Visitors Now:
Total Visits:
Total Stories:
Profile image
By Freedom Bunker
Contributor profile | More stories
Story Views

Now:
Last Hour:
Last 24 Hours:
Total:

I Voted…

Tuesday, November 8, 2016 10:26
% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.

(Before It's News)

20712757_ML…and I don’t feel good about it.

I’m writing this on election day, so I don’t know the outcome of the election. Clinton? Trump? The lesser of two evils is still evil. I’m conjecturing many people–even Clinton and Trump voters–see it this way from some casual evidence: I still see more Obama bumper stickers on cars from the election four years ago than I see Clinton or Trump stickers.

I’m registered as Libertarian, but the campaign Johnson and the Libertarians ran eats into any good feelings one might get from a Johnson vote. My impression is that Johnson wasn’t running a serious campaign.

Johnson’s greatest visibility came from some widely-publicized gaffes which gave the impression that not only is he not prepared to be president, he didn’t even make the effort to prepare. Anyone who kept up with the news would have been able to identify Aleppo, and known the name of the North Korean dictator.

The Libertarian party, more generally, didn’t have a strategy for winning the election. With such high negative ratings for Clinton and Trump, Johnson could have received enough protest votes to put him in the White House, much as Jesse Ventura did to be elected Governor of Minnesota in 1998. It’s actually easier (in a way) to win the presidency because it can be won without getting more votes than the major party candidates.

The president is selected by the electoral college, and if no candidate gets a majority of the electoral votes, the president is chosen by the House of Representatives from among the top three electoral vote recipients. All Johnson would have had to do was get enough electoral votes to keep Clinton and Trump from getting a majority. Then the House would choose from among Clinton, Trump, and Johnson.

It’s a Republican House, so they wouldn’t choose Clinton. And the friction between Republican Representatives and Trump is well-known. It’s very conceivable they would have been “non-partisan” and chosen Johnson, a former Republican governor, over Trump. President Johnson!

To make that strategy work, the Libertarians should have campaigned heavily in a few states–maybe New Mexico, Colorado, Texas, New Hampshire–to get a few electoral votes. It would not cost much. Rent an RV and drive around to meet and rally the voters, who we know don’t like either Clinton or Trump. Show voters there’s an alternative!

He didn’t need to get more popular votes than Clinton or Trump. He just needed enough to keep them from getting an electoral majority. Libertarians could have run a serious campaign that would have given Johnson a chance to win.

Johnson won’t be the next president because (1) he didn’t appear to be serious about winning, and (2) the Libertarian party didn’t pursue the winning strategy. So, voters can’t really feel good about voting for Johnson either.

I’m writing on election day so I don’t know who will be the next president, but I know it won’t be Johnson. I’m disappointed that Johnson and the Libertarians didn’t run a serious campaign.

Report abuse

Comments

Your Comments
Question   Razz  Sad   Evil  Exclaim  Smile  Redface  Biggrin  Surprised  Eek   Confused   Cool  LOL   Mad   Twisted  Rolleyes   Wink  Idea  Arrow  Neutral  Cry   Mr. Green

Total 1 comment
  • I dunno, as an outside observer and commentator, Jill Stein seems okay (though I’m wary of pretty much anything related to politics). But even then, she doesn’t fit either (of the same) polarizing gestures, generally that isn’t popular.

Top Stories
Recent Stories

Register

Newsletter

Email this story
Email this story

If you really want to ban this commenter, please write down the reason:

If you really want to disable all recommended stories, click on OK button. After that, you will be redirect to your options page.