Gary Johnson endorses #blacklivesmatter

[Black Diamond]

http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/libertarian-candidate-gary-johnson-endorses-black-lives-matter

Yeah. I'll stick with Trump.

[Elessar]

Well, this is yet another game-breaker to be not in favor of this idiot!

By the way, Guam did not sink yet!:laugh:

[Kathianne]

Gee, he was so depending on your votes and those of the alt-right.

[Black Diamond]

All we need is another President railing against cops.


Gee, he was so depending on your votes and those of the alt-right.
Initially I didn't like him because I thought he was playing the role fo Ross Perot. But this is different.


Initially I didn't like him because I thought he was playing the role fo Ross Perot. But this is different.

And of course legal hookers

[aboutime]

Johnson must be related to either Obama, or the Clinton's...proving that some hypocrites will do and say anything to get the Black Vote of the Uneducated.

[Gunny]

Johnson must be related to either Obama, or the Clinton's...proving that some hypocrites will do and say anything to get the Black Vote of the Uneducated.


It's worse, AT. He's from NM. If you can find one person in this state I would vote for they probably haven't been born yet. There is NOTHING conservative about this state. The people that call themselves conservative here just lie to themselves.

They bitch about the left being in control yet won't go get a job. If the state is supporting you, you ain't conservative.

They STILL dress like extras from Billy Jack. When was that movie made? 72? Yet some want to call Johnson conservative. In your wildest dreams. He's a whacko lefty. I'd as soon have my hand cut off as vote for that idiot. I have more common sense than he, and I'm a dumb grunt.

[Kathianne]

:laugh2: Hillary is the problem? Nope, Johnson!!!!

Boo!

[Gunny]

:laugh2: Hillary is the problem? Nope, Johnson!!!!

Boo!

Arguing with the wrong person. Johnson's a p*ssy. But I'd be willing for both of them to "fall overboard" halfway across the Pacific. Whoops, we lost them. Gee, how did THAT happen?

The simple tactic is divide and conquer. The media divides the right while the left goose steps right up to vote. Surefire plan to lose. Maybe we ought to use our brains instead of our emotions?

You don't like Trump? I think it's clear I don't. But I'm not willing to give everything away to try and make a point no one cares about and sure as not to vote for a fruitloop from Hell.

[Kathianne]

Arguing with the wrong person. Johnson's a p*ssy. But I'd be willing for both of them to "fall overboard" halfway across the Pacific. Whoops, we lost them. Gee, how did THAT happen?

The simple tactic is divide and conquer. The media divides the right while the left goose steps right up to vote. Surefire plan to lose. Maybe we ought to use our brains instead of our emotions?

You don't like Trump? I think it's clear I don't. But I'm not willing to give everything away to try and make a point no one cares about and sure as not to vote for a fruitloop from Hell.


Ok, Gunny! We got it. You're voting for the guy you don't like. All of his whacko statements, including that he'd lead and the military would follow in war crimes, don't matter. A guy that smokes dope, even raises it for profit, and says that there is racism in the country is a step too far.

You have your standards, I respect your right to keep them.

[Gunny]

Ok, Gunny! We got it. You're voting for the guy you don't like. All of his whacko statements, including that he'd lead and the military would follow in war crimes, don't matter. A guy that smokes dope, even raises it for profit, and says that there is racism in the country is a step too far.

You have your standards, I respect your right to keep them.

You stuck it out here. ma'am. I may respect your right to vote for whoever you want but it doesn't mean I have to respect him.

And I DO have a biased opinion about one thing ... dope and military. Anyone with military experience doesn't want some pot head behind him with a loaded weapon.

I don't care if he smokes dope. I used to. I don't want THAT as leader. When it's time to lead, it's time to quit.

[Kathianne]

You stuck it out here. ma'am. I may respect your right to vote for whoever you want but it doesn't mean I have to respect him.

And I DO have a biased opinion about one thing ... dope and military. Anyone with military experience doesn't want some pot head behind him with a loaded weapon.

I don't care if he smokes dope. I used to. I don't want THAT as leader. When it's time to lead, it's time to quit.

hmmm: http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/283878-johnson-ive-stopped-using-marijuana-while-running-for

Added on edit, I know you don't like links:


June 17, 2016, 08:33 am Gary Johnson: 'I've stopped using marijuana' during White House bid


Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson (http://thehill.com/people/gary-johnson) revealed on Thursday that he is abstaining from using marijuana while he runs for the White House.
During an interview with USA Today (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/06/16/libertarian-nominee-gary-johnson-guns-debates-pot/85982250/), Johnson was asked how long it’s been since he's taken the drug.

Johnson "It's been about seven weeks," he responded, adding that he would not partake in the drug during his term if he’s elected. "I want to be completely on top of my game, all cylinders."Johnson has long advocated for legalizing the drug, saying on Thursday that there is "an unbelievable disconnect" between politicians and the public on the issue.

"I haven't had a drink of alcohol in 29 years because of rock climbing and the notion of being the best that you can be, and in that same vein I've stopped using marijuana of any kind," he said earlier in the interview.

Ah the laser like focus on the end game-Johnson!

[Gunny]

hmmm: http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/283878-johnson-ive-stopped-using-marijuana-while-running-for

Added on edit, I know you don't like links:



Ah the laser like focus on the end game-Johnson! [/FONT][/COLOR]

In his particular case I'd say the burnout damage is done. He's a kook. He's as bad as Hitlery. Or worse. If he was an actual candidate THAT is when I would not bother to leave the house.

[Kathianne]

In his particular case I'd say the burnout damage is done. He's a kook. He's as bad as Hitlery. Or worse. If he was an actual candidate THAT is when I would not bother to leave the house.

He must have done something right, the COL is still better in NM than TX. :laugh2:

[Gunny]

He must have done something right, the COL is still better in NM than TX. :laugh2:

Might want to check your facts. Was that before or after they dumped a bunch of toxic waste in it in NM?

I'll also point that it's WAY cleaner in Texas than it is here. We can swim in our rivers and lakes. You've heard of "Don't Mess with Texas", right? The fact is despite people and their fantasies making it something it is not, it is nothing more than an anti-littering slogan. And they take it seriously.

You get popped littering in Texas you can kiss a grand goodbye. It's too bad in a way. We used to could go the river with some beer and have a good time. The idiots have ruined it because they get drunk, act stupid, pee in everyone's lawn to the point that tubing on the river is more crime than fun.

I'll quote the bad guy, Mr Smith, from the Matrix: "Humans are a virus". We destroy everything we touch. You can walk across the river on tubes in New Braunsfels and never get wet. THAT is fun? Was a nice place when I was a kid.

[GravyBoat]

No real Libertarian would endorse BLM let alone any civic organization whatsoever, not the Elks, not the Odd Fellows, not the Boy Scouts. That's not how a free republic works.

[Gunny]

No real Libertarian would endorse BLM let alone any civic organization whatsoever, not the Elks, not the Odd Fellows, not the Boy Scouts. That's not how a free republic works.

The problem is the word "libertarian" itself. It pretty much encompasses the entire political spectrum and includes any and everyone that is not considered so-called conservatives and leftwingnuts. It is misused as a term in the media as a term to describe "conservatives" solely who don't want to be part of the GOP.

There's not a conservative bone in Johnson's body. I get tired of people allowing the media to redefine words to sensationalize, and people using those redefined words.

[fj1200]

http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/libertarian-candidate-gary-johnson-endorses-black-lives-matter

Yeah. I'll stick with Trump.

Where did he say he endorsed BLM?


Well, this is yet another game-breaker to be not in favor of this idiot!

By the way, Guam did not sink yet!:laugh:

You do know that there is more than one person named Johnson don't you?


In his particular case I'd say the burnout damage is done. He's a kook. He's as bad as Hitlery. Or worse. If he was an actual candidate THAT is when I would not bother to leave the house.

Would that be his small government kookiness?


Might want to check your facts.

How would you know, you never read links. :poke:

[fj1200]

The problem is the word "libertarian" itself. It pretty much encompasses the entire political spectrum and includes any and everyone that is not considered so-called conservatives and leftwingnuts. It is misused as a term in the media as a term to describe "conservatives" solely who don't want to be part of the GOP.

There's not a conservative bone in Johnson's body. I get tired of people allowing the media to redefine words to sensationalize, and people using those redefined words.

I'm pretty sure the Libertarian Party is the one who has defined it. :confused:

[Gunny]

I'm pretty sure the Libertarian Party is the one who has defined it. :confused:

Disagree. The media has defined it for us because we're so dumb. I'd stay home before I'd vote for a leftwingnut like Johnson. As stated before, this state is left of CA. The only thing conservative I know of here is me.

I can't figure out how it can be right next door to TX. It's like yin and yang.

[fj1200]

Disagree. The media has defined it for us because we're so dumb. I'd stay home before I'd vote for a leftwingnut like Johnson. As stated before, this state is left of CA. The only thing conservative I know of here is me.

I can't figure out how it can be right next door to TX. It's like yin and yang.

I can't really help ya then.

[Gunny]

I can't really help ya then.

There's nothing to help me with. I feel like I'm stuck in an episode of the 3 Stooges. :stooges:

It's like gee, who sucks the most?

[Black Diamond]

I can't really help ya then.

Not about left vs right. Im not voting for someone who endorses that organization. And defends it the way he did. Sounded exactly like Obama. That terrorist organization has had enough support from the current assfuck in chief.

This move by Johnson could be a game changer in more ways than one.

[Black Diamond]

Where did he say he endorsed BLM?



You do know that there is more than one person named Johnson don't you?



Would that be his small government kookiness?



How would you know, you never read links. :poke:
It should be condemned as the terrorist organization that it is.

Johnson endorsed it to the same degree Obama has.

[Gunny]

First off, I agree with @blackdiamond about BLM being terrorists. We seem to be rather selective how we use that label.

Second, as I have said in the past, if you're going to be a party, take a stance and establish yourself. Just claiming to be something means nothing to me.

[fj1200]

There's nothing to help me with. I feel like I'm stuck in an episode of the 3 Stooges. :stooges:

It's like gee, who sucks the most?

Disagree. ;) I'll case a vote for the one who is defending liberty.


Not about left vs right. Im not voting for someone who endorses that organization. And defends it the way he did. Sounded exactly like Obama. That terrorist organization has had enough support from the current assfuck in chief.

This move by Johnson could be a game changer in more ways than one.

Where did he say he endorsed BLM?


It should be condemned as the terrorist organization that it is.

Johnson endorsed it to the same degree Obama has.

Not even close. At least from the bit I've seen.

[Black Diamond]

Disagree. ;) I'll case a vote for the one who is defending liberty.



Where did he say he endorsed BLM?



Not even close. At least from the bit I've seen.
He didnt say he's endorsing them that means he didn't endorse them.

[fj1200]

He didnt say he's endorsing them that means he didn't endorse them.

Not quite sure what you mean by that. Here is the closest thing I can find to a transcript on the subject.


At a CNN town hall Wednesday night, Johnson said the Black Lives Matter movement – which is protesting police discrimination and violence against blacks – made him realize his "head's been in the sand" on the issue of racial prejudice. "What it has done for me is [show] that my head's been in the sand on this," Johnson said.
"I think we've all had our heads in the sand. And let's wake up. This discrimination does exist, it has existed, and for me personally, slap, slap, wake up." He said he believes that when he makes a mistake, the best approach is to admit he was wrong and move on.

William Weld, the Libertarian vice presidential nominee, added: "I think we have a national emergency in the number of male black youth who are unemployed without prospects. They're four times as likely to be incarcerated if they have intersection with law enforcement as white people are.

"Their educational opportunities are not there. We have to get them into education and just concentrate the power of the government, trying to make sure that there are jobs available for them. It's a national emergency and when there's a national emergency, the government has to respond, libertarian or no libertarian."
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-08-04/libertarian-nominee-gary-johnson-admits-his-lack-of-awareness-on-race

Did I miss the "endorses BLM" part?

[Black Diamond]

Not quite sure what you mean by that. Here is the closest thing I can find to a transcript on the subject.


http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-08-04/libertarian-nominee-gary-johnson-admits-his-lack-of-awareness-on-race

Did I miss the "endorses BLM" part?

You missed where he quoted the same statistics Obama has quoted, which are misleading. This group needs to be condemned. Not given credence by the President. And this move may reshape the race, bringing voters in from the left.
He's going after Sanders voters and may get some.

[Black Diamond]

Not quite sure what you mean by that. Here is the closest thing I can find to a transcript on the subject.


http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-08-04/libertarian-nominee-gary-johnson-admits-his-lack-of-awareness-on-race

Did I miss the "endorses BLM" part?

You can endorse someone without saying you're endorsing them. He didn't endorse them the way Cruz could have endorsed Trump at the convention. But it was certainly an endorsement. Just not a formal one.

[fj1200]

You can endorse someone without saying you're endorsing them. He didn't endorse them the way Cruz could have endorsed Trump at the convention. But it was certainly an endorsement. Just not a formal one.

So what you're saying is that he didn't endorse them.

[fj1200]

You missed where he quoted the same statistics Obama has quoted, which are misleading. This group needs to be condemned. Not given credence by the President. And this move may reshape the race, bringing voters in from the left.
He's going after Sanders voters and may get some.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9bwi91j99U

Johnson didn't quote any statistics that I saw and Weld quoted a couple. It wasn't overly offensive unless you're looking to be offended IMO.

Is there a problem in the black community? No question but Weld focused on fixing the problem rather than merely condemning.

[Black Diamond]

So what you're saying is that he didn't endorse them.

He endorsed them. Get Johnson's dick out of your mouth, smartass.

Or don't. Maybe you simply want more dead cops.

[fj1200]

He endorsed them. Get Johnson's dick out of your mouth, smartass.

Or don't. Maybe you simply want more dead cops.

Guess we're done here. Thanks for playing.

[Kathianne]

Guess we're done here. Thanks for playing.

I don't try to convince anyone of anything at this point in time. Not on messageboards. They are either too skewed in members or too big to actually converse. Just post what is going on and those that wish to live in their own reality, welcome to it. ;)

Actually have had quite a few folks change their minds on some site blogs and like me they're now wondering when someone with classical values will step up and find some support. They're news junkies though and as time goes on, both Trump and Hillary are losing some that just can't believe what's going on now.

I find it sort of funny how many 'don't like Trump,' for very good reasons, yet are up in arms with those choosing a different path. There are few issues that are of utmost importance to me, that Trump addresses. SCOTUS comes the closest, but I seriously doubt he'd choose those 'good guys on the list,' nor alternatives that would be substantially different than Hillary.

Illegal immigration is important, just don't think 'the wall' is the answer.

With those two takes on what's important to me, the choice is simple. I'll go with the smaller government and lower taxes guy.

[jimnyc]

Gary Johnson will be as I stated much earlier, just another Ron Paul with less than 10% of the vote. And it's NOT because many won't support 3rd parties, IMO, but rather that so many of his stances are from the twilight zone.

[Kathianne]

Gary Johnson will be as I stated much earlier, just another Ron Paul with less than 10% of the vote. And it's NOT because many won't support 3rd parties, IMO, but rather that so many of his stances are from the twilight zone.

Except those that aren't. Stuff folks around here used to say they considered important.

[jimnyc]

Except those that aren't. Stuff folks around here used to say they considered important.

I've listed in another thread MANY of his stances that were crazy. Sure, he may have some others that are important that "we" stand for, but that doesn't change the other crazy stances he has.

And someone that still has the roaches in his ashtray, fresh from quitting, and no issue with heroin and meth and such being out there? No thanks.

And some of Trump's stances folks considered important as well. Does that meant those folks must then see all of his stances as important? Nope, no it doesn't.

[Kathianne]

I've listed in another thread MANY of his stances that were crazy. Sure, he may have some others that are important that "we" stand for, but that doesn't change the other crazy stances he has.

And someone that still has the roaches in his ashtray, fresh from quitting, and no issue with heroin and meth and such being out there? No thanks.

And some of Trump's stances folks considered important as well. Does that meant those folks must then see all of his stances as important? Nope, no it doesn't.

Actually, you all probably don't agree with his stances. Government should control where businesses operate from. The government should add duties to imported items, regardless of inflationary effects or retaliatory duties that are likely to be added to our exports. The government should be shoveling out money, again, for 'shovel ready' jobs-just because the new guy will do it so well, your head will spin.
The federal government must impose standards in education, well because. On and on we could go.

[jimnyc]

Actually, you all probably don't agree with his stances. Government should control where businesses operate from. The government should add duties to imported items, regardless of inflationary effects or retaliatory duties that are likely to be added to our exports. The government should be shoveling out money, again, for 'shovel ready' jobs-just because the new guy will do it so well, your head will spin.
The federal government must impose standards in education, well because. On and on we could go.

I agree with some of his stances as I stated, but fat too many I do not agree with. And then the drugs and such, just makes him a "no way in hell" candidate for me.

[Gunny]

Disagree. ;) I'll case a vote for the one who is defending liberty.


Liberty? Why don't you come on down for a visit. Save an extra check for taxes. This is the most socialist state I've ever lived in (and that includes IL, FL, MD and CA).
"liberty" here means you're free to pay for deadbeat handouts.

And guess who the architect is?

[aboutime]

Anyone who votes for Johnson will actually be voting Hillary into office.

If that is what you really want for OUR NATION today. At least I'll honestly have YOU to blame for the FALL of everything...coming soon to a Socialist State near you.

[Kathianne]

Anyone who votes for Johnson will actually be voting Hillary into office.

If that is what you really want for OUR NATION today. At least I'll honestly have YOU to blame for the FALL of everything...coming soon to a Socialist State near you.


Believe whatever you like, you're wrong about other's votes. You can blame anyone you like for whatever you like, but really should look in the mirror.

[Gunny]

Believe whatever you like, you're wrong about other's votes. You can blame anyone you like for whatever you like, but really should look in the mirror.

Actually. he is correct. And before you start in on me, try being stuck in the middle. I've railed against Trump every bit as much as Johnson and been attacked from both sides. AT's premise is quite correct.

If you don't vote, or vote 3rd party, you may as well vote for Hitlery or stay home. You're accomplishing nothing, and no I won't shut up anymore than you will. What do you think you are proving?

First 3 things in a 5 paragraph order -- Situation, Mission, and Enemy. You aren't recognizing any of them. Your screwing up the mission and aiding the enemy and not realizing/caring about the consequences of the situation because of some personal stand nobody cares about but affects us all.

[Kathianne]

Actually. he is correct. And before you start in on me, try being stuck in the middle. I've railed against Trump every bit as much as Johnson and been attacked from both sides. AT's premise is quite correct.

If you don't vote, or vote 3rd party, you may as well vote for Hitlery or stay home. You're accomplishing nothing, and no I won't shut up anymore than you will. What do you think you are proving?

First 3 things in a 5 paragraph order -- Situation, Mission, and Enemy. You aren't recognizing any of them. Your screwing up the mission and aiding the enemy and not realizing/caring about the consequences of the situation because of some personal stand nobody cares about but affects us all.

Nope. You just think you're doing the right thing. Both of you want to blame 'others' for the very bad choice those that elected Trump as the GOP nominee through the Republican primaries. They own this-you too if you voted for him in the primaries. Heck even if he wins, they'll own it if he is what many fear. OTOH, they'll also be genius if he wins and performs brilliantly or even not bad.

Those folks wanted 'to send a message to the "establishment."' They did so, he's the nominee. What they didn't think through is the nominee may be so 'out there,' that they elected the one guy who could lose against the worst candidate the Democrats could put forward, except perhaps for Bernie. The Dems have their own problems. "only Trump could lose to Hillary," is the norm; "only Hillary could lose to Trump," is equally true.

Come November Trump will get his core + any that decide that they'll go with 'the lesser of the two.' I have no idea how many will go 3rd party, but guess it will be significant. Right now it looks like he only has his core, in some cases even losing some of those. It's still 3+ months and lots can happen. The rest will just stay home in disgust. (We're not talking about the normal non-voters, but those that opted out of voting for Romney in disgust too. Not everyone is willing to play suck up to the 'party.')

[Gunny]

Anyone that stays home or votes 3rd party.

[Kathianne]

Anyone that stays home or votes 3rd party.

You're wrong, but that's ok.

[Gunny]

You're wrong, but that's ok.

Really? Every vote not against Hillary puts her in office. Only thing I ever agreed with Lincoln on is "a house divided cannot stand". And I have have history to support my side of the argument. We got 8 years of the most useless ass in Presidential history becaus people wanted to " stand on principle".

You don't want to do what it takes by laying the groundwork but you want to cry at the end because "I don't like so-n-so". I can't stand Trump. But I'll vote for him over Hitlery and do whatever I can to keep her out.

All you're doing is giving away the big picture -- the Supreme Court -- because of some principle nobody even cares about.

Learn to win. Even if you have to suck it up for the team.

[Gunny]

Nope. You just think you're doing the right thing. Both of you want to blame 'others' for the very bad choice those that elected Trump as the GOP nominee through the Republican primaries. They own this-you too if you voted for him in the primaries. Heck even if he wins, they'll own it if he is what many fear. OTOH, they'll also be genius if he wins and performs brilliantly or even not bad.

Those folks wanted 'to send a message to the "establishment."' They did so, he's the nominee. What they didn't think through is the nominee may be so 'out there,' that they elected the one guy who could lose against the worst candidate the Democrats could put forward, except perhaps for Bernie. The Dems have their own problems. "only Trump could lose to Hillary," is the norm; "only Hillary could lose to Trump," is equally true.

Come November Trump will get his core + any that decide that they'll go with 'the lesser of the two.' I have no idea how many will go 3rd party, but guess it will be significant. Right now it looks like he only has his core, in some cases even losing some of those. It's still 3+ months and lots can happen. The rest will just stay home in disgust. (We're not talking about the normal non-voters, but those that opted out of voting for Romney in disgust too. Not everyone is willing to play suck up to the 'party.')

Spoken like a true civilian civilian. There's no "nope". There's win. I don't give a damn about your ideals and political BS ... I know how to win a game. Y'all are too concerned with yourselves and your personal bullshit you don't know when it's time to shut up and man the line. You really think your individual opinion matters? Not sure which country you live in.

We have an enemy that is winning because they will lock step while people like you think your vote is more than just another vote. And you want to vote for a socialist idiot that's turned this state into the USSR.

But you go right ahead. We ain't going to agree. Expand your mind. It works.

[Kathianne]

Spoken like a true civilian civilian. There's no "nope". There's win. I don't give a damn about your ideals and political BS ... I know how to win a game. Y'all are too concerned with yourselves and your personal bullshit you don't know when it's time to shut up and man the line. You really think your individual opinion matters? Not sure which country you live in.

We have an enemy that is winning because they will lock step while people like you think your vote is more than just another vote. And you want to vote for a socialist idiot that's turned this state into the USSR.

But you go right ahead. We ain't going to agree. Expand your mind. It works.

I will, thanks for allowing me to exercise my vote the way I choose. I too don't give a damn about your take on making decisions regarding your vote. Do as you please. I am entitled to my opinion on the wrongness of that thinking, as you are on mine. :beer:

[Gunny]

http://www.wptv.com/news/state/orlando-shooters-father-attends-hillary-clinton-rally-in-kissimmee



http://media.hotair.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Screenshot-75-300x173.png

Any one that doesn't vote or votes 3rd party.

[aboutime]

You're wrong, but that's ok.


Kathianne. Hate me if you must, but reading that above, from you, is very disappointing. You might as well admit...telling anyone who offers an opinion...."They are wrong", sounds more like the programmed answers from liberals who will vote for Hillary...merely because she will be the FIRST female to hold the office??? Sad, sad, sad.

Of course. You have every right to say what you want...just as the person you called "WRONG!" And..as I DO TOO!

[Kathianne]

Kathianne. Hate me if you must, but reading that above, from you, is very disappointing. You might as well admit...telling anyone who offers an opinion...."They are wrong", sounds more like the programmed answers from liberals who will vote for Hillary...merely because she will be the FIRST female to hold the office??? Sad, sad, sad.

Of course. You have every right to say what you want...just as the person you called "WRONG!" And..as I DO TOO!

Crap on a cracker, you're wrong on so many levels and so many ways. No matter, expected.

[aboutime]

Crap on a cracker, you're wrong on so many levels and so many ways. No matter, expected.




There you did it again Kathianne. My apologies for your inability to accept being told the truth. And, I am still disappointed to read you saying it again.

Since you insist I am wrong. I must agree. I was very wrong about you.

[Kathianne]

There you did it again Kathianne. My apologies for your inability to accept being told the truth. And, I am still disappointed to read you saying it again.

Since you insist I am wrong. I must agree. I was very wrong about you.


I'm certain we're both just devastated. We'll live.

[aboutime]

I'm certain we're both just devastated. We'll live.


Forget it. I expected a more sincere reply. Never mind. Your devastation for not being willing to answer with an actual answer, rather than trying to be smarter than everyone else. I'm done.

[fj1200]

I don't try to convince anyone of anything at this point in time. Not on messageboards. They are either too skewed in members or too big to actually converse. Just post what is going on and those that wish to live in their own reality, welcome to it. ;)

Actually have had quite a few folks change their minds on some site blogs and like me they're now wondering when someone with classical values will step up and find some support. They're news junkies though and as time goes on, both Trump and Hillary are losing some that just can't believe what's going on now.

I find it sort of funny how many 'don't like Trump,' for very good reasons, yet are up in arms with those choosing a different path. There are few issues that are of utmost importance to me, that Trump addresses. SCOTUS comes the closest, but I seriously doubt he'd choose those 'good guys on the list,' nor alternatives that would be substantially different than Hillary.

Illegal immigration is important, just don't think 'the wall' is the answer.

With those two takes on what's important to me, the choice is simple. I'll go with the smaller government and lower taxes guy.

Vote Libertarian; The ultimate anti-establishment party. :laugh:


Liberty? Why don't you come on down for a visit. Save an extra check for taxes. This is the most socialist state I've ever lived in (and that includes IL, FL, MD and CA).
"liberty" here means you're free to pay for deadbeat handouts.

And guess who the architect is?

You do realize that GJ neither founded New Mexico nor is responsible for most of its laws don't you?

[fj1200]

I've listed in another thread MANY of his stances that were crazy. Sure, he may have some others that are important that "we" stand for, but that doesn't change the other crazy stances he has.

And someone that still has the roaches in his ashtray, fresh from quitting, and no issue with heroin and meth and such being out there? No thanks.

And some of Trump's stances folks considered important as well. Does that meant those folks must then see all of his stances as important? Nope, no it doesn't.

There's not liking a particular stance from a candidate and then there's making stuff up to justify one's stance.