candidates that they don't?
One man's hero is another's monster.
Perhaps if American politics became more about issues rather than Millions of Dollars spent to turn oponents into the anti christ things might be a little different.
3rd party candidates debate tonight, 9 pm edt, streaming at freeandequal.org and I believe CSpan is televising it. You should at least give them an opportunity to speak.
I'm tired of the talking points and the rhetoric of this campaign. We are phucked either way, and no one seems to grasp this. Congress needs term limits, people willing to serve their country, not career building powermongers.
Jerry, Gary Johnson, certainly, more than earned it. His name is on every state ballot. Further, the "earn it" standard is a canard. The system is rigged to ensure a Republicrat monopoly on the political machine. Neither party wants voters to have any real choice.
Jerry; it means that Phil doesn't deserve to be disparaged for having thoughts and opinions that are outside of the so-called norm. Just because someone doesn't repeat the blatherings of politicians and pundits that some try to pass off on here as their own opinions, doesn't make it "outrageous".
I will be the first person to admit that I am for President Obama. Having said that I would like to hear from all the candidates. ABC, NBC, CBS, CSPAN, Cnn, MSNBC and Fox should show this debate. Why not?
That's nice how you put words in my mouth to try and denounce what I say. It's a cute tactic.
The fact that you don't know what other candidates are out there shows a complete lack of full education on the process. The reason for this is the very system exists to prevent 3rd party candidates from gaining access.
All of the debates are ran by a commission that are funded and staffed with prominent members of the two parties. Barrack Obama and Mitt Romney signed a document banning 3rd party candidates. That's not democracy, that is being force fed information.
I agree with Howard, if we are a free country. This process is broken.
While all of this is a good cerebral excersise, the reality is that either Barack Obama or Mitt Romney is going to be the next President of the United States. If the internals that are starting to be shown are correct, it will likely be Mitt Romney (All positive movement in internals favors him at this point) and the vicious and factually void attacks against him by the DNC all went out the window in the first debate, so much so that the other two debates were actually pointless.
That all said, Howard's point is one that is without question the real point. If we are to have true debate in the 2016 election year, the third, fourth and fifth party candidates are going to have to begin positioning themselves immediately after this election. The only way that the current structure will change is with grass root overwhelming support. That is the only way to strip power from the two political machines.
That isn't going to happen in a 12 month period and will be difficult to say the least in a 48 month period and an awful lot can happen over the next 4 years that can determine things, but without regard to the unknown variables, non republican or democrat wanna be presidents are going to have to begin positioning themselves for 2016 in a few short months, otherwise we will be having discussion again in October 2016.
Howard, I respectfully disagree. It is very clear to me neither Johnson nor Stein had what it takes to command the national stage. Their ideas weren't embraced enough to gain any popular traction. They apparently lacked the money needed to campaign to the masses and get some attention. I do see you point on the "Republicrats." The person with the good idea that attracts enough followers can succeed. Our system isn't perfect obviously.
Dave...I fully agree with your last comment but don't understand why you posted it (where you're coming from).
Phil...my comment to you was to point out that many people who disagree also consider themselves "educated." For inexplicable reasons, people can look at the same thing and come to different conclusions. I made a (perhaps faulty) assumption that you assume those who disagree with you are not "educated." I've gotten that assumption before from previous posts of yours. If I'm wrong, please forgive me.
One thing we all may be able to agree on....this election sure is an emotional one!
You are wrong, and forgiven. Education on this is not about the candidates, but the process. These are not opinions, but rather facts.
To say that a candidate hasn't earned the right to be in the process is an opinion, and not factual within our current structure. That is where my comment came from.
Jerry, look at the polls, there are more people who agree with Johnson's ideas point-by-point than either major candidate. This is a country that loves its freedom, but they've been hornswogled by the system to accept what's force fed them.
Most people want marijuana legalized. You won't get that from Obama or Romney.
Most people want a less interventionist foreign policy and less money spent on the military. You won't get that from Obama or Romney.
Most people want less government in their personal lives. You won't get that from Obama or Romney.
Most people want smaller government. You won't get that from Obama or Romney.
Most people want reduced spending. You won't get that from Obama or Romney.
The idea that Johnson's ideas weren't embraced is ludicrous. They system is designed specifically to shut out people that don't go along with the Republicrat program.
"For inexplicable reasons, people can look at the same thing and come to different conclusions."
I can agree with that as well Jerry. I felt that you were admonishing Phil for defining "educated" I thought it hypocritical for you to then to define "outrageous" Obviously, I could have made my point better. Anyway, I admit to a bit of impulsiveness, so hopefully you can forgive me.
Obama and Romney are still horrid prospective Presidents in my opinion.........
C-Span is carrying the third party candidate debate tonight, just checked their website and TV guide, I plan on watching.
“Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.” John Adams
If this is what you live by, you may find your candidate tonight.
Gary Johnson was in the republican debates.He changed from a Republican in May of this year to run as a libertarian...He has had his chance to make his points on the national stage...He can't get any support...Ron Paul had the national stage ..He can't get the support it takes to be President either..It has come down to Obama and Rommey...They all had their chance.....The media are the ones who pick and choose who they want to cover...I would lay more blame on them for not treating all candidates equally...I myself would aline more with Gary Johnson..But also realize he doesn't have a shot at winning New York's electoral votes and neither does Rommey..So i know my vote will mean squat....I think we need to make changes to the electoral College and then we might see a better chance for a third party candidate...Maybe we need to assign electoral votes proportional to the vote cast for a candidate.....
Larry King to moderate third-party debate on Oct. 23
By Nate, on October 19th, 2012
Former CNN host Larry King will moderate a debate between third-party candidates in Chicago coming up on Tuesday, October 23, 2012. This debate will not include President Obama or Governor Romney but it will be available streamed online as well as broadcast live on a few cable channels.
Air Time: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 at 9pm et
Live Stream: Ora.TV (Oct 23, 2012)
TV Channels: Link TV, Al Jazeera English, RT America
Could not agree more Bud on term limits, but why stop there? We need to stop giving a retirement salary to Congress/HOR and the President. Even the military is required to serve 20 years to collect a retirement. The Air National Guard and Reserves have to wait until they are 60 before they collect. Yet our President, Congressmen and Senators collect retirement even is they only serve for one term. Let's face it, they are in the positions they are in because, they are volunteering themselves to run as your representative. They all come from an established family and/or career. Basically, none of them are hurting for money.
Obama has taken yearly wage increases from all Government Employees except Congress and H.O.R. for three years. Heck both are able to increase their pay even if, the public does not agree. Our budget is not balanced correctly, they failed and forget they work for the citizen of the USA, they creat large deficits, yet they keep voting for pay raises and behold they vote "YES!"
I believe all political offices should have a term limit no longer than 12 years. Things change, ideas change, society changes. This would allow younger and brighter ideas into the arena. Biden has been in so long that, I believe he is out of touch and corrupt.
Last night's debate was "BORING!" Who cares about foreign policy at this moment. I am worried about our economy and my children's future. Dave brought up Gary Johnson, but let's be real. He is not going to get elected because, the media does not inform us about anyone else. I agree with Howard. Why should the Presidental debate only include Obama and Romney? It should bring everyone on the ballot running for the Presidency. Unfortunately, the reality of our situation gives us two choices a.k.a the lesser of the two evils. I do not like the direction Obama has taken us and disagree with many of his policies. He claims he ended the war in Iraq (FALSE), He claims he will pull our troops out of Afghanistan in 2014 (FALSE). He has lied to all of us time and time again yet, people could care less now. If Obama's last four years are his ideas of Hope and Change, then I am not onboard.
The only reason I am voting for Romney is because, I feel as a businessman he is more suitable to bring our economy back. Dave, if Gary Johnson was an feasible selection for the Presidency, I would vote for him as long as his record is as true as you stated. However, my main concern is to remove our current cancer a.k.a Obama! Like he stated, he means what he saids. Well he has said plenty over the past four years that offended and insulted the American People!
I am curious if, we eliminate all these special perks our politicians get. Would they be so entice to run for office. They should be given a salary like local politicians. They keep their current means of income and get a limited salary as a representative of the American Voters. Maybe this would help them work together for the benefit of the American People and get rid of their self-agenda. Retirements for educated whiners, corrupted politics and self-agendas? Really!? We need to figure out away to take our power back from these A-holes!
Howard while I agree with you that Gary Johnson is more intune with many voters as some might think. Polling on some of these issues is contrary to what you said.
1 On Marijuana legalization you are dead on (56%)
2. On smaller Government you again are dead on (54%)
3. On less Government in personal lives again dead on (53%)
4. On interventionist foreign policy, would depend on how the question is asked, but you are again dead on
5, But on military spending it may not only surprise you that you are wrong, but it is also trending the opposite way, What most people seem to be against is Increased military spending. But here are two polls on from 6 months ago and 1 from last week.
Most other polling sources mirror Rassmussen on this except for a few of the more liberal weighted ones.
I would have loved to see Obama, Romney and Johnson all on the same stage especially for this last foreign policy debate it probably would have made it at the least more interesting
Just finished watching the 3rd party candidate debate. A well spent 90 minutes. A lot of unencumbered truth was laid out. The hands down line of the night came from Gary Johnson "the only wasted vote is a vote for somebody you don't believe in".
The fact of the matter is, Gary Johnson is more mainstream than either Obama or Romney. It's just that the Republicrats and the media industrial complex that supports them doesn't want to get that message out.
I agree with you on Gary Johnson being a viable candidate Howard, but look at the dates of your polling on those links, 3/2011 & 05/10/2012 now look at mine 5/12/2012 & 10/12/2012, my statement wasn't that you were wrong, but that the sediment that you suggest has been changing the opposite way since spring.
The Stimpson Center survey cited by the Hill on July 16th was actually conducted in May 2012.{From the article: "In a May release about the survey, Koll said that the PPC survey found more favored cutting defense than other surveys that asked a simple question.")
The dates of those polls (The ones you posted and the ones that I did including the Stimson Survey) are completely in support of what I said and it is an obvious trend. (Sequestration threat might account for this I admit)
For any position a poll can pretty much be found to support it or refute it, but Rassmussen and Gallop have consistantly been very close to the mark over several decades.
Now, yes Gary Johnson is a very viable candidate, just as viable as was Ron Paul, and in each of those two I find much that I can agree with, but not everything.
I find little that I can agree with Obama, nothing that I can agree with with Jill Stien, and more that I can agree with with Mitt Romney, albiet slightly more than a Ron Paul and/or a Gary Johnson. I am pretty certain that I am far from alone there.
I do unequivably agree with you that the debate process is pretty much controlled by the two major parties, I also agree with you that this is wrong. Please do not confuse a statistical difference in what I found with an attempt to discredit Gary Jihnson as a viable candidate,it was not the intent. The military spending issue is however one of a few issues that I disagree with him on, but I do consider him a very viable candidate.
Unless there is an October surprise, which there very well may be, the polling trends are pretty much pointing toward a Romney victory, it is his election to loose right now, that said everyone should vote their conscience regardless of the outcome, further I agree entirely and whole heartedly that the way these debates are conducted must change.
This election has been the most personal attack generated affair that I have seen in my life time and I believe open and often public debates with all viable candidates is the way to change that. On that I know you and I agree.
For anyone who's interested; there will be another debate sponsored by Free& Equal on Oct. 30. They are having a run-off vote right now and the top 2 vote getters will be in the next one. Voting ends at 1030 pm today. http://freeandequal.org/
It was around 6 oclock in the morning on Tuesday, watching fox news, as any good Romney fan does. Then all of a sudden I almost deficated. Here is this guy talking and talking about the issues from last nights debate and he is hitting every point that I liked. I said to my self, wow this guy is good, he should run for offfficcce.... this is when I almost deficated my self and understood who this guy was. I literally said out loud, Fox needs to get this guy off the air. I would vote for this guy and so would alot of people in Ohio. Good, bad, or indifferent I am voting for Romney because he holds more of my personal values than Obama does. Johnson gets the word out and he could make a real run for the office.
"This election has been the most personal attack generated affair that I have seen in my life time..."
One of the problems with the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD), the two major parties own it and build in damage control for the candidates. Prior to 1988 the League of Women Voters hosted the debates. The League withdrew when G H W Bush and Michael Dukakis began arguing about podium height. etc. It was also at this juncture that DNC chair Kirk proclaimed that third party candidates should be excluded from national debates. ...Maybe remember that in 1980, Pres. Carter refused to debate if John Anderson was included; the first debate was between Reagan and John Anderson.
As the two major parties continue to lead the United States down the road to disaster, Americans consistently say that a third party is needed. Yet, in election after election, only the candidates nominated by Republicans and Democrats are seen or heard; in day-to-day coverage of the debates.
Why is that?
Read more: Gary Johnson and the empty chair at the first presidential debate | Washington Times Communities
Follow us: @wtcommunities on Twitter
Gary Johnson is the only
Gary Johnson is the only candidate who has been re-elected. Neither Romney nor Obama have ever been re-elected to anything. Think about that for a second. Also, you want real world business experience? Gov. Johnson started going door to door looking for handyman jobs to earn money while a college student, he built that into a large construction company with 1,000 employees. That's real world business experience. Check him out, would be an excellent President. http://www.garyjohnson2012.com
Overall Accomplishments during 2 terms as Governor 1995-2003
Left office with New Mexico as one of the only four states in the country with a balanced budget
Left New Mexico with a budget surplus
Used Line Item Veto thousands of times to trim the budget
Vetoed 750 bills during his time in office; more than all other governors combined
Cut over 1,200 government jobs without firing anyone
Created more than 20,000 new jobs
First New Mexico Governor to challenge education status quo and propose statewide voucher program
Restored State General Fund reserves to more than $222 million from a low of $28.1 million
Limited annual state budget growth to 5.0% during eight years in office
Cut taxes 14 times while never raising them—a first for New Mexico
Vetoed 32% of the total number of bills submitted for his signature
I'm not sure how one can be
I'm not sure how one can be truly undecided at this point, though there are plenty who say they are.
Gary Johnson and Jill Stein?
Gary Johnson and Jill Stein? Shouldn't they be in the "other" category? There's no the way the majority of voters even know who they are.
Then maybe people should
Then maybe people should educate themselves, Jerry instead of taking what is being fed to them.
All last night showed me was how incredibly the same these two are. Anyone who watched that and didn't come to the same conclusion, just doesn't want to believe it.
Gary Johnson all the way.
More voters would know who
More voters would know who they are if they had been included in the debates as they properly should have been. They're the two most prominent alternatives to the Republicrats.
Phil, please take care on
Phil, please take care on assessing how people educate themselves. I mean, you probably consider yourself "well-educated" on the candidates yet you still make comments that other "well-educated" people view as outrageous.
Those that want to sit on the national stage need to earn it. Johnson and Stein have not done that. Again, it is 23 October and who are they?
They should add another
They should add another option to the ballot:
NONE OF THE ABOVE
That's my choice.
Jerry, what comment has Phil
Jerry, what comment has Phil made that is so outrageous? Maybe you should take care yourself.
Who doesn't make outrageous
Who doesn't make outrageous statements for the candidate they support and against the candidates that they don't?
One man's hero is another's monster.
Perhaps if American politics became more about issues rather than Millions of Dollars spent to turn oponents into the anti christ things might be a little different.
3rd party candidates debate
3rd party candidates debate tonight, 9 pm edt, streaming at freeandequal.org and I believe CSpan is televising it. You should at least give them an opportunity to speak.
I'm tired of the talking points and the rhetoric of this campaign. We are phucked either way, and no one seems to grasp this. Congress needs term limits, people willing to serve their country, not career building powermongers.
Jerry, Gary Johnson,
Jerry, Gary Johnson, certainly, more than earned it. His name is on every state ballot. Further, the "earn it" standard is a canard. The system is rigged to ensure a Republicrat monopoly on the political machine. Neither party wants voters to have any real choice.
There should be a debate held
There should be a debate held in every state, anyone who meets that states requirement should be on stage. Followed by a state open primary.
Candidates will get weeded out as they move from state to state, and in October the the top two or three will surely emerge.
Then three debates with anyone having more than 25% of the cumalated votes over the 50 states duke it out, whether it be , 3 or 4 remaining candidates
The Presidncy should not be party based at all, republican, Democrat, green or liberatarian.
Thanks for the update. I've
Thanks for the update. I've already voted (NC has some nice early voting rules), but it will be interesting to hear from them.
Gary Johnson! We should use a
Gary Johnson! We should use a run off voting system so people can't say they are wasting their votes by voting for a third party.
Every face on Mt. Rushmore was a third party candidate at some point.
Howard, I do hear you, but
Howard, I do hear you, but will stick with my assertion that if he earned it, he'd be on the national stage.
Dave, not sure what your comment means?
Jerry; it means that Phil
Jerry; it means that Phil doesn't deserve to be disparaged for having thoughts and opinions that are outside of the so-called norm. Just because someone doesn't repeat the blatherings of politicians and pundits that some try to pass off on here as their own opinions, doesn't make it "outrageous".
A) Nobody should have to
A) Nobody should have to "earn it" This is supposed to be a free society. All voices should be heard.
B) He did earn it. The fact he's not in the debates doesn't prove he didn't earn it. It proves the system is corrupt.
I will be the first person to
I will be the first person to admit that I am for President Obama. Having said that I would like to hear from all the candidates. ABC, NBC, CBS, CSPAN, Cnn, MSNBC and Fox should show this debate. Why not?
That's nice how you put words
That's nice how you put words in my mouth to try and denounce what I say. It's a cute tactic.
The fact that you don't know what other candidates are out there shows a complete lack of full education on the process. The reason for this is the very system exists to prevent 3rd party candidates from gaining access.
All of the debates are ran by a commission that are funded and staffed with prominent members of the two parties. Barrack Obama and Mitt Romney signed a document banning 3rd party candidates. That's not democracy, that is being force fed information.
I agree with Howard, if we are a free country. This process is broken.
While all of this is a good
While all of this is a good cerebral excersise, the reality is that either Barack Obama or Mitt Romney is going to be the next President of the United States. If the internals that are starting to be shown are correct, it will likely be Mitt Romney (All positive movement in internals favors him at this point) and the vicious and factually void attacks against him by the DNC all went out the window in the first debate, so much so that the other two debates were actually pointless.
That all said, Howard's point is one that is without question the real point. If we are to have true debate in the 2016 election year, the third, fourth and fifth party candidates are going to have to begin positioning themselves immediately after this election. The only way that the current structure will change is with grass root overwhelming support. That is the only way to strip power from the two political machines.
That isn't going to happen in a 12 month period and will be difficult to say the least in a 48 month period and an awful lot can happen over the next 4 years that can determine things, but without regard to the unknown variables, non republican or democrat wanna be presidents are going to have to begin positioning themselves for 2016 in a few short months, otherwise we will be having discussion again in October 2016.
Howard, I respectfully
Howard, I respectfully disagree. It is very clear to me neither Johnson nor Stein had what it takes to command the national stage. Their ideas weren't embraced enough to gain any popular traction. They apparently lacked the money needed to campaign to the masses and get some attention. I do see you point on the "Republicrats." The person with the good idea that attracts enough followers can succeed. Our system isn't perfect obviously.
Dave...I fully agree with your last comment but don't understand why you posted it (where you're coming from).
Phil...my comment to you was to point out that many people who disagree also consider themselves "educated." For inexplicable reasons, people can look at the same thing and come to different conclusions. I made a (perhaps faulty) assumption that you assume those who disagree with you are not "educated." I've gotten that assumption before from previous posts of yours. If I'm wrong, please forgive me.
One thing we all may be able to agree on....this election sure is an emotional one!
Jerry, You are wrong, and
Jerry,
You are wrong, and forgiven. Education on this is not about the candidates, but the process. These are not opinions, but rather facts.
To say that a candidate hasn't earned the right to be in the process is an opinion, and not factual within our current structure. That is where my comment came from.
Jerry, look at the polls,
Jerry, look at the polls, there are more people who agree with Johnson's ideas point-by-point than either major candidate. This is a country that loves its freedom, but they've been hornswogled by the system to accept what's force fed them.
Most people want marijuana legalized. You won't get that from Obama or Romney.
Most people want a less interventionist foreign policy and less money spent on the military. You won't get that from Obama or Romney.
Most people want less government in their personal lives. You won't get that from Obama or Romney.
Most people want smaller government. You won't get that from Obama or Romney.
Most people want reduced spending. You won't get that from Obama or Romney.
The idea that Johnson's ideas weren't embraced is ludicrous. They system is designed specifically to shut out people that don't go along with the Republicrat program.
"For inexplicable reasons,
"For inexplicable reasons, people can look at the same thing and come to different conclusions."
I can agree with that as well Jerry. I felt that you were admonishing Phil for defining "educated" I thought it hypocritical for you to then to define "outrageous" Obviously, I could have made my point better. Anyway, I admit to a bit of impulsiveness, so hopefully you can forgive me.
Obama and Romney are still horrid prospective Presidents in my opinion.........
C-Span is carrying the third
C-Span is carrying the third party candidate debate tonight, just checked their website and TV guide, I plan on watching.
“Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.” John Adams
If this is what you live by, you may find your candidate tonight.
I always say the only wasted
I always say the only wasted vote is the vote cast for "the lesser of two evils."
Gary Johnson was in the
Gary Johnson was in the republican debates.He changed from a Republican in May of this year to run as a libertarian...He has had his chance to make his points on the national stage...He can't get any support...Ron Paul had the national stage ..He can't get the support it takes to be President either..It has come down to Obama and Rommey...They all had their chance.....The media are the ones who pick and choose who they want to cover...I would lay more blame on them for not treating all candidates equally...I myself would aline more with Gary Johnson..But also realize he doesn't have a shot at winning New York's electoral votes and neither does Rommey..So i know my vote will mean squat....I think we need to make changes to the electoral College and then we might see a better chance for a third party candidate...Maybe we need to assign electoral votes proportional to the vote cast for a candidate.....
Here's info on the
Here's info on the third-party debate:
--
Larry King to moderate third-party debate on Oct. 23
By Nate, on October 19th, 2012
Former CNN host Larry King will moderate a debate between third-party candidates in Chicago coming up on Tuesday, October 23, 2012. This debate will not include President Obama or Governor Romney but it will be available streamed online as well as broadcast live on a few cable channels.
Air Time: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 at 9pm et
Live Stream: Ora.TV (Oct 23, 2012)
TV Channels: Link TV, Al Jazeera English, RT America
---
Link TV is channel 375 on DirecTV.
Could not agree more Bud on
Could not agree more Bud on term limits, but why stop there? We need to stop giving a retirement salary to Congress/HOR and the President. Even the military is required to serve 20 years to collect a retirement. The Air National Guard and Reserves have to wait until they are 60 before they collect. Yet our President, Congressmen and Senators collect retirement even is they only serve for one term. Let's face it, they are in the positions they are in because, they are volunteering themselves to run as your representative. They all come from an established family and/or career. Basically, none of them are hurting for money.
Obama has taken yearly wage increases from all Government Employees except Congress and H.O.R. for three years. Heck both are able to increase their pay even if, the public does not agree. Our budget is not balanced correctly, they failed and forget they work for the citizen of the USA, they creat large deficits, yet they keep voting for pay raises and behold they vote "YES!"
I believe all political offices should have a term limit no longer than 12 years. Things change, ideas change, society changes. This would allow younger and brighter ideas into the arena. Biden has been in so long that, I believe he is out of touch and corrupt.
Last night's debate was "BORING!" Who cares about foreign policy at this moment. I am worried about our economy and my children's future. Dave brought up Gary Johnson, but let's be real. He is not going to get elected because, the media does not inform us about anyone else. I agree with Howard. Why should the Presidental debate only include Obama and Romney? It should bring everyone on the ballot running for the Presidency. Unfortunately, the reality of our situation gives us two choices a.k.a the lesser of the two evils. I do not like the direction Obama has taken us and disagree with many of his policies. He claims he ended the war in Iraq (FALSE), He claims he will pull our troops out of Afghanistan in 2014 (FALSE). He has lied to all of us time and time again yet, people could care less now. If Obama's last four years are his ideas of Hope and Change, then I am not onboard.
The only reason I am voting for Romney is because, I feel as a businessman he is more suitable to bring our economy back. Dave, if Gary Johnson was an feasible selection for the Presidency, I would vote for him as long as his record is as true as you stated. However, my main concern is to remove our current cancer a.k.a Obama! Like he stated, he means what he saids. Well he has said plenty over the past four years that offended and insulted the American People!
I am curious if, we eliminate
I am curious if, we eliminate all these special perks our politicians get. Would they be so entice to run for office. They should be given a salary like local politicians. They keep their current means of income and get a limited salary as a representative of the American Voters. Maybe this would help them work together for the benefit of the American People and get rid of their self-agenda. Retirements for educated whiners, corrupted politics and self-agendas? Really!? We need to figure out away to take our power back from these A-holes!
Howard while I agree with you
Howard while I agree with you that Gary Johnson is more intune with many voters as some might think. Polling on some of these issues is contrary to what you said.
1 On Marijuana legalization you are dead on (56%)
2. On smaller Government you again are dead on (54%)
3. On less Government in personal lives again dead on (53%)
4. On interventionist foreign policy, would depend on how the question is asked, but you are again dead on
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politic…
5, But on military spending it may not only surprise you that you are wrong, but it is also trending the opposite way, What most people seem to be against is Increased military spending. But here are two polls on from 6 months ago and 1 from last week.
April 12th 2012
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politic…
October 13, 2012
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politic…
Most other polling sources mirror Rassmussen on this except for a few of the more liberal weighted ones.
I would have loved to see Obama, Romney and Johnson all on the same stage especially for this last foreign policy debate it probably would have made it at the least more interesting
Just finished watching the
Just finished watching the 3rd party candidate debate. A well spent 90 minutes. A lot of unencumbered truth was laid out. The hands down line of the night came from Gary Johnson "the only wasted vote is a vote for somebody you don't believe in".
Mark, you say polling is
Mark, you say polling is contrary to my assertions, but cite only one of my assertions where you find polling data is opposite to my assertion.
However, I still maintain my assertion is correct.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/09/us-usa-budget-poll-idUSTRE728…
http://www.publicintegrity.org/2012/05/10/8856/public-overwhelmingly-su…
http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill/budget-appropriations/238085-surve…
The fact of the matter is, Gary Johnson is more mainstream than either Obama or Romney. It's just that the Republicrats and the media industrial complex that supports them doesn't want to get that message out.
I agree with you on Gary
I agree with you on Gary Johnson being a viable candidate Howard, but look at the dates of your polling on those links, 3/2011 & 05/10/2012 now look at mine 5/12/2012 & 10/12/2012, my statement wasn't that you were wrong, but that the sediment that you suggest has been changing the opposite way since spring.
The Stimpson Center survey cited by the Hill on July 16th was actually conducted in May 2012.{From the article: "In a May release about the survey, Koll said that the PPC survey found more favored cutting defense than other surveys that asked a simple question.")
The dates of those polls (The ones you posted and the ones that I did including the Stimson Survey) are completely in support of what I said and it is an obvious trend. (Sequestration threat might account for this I admit)
For any position a poll can pretty much be found to support it or refute it, but Rassmussen and Gallop have consistantly been very close to the mark over several decades.
Now, yes Gary Johnson is a very viable candidate, just as viable as was Ron Paul, and in each of those two I find much that I can agree with, but not everything.
I find little that I can agree with Obama, nothing that I can agree with with Jill Stien, and more that I can agree with with Mitt Romney, albiet slightly more than a Ron Paul and/or a Gary Johnson. I am pretty certain that I am far from alone there.
I do unequivably agree with you that the debate process is pretty much controlled by the two major parties, I also agree with you that this is wrong. Please do not confuse a statistical difference in what I found with an attempt to discredit Gary Jihnson as a viable candidate,it was not the intent. The military spending issue is however one of a few issues that I disagree with him on, but I do consider him a very viable candidate.
Unless there is an October surprise, which there very well may be, the polling trends are pretty much pointing toward a Romney victory, it is his election to loose right now, that said everyone should vote their conscience regardless of the outcome, further I agree entirely and whole heartedly that the way these debates are conducted must change.
This election has been the most personal attack generated affair that I have seen in my life time and I believe open and often public debates with all viable candidates is the way to change that. On that I know you and I agree.
Gary Johnson... We need
Gary Johnson...
We need someone who will stand by true Constitutional principles and protect the Second Amendment.
SEND A MESSAGE TO THE 2 party elitist controllers... vote for the only real Constitutional American presidential candidate Libertarian Gary Johnson.
http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/
For anyone who's interested;
For anyone who's interested; there will be another debate sponsored by Free& Equal on Oct. 30. They are having a run-off vote right now and the top 2 vote getters will be in the next one. Voting ends at 1030 pm today. http://freeandequal.org/
It was around 6 oclock in the
It was around 6 oclock in the morning on Tuesday, watching fox news, as any good Romney fan does. Then all of a sudden I almost deficated. Here is this guy talking and talking about the issues from last nights debate and he is hitting every point that I liked. I said to my self, wow this guy is good, he should run for offfficcce.... this is when I almost deficated my self and understood who this guy was. I literally said out loud, Fox needs to get this guy off the air. I would vote for this guy and so would alot of people in Ohio. Good, bad, or indifferent I am voting for Romney because he holds more of my personal values than Obama does. Johnson gets the word out and he could make a real run for the office.
"This election has been the
"This election has been the most personal attack generated affair that I have seen in my life time..."
One of the problems with the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD), the two major parties own it and build in damage control for the candidates. Prior to 1988 the League of Women Voters hosted the debates. The League withdrew when G H W Bush and Michael Dukakis began arguing about podium height. etc. It was also at this juncture that DNC chair Kirk proclaimed that third party candidates should be excluded from national debates. ...Maybe remember that in 1980, Pres. Carter refused to debate if John Anderson was included; the first debate was between Reagan and John Anderson.
EXCELLENT POINTS CM
EXCELLENT POINTS CM
As the two major parties
As the two major parties continue to lead the United States down the road to disaster, Americans consistently say that a third party is needed. Yet, in election after election, only the candidates nominated by Republicans and Democrats are seen or heard; in day-to-day coverage of the debates.
Why is that?
Read more: Gary Johnson and the empty chair at the first presidential debate | Washington Times Communities
Follow us: @wtcommunities on Twitter
http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/reawakening-liberty…
Thanks, Brian that was a
Thanks, Brian that was a really great article. The writer makes some excellent points