The 2016 General Election Thread

[mrjarrell]

Gary Johnson could snatch the election away from Donald Trump ... or Hillary Clinton | OregonLive.com

Johnson and Weld could snatch up the entire enchilada. Thank goodness there is a sane alternative.

 

[T.Lex]

Gary Johnson could snatch the election away from Donald Trump ... or Hillary Clinton | OregonLive.com

Johnson and Weld could snatch up the entire enchilada. Thank goodness there is a sane alternative.

A sane alternative to enchiladas? Two words: chimi changa.

 

[mrjarrell]

A sane alternative to enchiladas? Two words: chimi changa.

Johnson IS the chimichanga in this race. Clinton and Drumpf are the Taco Bell Burrito's of the political world. Go with them and all youget is the runs and indigestion.

 

[jamil]

Gary Johnson could snatch the election away from Donald Trump ... or Hillary Clinton | OregonLive.com

Johnson and Weld could snatch up the entire enchilada. Thank goodness there is a sane alternative.

Johnson IS the chimichanga in this race. Clinton and Drumpf are the Taco Bell Burrito's of the political world. Go with them and all youget is the runs and indigestion.

Of course that is subjective. Your douchebag could pull it off over the other douchbags. In an alternate universe. I kinda think the people who know how to play the system will likely pull this out. Your douchbag may play a role in determining the outcome, but the outcome will be one of the two main party candidates.

But you're welcome to dream big.

 

[T.Lex]

So here's a fun game. If you were the Director of the Libertarian National Committee (I'll pause now while you consider the irony of that position even remotely being available)...

... would you try to win just 1 state? I mean, that in itself would be huge. Rather than get 15% of everywhere and end up with nothing, wouldn't it be a bigger deal to get 51% of 1 meaningful thing?

Which state would you try for? And, I guess if this gets traction, maybe it would be better to go into the Libertarian thread.

 

[mrjarrell]

So here's a fun game. If you were the Director of the Libertarian National Committee (I'll pause now while you consider the irony of that position even remotely being available)...

... would you try to win just 1 state? I mean, that in itself would be huge. Rather than get 15% of everywhere and end up with nothing, wouldn't it be a bigger deal to get 51% of 1 meaningful thing?

Which state would you try for? And, I guess if this gets traction, maybe it would be better to go into the Libertarian thread.

Well, if I were Nicholas I don't know that I would try that strategy, such as it is. Too many other states rely on the candidates for ballot access. And, the LNC has almost nothing to do with how the candidates run their campaign. This would be more in the bailiwick if the Johnson campaign, not the LNC. That said, it wouldn't be a terrible strategy if it resulted in throwing the race into the house for them to decide the winner. As hated as Clinton and Trump are they might very well hand it to a proven ex-governor and tell the Trumpkins to go **** themselves, the country was more important. If the strategy didn't result in throwing it to the house I see little value in it.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Well, if I were Nicholas I don't know that I would try that strategy, such as it is. Too many other states rely on the candidates for ballot access. And, the LNC has almost nothing to do with how the candidates run their campaign. This would be more in the bailiwick if the Johnson campaign, not the LNC. That said, it wouldn't be a terrible strategy if it resulted in throwing the race into the house for them to decide the winner. As hated as Clinton and Trump are they might very well hand it to a proven ex-governor and tell the Trumpkins to go **** themselves, the country was more important. If the strategy didn't result in throwing it to the house I see little value in it.

Doubtful. The House will still be in control by one of 2 parties. And neither will shrink from using their power to put one of their own in the office. Your only hope will be...nah...there is no hope.

 

[jamil]

Doubtful. The House will still be in control by one of 2 parties. And neither will shrink from using their power to put one of their own in the office. Your only hope will be...nah...there is no hope.

This is true. I think it'd be better for Johnson to do as T.Lex said, go for actually winning even one state. If Johnson wasn't such a anti-religion putz he could probably make headway in Utah. But I think the Mormons don't like him any more than Trump.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

This is true. I think it'd be better for Johnson to do as T.Lex said, go for actually winning even one state. If Johnson wasn't such a anti-religion putz he could probably make headway in Utah. But I think the Mormons don't like him any more than Trump.

Probably in several other states as well.

 

[BugI02]

Gary Johnson could snatch the election away from Donald Trump ... or Hillary Clinton | OregonLive.com

Johnson and Weld could snatch up the entire enchilada. Thank goodness there is a sane alternative.

A tie in the Electoral College that throws the election to the house?

You'll believe that's a possibility, but not that Trump could turn out to be an acceptable POTUS?!

Earth to MrJarrell

 

[BugI02]

So here's a fun game. If you were the Director of the Libertarian National Committee (I'll pause now while you consider the irony of that position even remotely being available)...

... would you try to win just 1 state? I mean, that in itself would be huge. Rather than get 15% of everywhere and end up with nothing, wouldn't it be a bigger deal to get 51% of 1 meaningful thing?

Which state would you try for? And, I guess if this gets traction, maybe it would be better to go into the Libertarian thread.

I know that "We could win it all" is the brave face they're putting on for potential Lvoters, because they have to. What I don't know is if they believe it themselves.

I think 15% would be the most sensible goal at this point in development of the party and have the most lasting effects

I certainly would not begrudge them any votes on the way to 15 that do not end up throwing the election to the Mordor candidate

 

[PistolBob]

OK..conventions are over...let the battle begin....will you vote for HRC?

I can't in good conscience vote for Mrs. Clinton. Her VP is a big time friend of the "Muslim Brotherhood", just like she is and our very own Andre' Carson. I get it.

This ain't my daddy's democrat party....it's more like my insane sexually confused pathetic lying cousins party.

So no.

 

[Double T]

Are we voting for tar and feathers? That's the only way I would vote for her...

 

[Tombs]

I'm voting to put her behind bars, where she belongs.

 

[Sling10mm]

Ummmm.......... no.

 

[MCgrease08]

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...sion/415115-2016-general-election-thread.html

 

[Bennettjh]

He!! no

 

[red_zr24x4]

I'm voting to put her behind bars, where she belongs.

If only the last picture were true

 

[churchmouse]

No way never ever for any reason what so ever.....no way.

 

[jd4320t]

Nope. Never. That woman won't ever get an ounce of support or respect from me.

Those who are supporting her and will vote for her won't have the guts to actually say it on here. They'll just troll threads and talk bad about Trump every chance they can.