84 votes

Is it about Gary, or is it about a 3rd party?

There are 4 registered Republicans in our family, all will be voting for Gary Johnson. We love Ron Paul, we like Gary Johnson, but we are not voting for Gary with an expectation of winning. We are voting for Gary to give a 3rd party some kind of chance, some kind of traction in 2016.

If Gary gets at least 5% of the vote, that means the libs get something like $30-$35 million in matching campaign funds in 2016.

If the 2 party system throws up 2 more clowns in 2016, I want a 3rd party to start to be significant. What if Ron Paul runs in 2016 as a Lib candidate? It would be nice to have him come out of the gate with $30 million.

I am truly a lib, vote your heart, but for those undecided about what they are going to do, I urge all 3rd party voters to come together and make a 3rd choice part of the system. We need to get 5% of the vote.

Ron Paul has been saying for years a 3rd party can't get the money to run. He would have ran 3rd party if this was different, well, we can make it different, otherwise we are scattered just like the other 2 parties want us to be. I hope the undecided can see the bigger picture.




Comment viewing options

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

Ok I see what you mean... do

Ok I see what you mean... do you think a constitutional import tax alone would be enough to fund the government (even if downsized)?

Far more than enough

Lets look at the limitations placed upon the federal government by the Constitution and Founders:

1.) The federal government "CONSTITUTIONALLY" can only prosecute 4 crimes

a.) piracy on the high seas (only),
b.) Counterfeiting,
c.) crimes against the law of nations and
d.) treason.

That's it.

See Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788; The Constitution and The Kentucky Resolutions 1798 #2 (Thomas Jefferson) and NO OTHER CRIMES WHATSOEVER!

2.) Cannot Govern police outside the 10 miles square of Washington DC - See the Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788

3.) Cannot collect taxes except for National Defense and paying for the National Debt (TWO THINGS ONLY) in consequence of the Welfare clause - See Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788.

4.) CANNOT EXCEED the 10 miles Square of Washington DC or be more that 1 mile in size.

5.) Cannot Make ANY REGULATION THAT MAY EFFECT THE CITIZENS OF THE UNION AT LARGE: Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788.

OK. That pretty well limits what they can collect and spend it on...

IF they obey the Constitution.

You can find these in our four SUGGESTED READING documents on our APP Web site - Blue strip along the top of the page has the links.

http://www.americanpatriotparty.cc

RichardTaylorAPP - Chair - American Patriot Party.CC

John Locke #201, 202, 212 to 232; Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions 1798; Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788; Rights of the Colonists 1772.

Liberty4Me's picture

In addition,

The income tax is historically a tax on corporate profits. Exchanging your time and talents for something of equal value does not generate income.

We've all been fooled for a long time, but the point is that the income tax does not apply to everyone. Substitution of a tax of limited scope with one of very broad scope would be bad for us all.

It's all about the 3rd party

It's all about the 3rd party options! What other real choice do we have this November? I have a Facebook event page I just started where folks can pledge to vote 3rd party or write-in a candidate. I'm hoping it gets a good conversation going and shows that there is enough 3rd party support in our country for our votes to really make a difference.

It's been interesting to hear arguments from the "lesser of two evils" camp vs. those of us who support a 3rd party vote.

Nobamney 2012: A Pledge to Vote 3rd Party or Write-In:
https://www.facebook.com/events/277728019010245/?fref=ts

Ron Paul rejected matching

Ron Paul rejected matching Govt funding because he didn't believe that a candidate should take the taxpayer's money without their consent. By taking Govt matching funds you are taking money from those who perhaps would not otherwise fund your campaign. Funding needs to be voluntary rather than mooched from the taxpayers. Another reason I won't vote for Johnson. If he can't get enough funding from actual supporters he has no place taking my tax dollars to fund his campaign.

Blessings )o(

So you'd rather they go to

So you'd rather they go to Mitt Romney and Barack Obama? The funds are going to be allocated regardless.

Its amazing to me there is

Its amazing to me there is even a debate. Geeze ending the wars balancing the budget and cutting spending alone are enough reason to vote for Gary. The alternative is failed economy, endless war, and increasing totalitarian police state...

I am beginning to think most of the Anti-Gary Johnson crowd spouting unsubstantiated rhetoric are just pot stirring shills. They jump on every thread and repeat the same non-sense...

True liberty lovers would rather take a few steps forward in liberty even if we cannot get all we want then continue our demise with the status quo.

-----
End The Fat
70 pounds lost and counting! Get in shape for the revolution!

Get Prepared!

That isn't the way Ron voted in Congress

Ron never liked 60% of a bill and voted for it. Not even 90%...

I think that might be where a lot of resistance to Gary might come from... Ron has turned us into purists (and ultimately, that may not be a great thing - Rand isn't so much a purist... I think that is why he gets a lot of flak around here). I can speak for myself - I flip-flop on Gary about every other day...

I think that is different

I think that is different those bills would have one or two steps forward and ten steps backward. In this case there is nowhere to go but forward.

-----
End The Fat
70 pounds lost and counting! Get in shape for the revolution!

Get Prepared!

I agree 100%

We sit around and complain about the MSM attacking personalities and not dealing with substance.
This should not be about Johnson the man, it should be about breaking the back of the two party monopoly.

Gary, who will run the Fed for you?

Gary Johnson, if he is anything more than a placebo for the disaffected and disenfranchised, needs to announce that RON PAUL will be his choice for Secretary of the Treasury and Chairman of the Fed. That would certainly clear up a lot of fuzzy thinking across the land.

"To the morally inverted, war appears as a quick, clear path to the top." -- Preston Parker
firelightermedia@gmail.com

C_T_CZ's picture

Johnson = Audit The Fed!

Johnson is a Ron Paul supporter himself, and has already said that Ron Paul is welcome in his administration. I believe it is against the law for candidates to actually offer positions to people before they are elected. I think Gary Johnson would share your enthusiasm for a Ron Paul Secretary of Treasury spot. Johnson has already said that on day 1 he would order a full FED audit.

rEVOLutionary Ads: It's Better Than Sitting On Your Rump Doing Nothing™

Taking matching funds is immoral

I disappointed that so many people think its fine to take money that has been stolen from taxpayers to use it to promote their agenda. Ron Paul never took one dime of matching funds and never accepted Secret Service protection at taxpayer expense.

It is is our reality

We do not have the vast reservoirs of riches that the likes of Obama has access to and turning down the matching funds would further the disadvantage during the General.
To clarify though: I am not "fine" with it, but I do see it as necessary. We need to beat the "system" in order to change it.

I disagree

If you add the tax dollars of the 5% of the population that voted for Johnson it would be more than 30m

I didn't realize that is how it works

so, if you add up the 40% that support Romney that would be worth billions.

I'm supporting and voting for GJ, he's just not libertarian on this issue.

LIBERTY2ME's picture

He'll get 5% and flip the

He'll get 5% and flip the votes to 1%...

He'll get 6%

and then they'll change the requirement to 8%.

End The Fed!
BTC: 1A3JAJwLVG2pz8GLfdgWhcePMtc3ozgWtz

SteveMT's picture

What do you think the chances are GJ gets 4.99% of the vote?

With the manipulators pulling all of the strings, I would grimly say that a result just shy of 5% is a foregone conclusion. With Spain counting the votes overseas we will be told: Oh darn. GJ just missed this 5% this time. Please try again in 4 years.

ytc's picture

Is it about Gary, or is it about a 3rd party?

To me it's about BOTH: Gary and 3rd, 4th, 5th parties.

Besides, I am really impressed with Gary J's VP choice: Judge James P. Gray.

It's about a movement that

It's about a movement that shouldn't of been so easily silenced by one party. That party should be DESTROYED (not taken over, that idea failed, a few times) and replaced with OUR party.

For me its about showing the

For me it's about showing the Republican party anyone but Obama isn't good enough. We need Ron Paul as the Republican candidate, for the future of the country and if the party wants one. I hope Romney loses and I hope we get the blame. That way they will know in 2016 they had better give us actual change if they want our support. That way they'll know they won't be able to spit in our faces at the convention, because we won't fall in line like good little sheep.

I've always liked Gary Johnson

The powers that control the elections will not let him debate because of his views and what he would say. Can't have any more people learning about actual liberty, can we?

Break the duopoly stranglehold

I'm with Ron Paul's intent in the 3rd-party press conference he had back in 2008 - we've got to kill the repub/dem chokehold on our political process.

I could not support Gary Johnson in so far as believing he's proper for the office of the presidency - he's got too many issues for me there, even though I like a lot about him otherwise.

However, I *could* see myself supporting him - or another third-party candidate - if it was likely to succeed in beating both the democrat and republican nominees and freeing things up a bit (depending on some very important details, of course).

For me, it definitely won't be about Johnson even if I think he'd be better than either of the other knuckleheads. I don't think I can support him at this point unless tides shift severely somehow.

It's a blasted shame Perot torpedoed himself back in
'92 - we might be pretty well off at this point otherwise, his warts aside.

I like Jesse Ventura's stance

That we should get rid of parties. Our govt is based on individual rights so people should identify first as individuals, not members of a gang/party.

id like a third fourth or fifth party

republicans and democrats don't represent me at all. Gary Johnson is just a great person for the job because of his ideology and his great record that very few if not any of our desired folks have.

I would settle

for a 2nd party! lol

+ 1

Thanks.

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

C_T_CZ's picture

Gives Us A Different Party To Call Home

I see numerous benefits to voting for Gary Johnson, including setting us up with a home in the Libertarian party, should the GOP prove to be unworthy/unable to be saved.

My wife and I will be voting for Gary Johnson, and we'll be encouraging family members to do the same.

rEVOLutionary Ads: It's Better Than Sitting On Your Rump Doing Nothing™

Abortion is lawless because it is murder.

No government has authority before God to murder, it only defines them as wicked idol worshipers, sacrificing children to make some other image for or of themselves.

Gary Johnson pals around with murderous ideas, ideas contrived in rebellion that have the sole purpose to destroy liberty rather than promoting righteousness, justice and mercy.

.