Gary Johnson position of the 2A

[KasualObserver]

I am surprised he does not get more exposure:
Gary Johnson on guns
On The Issues: Gary Johnson

He is present on the ballot in all 50 states. To me, he appears to be a good possible alternative to (1) a candidate opposed to gun rights, and (2) a candidate who was opposed to gun rights until recently.

If you have other (practical) suggestions, I'd love to read them.

 

[dogtown tom]

KasualObserver I am surprised he does not get more exposure:

First, because he will get a hundred more votes than a dead man.
No matter what his beliefs he has zero chance of winning.
Any vote NOT for Trump means Hillary is one vote closer to being elected.

You may despise Donald Trump ( I always have), but voting for anyone but him means Hillary gets elected. I'll take anyone before Hillary



Third, political threads rarely last long.

 

[TomJ]

Keeping this gun related, last election millions of Republicans did not vote because they did not like Romney. The end result was another Obama term. I have no issues with Gary Johnson, but he has absolutely no chance of being elected. Our next president will either be Hillary or Trump. Hillary will do what she can to attack our gun rights and will nominate Supreme Court judges that will be anti 2A. Having never held office, Trump has no record so I can't guarantee what he'll do, but I can't image he'll be hostile towards the 2A the way Hillary is. Trump was not my first choice, so think of my vote for him as a vote to keep Hillary out of the White House.

 

[Arkansas Paul]

If he gets in the debates it will at least be interesting.
There are many, many Bernie supporters throwing their allegiance behind him as well as disgruntled Republicans.

Keeping it on topic for THR, he is definitely the most 2A friendly. Unlike Trump, he was pro-2A before he decided to run for president.

I am torn. I try not to be a one issue voter, but here lately I have nearly became one. If it turns out that Johnson has a chance of winning (slim I know) I will likely go that route. If not, I'll cast my vote against Hillary.
The absolute most important thing to me is that she not be able to nominate a Supreme Court Justice or two.

One thing that bothers me is hard line party liners (either side) saying you are wasting your vote if you vote for XYZ candidate.
A wasted vote is a vote for someone you don't believe in.
People who say you are wasting your vote are really saying that you should silence your voice so that theirs can be louder. I can't think of anything more un-American than telling someone they are wasting their vote by voting their conscience.

Now countdown to the thread lock....................

 

[Charles S]

KasualObserver, you should post more. I thought I had a low post count.

I have some libertarian views and like some of Gary Johnson's positions, but I tend to agree.... a vote for anyone other than Trump is a vote for Hillary. I am not sure I trust Trump. I KNOW I don't trust Hillary.

In before the lock...

 

[dogtown tom]

Arkansas Paul ....One thing that bothers me is hard line party liners (either side) saying you are wasting your vote if you vote for XYZ candidate.

Funny, but I'm not a "hard line party liner" in any sense of the term.

A wasted vote is a vote for someone you don't believe in.
People who say you are wasting your vote are really saying that you should silence your voice so that theirs can be louder.

Nothing of the sort. Vote your conscience by all means. Just understand that your conscience will weigh heavy when Hillary gets in office.

Quite a few folks (97,000+) voted for Ralph Nader in 2000. If just 600 had voted Democrat, Al Gore would have been in the White House. They voted their conscience thank goodness!
http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?year=2000&fips=12

I can't think of anything more un-American than telling someone they are wasting their vote by voting their conscience.

I can. It's called eliminating the Second Amendment.

 

[Handloader109]

Vote your conscience, vote your affiliation, but a vote for ANYONE but Trump is a vote for hillery. No third party candidate can win. No maybe or if we'd vote for him, none can win.... Sorry, just a fact.

 

[Walkalong]

We don't do politics outside of clear 2A topics.

Keep this discussion on the RKBA/2A Johnson views and his role in the election and you'll stay on the high road.

Remember Activism/Activism Discussion has a strict narrow focus.

 

[hso]

Johnson is the strongest 2A supporter even if he isn't the strongest candidate for POTUS.

Johnson pulls from both Clinton and Trump because there are a lot of people dissatisfied with the status quo and both parties. Will his candidacy do more harm to Trump's or Clinton's chances? It probably depends upon the debates and whether he participates or gets debate coverage. He would certainly get a jump in recognition from participating in the debates, but he'd be able to control his "responses" to questions if he was out, but got post debate news coverage. How he frames his 2A, crime, terrorism points would tell us and the public how likely he'd be good for the 2A or not.

The other consideration is if he'd help the downballot on the 2A? Would the perception of taking votes from Trump help the R downballot so important in guarding the 2A in the Senate?

 

[Charlie Horse]

Gentlemen, it's not at all pretty for the Second Amendment right now.

I grew up in a political family. My grandmother's claim to fame was as a Goldwater delegate, and being the grandchild closet to her heart and mind, she imparted her wisdom to me over my lifetime. Because of Gran, I wound up going back and getting a political science degree, that may or may not have been worth the money. I say all of that to say this, what matters is the Buckley Rule. William F. Buckley said that conservatives should always vote for the most conservative candidate WHO HAD A CHANCE OF WINNING. (emphasis his) This is sound strategy for 2A candidates too.

The most pro gun candidate this time out is certainly Gary Johnson, but the problem is that he has, to be charitable, under-performed in the polls. (and AT the polls for that matter...) In short, he really has no realistic chance of winning. If one wants to vote for him, one certainly has that right, but don't think you aren't part of the vote splitting that is sure to happen.

Next up is Donald Trump. I would never think of his as a lifelong supporter of the 2A, but he has said that he is, and the truth is he has not proven himself to be anti 2A, as has Hilary Clinton. Trump MAY be bad, but we know that Clinton IS and WILL be bad, because she HAS BEEN bad before.

Now, can Trump win? Not at this rate. His bumbling gaffes of taking ALL of the bait laid out for his is a problem. Furballing with gold star parents, fighting with his own party, and engaging mouth before brain is killing him. There is proof positive what's going on. For those who have not seen it, look here:

Sabato's Crystal Ball

Larry Sabato's is a professor at the University of Virginia, and is the Director of the UVA Center for Politics. They have an impressive 98% success rate on predicting Senate and House elections since their inception, and they nailed the last two elections 100%, He is the best there is right now, largely because he does NOT fall into the trap of making the election about national polls, but instead focuses on the Electoral College. At this point, he has Hillary @ 347 electoral votes to Trump's 142. Barring a miracle, or the American electorate waking up and suddenly caring about what they are doing, Donald Trump won't be our next president.

This is certainly not good news for the Second Amendment, or those of us who care about it.

 

[DamDoc]

I agree with the pragmatists, not the idealists here.. trump, or bust. Trump's sons are hard core 2nd and hunters.. they will keep him in line. A vote for third party is a vote for the hildabeast. And she is purporting the Austrailian model. Dont be stupid.

 

[DoubleMag]

I'd like to repost 3 items from #3...

1-Hillary will do what she can to attack our gun rights and will nominate Supreme Court judges that will be anti 2A.
2-Hillary will do what she can to attack our gun rights and will nominate Supreme Court judges that will be anti 2A.
3-Hillary will do what she can to attack our gun rights and will nominate Supreme Court judges that will be anti 2A.

...Gary who?

Election day primer; BIG nose clip, receive ballot, enter booth...

If any other clarity is needed I would simply refer to my signature line VV below . Somethings never change.

 

[captainamerica]

+1000

 

[hso]

https://youtu.be/N0FhVkyCdVE?t=1119

 

[Predator55]

Gary Johnson is going no where and a vote for him is a vote for Hillary, third party candidates are not there yet, but with a few more elections like the current a third party will have a chance. If Hillary gets in it will be bad news for gun owners, we'd be down to single shot guns and the court left it open to ban certain weapons and I have no doubt the libs will take it as far as they can.

 

[DLam]

If he gets in the debates it will at least be interesting.
There are many, many Bernie supporters throwing their allegiance behind him as well as disgruntled Republicans.

Keeping it on topic for THR, he is definitely the most 2A friendly. Unlike Trump, he was pro-2A before he decided to run for president.

I am torn. I try not to be a one issue voter, but here lately I have nearly became one. If it turns out that Johnson has a chance of winning (slim I know) I will likely go that route. If not, I'll cast my vote against Hillary.
The absolute most important thing to me is that she not be able to nominate a Supreme Court Justice or two.

One thing that bothers me is hard line party liners (either side) saying you are wasting your vote if you vote for XYZ candidate.
A wasted vote is a vote for someone you don't believe in.
People who say you are wasting your vote are really saying that you should silence your voice so that theirs can be louder. I can't think of anything more un-American than telling someone they are wasting their vote by voting their conscience.

Now countdown to the thread lock....................

:clap:

Sent from my SM-G530T using Tapatalk

 

[Arkansas Paul]

Gary Johnson is going no where and a vote for him is a vote for Hillary

Right.
And drinking Dr. Pepper is drinking Pepsi because it's not Coke.

 

[hso]

Folks, let's stay on topic of the Gary Johnson presidential bid and not wander off onto barely related topics of how one mainstream candidate is bashing another (whether by proxy or directly).

 

[LeonCarr]

Sadly until the Libertarians and other Third Party options decide to go all in and run a campaign where they are actually campaigning they are not an option. In the grand scheme of things the voters have no idea who they are or what they stand for.

In this election a vote for anybody but Trump is a vote for hiLIARy.

Just my 02,
LeonCarr

 

[GRIZ22]

You can vote for Big Bird or Pee Wee Herman if that's what you conscience tells you. However politics is not only black and white. If you're concerned about maintaining the 2A and recovering a lot of things this country has lost you need to vote for Trump. Even if you see Trump 20% pro 2A that's a lot more than Hillary will give you. Trump and Hillary are the only two who have a chance to win. If you're looking for a candidate that agrees with you 100% you're looking at a politician who knows how to lie to you.

You also have to consider the next president will have several SCOTUS appointments. We can lose the headway that has been made with the 2A and other conservative issues if Hillary wins. We will be losing for the next 20-25 years if that happens. You can't be a one issue voter. Trump, no matter how bad some think he is, is better than Hillary.

Vote your conscience. You can vote to make a statement or vote for a candidate who can win and look after most of your rights.

 

[ajd3530]

The psyche of people never ceases to amaze me. "A vote for Johnson is a vote for Hillary." What a load of hogwash. Unless I am seriously mistaking, a vote for Johnson is a vote for Johnson.

In fact, if everybody who was voting Trump for the sole reason of stopping Hillary and everybody who was voting for Hillary for the sole reason of Trump (and there are Alot of those) would vote for Johnson instead, along with the 10% or so of the electorate who have already decided on voting for Johnson, he would win in a landslide, and the two party system would die. Pure and simple.

 

[Ed Ames]

Johnson has the right position on the 2A and the only reason he won't win is because mainstream party hacks throw out the illogical "a vote for X is a vote for Y" thing and so many believe it.

The reality is that you have a civic duty to vote for the candidate who best represents you. That vote is your one way of telling the republic how you stand and what you want. If you vote for someone else because you think that other person has a better chance of winning, you are lying and abrogating your civic duty. Strategic voting isn't a winning strategy...it is a way to guarantee you will lose.

 

[1KPerDay]

Some of the members here need to read up on how the electoral college works. My state is going to go heavily for trump. I am voting for Johnson. I am sick of choosing between a criminal and a sleaze. We need more legitimate choices.

/hijack

 

[Handloader109]

No Ed, I'm not abrogating my civic duty by voting for Trump. I'm protecting my 2nd ammendment rights Along with all of my other rights that the Democratic candidate will trample if she is Elected.

And maybe our think you're state will go a certain way, but you can't be sure. And That is no reason to vote for Johnson, a sure loser

 

[Ed Ames]

Handloader...if you think Trump best represents you and your values, then I agree you are not abrogating your civic duty.

If, on the other hand, Johnson or even whoever is on the green ticket better represents you, you are not only defaulting on your duty to society, you are compromizing your personal integrity by lying to your country.

As far as I'm concerned people who lie with their votes are worse than people who don't vote at all. in either case they have no moral standing to talk about the direction the country subsequently goes. In other words, don't lie about who you want to represent you and then start sniveling about what Clinton II does when she gets into office.

This really is a matter of character. This republic was formed by people who were willing to put their name to dangerous and unpopular ideas, not because they knew they would win, but because they knew those ideas were right. That gave them a certain moral authority. A moral authority that is set on fire and stomped on when you game your vote.