Who does Gary Johnson hurt more? Trump or Hillary?

a reply to: JDeLattre89

I'm of a libertarian viewpoint, if any. But the OPEN borders party platform they've adopted from the Democrat's is insane. And Johnson is a PC douche. While the third parties are still hopelessly futile right now. Where taking down the 2 Party domination hold Trump is the biggest threat to that (to pave a future for third parties, we're already seeing it happen). And today stopping the PC totalitarian takeover should be priority #1, although stopping open corruption Hillary does rival that. So I say VOTE TRUMP. If he proves Chump then we'll crucify him next time.

I concede your points to you. But you are a rarity these days. I am talking about the general masses whom for the most part don't know anything about any of the candidates, much less can actually make an intelligent decision about whom to vote for. Obviously you are one of the ones who think for themselves. My reference is to the cultlike followers of each group.

My parents fall into that category for republicans, and my grandparents do for democrats. My parents because they worked hard to get into and stay in the middle class and they see the democrats as a threat to that. My grandparents because the union told my grandfather many moons ago to vote democrat.

Me, I typically vote for the person. This time around, I will likely vote for Johnson. That is because there are only two of his major platforms I disagree with (which wouldn't change anyway because of congress even were he elected), and he is someone I would trust to run the country long before the other two. And sorry, but Stein is just another Sanders clone, a communist wanting to change the make-up of the country.

But my biggest reason to go 3rd party is that if I vote 3rd party, then my vote might actually make a difference. No my candidate will likely not win (next to impossible), but my vote would still matter. People may say, your vote don't count you're throwing it away etc... But voting 3rd party helps get it over the required 5% level for fund matching from states like the other two parties. And this is the first step to eliminating the corrupt two party system which is designed to keep the people down without any real choices and keep the super-elites in power.

Let's face it most democrats and republicans are interchangeable.

Pete for Prez!

a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

You're assuming that if there was no Gary Johnson, these people would be forced to vote for Trump or Hillary? Maybe they'd just do what I'm doing and stay home.

originally posted by: sirlancelot
From what I hear millennials more of those who would usually vote for Hillary are voting Johnson. Advantage Trump. Also read Soros has funded Johnson and Johnson's open borders policy is same as Hillary's and many don;t want that.

Where does it say GJ was funded by Soros?

He can barely raise $3m. Yet Hillary can raise over $300m+ and Trump over $150m+.

a reply to: Kapriti

It is kind of rigged though. They only count "likely voters". What ever that means.

Do they even count 18-35 in phone polls?

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: JDeLattre89

I'm of a libertarian viewpoint, if any. But the OPEN borders party platform they've adopted from the Democrat's is insane. And Johnson is a PC douche. While the third parties are still hopelessly futile right now. Where taking down the 2 Party domination hold Trump is the biggest threat to that (to pave a future for third parties, we're already seeing it happen). And today stopping the PC totalitarian takeover should be priority #1, although stopping open corruption Hillary does rival that. So I say VOTE TRUMP. If he proves Chump then we'll crucify him next time.

Define "open borders".

originally posted by: John_Rodger_Cornman

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: JDeLattre89

I'm of a libertarian viewpoint, if any. But the OPEN borders party platform they've adopted from the Democrat's is insane. And Johnson is a PC douche. While the third parties are still hopelessly futile right now. Where taking down the 2 Party domination hold Trump is the biggest threat to that (to pave a future for third parties, we're already seeing it happen). And today stopping the PC totalitarian takeover should be priority #1, although stopping open corruption Hillary does rival that. So I say VOTE TRUMP. If he proves Chump then we'll crucify him next time.

Define "open borders".

According to Johnson it's doing 65 across the Mexican and US border. No checkpoint, anyone can come or go at will.

Yea that's a really great idea.

a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

The demographics of a poll are generally provided.
Have you looked?

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: John_Rodger_Cornman

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: JDeLattre89

I'm of a libertarian viewpoint, if any. But the OPEN borders party platform they've adopted from the Democrat's is insane. And Johnson is a PC douche. While the third parties are still hopelessly futile right now. Where taking down the 2 Party domination hold Trump is the biggest threat to that (to pave a future for third parties, we're already seeing it happen). And today stopping the PC totalitarian takeover should be priority #1, although stopping open corruption Hillary does rival that. So I say VOTE TRUMP. If he proves Chump then we'll crucify him next time.

Define "open borders".

According to Johnson it's doing 65 across the Mexican and US border. No checkpoint, anyone can come or go at will.

Yea that's a really great idea.

I thought it was no quotas and unlimited work visa with a social security number.

That does not sound like "open borders" to me.

a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

Ehh I can't find the soundbite, but he said his idea of open borders is being able to drive to and from Mexico/USA without checkpoints.

As far as visa's, yea lets promote that seeing how that is the number one cause of illegal immigration via the workforce.

a reply to: Vector99
I heard him say something like that too.

To me he just sounds like a flake. And I am a registered Libertarian.

a reply to: Phage

It's sad that is who your party's candidate is this year. On a plus note though, he does seem to have a following.

Maybe, just maybe, I'll go vote for him in the hopes I can help garner the 5% needed for the party to receive future federal funding. The 2 party system is # and I'll never ever vote for it.

a reply to: Vector99

A work visa would make them legal residents. So what are you arguing?

a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman
I think the point was that a great number of "illegals" are here because they have overstayed their visas.
Though I don't think that restricting the issuance of visas is a solution or advisable.

originally posted by: John_Rodger_Cornman
a reply to: Vector99

A work visa would make them legal residents. So what are you arguing?

Does the work visa automatically deport them when it expires?

a reply to: Vector99
www.h1base.com...

"An H1B visa is typically valid for up to six (6) years and entitles your spouse (husband/wife) and children (under 21) to accompany you and live in the USA on an H4 visa. The H4 dependent visa does not allow your spouse/children to work (unless they get their own H1B visa)."

www.ontheissues.org...

"Q: What about work visas?

JOHNSON: Look, if you're in the country illegally, come on in, get your work visa, as long as you've been law-abiding, we'll give you the work visa, and let's start make it easy to distinguish from a Border Patrol standpoint the difference between bad people that are crossing illegally and the woman with her kids who knows there are jobs in El Paso, but she's got to wade across the Rio Grande with her kids to get that job.

Q: But that would also be considered illegal.

JOHNSON: It is. Yes, it is.

Q: From a compassionate standpoint, I get the distinction. But from a legal one?

JOHNSON: Make it as easy as possible for her to get a work visa so that the line is moving to get across the border. And if she's gotten across the border already and she's held a job, look, come on in, get a work visa. Let's dot the i's and cross the t's on your being here legally. And I'm not even talking about being a citizen. Citizenry will still be a process."

www.cato.org...

"Our politicians, both right and left, have created a system for legal immigration that simply doesn’t work. We have artificial quotas. We have “caps” on certain categories of workers that have no real relationship to the realities of the free market. It’s no coincidence that recent history shows the only successful way to reduce illegal immigration is to have a recession. Over the past 10 years, both illegal entries and the number of undocumented immigrants in the country have declined. That’s not because the government did anything right. ….

Try this, instead: No caps. No categories. No quotas. Just a straightforward background check, the proper paperwork to obtain a real Social Security number and work legally or prove legitimate family ties, and a reliable system to know who is coming and who is going."


What is wrong with that?

found it

Q: Would you open the borders and make it easier to immigrate legally?

A: My vision of the border with Mexico is that a truck from the United States going into Mexico and a truck coming from Mexico into the United States will pass each other at the border going 60 miles an hour. Yes, we should have open borders.

www.ontheissues.org...


a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman
I agree with him that the system is broken. I'm not confident his solution is viable.

a reply to: Phage

I don't see what the problem is.

The only difference between GJ's policy and the current immigration policy is that he is for no quotas and for work visas with SS numbers.

How is that extreme?

a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

So your answer is no.

I asked if a work visa is self-deporting.

a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

The only difference between GJ's policy and the current immigration policy is that he is for no quotas and for work visas with SS numbers.

Um. No. He wants open borders. That is quite different from current policy and law. Anyone from anywhere, come on in.

I have nothing against immigration. I think attempts to "deport" those who are not criminals and without due process is not only not the right approach but also nonviable. But I don't think that "come on in and we'll sort it out later" is viable either.