I am consistent. Clinton’s last poll showed her ahead in Florida, so I can vote Johnson. At least for now. Fortunately, I vote on election day. I’m old fashioned that way. So we’ll see where the race is that Monday.
Yes we are all waiting with bated breath. We all know adaher is the deciding vote, will he take the leap and vote Johnson to signal his disapproval of Clinton, or will he save humanity by dashing into the booth and pulling the lever for Clinton.
Just poking a little fun, but seriously, there is no chance your vote will decide the election.
You would like to have 100 dollars, but you have a choice between three different envelopes that contain 67 dollars, 32 dollars, and 57 cents. Using your argument, you would pick the envelope that contains 57 cents because all three envelopes are equally not 100 dollars.
To me our addie is a little focus group likely representative of the thought processes of a not insignificant number of conservatives who are repulsed by Trump, who see Clinton as someone who will be a very competent president, want her to win, but who would prefer not to actually vote for her. It is educational to witness the clear conflict between years of reflexive bashing and the more thoughtful conclusion that she’ll be pretty good, and is the far superior choice. As addie goes so likely goes at least 1% of the vote, maybe even 2. Is that huge? No. But in Florida, depending on the wildcard of who turns out (that polls and the WAGs of people like me, you, and professional pundits alike may be clueless to predict) that 1% could be what swings a state one way or the other, and as we have seen, potentially a complete election, even if election eve polls call it by 3% one way or the other.
Yes how he decides actually does matter.
Just for the record, I acknowledged that despite her ethical issues, she would probably be a good President back when I actually had hope that a Republican would be nominated who would beat her. If I had thought Clinton to be disastrous as President, I’d be in the Trump camp to stop her. I understand where the Never Hillary voters are coming from, other than the fact that they know little about her actual record, which is pretty good.
Plus even intraparty, there are always winners and losers in elections. If Clinton wins, that’s a win for the corporate Dems and a loss for the progressives. If Trump wins, that’s a win for the alt right and a loss for true conservatism.
The ideal outcome is for Clinton to beat Trump by a little bit and for Johnson to make a better than expected showing. If Johnson voters are the balance of power in federal elections, then that makes libertarian leaning voters essential, which is also good for my side.
So what degree of closeness in the polls on election eve will make you (interested again in not just you but the not insignificant number like you) decide to vote Clinton, and what degree will make you free to vote Johnson?
WEll, I don’t think most voters are going to be watching the polls. Nader voters sure as hell didn’t. For me, I’ll just vote for Clinton if Florida looks to be within 5 points and 538 has her chances below 90%.
Bill Weld, Johnson’s running mate, has high praise for Hillary: http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/30/politics/bill-weld-hillary-clinton-qualified/index.html
No surprise there. Weld has never been a libertarian, just a plain liberal.
I half expect him to betray Johnson and endorse Hillary.
Chicago Tribune endorses Gary Johnson:
You know how everyone on the planet knows that Trump didn’t pay Federal taxes? Not everyone. Johnson looks like he had another Aleppo moment on CNN. He says he doesn’t understand how Trump didn’t pay taxes, but he favors eliminating income taxes.
Oh, Gary.
You think so? As a person who is left-center, and thinks we really do need the balance of at least the two main parties remaining viable, I thought the best option would be for Trump to get beat hard. My thinking is that it would result in a redefining of the Republican party. I realize this isn’t exactly unique thinking, but the current marriage of social conservatism, pro-business, and evangelicals just doesn’t make sense.
The Republican party did fine for decades without the Jesus vote, and I think if they can divorce from it they can emerge much stronger. I realize it delivers a lot of bodies, but ironically it turns out to be a deal with the devil. And while I know that sounds like I’m picking on the evangelical vote (OK, I am a little) it’s not that I don’t think they deserve their voice, it’s just that I don’t think the two pieces go together.
Latest poll has Johnson down by just 11 in New Mexico. 538 rates his chances of winning the state at 2-3%.
Not a surprise. That’s pretty much his party’s main issue. If he was pro-income tax in any way, I don’t think he could have been nominated. To get any more extreme on income taxes, the party would have to start ranting about how Ohio wasn’t a state and there’s gold fringe on the flag and wages aren’t income.
Do any of the people voting for Johnson actually think he’d make a good President?
This is the guy who wants to abolish the IRS, abolish the Federal Reserve, drastically reduce SocSec, EPA, etc.
H couldn’t name a foreign leader he admires and doesn’t know where Aleppo is. He thinks global warming will solve itself in a few billion years.
Yes, I understand there’s no risk that this buffoon will win, but you can’t have it both ways. When you say “I don’t waste my vote on either Hill or Don, so will vote for the smart guy, even though his chance is tiny,” it rather helps if the “smart guy” is not a bizarrely ignorant dolt, no?
No unless he has a cult following, his decision does not effect the other votes.
What an odd little comment that has nothing to do with the comment quoted.
He governed a state for eight years with few complaints. Have Clinton or Trump done that? A city maybe? A business? Okay, Trump’s run a business, but Clinton has never actually been solely responsible for anything in her life.
A candidate’s record matters more than their ability to answer pop quizzes.
You claimed that as adaher goes, so goes 1-2%. That’s an error. If he changes his vote, it does not change other votes. It ok it’s a common mistake to make, the foundation of which is the ideological belief that our vote matters. The hapless taxpayer is bamboozled one way or another.
How is a governor “solely responsible” for his state? What about the Lite Gov, Atty General & the rest of the Executive Branch? (Texas has a weak governorship–but that’s a relic of Reconstruction. Probably not the case in New Mexico.)
Usually the other branches of government have their roles. The Governor has to work with them.
We know you hate Hillary. But she has real experience.