32 votes

Rational discussion about what to do for the 2012 race for POTUS

Most regular users of the Daily P.Au.L are aware that I openly support Gary Johnson. That is beside the point with respect to this post. My intentions here are only to encourage rational consideration of the available options left for Paulites in the general election and to attempt to spark a healthy discussion with no name-calling or other actions stemming from anger, disappointment, spite, etc. I hope you will set the emotional nature of the current times aside and genuinely consider what I have to say.

Option 1 - Vote for Obama:

Pros:

- Delivering the election to Obama is a method of punishing Romney
- Romney may be considered unelectable in 2016 given that Obama is much weaker than he was in 2008 and Romney may likely do worse than McCain did

Cons:

- Our troops remain in Afghanistan until 2014 (at least - whatever happened to the recent 2024 extension? Is 2014 election year fodder?)
- We may end up engaged in more needless militarism in Iran, Syria, etc, putting tens of thousands of American lives at stake
- Indefinite detention clauses in the current NDAA will remain
- The UN Small Arms Treaty will likely be signed
- Draconian censorship laws will likely be levied against internet freedom
- Whistle blowers will continue to be treated like sub-human criminals
- The government will continue to grow at an alarming pace
- We will likely get stimulated again with the current economic outlook
- The War on Drugs will continue even in states that have put in place legalization/decriminalization laws
- The healthcare mandate will endure
- There will be no audit of the Fed
- Foreign aid will remain untouched or maybe even increased
- The Welfare State will likely continue to expand

Option 2 - Vote for Romney:

Pros:

- Slight possibility that Romney would listen to Austrian solutions in another economic crisis (I doubt it though)

Cons:

- Romney will be rewarded for his underhanded tactics used to attain the nomination
- Our troops remain in Afghanistan until 2014 - at least
- We may end up engaged in more needless militarism in Iran, Syria, etc putting tens of thousands of American lives at stake
- Indefinite detention clauses in the current NDAA will remain
- Draconian censorship laws will likely be levied against internet freedom
- Whistle blowers will continue to be treated like sub-human criminals
- The government will continue to grow at an alarming pace
- We will likely get stimulated again with the current economic outlook
- The War on Drugs will continue even in states that have put in place legalization/decriminalization laws (likely at a more aggressive pace than Obama. Romney equated drug use to murder in a speech aired on HLN earlier in the year)
- The healthcare mandate will endure
- There will be no audit of the Fed (I don't trust Romney's sincerity)
- Foreign aid will remain untouched or maybe even increased
- The Welfare State will likely continue to expand (Medicare promises)

Option 3 - Write-in Ron Paul:

Pros:

- You get to vote for one of your heroes

Cons:

- No one outside of your personal contacts will know you did so
- A write-in campaign has no chance at successfully electing Dr. Paul

Option 4 - Vote for Johnson:

Pros whether he wins or loses:

- The votes will be counted (to some varying degree depending on the state - I doubt there would be 100% vote flipping) which would send a clear message to the GOP that the Liberty Movement won't just fall in line based on political rhetoric and/or coercion
- 5% of the vote puts the LP in major party status for 2016 which would likely help to solve problems with gaining participation in the debates
- Johnson will not be the last LP POTUS nominee. Others after him may be more universally acceptable to the Liberty Movement, and major party status would give those potential candidates much firmer footing
- It will piss off both the Democrats and the Republicans (Johnson affects the duopoly candidates differently depending on the state in question)

Pros for the outside chance he wins:

- Afghanistan will immediately be drawn down
- Avoid war with Iran, Syria, etc, potentially saving tens of thousands American lives
- A budget with $1.4 trillion in cuts - enough to balance year one (more than the $1T proposed by Paul) - will be submitted to Congress which would likely lead to real cuts (not just baseline cuts)
- In the event of a financial crisis, no economic intervention will be employed thereby creating an environment for real recovery
- If Audit the Fed hits his desk, it will get signed
- The Drug War will end
- If the legislation passes, the 16th Amendment will be repealed, the IRS abolished, and a consumption tax implemented which would eliminate all federal payroll withholding (saving entrepreneurs a fortune), eliminate taxes on all used goods (clothes, cars, etc), and distribute the federal tax burden over everyone that interacts with our economy (illegal aliens, tourists, other visitors) not just the employed citizens.
- Religious influences will no longer be employed to provide collectivist, government benefits to straight couples while punishing the gay and lesbian community. Separation of Church and State should not have exceptions, and the only argument that exists is based in religion.
- Although Johnson is pro-choice up to independent viability of the fetus, he takes the same policy approach as Ron Paul in saying it should be left to the states, thereby negating the importance of his personal opinions on the issue

Cons:

- If the legislation passes, some are concerned that the Fair Tax would create a new entitlement system due to the prebate that would be distributed to all US citizens. However, I would argue that collectivism is avoided because all citizens will receive it, and the prebate only represents the amount of tax that would be paid based on poverty level income (~$2000/yr) which is not nearly enough to survive on and provides a logical solution to the regressive nature of other consumption taxes
- Johnson said he may be willing to militarily intervene for humanitarian reasons in other countries; however, he said he would only do so with approval from Congress (giving respect to the process provided by the Constitution)

----------------------------------------------

Did I leave anything out? Please discuss.

One last note: To illustrate the unreliability of emotion based decision making, please consider the following questions -

What percentage of people in prison (barring victimless crimes) are there because they acted out of emotion? I would venture to say greater than 90%.

What percentage of people in prison (barring victimless crimes) are there because they made rational decisions? Very few.

Did your parents ever tell you to "think before you act?" If so, why did they tell you that? Was it because making emotional decisions out of anger or other emotions can often get you into trouble?

Is the purpose of the Liberty Movement to gain liberty? If not, what is the goal? Given the above information, what is the most productive choice for Liberty with respect to the 2012 race for POTUS on a rational basis, neglecting emotion?

The factors stated above are what led me to where I stand now.

Thanks ahead of time for your genuine consideration and responses.

Comment viewing options

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

Let me ask... is promoting

Let me ask... is promoting liberty to its full potential and avoiding the sabotage of that potential a principle of yours?

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

Sure - that's why I won't settle for Johnson

As I have repeated many times - I don't think he is good for the cause in the long run.

Please - take the cool-aid tray somewhere else... it has been offered way too many times.

It has been fun trading negatives with you.

And why isn't he good for the

And why isn't he good for the cause?

If that's true... then we should all know so we don't sabotage ourselves!

If you don't bestow your wisdom, you're sabotaging us in not letting us know how we're sabotaging the movement!

Don't you care about the liberty movement enough to let us know how Gary Johnson will only hurt the movement???

If you don't respond, apparently you don't :(

I have a long list of ways he helps the country and the movement. Please invalidate them so I don't use them to sabotage us!!?!

"-=Support for Gary Johnson will help get him 15% to enter the national debates.=-
1. Him being in the debates shows the entire country how similar, in the worst ways, both Obama and Romney are.
2. Him being in the debates will get people to be interested in looking up Ron Paul and the meaning of "Liberty" for themselves.
3. Him being in the debates in a time where we have the same tool that helped us more than double Paul's supporters in 4 years time, the internet, INCREASES his chance of garnering the votes of the 46% of Americans who consider BOTH, Obama and Romney, one of "two evils"... to either get the dramatically largest vote that any 3rd party candidate has ever received, or even win the presidency.

-=Our votes unified behind Johnson will make a huge impact for the country and our bid for the GOP nomination with a TRUE libertarian in 2016 during our takeover of the Republican party.=-
1. If the GOP loses or only wins by a small margin, and they see a large amount of support behind the supposed "Libertarian", they know exactly who they lost their votes to.
2. If the GOP realizes how many votes they lost because they cheated, pushed aside, and alienated libertarians, for the sake of winning or winning by an even larger margin for the sake of less risk of losing, they not only won't cheat us, but may even promote a libertarian nominee for the sake of getting our vote.
3. Winning the GOP nomination with a true libertarian in 2016 would be the apex of our takeover. The Republican party would almost be synonymous with libertarianism. No more RINOs. Just classic liberty loving Republicans that are the end result of hundreds of years of learning and appreciating what liberty and our constitution are all about."

--- http://www.dailypaul.com/253833/conflicting-principles-sabot...

So how does he hurt the movement????
If your reasoning is so sound, it will stand up to scrutiny!

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

Wow... tell me...

Were you one of the ones running around the internet telling people how stupid they were because they didn't support Ron Paul?

Antagonizing people is not a good way to persuade.

Making claims and not backing them up is "antagonizing"

Wow... tell me...

Why is he not good for the cause?

Why is a write-in for Ron Paul better?

Which helps us reach the liberty movement's full potential for the sake of now and the future?

...simple questions.

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

Haha - you are an ass

Wow - what are you like in-person? You truly must live to argue.

The site should have a 900 daily comment limit - you'd be about there.

And... Do you always plus-one your comments and minus-one the person you are talking to? That is very annoying and childish.

Hey look at you avoid the

Hey look at you avoid the simple questions, use excuses as a cop out, and then deny that you're using excuses with an excuse.

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 didn't know blocking people was so easy...

Just click their name - and click block! You never have to see them again!

Thanks for the dumb time xRegardsx - bye

Thanks for proving me right

Thanks for proving me right about 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

Barack is naturally lazy

I feel that Barack Obama is naturally lazy and will do nothing if re-elected except play basketball all day.

;-)))

LOL That's Funny!!!
For decades, wrote Rothbard,

“it was shameful and taboo for anyone to talk publicly or write about home truths which everyone, and I mean everyone, knew in their hearts and in private: that is, almost self-evident truths about race, intelligence, and heritability.

“What used to be widespread shared public knowledge about race and ethnicity among writers, publicists, and scholars was suddenly driven out of the public square by Communist anthropologist Franz Boas and his associates in the 1930s and has been taboo ever since.

“Essentially, I mean the almost self-evident fact that individuals, ethnic groups and races differ among themselves in intelligence and in many other traits, and that intelligence, as well as less controversial traits of temperament, are in large part hereditary.”

I've voted Repub: 40+ yrs. NO MORE!!!!! PERIOD!!!Unless we fight to win back the party.I fear that will be in the streets.;-))
Peace & Love to ALL.

F*ck the GOP! The GOP is a

F*ck the GOP!

The GOP is a tarnished brand, even within their own party after the tricks they pulled. We are trying to take over a party, but why are we trying to take over a party that is known starting wars, amassing a huge debt and running one of the richest men in America who lacks common decency towards his fellow man.

We aren't going to bring in young people into this party, remember the Republicans in 2016! We're killed your Uncle in Iraq?

I think it was a brilliant idea Dr. Paul had to get delegates, he assumed he could have a floor fight, but they cheated. They are known as cheating and backwards with no new ideas. We brand the GOP what they are War Mongering Rich Assholes. They have pissed of delegates that would have happily voted Romney.

We aren't Republicans or Democrats, we are people trying to change Our Country.

I suggest we take over a 3rd and make it a first party. After the election we have the people that we got into office, switch parties, in mass. We register as this 3rd, in mass. And we make it known.

The current laws prevent that line of action.

Influence the Remnant in all the parties is the way forward. Forget about power, spread the message of liberty.

Free includes debt-free!

Perhaps the best post on this day

Front page material.
Thank you.

LL on Twitter: http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
sometimes LL can suck & sometimes LL rocks!
http://www.dailypaul.com/203008/south-carolina-battle-of-cow...
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

Im leaning a little bit towards GJ but still undecided

I just read an Amazing artical here on how the LP is at a new house. I wont be leaving the GOP by any means, but looking at how the Neo-cons was booed out from the LP by the Grassroots [which was suppose to be done at the RNC] i think there is a lot of reform happening within the LP we should help out with too! there is never anything wrong with diffusing more Liberty.

http://www.dailypaul.com/253894/bob-barr-and-wayne-allen-roo...

His name is Edward Snowden

What is Capitalism?
http://youtu.be/yNF09pUPypw

Ron Paul would likely be sec of treasury with a GJ

Presidency. That's another pro for Liberts.

I'm fully aware that GJ is no Ron Paul but he is the only candidate whose philosophies point the USA in the right direction in this upcoming election.Regardless if you dislike the current officials in libertarian party it makes the most sense to plant the liberty movement there...just so in the name itself. The libertarian ideology in its simplest form is attractive to a broad base of people they just don't know it yet. I mean who doesn't like liberty and no taxes? The government doesn't but we don't like government either.

I dont expect GJ to win however a good showing would would make our voices heard and even louder in years to come...eventually succeeding especially compared to facist-leaning Demopublic Party.

Promise us a cookie?

Gak!

Free includes debt-free!

No cookies in the LP platform this year.

.. Sorry

I haven't seen this con to Gary Johnson mentioned...

This may be unavoidable.

If Romney loses - who will 'they' blame? They will blame Gary Johnson and Ron Paul.

To you and me that is bunch of baloney - but to the average voter that pays no attention to reality... this could be devastating to the movement.

I know - "You are going to allow that fear to stop you from voting your conscience?" Well, my conscience doesn't say vote for Gary. I think it is a risk with no potential benefit. I only see negatives in the long run.

You might think a vote for Gary will teach the GOP that they have to accept us - but I expect the opposite. I believe the mantra from the GOP to the masses will be 'Ron Paul gave you 4 more years of Obama.' It happened to Nader.

(Of course, they expect Gary to peel away votes from Rs and Ds - I expect more from the GOP)

The GOP let Romney poop in the punch bowl.

The Party is over.

We want them to blame us. We

We want them to blame us. We blame them for not getting behind the best candidates.

If they lose to either Johnson or Obama, or EVEN IF they win by a very narrow margin... they will have put 2 and 2 together on where all their voters went. In 2016 they won't feel like they can alienate us again in fear of losing votes that could give them a win or a win by an even larger margin so it's more guaranteed. Because they would want us to stay with the GOP, they might even promote and completely accept a libertarian candidate... especially after 4 years of watching their party get taken over.

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

Yeah - except...

That isn't what they will do.

When Perot split the vote and Clinton won - they blamed Perot... but did the party change?

When Nader was blamed for Al Gore's loss, did they suddenly adopt his positions and give him a voice?

NO - that isn't how these guys play. Instead they were blamed for the loss.

It was used as a tool AGAINST THIRD PARTIES: "Your vote will be wasted" - "You will split the vote"

I don't agree with the argument - Al Gore lost Florida because he didn't get enough votes . (PERIOD!)

It is folly to think a 1-3% take by Gary will give us a seat at the table.

And no - we don't want them to blame us - to go on Fox news and have these assholes telling millions of GOP sleepers that Ron Paul / Gary Johnson gave you 4 more years of Obama. It will become a meme.

They didn't change because

They didn't change because they didn't have a full blown and NOW ever growing movement.

Where's the movement that Perot started and how much has it grown in the years during and following his presidential runs?

And I never said a 1-3% take would do that, so please don't put words in my mouth or misconstrue what I say.

15% to get him into the debates.
46% of Americans who consider BOTH Obama and Romney "Evil" (Rasmussen)
60-80% of Americans willing to consider a 3rd party candidate (Reason-Rupe)
A large number of those seeing the striking and failed similarities between Obama and Romney if they're on the national stage with Johnson... which is the same exact circumstance Paul himself said would be required for America to wake up and begin to end the duopoly.

Watching Perot do horribly twice doesn't change minds. Seeing Paul do twice as well and seeing a 3rd party do amazingly well compared to the 1-3%'s they've gotten in the past DOES and WILL continue to change minds.

The internet has changed politics forever... and will continue to do so as people start realizing it's important again. They learn to distinguish between pandered "Hope" and genuine and un provoked hope.

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

Perot spawned a whole party

Perot spawned a whole party. He took 19% of the popular vote in '92.

? How is that horrible ?

And for you to suggest that Paul did twice as well? I'm not sure what you are talking about.

Paul is at least twice the man... but I didn't see Paul getting 38% anywhere.

You missed the point because

You missed the point because you didn't understand what was said.

Paul did "twice as well" in the GOP primaries and caucuses as he did 4 years prior.

Was not comparing Ron Paul to Perot.

Given the power of the internet that HAS doubled Paul's support in the last 4 years... I think Paul had a better chance of winning 3rd party.

Maybe 4 years ago and before his chances were greater in the GOP, but times are changing.

Then add in the fact that there's a VAST difference between Perot and Paul that while Paul's support doubled in 4 years time... Perot's support went from 18.9% to 8%. That party that "spawned" was a party he HIMSELF started. Where is the "Reform Party" now?

When did a person's numbers dwindling to less than half of what they had ever change anyone's mind about anything?

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

So what is your point?

You know - I'm not trying to make a case for Perot!

My premise was that voting for Johnson out of spite - to punish the GOP could very well backfire. That is all I am saying.

Your premise seems to be that we vote for Gary, the GOP loses and next election the GOP invites Ron Paul give the keynote speech or something. No - you didn't literally say that. You suggest that they will embrace the liberty movement because they need us - I'm saying "no, they won't." - they will use us as an example - that 'we' caused them to lose - that 'we' gave the nation 4 more years of Obama. I'm not saying I believe that if Gary peels off more from Romney than Obama, and Romney loses it is Gary's fault - nobody owns those votes - It is the way it will be portrayed in the MSM - it will become a meme just like 'Nader caused Gore to lose'

Your enthusiasm that the nation is going to wake up because the internet... Well - we've been at it 8 years. I have the patience. I'm just suggesting that Gary is going to end up doing more harm than good in the end (not in any premeditated evil way - I just think the finally tally will be negative).

I NEVER said you were making

I NEVER said you were making a case for Perot.

What I explained was how your "backfire" reasoning was invalid.

1. You said that both parties didn't change because of Perot doing well.

2. I said it had nothing to do with JUST him doing well. That it had to do with Paul and those like him DOING BETTER.

3. You then misunderstood what I said about the "doubled support", thinking I was talking about comparing the two when I was comparing RP 2008 and 2012.

4. I then show how they felt no threat because Perot's "movement" and support reached less than half of what it was WHILE the difference was that Paul's support doubled... and they know it will continue to grow versus relying on people's acceptance of discontent like they could before.

Perot doing worse cemented people into thinking that a 3rd party can't win, while, with the internet as a huge tool, Paul's support and the liberty movement more than doubling, will UN-cement that idea.

Everyone has facebook just about... 4 years ago many of our extended family and friends still didn't. Many people, family and friend alike, tell me they rely on my facebook posts to stay in the know.

THAT is the difference. Even comparing now to 8 years ago isn't an accurate comparison.

If they used us as that "example" (which they already do)... then they alienate us further and lose even harder than they did before.

That's their choice. If that happens (which I doubt seeing as we'd already had taken over a bunch of the party by then), then we keep at it for 4 more years until the neo-cons are gone and there's no one left to alienate us.

If we don't try though, we'll never know.

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

WE can win by writing in Ron Paul

42 states allow write in votes which adds up to 493 electoral votes if this is correct then it could be done!Or am I wrong?

Yes!

We're going to WIN!

Read my comment below and

Read my comment below and please realize that you're dreaming.

You probably thought we'd win the GOP nomination even after Paul himself said we wouldn't. Ignoring facts like the ones I listed below when you ignored the fact that winning the nomination would require changing the minds of a thousand stubborn and close-minded neo-cons who already thought Ron Paul was sabotaging the GOP and disliked his "disrespectful" supporters.

Use your conviction to realistic and objective means rather than wasting your time on the impossible. You sabotage our true potential when you go after lesser strategies... especially impossible ones.

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