EXCLUSIVE: Exclusive ATSNN Interview With 2004 Presidential Candidate Michael Badnarik.

Originally posted by DanTodd
we know. third party might mess up the election this year, the third party candidates are loosing votes for kerry, and we need bush out! the 3% of americans voting for third partys could cost kerry the election this year.

And what if you would have voted for bush?

MOST OF US WOULD NOT VOTE FOR KERRY

Originally posted by Amuk

Originally posted by zerotime
Badarik isn't going to steal any votes away from the right side or even the middle of the road � Badarik�s voters would have likely voted Kerry otherwise.

I love these statements.... Most Libertarians are EX-Republicans and most would vote for Bush if not Badnarik.

Really? Seriously I do not follow the third parties (Libertarians - Green). I did not realize that Libertarians are EX-Republicans. Where do Libertarians stand on the hot button issues like gay marriage, abortions and gun control?

Hey - I just created a thread where you can post those exact political stances, regardless of your party affiliation...
Where do you Stand?

Personally, I'm an ex-dem who would have voted for Kerry, but now I'm a Libertarian voting for Badnarik...Some say that's a wasted vote, and I can see their argument...I just would rather vote for who I truly believe should win, and I'd like to see an increase in third party support so that more people will know we're out there and that there are better choices with candidates with more refined positions who are not afraid of political suicide...

Besides, I don't think Bush will make it anyways...

Originally posted by zerotime
Where do Libertarians stand on the hot button issues like gay marriage, abortions and gun control?

For, for and against

Gay marriage and abortion would be legal on the federal level but the states would be allowed to vote as they see fit in there on states.

Gun control is a big no-no

For all the Badnarik supporters who care...I called in to a radio show, Mancow's Morning Madhouse (it's a goofy talk show based out of Chicago, but it's VERY popular) and asked him if he had heard about how Badnarik and Cobb were arrested attempting to get into the 2nd debate. Mancow (his real name is Eric Muller) is a big Libertarian advocate. He has made it very known that he will be voting LP this year. Anyway, after I asked him (on live radio, with millions of listeners across America) he said he had no idea about it, but was really pissed to hear about it. He went on and on about how messed up it is that more candidates aren't allowed to get in the debates. Then they said that they will be having Badnarik on their show next week. That is going to be AWSOME. Mancow is the best person to get the word out. He isn't afraid to let people know the truth. If you can listen to the show, I'd highly suggest it. The interview will be great I am sure. If I hear when it will be on I'll let you all know.

Badnarik is attacking Wisconsin, his aim? Show disoriented, confused Republicans the light.

The current pre-campaign poll:

If the Presidential election were held today, would you vote for Republican George W. Bush, Democrat John F. Kerry, Libertarian Michael Badnarik or Independent Ralph Nader?

47%-Bush
48%-Kerry
1%�Badnarik
1%�Nader
1%�Some other candidate
2%�Not sure

badnarik.org...

With many other polls showing Bush ahead by a slim margin. Why Wisconsin? If Bush gets Wisconsin and Ohio, Kerry is pretty much done unless he has several Halloween treats in his basket already. Ohio and Wisconsin (30 Electoral votes together) seem to be the more decisive states this election, as well as the other battleground states.

Compared to Florida which has 27. And Pennsylvania's 21.

With regards to Mr Badnarik's earlier statements about paper and commercial ads, targeting "battleground" states, I would think that Wisconisn would have been one of them, with the number of electorial votes we have... but I haven't seen a one.

My parents usually do vote for a third party, but not this year... their reason being "not wanting to throw away vote"; I lectured them about how it'd let the Big 2 parties know that people want change, but... what can you do?

Originally posted by Damned

There is no such thing as a wasted vote!

Sure there is. Voting for a party that has absolutely no chance of winning (due to the monopoly Republicrats have on politics), while you could use it to remove someone who you consider dangerous to our future, is throwing away your vote, IMO. I'll throw my vote away when it doesn't matter as much. IMO, this isn't the time. I do hope to see more Libertarian votes than ever before, though. Maybe it'll give me some hope for America. Currently, I have none.

[edit on 13-10-2004 by Damned]

There is such a thing as a wasted vote. and that is not voting your conscious. if your are only voting ANTI BUSH or ANTI KERRY, or ANTI anything for that matter not only are u wasting your vote, but your WASTING YET ANOTHER vote of someone who is voting their beliefs, by making them fight an uphill battle against a party you dont support.

millions of anti bush voters could vote for anyone but bush, but in reality its nobody but kerry. thats the same attitude that also makes people vote for bush (anyone but the liberals)

[I]Originally posted by Neutrally[/I]
There is such a thing as a wasted vote. and that is not voting your conscious. if your are only voting ANTI BUSH or ANTI KERRY, or ANTI anything for that matter not only are U wasting your vote, but your WASTING YET ANOTHER vote of someone who is voting their beliefs, by making them fight an uphill battle against a party you don't support.

millions of anti bush voters could vote for anyone but bush, but in reality its nobody but Kerry. that's the same attitude that also makes people vote for bush (anyone but the liberals)

This is a one time thing, for me. I feel it's far more important to get rid of Bush than to vote for Badnarik. Sorry, but I consider Bush the biggest threat to the US, right now. That takes precedence over everything else....removing him, before he starts WWIII. Kerry will be a lame duck, but at least he won't get us all killed. Next election, when it's not as crucial, I'll continue voting Libertarian. Voting Libertarian at this point is not the wisest thing to do, if you consider Bush a loose cannon, as I do.

You're vote will accomplish nothing, while mine will help remove the insane "leader of the free world". Tell me which vote is wasted. IMO, it's like Hitler vs. Carter. I'd definitely vote for Carter in that scenario, especially if I already knew that Hitler was insane. I don't believe we have the luxury of taking a chance that Bush remains in office.

[edit on 18-10-2004 by Damned]

You're vote will accomplish nothing, while mine will help remove the insane "leader of the free world". Tell me which vote is wasted. IMO, it's like Hitler vs. Carter. I'd definitely vote for Carter in that scenario, especially if I already knew that Hitler was insane. I don't believe we have the luxury of taking a chance that Bush remains in office.

Wrong! If Badnarik gets at least 5% of the vote, the Libertarian Party gets federal funding. Which will drastically alter the way the country looks at third party candidates. It will send a major message to the Whitehouse that change is needed and change is coming. IMO, that is more important than anything!!!

Originally posted by mpeake
Wrong! If Badnarik gets at least 5% of the vote, the Libertarian Party gets federal funding. Which will drastically alter the way the country looks at third party candidates. It will send a major message to the Whitehouse that change is needed and change is coming. IMO, that is more important than anything!!!

Yes, that is important, but not as important as removing the psycho, religious idiot that's currently causing our country permanent damage. I, for one, don't believe America will survive another 4 years of Bush and his cowboy attitude. If we do, there will be even more irreversible and undesirable changes. Are you really willing to let him do what he will for the next 4 years? I'm not! You trust him with the keys to the country for another 4 years, really??? Man, that is scary. We'll have more enemies than we can even count.

[edit on 18-10-2004 by Damned]

The difference between you and I is that I see no difference in the demise of the next four years whether it's Bush or Kerry. To me, we are still going to spiral down either way. Kerry will not improve relations with other countries, he will bow to their demands. Kerry will not command the respect of our armed forces, which means people will not volunteer to serve, which means he will enforce a draft (something that the Dems have already passed).

Originally posted by mpeake
The difference between you and I is that I see no difference in the demise of the next four years whether it's Bush or Kerry. To me, we are still going to spiral down either way. Kerry will not improve relations with other countries, he will bow to their demands. Kerry will not command the respect of our armed forces, which means people will not volunteer to serve, which means he will enforce a draft (something that the Dems have already passed).

So, you think that any president and his regime would have decided to attack Iraq after being attacked by Saudi hijackers that were supposed to be from Afghanistan? The man and his team have absolutely no logical thought process, IMO. Kerry isn't insane, IMO. He may not be the best candidate, but he definitely can hold a candle to Bush in the mental department.

Honestly, I don't know what Kerry would have done. He says that this is the wrong war at the wrong time, but if he were in that same situation, I imagine he would have responded in similar fashion. Even if he hadn't though, we are where we are now and we can't undo the past. And Kerry isn't going to fix that either. Kerry also isn't going to do much of anything different than what we are doing now.

Thanks for the interview Mr. Badnarik and ATSNN! It gives me a little hope, when I see that there is growing support for Mr. Badnarik. He is an intelligent and honest man who hasn't sold out to "special interests" and I hope disillusioned Americans will consider giving him their support.

I have read a few people's comments about how they support Mr. Badnarik in principle, but feel they must use their vote to keep either Bush or Kerry out of office, so they won't vote for a 3rd party this election.

I just want to say that, IMO, the US is going to continue on its current course unless the people (that's us) make it known that we are fed up with all of the b.s. and we will not be forced into supporting a President we don't believe in.

Bush and Kerry (and their handlers) are counting on the fact that people will not vote their conscience this election. They are preying on people's fears of "wasting their votes" or being seen as a traitor to their party (should they vote for someone other than their party's candidate), in order to manipulate people into voting for them.

If we vote for Kerry, in order to try and vote out Bush (or vice versa), we are telling Kerry, that we feel he can represent us, and serve our Country, better than any of the other candidates from whom we could have chosen. We are declaring that we want him as our Commander-In-Chief, because we share his ideals and political beliefs, and we support his plans for our Country more than we do anyone else�s.

There are no �Yes for Kerry, because I want Bush out� options on the ballot, as far as I know.
How are we going to get any of the arrogant, self-absorbed politicians in Washington DC to acknowledge and respond to our cries for change, when they know that Americans won�t vote their conscience, even when it really matters? How are they supposed to know that we only voted for one because we hated them slightly less than the other? Why should they bother being honest or having integrity, when they know people will vote for them regardless of their actions? All a politician has to do is be slightly more likable (or less reprehensible) than their competition, and they are in.

To vote for Bush, is to vote for Kerry, is to vote for Bush...They are both sold out, corporate puppets, who could care less about the people they are supposed to be servants to.

The game is rigged, and it doesn�t matter whether you elect the Republican or the Democrat, the dealer still wins. You can pick the one that scares you the least, hoping that things will change once the other party is in office, but I wouldn�t count on too much. It�s all just a ruse, an illusion.
There is only one party in Washington, the Soulless Order of Greedy Bastards, but it is cleverly disguised as two (commonly known as the Republican and the Democratic Parties). It doesn�t matter which side gets elected to office, though they pretend like it does for our benefit. There�s only one way to stop the charade--stop playing their game. The more people who vote for candidates because they believe in them, regardless of which party they are affiliated with, the less control the Soulless Order of Greedy Bastards will have over us, and the stronger we will become as both individuals and as a nation.

I'll say something that has not crossed my lips in two decades.....

AMEN!!!!

You hit the nail on the head. Unfortunately there are many who will continue to believe in the "wasted vote". Perhaps when Badnarik gets the 5% we'll see some people begin to wake up. Yeah right.

Originally posted by mpeake
Honestly, I don't know what Kerry would have done. He says that this is the wrong war at the wrong time, but if he were in that same situation, I imagine he would have responded in similar fashion. Even if he hadn't though, we are where we are now and we can't undo the past. And Kerry isn't going to fix that either. Kerry also isn't going to do much of anything different than what we are doing now.

But I know that Kerry isn't going to launch additional pre-emptive strikes. He's not a fan of the pre-emptive foreign policy. He's also going to work to end this crisis, instead of inflame it worse, as Bush is doing. That much, I do believe. Whether or not he'll be successful remains to be seen, but at least it's obvious that he's not as much of a moron as Bush. I don't believe he'll jump to wild conclusions and act upon them. That's the most important thing to rectify right now, IMO. As long as we have a president who's more than willing to act upon false and/or bad "intelligence", we're screwed.

In case anyone is interested, Badnarik will be doing a radio show interview this am on "Mancows Morgning Madhouse".

It's based in Chicago so if you can't pick up the station on your radio, you can hear it on the web at the following link:

www.mancow.com...
(just click on the "listen Live" link)

It should be a pretty interesting interview to say the least!

[edit on 20-10-2004 by mpeake]

When I click Listen Live, nothing happens. It just reloads the page.

Nevermind...popup stopper problems.

[edit on 20-10-2004 by Damned]

that's ok...the interview ended about 5 minutes ago...sorry