Why isn't the world rushing to Gary Johnson? Nobody is excited about Trump or Hillary

Why isn't the world rushing to Gary Johnson? Nobody is excited about Trump or Hillary.

Nobody likes a Ancap, no matter how well disguised

But he'd be restrained by congress. People forget why we have those checks and balances. He'd be a strong leader who wouldn't get everything he'd want, but would move us in a good direction.

just recently heard about him, only read some shit article slandering him for his increase in spending during his campaign which is negligible in comparison to the two rodeo clowns we have presented before us. I plan on checking more out about him but dont know much

I'm voting for him or Jill Stein.

Because he is an idiot. And he thinks a minimum raise is ridiculous. Just because the other options are bad doesn't mean he is a godsend-- he is shit, too. Funny how hard Facebook is pushing him now. I never stop hearing about him anymore from the same vapid people who would incessantly talk about Bernie and Paul earlier in the year.

the Facebook team that decides what is trending**

i don't wanna rush to call people idiots like you, but if you actually knew anything he is against a FEDERAL minimum wage, not minimum wage in general. it is kind of impossible for a country to enforce a federal minimum wage on the very different economic environments of each of the 50 states is it not?

either way, i don't think that argument is as important as things like ending the drug war and legalizing marijauna, ending dumb foreign wars, reducing spending, getting rid of the nsa and patriot act, etc

>Why isn't the world rushing to Gary Johnson?

Because there's a lot of money behind Hillary and Trump and the two party system controls all the major media outlets.

People don't want to pay for their own shit.

Theory: libertarianism is a balance between fiscal conservatism and social liberalism

Practice: The Libertarian party is a butt-hurt off-shoot of the Republican party. It's composed of people who are embarrassed by Repubs like Ted Cruz and Michelle Bachman, but otherwise share their policies. Like other fringe groups, it's filled with the rejects, losers, and loners of society rather than the mainstream.

Because despite not being Hillary or Trump, his platform still kinda sucks. It's liberal-friendly in that his social policies are pretty hands-off so pot, abortion, gay marriage etc are all allowed but he's also not going to regulate the environment etc so it's going to be mixed results with liberals and the jesus-GOPers won't like him either. His fiscal policy is also a mixed bag - get rid of debt, ok, but get rid of the Fed? Maybe not. Wall street folks will like and not like him - the lack of regulation is good for them but they also make a lot of money off the government.

TL;DR people don't know what to do with him yet

>but otherwise share their policies
like what? against gay marriahe? nope, libertarians have been for it since the 70s. against drugs? nope, legalize it. against porn? nah man freedom. more wars in the middle east and sucking israels dick? nope. putting god into more government? nope.

so what exactly makes libertarians like those republicans?

>jill stein

>Jill Stein
Holy fuck I'm dying over here.

also
>him or Jill Stein.
They're practically the exact opposite on all their beliefs.


Johnson isn't even relatively closed to anarcho capitalism. He's not even a libertarian and a lot of libertarians hate him for that. He's honestly ridiculously moderate on just about everything.

Why even reply to a thread if you have no idea what you're talking about. Maybe this is your idea of trolling, who knows.

>be me voting in 200? election
>reading voter pamphlet
>responses by different parties to current ballot issues
>read about prop XXX - "amends last year's tax subsidy to include farmers ... blah blah blah"
>read Democratic response: "Vote Yes. The farmers were meant to be included but were left out by a clerical oversight..."
>read Republican response: "Vote Yes. This was the original intent of the law, and farmers should be included..."
>read Libertarian response: "Vote NO! The government should not be in the business of granting subsidies and the fact that the farmers are not getting them when others are is immaterial to the principal that ... blah blah blah"

Libertarians are the Fedora-wearers of the political spectrum.

They're so blinded by their own principals that they've lost all objectivity and reason.

Is an-cap really a thing? Like military intelligence and shit?

he would be the first gay president so there is that

because everyone's excited about trump? you young liberals on this site are to retarded to see that

As someone who actually follows Libertarian ideas I can give you the honest truth as to why they dont gain support although they have grown.

The Democrats and Republicans have obviously controlled the system for decades. They create the requirements to debate eachother and how the entire election is played out.

For every 100 articles about Hillary or Trump uou might get 1 about Jill or Johnson. DNC emails showed without a doubt political parties are tied in with the media and you can guarantee the RNC do the same thing. So rather than call eachother out and end it the 2 play it sage so as to have a 50/50 shot at the election.

Now when it comes to ideas Libertarians dont just want no government. Thats Anarchism. No, Libertarians want more self ownership and self control. In short if the people can do it and not hurt anyone wjy not let them.

Socially Liberal and fiscally conservative does not just mean no government. It means no pointless governments lost in revelation after regulation. Much of what governments have been tasked with controlling could be done by ourselves but that would require responsibility. Something Liberals done have anymore. Not getting involved in one's self choices requires people to stop being so worried and uptight about others. Something Conservatives cant do.

In short Liberals are people who want to be taken care of by the government at every point and Conservatives want everyone to fit into their social norms (although now adays the regressive left are much the same at a different spectrum )

They both clammer for a master to force the rest of us to live their way.

...

>In short Liberals are people who want to be taken care of by the government at every point and Conservatives want everyone to fit into their social norms (although now adays the regressive left are much the same at a different spectrum )


That's not what those words mean. Liberals want the New Deal social programs. Conservatives don't. Libertarians are technically Conservatives because they oppose the social programs. You're confusing Conservatism with the Religious Right.

Because too many people get their news from the mainstream outlets that are deeply invested in the status quo (i.e. two big parties with a blue good guy and a red bad guy). They genuinely don't know that there are viable third party candidates because the TV told them there aren't.