19 votes

A Winning Strategy to Get a Libertarian Nominated in 2016 by the GOP!

NOTE: I changed the name of this article from "Should We Write-in Dr. Paul? (Winning Strategy!)" to the current one because too many people didn't understand that it was a rhetorical question that I then fully answer and then they would skip the post and answer it missing the point completely.

DISCLAIMER: Please realize that this strategy works only because we have a 3rd party candidate. I personally like Gary Johnson, but in all honesty it doesn't matter who it is. A vote for 3rd party is for the sake of showing that we have all the power in the GOP next time around. Note though... my reasoning for GJ is that he's the only one on the ballot in all 50 states that will let this strategy work for us in winning 2016.

There seems to be mass confusion in what our strategy should be from here on out. By that, I mean, everyone has their minds set on doing one of several things. Here is the conclusion that a discussion with user The Granger in my last thread posted here has brought me to.

Throughout the Paul campaign I have noticed and quickly dismissed Gary Johnson and the few supporters he has trying to get the word out about him to Paul supporters. This being even when we thought the delegate strategy would give us a brokered convention if at least one other candidate stayed in the GOP race. Then, when I'm told directly by the Paul campaign that they don't think they can get the nomination, I decided that I would write in Ron Paul's name regardless. My main inspiration being the quote by John Quincy Adams:

"Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.”

But then I look at this objectively. When a write-in isn't counted... who does it serve?

It doesn't stand as a message: It's rarely counted at local levels and surely wouldn't be counted on the national stage.
It doesn't prove that I stood by my principles: My libertarian principles don't change whether I go and write on a piece of paper or scream "I Choose You Ron Paul!" from the mountain tops covered head to toe in Ron Paul merchandise.

All I could then figure was that it was serving me and me alone. How you may ask? It was to protect my ego from feeling hurt. From keeping myself from feeling like others, or myself, could and would judge me for jumping ship if I were to change my vote after spending possibly years pushing his name and the liberty message every single chance I got. The worst being the ridicule from your own family and friends that... just didn't get it... and probably never will. At least until they see a much different eye-opening outcome that changes everything they thought they knew about "politics" and "patriotism".

If your hero and mentor is the captain of a ship and it's sinking... do you honestly believe that they want you to go down with them... or get on the ship of someone that is going to the same destination?

Do people "occupy" major cities by sitting on their couches... or do they go out there or perform some kind of activism for a reason... to be heard?

I concluded that a write-in would be equivalent to writing "Ron Paul" on my shirt and never leaving the house. No one would see it, it wouldn't spread the message of liberty or let those that have fallen into or always have believed that "there's only two choices" every year.

Ron Paul's movement made a much louder noise this time around. Why? Because our numbers have doubled. Now imagine if a 3rd party candidate, who's votes were actually counted, ended up receiving twice the number of votes that any 3rd party candidate has ever received in modern history.

Now you might be saying, "Well we can't let Obama win, he's the worst!". Last time I checked, the vast majority of us hardcore Ron Paul supporters believed that both Romney and Obama were almost completely identical on the most serious, unconstitutional, and anti-libertarian positions.

Are you really trying to tell me that I should not only sacrifice the message I would help send with my 3rd party vote, but also my vote for a proven more capable and experienced candidate... my principle in choosing a "good" candidate rather than either of "two evils"? I look back on that J. Q. Adams quote.

Now some people would argue that that quote is justification for writing in Dr. Paul. I completely disagree. Ron Paul is no longer a candidate or choice and therefore couldn't actually receive any real "vote" in most states.

A write-in would be equivalent to someone offering me the choice of brussels sprouts or lima beans and me shouting "PIZZA!". My preference to a non-choice would be irrelevant to everyone but me and falls back to my reasoning to write-in in the first place... protecting my ego with nothing to show for it. Now if someone were to offer me brussels sprouts, lima beans, OR carrots... well... carrots aren't my favorite, they do taste pretty good... and I can still prefer pizza if it were available. I would choose carrots, because it wouldn't mean sacrificing my "food of choice" principles.

Gary Johnson is my carrot. He is no Ron Paul. He fully and humbly acknowledges that... Ron Paul being a hero of his own. And yes... he has some gray areas in how he perceives his libertarian views that you may not agree with... just like Paul does regarding the morning after pill and early abortion. Regardless, with him... it's not a question of which candidate sucks the least. To me it's the simple answer of choosing the only libertarian(-esque for you GJ haters out there) choice. Choosing the only good candidate. The clean sailboat that saved me from falling into the "sea of garbage" when riding on the clean yacht was no longer an option.

Now for the Gary Johnson haters out there... a question. Would you vote for Rand Paul if he was the 3rd party option? Many of you would say yes, all the while a whole new group of Ron Paul supporters would come out in protest about how he's "not a real libertarian".

Point being, we should be more understanding about why a self-proclaimed libertarian might choose something that doesn't seem libertarian at all. They perceive it as the libertarian choice in a gray area that to one half of the population is dead wrong no questions asked or morally right without question.

There are many libertarians that don't agree with Ron Paul on the morning after pill. That doesn't mean he's not a libertarian. People naturally don't observe or consider all of the details and easily tell themselves they have done both so they can be more assertive in their position. I bet a lot of close-minded people tell themselves they're open-minded too.

Yes, even here in the libertarian movement we have radical crazies that do more damage for the cause than help... just like the far left and right do... but that's another topic.

Now this was only the choice between whether to vote for a 3rd party or write-in. Until I had talked to The Granger in my last post, I hadn't even thought about what those that have already taken up positions within their local GOP were to do. Who is Ron Paul going to vote for?

I wouldn't be surprised if he privately voted for a 3rd party himself. (Listen to him on his position with running as 3rd party: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87PyTbuSUvg)

This is where I then came to the conclusion of what I think is a winning strategy for the future. For many and myself, "Obamney" isn't even an option. So what is the plan?

    3 STEPS TO WIN IN 2016!


1. Continue "becoming the tent" that is the GOP
If you can't beat 'em, join 'em by replacing them. Turn a party lacking integrity and consistent principles into a party that exemplifies it.

2. Everyone vote for Gary Johnson
Even if you don't think he has a chance to win, it would not only document where all the votes went that Romney needed and send a message that the political spectrum changing with Ron Paul wasn't just a passing fluke, but who knows? He could even possibly get the 15% needed for the national debate. 15% is more threatening to the GOP than 8%, 5%, and 2% separated. This is human behavior's preference, inspired by the tactic "divide and conquer". Libertarian votes for Romney or Obama, write-ins, for other 3rd party candidates, and lost votes to those that stay home in protest and considered part of the "voter participation" numbers... all sabotage the accurate documentation of the votes the GOP lost and needed to win in 2012.

3. Next presidential election, we now have ALL of the cards
The cronies still left in the GOP establishment will no longer have the theories that allowed them to believe they didn't need us and that cheating and treating us the way they did came with no serious consequence.

Let them blame us for Romney's loss. We know better. We didn't choose Obama, we chose a better candidate and THEY failed to jump on board in both counts. We can't let our principles falter for the sake of a few minute differences between the two. Ron Paul never has... so why would he vote for a lesser of two evils when he's completely against it?

I believe that Romney, with how much he's shot himself in the foot and shown his lack of integrity that simply matches that of Obama's, would have lost even if Ron Paul didn't run.

"We are not afraid to lose if losing means our integrity and principles remain with us. Our numbers have tripled in this election and we have already won. We have spread the message of individual liberty far and wide. Ron Paul has inspired the liberty movement in Africa, in Europe, even in Korea. Only a third of American colonists believed that the Revolutionary War was necessary and they changed the course of history forever." -ABillyRock
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOFZyezPenE

If "anyone but Obama" was their reasoning... and sound logic showed that post-Tampa, Ron Paul would have the best chances to win when the independent, disenfranchised dem, and just recently apathetic votes were added to party loyalists' that were what won it for obama in 2008 (52-44% independent vote)... and they STILL chose Romney...

...how can we allow ourselves to go back to that losing and glass-half empty mentality?

So does this sound like a sound plan?
How could it backfire?

I know this was long and I know there will be plenty of Johnson haters who ignore most of what I've said and spam negative ratings all over the place, but I do thank those of you that read all of this. I hope this may have meant something to you.

Also, thank you for all of the posting you've all done before I even recently signed up. If you type "d" into any computer's browser, here or at work, DailyPaul is the first suggested site on every machine and has been for a very long time.

Ron Paul would have beat Obama if given the nomination in 2012. In 2016 the GOP and its remaining cronies will not be able to ignore us if this strategy is followed starting with this election. If they want to win, they will have to realize when our support doubles or more yet again, while their numbers dwindle, they not only can't pretend they don't need us, but they will KNOW we are the future of the party.

Here's some pics of my sweet ass ride here in CT for the hell of it :P
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.840325873507.22169...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

If you really want to put it

If you really want to put it to the GOP leave the presidential blank.... vote for other congress/local liberty candidates...

The polls record how many republicans vote. They also record how many republicans vote for a candidate..

x number of Republicans voted today and x number of Republicans voted for Romney....

Hit em hard and have a ton more turn out than vote for Mitts...

You need not hold your nose...

It would hurt the GOP worse

It would hurt the GOP worse to vote as a Republican for a 3rd party than vote as a Republican for no one.

Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally

Agreed

I'm voting GJ this year, it WILL show evidence of our pro-liberty message. It remains to be seen what happens for the 2016 cycle though, so I'm not going to say I'll for sure be voting L that year. But with how incredibly weak and corrupt the GOP has become, it's a high likelihood.

The main problem with an L ticket in 2016 is destroying the "3rd party will never win" mentality.
I think that if you are to implement this that we would have to have a MASSIVE campaign on just how stupid the D/R thinking really is.

I'm voting for a L running in

I'm voting for a L running in the libertarian party in 2012 because there isn't one in any party with an advantage and I'll be first voting for a libertarian in the GOP in 2016. The strategy as outlined (simple 3 steps that start on Nov 6th) will give us the upperhand as explained in the GOP in 4 years.

Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally

I've asked this question many times before

I always get voted down (I think my record is something like -12) for asking people here who they will vote for after Ron Paul retires.

Well, as far as national politics goes, Ron Paul is basically retired. So who now?

I say Johnson. People seem to have a huge beef with him. So I ask you then, who is better?

Our future president in 2016...

Tom Davis.

I don't play, I commission the league.

Davis is great, but...

He will be running against Lindsey Graham for Senator in SC.

Rand Paul 2016

Rand Paul 2016 for Peace

By the time Rand can run in

By the time Rand can run in 2016, the takeover of the GOP will be in full swing and him winning the nomination will be the signal that the takeover will be successful!

Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally

Apparently writing in for

Apparently writing in for someone that achieves no real end result accept personal gratification is better than furthering the movement and standing up for their principles.

They find waving the independence of their vote like a flag more important than promoting libertarianism.

You don't rate my comments down because you don't agree and can invalidate what I say. You vote my comments and post down because you're upset with the truth that you don't want to accept.

Pretty sure that's pretty hypocritical for a libertarian that speaks out against the oppression of the truth.

Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally

LOL.

They find waving the independence of their vote like a flag more important than promoting libertarianism.

Claiming that Gary Neocon Johnson promotes libertarianism is like claiming Willard promotes conservatism. Laughable.

I don't play, I commission the league.

And like many conspiracy

And like many conspiracy theorist GJ haters... I challenge you to back up what you say.

How is he a neo-con?
What does he do that doesn't promote libertarianism?

Feel free to add credibility to your claim and how good you are at making a sound argument any time now.

Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally

It is a major question as to how to proceed.

I'm inclined to Write-In Ron Paul for a couple reasons:

1. It's the last time (most likely) we'll ever have the chance to do so.

2. He certainly deserves my vote.

3. Hopefully some republican vote-counter would be forced to see Ron Paul's name and wonder for just a second if Ron Paul would have beat Obama (when Romney will lose).

On the other hand, a vote for Gary Johnson would actually be counted while a RP Write in won't (in WA State).

But either way the final result will be the same so you have to vote based on your gut feelings I guess.

"We have allowed our nation to be over-taxed, over-regulated, and overrun by bureaucrats. The founders would be ashamed of us for what we are putting up with."
-Ron Paul

1. Fallacy #1: You can

1. Fallacy #1: You can write-in Paul's name every presidential election that he's still alive.

2. Fallacy #2: There are other promoters and liberty torch bearers out there that deserve it as well. Holding people to the standard of Ron Paul is going to give you no one to get behind.

3. Fallacy #3: What's more important to you... a local volunteer hearing your vote or the GOP establishment?

If you were paying attention to the strategy you were commenting on... you'd fully know that the end result isn't exactly the same in the short or long term.

The title of this post was rhetorical and you commented on the title alone. Way to keep up and detract from the point.

Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally

I'm Voting Third Party, but Not for Gary Johnson

xRegardsX, here is my reasoning which differs somewhat from your idea. Why give the republicans or democrats only one other party (Libertarian) to worry about in the future? Why not give them fits about a multiplicity of third parties who received votes in the 2012 presidential election?

Here is a list of TP (Third Party) candidates http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_third_party_and_i... . If any of them are on the ballot in your State, consider voting for him or her.

I say, spread the pain. We know none of the TP candidates will win (including Gary Johnson). The media will have to report the numbers and the figures will show the country there is a growing segment of voters who are fed up with the two party monopoly. Let's mock the hell out of the republicans and democrats!

Because it isn't about them

Because it isn't about them worrying about a specific party. It's about them being scared that they'll lose our vote to any other party for the sake of furthering the takeover of the GOP in 2016.

You missed the point of this strategy. Plus they were start to see the threat even earlier if Johnson were to get the 15% needed for the national debates... the only 3rd party candidate able to do so from being on the ballot in all 50 states.

Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally

Commission on Presidential Debates Selection Criteria

xRegardsx, you responded it's not about a specific party; it is about a strategy to worry the GOP they will lose political power, period. So what's special about Governor Johnson? Yes, the Libertarian party is on the ballot in all 50 states but so what? There are other third parties on state ballots as well, all just as capable of taking votes away from the GOP. My point is a vote for ANY third party will weaken the republican AND the democrat base. Statistics will show the country has less support for both immoral and rotted parties.

You then mentioned Mr. Johnson may be the only other candidate to appear in the national debates. I went to the CPD (Commission on Presidential Debates) website and looked up the broadcast schedule for the three presidential debates and one vice presidential debate (see: http://www.debates.org/index.php?mact=News,cntnt01,detail,0&... )

The four moderators are: Jim Lehrer, Martha Raddatz, Candy Crowley and Bob Schieffer (see: http://www.debates.org/index.php?mact=News,cntnt01,detail,0&... ). We have all seen these standard bearers of the entrenched elitists before during the primaries.

In order for Governor Johnson to participate in the televised debates, he will have to achieve a 15% general electorate support level based upon an average of five national public opinion polling organizations (see: http://www.debates.org/index.php?page=candidate-selection-pr... ). I have no faith in political polling organizations because they have been corrupted just like the main stream media. The suggestive questions are often skewed towards an agenda of favoritism for special interest groups. So I don’t believe Johnson will be seen by the public.

If you support Governor Johnson and believe he will be true to his platform, then by all means vote for him. But I will not. I will cast my vote for another third party on the ballot in New York. I want the people to see statistically there is a diversity of opinion beyond the two party duopoly that has ruined our country.

You apparently missed the

You apparently missed the point that you claim you think you understand in your first sentence of your response.

"Making the GOP worry they're losing power" and "Putting an emphasize on the size and scope of the libertarians specifically that were lost and wouldn't be counted accurately with write-ins, votes for romney/obama, other 3rd party candidates, or not at all in protest" are VERY different things.

It's not making them "worry". It's making them KNOW versus the theories of how they didn't need us as much as they thought they did that allowed them to treat us the way they have. 15% seems to be a larger threat than them seeing 8%, 5%, and 2%. It's human behavior and what the tactic "divide and conquer" was inspired by.

In a country where a large majority think they only have 2 choices (including the half that think they're both "evil")... a 3rd option being on the table makes that "diversity" statement with a spot at the national debate MUCH louder than several 3rd party candidates that most people will never hear about because they watch TV and don't read up on politics and polls, online or elsewhere.

You're being counter productive to your "diversity cause", as I've just explained.

Your logic is the same as if everyone that voted for our delegates decided instead to vote for whoever they felt like instead of agreeing on specific people to increase their chances. Our delegate strategy would have failed using the "vote your conscious" rhetoric, when considering this strategy being viable... the conscious choice to promote the libertarian movement and plans of GOP takeover as Paul himself promoted should be obvious.

I wish I didn't have to spell it out for you... but we only got as far as we did from voting strategy... there's no reason we can't do it again. The general election vote is no more "special" than the delegate vote like everyone is trying to make it. Yes, it's a sign of our freedom... but that includes the freedom to stratagize for a better future.

Imagine an army doing well without tactics... just everyone doing what they EMOTIONALLY choose to do. They would lose and there would be many casualties.

Ignoring a good strategy with better results is the same as sabotaging our potential.

If you feel like sabotaging potential that you haven't been able to invalidate is important to you, then by all means do it. That's your right.

Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally

Me too.

And one that will get a very low percentage vote, so they can't steal it. If there are too few votes, it will be noticed if they steal any.

Strategy is a fail

A strong showing for Johnson accomplishes nothing. What it would unintentionally do, is make Johnson into the new ambassador of our movement; and that will discredit us. This is a huge distraction from the important work that needs to be done. What we need are many new faces in congress who are Ron Paul Republicans. They can make the noise that will not only send a message, but attract more support and help us gain momentum.

1. We can't put enough Ron

1. We can't put enough Ron Paul republicans in congress fast enough
2. If we are turning the GOP into the new libertarian party, what people think of the "libertarian" party or its ambassador doesn't even matter. The Republican party won't even need the word "libertarian" for people to know it's become synonymous again by returning to its libertarian heritage.
3. You give too much credit to the effect of Johnson making any noise. The documented number of votes lost to a 3rd party for both major parties, the GOP especially for the sake of the 2016 nomination, far outweighs what the general population will forget about or remember with Johnson 4 years prior.
4. If you haven't noticed, we are what make the noise. The politician up for a congressional seat is nothing without us. Imagine how quickly Ron Paul would be forgotten if no one understood his message of liberty.

Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally

I fully support your decision

to vote for Johnson. Your strategy doesn't make sense, though. Neither do your counterpoints.
1) So we should do something pointless because the smart thing to do isn't fast enough?
2) You admit Johnson is deficient. Why do you want us to all promote him? Yes, it does matter what people think of the man who becomes the new face of the movement.
3) ? What outweighs what?
4)?? Are you arguing that we shouldn't get people elected to congress?

Man, I already regret posting a reply on this thread.

1. It isn't pointless. What

1. It isn't pointless. What would be pointless is dividing our vote into separate categories (write-ins, 3rd party, for "romney and obamney" which can't even be counted). That would create less of an impact. "15%" seems more threatening of a loss of votes than "10% and 5%". It's human nature to discredit a few small numbers while exaggerating single large numbers on a subconscious level. Their manipulative ways cater towards a situation they feel they can divide and conquer much more easily than something that may prove to be a threat.
Imagine Romney loses and the GOP look at Gary Johnson, who not only (attempts to) represent the libertarian movement, but also has 2 to 3 times the number of votes than any other 3rd party candidate has ever gotten in modern politics. Then add in the fact that 2008 was decided by the independent vote (52-44%). They will make the connection and realize that we were why they lost and need us. Their theory that they don't need us because most will slide back to Romney or that non-party loyalist paulites aren't large enough in numbers to pose a threat or offer a guaranteed win if they had them for the GOP, would be completely blown out of the water. If their theory is allowed to continue existing... they'll take a second chance and keep a libertarian out as much as possible.
2. I admit that Johnson isn't a Ron Paul and as a third party... even with his numbers double or tripled... he doesn't pose much of a threat to the established and oppressive two party system. That doesn't mean he's a bad candidate and that he doesn't have some very good points that should be questioned live on a national stage of Romney or Obama which many people would never have thought to consider before. And when you separate the what's considered mostly fringe "libertarians" by many from the fact that we'll simply take over the GOP and redefine "Republican" to mean the same as "libertarian"... anything bad that comes of Johnson (which couldn't be much compared to how bad Romney and past candidates have hurt the GOP's image) get's lost in translation. There is a difference between our movement and the libertarian party. When the GOP is fully taken over, there will be no need for a LP and because our libertarian principled policies under a republican name would show to work extremely well... regardless of what happens with Johnson, Libertarianism will come out of the fringe completely and take over the 2 party system. Long term the GOP will have a steady influx of independents and democrats who end up favoring libertarian ideals and there will always be those with radically different positions along the spectrum.
3. In the long game... any negative effect that Johnson might have made will be completely outweighed with the huge push and advancement of the libertarian movement and takeover of the GOP and whitehouse as I've just explained.
4. Me saying that we can't get them elected to congress fast enough in no way implies we shouldn't do it. In fact IF you read and full understood the post you would have read the 3 steps of the strategy... the first being the takeover of the GOP, which obviously includes seats in congress. The very contrary to what you're trying to imply was my argument.

The fact that you were that far off base with your rebuttal and how you comprehended this as I've shown is the real reason you should regret posting a reply.

Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally

the GOP can shove it

writing in Ron Paul is up to the individual ... if you are in one the few states that allow a write in for him ... great. Many states do not allow write ins or have a poor loser rule (or some nonsense) where you can write in Mickey Mouse but no one who was on the primary.
Third Party is always a good option and one I most like will be doing again this year. The GOP is dog waste. RIP corrupt party.

Just curious... but are you

Just curious... but are you responding to the rhetorical question that is the title of the post... or did you actually read it?

You seem to have completely missed the point... like many others that are too bothered to read or try to understand what's said, but not bothered at all when it comes to opening their mouth to spat their then irrelevant opinion.

Meaning no offense, maybe you just didn't realize there was more to this than a question that I end up answering in the post.

Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally

I am writing in Ron Paul.

I am writing in Ron Paul. Here in NH my vote will be counted, well, as much as any vote is counted in a rigged system.

Blessings )o(

Then you've completely

Then you've completely ignored the strategy that helps us win with a libertarian/GOP candidate in 2016. You've answered the VERY rhetorical question and didn't read the post at all.

Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally

CFR puppet GJ in the debates

as a supposed libertarian would do severe damage to the movement

Oh look... another baseless

Oh look... another baseless implied conspiracy theory post by kane!

Conspiracy theorists that can't offer conclusive evidence of their claims discredit the movement more than anyone... why many consider libertarians a fringe element.

Truthers and birthers... whether your claims are true or not... until you have conclusive evidence that's good enough for the general public... stop making us look bad. Thanks.

You're hurting the movement... NOT helping it.

It's the equivalent of an alcoholic husband who gets the entire family uninvited to a dinner party.

Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally

GJ is as repulsive to me as

GJ is as repulsive to me as Obama and Romney. Is that clear enough for you?

Blessings )o(

So you're choosing satisfying

So you're choosing satisfying your ego with a write-in over a strategy that would help us get a true libertarian in as president UNDER the GOP in 2016?

How noble of you.

Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally