Gary Johnson is polling double digits against Trump and Hillary

Gary Johnson is polling double digits against Trump and Hillary.

Other urls found in this thread:

monmouth.edu/assets/0/32212254770/32212254991/32212254992/32212254994/32212254995/30064771087/7714a05b-515f-4ad3-bdaa-e72a6e5f8e61.pdf
history.com/topics/child-labor
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keating–Owen_Act
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

[citation needed]

That was long time ago. We need a new poll, and I think he/LP candidate will do even better.

Say it with me
President Johnson

pls tell me the gary will make it scary for the hairy hillary and trump who belong in the dump

PRESIDENT JOHNSON

this election isnt funny anymore, jeb bush may have been the funniest guy since howard dean, probably even funnier, but now that the humor is gone, we need gary to sweep away the trash

#Takeitawayjohnson

Why do libertardians still come here?

Cite it OP

looks like Ders finally made city counsel-man dude

why do authoritarians think theyre edgy and cool and have nothing better to do than post stupid memes and lick boots?

He should run third party :^)

...

Give me one country that amassed large amounts of money under libertardian pricinples. Protip: there is none.

> 848 people

johnson is USA's DUDE WEED politician

>double digits
they're thinking of Arte Johnson

didn't obongo promise the DUDE WEED in his campaigns? will drumpf tap into the DUDE WEED electorate?

...And? That's not unusual for a national poll. It's more than any poll included in the RCP republican primary average going back to December 9th.

monmouth.edu/assets/0/32212254770/32212254991/32212254992/32212254994/32212254995/30064771087/7714a05b-515f-4ad3-bdaa-e72a6e5f8e61.pdf

No, he's the DUDE LIBERTY LMAO politician. Weed comes with that.

The US, prior to 1913.

the united states of america retard

while blacks were still second class citizens without the right to vote, pretty libertarian xD fuck off yellow idiot

so your remaining argument is black lives matter?
theyre worth less than fecal matter

The right to vote was dependent on the state and their slave status prior to 1865. Not all blacks in the US were slaves and half of the country outlawed slavery. They could all legally vote after that.

>I want libertarianism, but black should still be slaves
Let's face it your libertarianisms comes from your racism. I'm not saying it's bad, just admit it you hypocrite.

Why do alt-right goobers constantly fantasize about Sup Forums being their safe space?

Peterson would be better but I would like to see finally the lp getting above 5 percent.

Slavery and voting aside, the US prior to 1913 was remarkably libertarian. Federal, state, and local taxes combined only amounted to 6% - 8% of GDP, and most of that was for local stuff, like roads and schools.

what about jim crow and the unable to vote by women? that is libertarian? TOP KEK

I tolerate progressives and liberals, but libertarians are just closeted racist tbqh.

I've been saying for a while now that my biggest fear is the Libertardians siphoning off like 5-10% from Trump and causing him the election. With the current electoral demographics stacked in favor of the Dems, even a small amount siphoned from Trump could cost the election.

Watch for the MSM to cover the Libertarian party way more than previous years and for a decent chunk of the Never Trump cucks to vote Libertarian.

This is the single biggest threat to Trump right now. Get the word out. Libertarians need to know there is no room for a third party with the way our electoral system is set up. They must stand down to avoid a catastrophic Clinton presidency.

#bordersareracist

why would i want black slaves? there is no reason to have blacks as slaves today.
while your argument is that black people being able to vote and all people licking boots is better than all people being actually free and black peoples ability to vote being up for debate and democratic decision

>Slavery and voting aside, the US prior to 1913 was remarkably libertarian
>I want liberty but >50% of the population shouldn't have the right to vote
HAHAHAHA

this
if only they could handle the petersen

>I tolerate progressives and liberals, but libertarians are just closeted racist tbqh

????

Did constantly smelling toilet bleach mess with your neural channels, Wozcyak?

A Gary Johnson presidency is pretty much confirmed.

I've looked at all the numbers in every which way, and I've never been so sure of something since I predicted a Kasich GOP nomination victory.

>I've been saying for a while now that my biggest fear is the Libertardians siphoning off like 5-10% from Trump and causing him the election
all the Levins and Shapiros of the world will shill now for Johnson because their end goal is President Hillary Clinton. All the butthurt conservashits will support Johnson to not be accused of directly supporting Shillary. The 3rd party is the spoiler party, the splinter in your crotch party that messes everything up.

>Not voting for Madman McAfee

if there was no drumpf Sup Forums would be drooling over him, I'm fucking sure.

Again, there were states and territories where women always had the right to vote. And Jim Crow laws were primarily a southern thing. Then, as now, the south was relatively poor. You're pointing to the least libertarian parts of the country and connecting that to being worse off economically.

id rather risk a clinton presidency than have america and its ideals die
there are more than two political parties, and revolution has to come
your entire argument against libertarians seems to be mixing the word retard into the word
so le fug off authoritard

Nah, /neopol/ likes big government fucking them in the ass, while they feel safe and secure.

still women couldn't vote, what now?

If the Republican party wanted our votes, they ought to be more libertarian.

When did I say they shouldn't have the right to vote? I said those were a blemishes on a period of time that was otherwise remarkably libertarian.

You do understand that there is more to libertarianism than just voting?

Gary Johnson fucking sucks dick. Open borders piece of shit

rather have open borders than an open door for the government

>80 hour+ work weeks
>children under 10 working in factories
>workers still can't afford to feed themselves
>monopolies

Also, some companies made you give up your right to vote if you wanted to work for them, because of the rising fear of union power.

I'm not sure what you mean. There was no nationwide ban on women voting. It was a state-by-state thing.

>hurr durr
>implying child labor didn't exist in socialist countries at that time
>implying people in nanny state countries could feed themselves
>implying libertarian capitalism has anything to do with those things

I'll take him over Trump.

t. Cruzmissile

>"nanny state" countries existing before 1913

>huur durrrr

hour+ work weeks
>>children under 10 working in factories
>>workers still can't afford to feed themselves
>>monopolies

You're talking about a different period of time. Most people worked in agriculture. They would work 100 hours when in season, and then have 3-6 months off. The factory workers in the mid to late 1800's showed a steady decline in the number of hours worked well before the passage of any legislation in the early 1900's. The reason for the decline in hours was that people became more productive with improved technology. The same applies to child labor. Very few children worked by the time the laws were passed restricting the practice. It was improvements in the economy that eliminated child labor and limited working hours, not government.

Abusive monopolies can only happen with government backing.

>Also, some companies made you give up your right to vote if you wanted to work for them, because of the rising fear of union power.

Source? How was it enforced?

Fuck you nigga, we vote with our conscience.

Retards like you are the reason two party system is still in place. Choosing lesser evil is for retards.

Also, a lot of Berniebros won't vote for Hilldog, so I think the forces are fairly in balance. Maybe even skewed toward Dolan, I can see more Berniefans not voting for Hillda, than Republicunts for Dumbo.

>Abusive monopolies can only happen with government backing.

meme level garbage. They happened because some companies got too large and used unethical means to get rid of any competition.

You retards pretend that unregulated capitalism is a perfect system that has no flaws.

history.com/topics/child-labor

>In 1900, 18 percent of all American workers were under the age of 16.

Look, I can use google. It's not that hard.

>>children under 10 working in factories

Also, you should note that, not only was child labor nearly eliminated before laws against it were enacted, most children who did work were simply helping their parents on the family farm. Very few worked in factories.

So let in the third world hordes who are going to vote in exactly that sort of government?

You realize that the reason American politics have swung so drastically left in the last 30 years is because of immigration? California used to be a red state. Reagan won California. Immigration has consequences

This country is currently 60% white and dropping fast. Once these third world populations gain electoral control, do you know how fucking shitty it's going to get? Look at what happened to Detroit.

Look at the trend. IIRC, the national laws against it were part of the New Deal in 1933. Child labor was clearly on its way out before then.

Child labor laws starting passing per state from 1902 to 1918. 1918 was the federal pass, so your numbers did not fall "naturally."

>They happened because some companies got too large and used unethical means to get rid of any competition.


Such as...?

Hey hey hey hey
smoke weed everyday

AP4LP, you fucking nigger

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keating–Owen_Act

Nah, just get them out of the country and never let them come back

I hope you get shot by a real polish.

blacks happened to detRIOT, not spics
im not pro open borders, i just think that open borders and small government is better than closed borders and overreaching government
closed borders and small government would be better

The two party system is in place because of the winner take all nature of the electoral system.

Even without the state laws, there was a decline from 1880 to 1900.

The law passed in 1916 was struck down in 1918. There was no federal law that stuck until 1938, says wikipedia.

>the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the law two years later in Hammer v. Dagenhart (1918), declaring that the law violated the Commerce Clause by regulating intrastate commerce.

I meant that as "whoever the LP candidate is". Although I'm not really a fan of AP, since he's shitting on NAP (which is the basis of libertarianism).

But yeah, I think AP would have the best chances to get the republican vote.

Spics are not as bad as blacks, but they're much much worse than whites.
Just look at the kind of governments they elect down south.

There were also temporary state laws as well. The fact is that the industrial revolution in the US was highly exploitative and the benefits of that did not go to improving the wealth of the country. It directly led to the rise of unions and started the progressive movement in the US.

You can't seriously believe that anarchy is a good system?

You can't have open borders when you have a universal franchise democracy

Imagine if Starbucks allowed every customer who wandered through their doors an equal vote on company policy. They would probably be very restrictive on who they let in

im aware of the spic situation, my brother teaches at a public school ran by spics and he tells me stories all the time about how he sees them abusing the system, throwing away the excess food the government supplies them with, living in families under 4-5 different last names to abuse government programs, the government is making spics become a problem though
im not afraid of open borders, i do not think congress would ever let open borders happen

>The fact is that the industrial revolution in the US was highly exploitative and the benefits of that did not go to improving the wealth of the country.

Factory workers were absolutely better off. That's why so many people moved from rural areas to the cities: to work in factories. They had the option of continuing to work on a farm. Revealed Preference.

>It directly led to the rise of unions and started the progressive movement in the US.

None of that is possible without first building a foundation of wealth. Demanding higher wages and shorter working hours without the economic and technological advancements to make workers productive enough to enable a shorter work week is the equivalent of a peasant in the Middle Ages demanding a microwave.

>You can't seriously believe that anarchy is a good system?

The US prior to 1913 was hardly anarchic.

>I'm not afraid of open borders

>This is the single biggest threat to Trump right now. Get the word out. Libertarians need to know there is no room for a third party with the way our electoral system is set up.

Not true. If GJ splits the electoral vote with Trump and no one gets 270, then it goes to the House of Reps, which is 256 R to 188 D. They would confirm whoever the Republican is, because they're party hacks.

And Johnson would mainly just be bringing in new voters, people who were planning to sit out. This would actually be good for the GOP since they'd also add votes for Republican senators and reps.

The 2 states that Johnson would likely win are CO and NV, and Trump is behind there anyway.

If a Johnson made up the conservative 3rd party, then maybe a liberal 4th party would joint too, Bernie Sanders or someone who could win his supporters. Then it might get really crazy.

The US had an open borders policy - with citizenship restrictions - for around 100 years. That's the way it should be. Limit who can be citizens, not who can come.

Let them all in!!!!

Why wouldn't sensible libertarians vote for Trump? Are you all open border pro globalizations retards?

Actually immigration policy was explicitly designed not to upset the demographic balance of the country.

Third world races such as Africans and Hispanics were deliberately and systematically displaced to make room for whites

Nothing bad will happen, let them in!

i said im not afraid that open borders will be a possibility, it just wont happen and thats why i dont care about open borders, i support closed borders

...

>The 2 states that Johnson would likely win are CO and NV

Not New Mexico and Alaska? The LP once hit 11.7% for a presidential race in Alaska.

If I actually had any interest in seeing Trump as President I'd agree with you, but since I think he and Hillary are equally repulsive, I'll vote third party, and encourage others to do so as well.

None of those thing are arguments

No. Then millions of shitskins would flood our streets like Europe. They'd probably rather live here on the streets than whatever shitskin town they come from.

Because almost nothing he wants to do lines up with libertarianism. His policies are all about centralized power.

Chinese were banned around 1872 (not sure of exact date.) The policy of restricting immigration to the demographics of those already here came around 1920. It was open borders prior to 1872. There was no immigration law or enforcement at all.

Let them in! refugee's welcome

And yet the nation wasn't being flooded with 3rd worlders like it is today

So your argument holds no water in the modern scenario

What do you find repulsive about Trump?

Where is this

I don't like either nationalism or populism, and he's all about both.

Open borders cuck who admitted he wants the state to have a heavy hand in enforcing "anti-discrimination" laws, he doesn't think businesses should have ANY right to choose who to serve. in the LP debate he said Jewish business owners should be FORCED to serve Nazis.

Fuck GaJo.

>planes
I'd like to see where you got this idea that America let everyone into their country while not giving them citizenship.

>implying Irish and Chinese weren't third worlders at the time