Sunday, July 31, 2016

Gary Johnson For President! However...


I want to see Gary Johnson, of the Libertarian Party, as our next President.



Quixotic dreamer that I am, I think he actually could become the occupant of The Oval Office if things fall right. He's polling in the low double-digits at present. If he can crack 15% in select national polls, he will be given a place on the stage during the presidential debates this fall. If that happens, anything can happen.

And I'm fairly militant about my candidate, too. Ask me my opinion and I'll give it to you straight. I think Trump and Clinton are BOTH unfit for the office. Whichever one of them wins - if, indeed, one of them does win - I'll be a combination of sad, angry and disillusioned that I have never been before.

Having said that, though, I am trying desperately to not alienate the people who really matter to me. I am trying to hold my most strident political opinions in check when I am in the company of those folks I love but who may have a differing opinion.

I'm trying, but I'm failing - sometimes. And that's what my column in today's Boston Herald is about.

As always, I'm grateful to you for stopping by this increasingly desolate wasteland that once was a robust and thriving blog. I'll be even more grateful if you go to the Herald's website. I'll be positively ecstatic if you leave a positive comment there. I might even die as a result of paroxysms of joy if you write a letter to the editor and it's published (but, even if you don't want to see me dead, feel free to take the chance. I'll medicate myself each morning before I read the paper, just in case.)

Soon, with more better stuff (especially if Johnson wins, but I think I already said as much and I don't want to beat a dead horse, as much fun as that might be.)

(I had no idea, until this very moment, how macabre I could be concerning deceased equines. Sorry!)

11 comments:

messymimi said...

A tactful way to approach people, if you want: "Yes, being angry enough about the whole situation not to vote at all is one valid way to approach this. It seems to me, though, that this approach doesn't do anyone any good. Perhaps voting for a third party candidate, such as Gary Johnson, would be a more productive way. If he gets enough votes, it might keep either of the other two from getting a clear majority, and even if that doesn't happen, a solid showing for him would send a message to Washington that there are a lot of people who are tired of the game."

Lowandslow said...

As things stand today, I'm voting for the Libertarians, too. Frankly I'm more impressed with Weld than I am Johnson, but either are IMO better that our other choices. This whole thing is like a bad dream! *sigh*

(not necessarily your) Uncle Skip, said...

What disturbs me most is the media ignoring third party candidates, except as anomalies.
No longer are they kooks, crackpots, or dingbats.
It is a sad state when the masses are convinced the only choices they have are from the two major parties.

It's.a.crazy.world said...

I am more familiar than most with Gary, and agree with you wholeheartedly! Here, let me make that clear:
VOTE FOR GARY JOHNSON! Sorry, didn't mean to "yell". He had been our governor, and I enjoyed his policies. As far as choices go, sure beats Clinton and Trump.

Suldog said...

Thank you, all, for your well-thought and meaningful comments. I appreciate them all (I also appreciate all of you, for taking the time to make them!)

Should Fish More said...

Well, the 800 pound gorilla in the room that's being ignored is Ralph Nader, right? Remember George, he's got Ralph to thank for his election, along with a bit of malfeasance in the good state of Florida.

If you see no difference between Clinton and Trump, I have nothing for you. I guess it boils down to do you want the country to be run by a politician who has wavered and bend where the wind blows, or do you want a demagogue, who hasn't the vaguest idea how to be the ceo of a country. If Trump is your guy back there on the east coast,m probably has nothing to do with the fact that over 95% of his supporters are white males, eh? Nah, couldn't have anything to do with it.
If he wins, do enjoy. boy, won't things be fun then....gettin' all those muslims out of boston, hell, maybe you can clear out southie from all those 'undesirables', eh?

Cheers,
Mike

Suldog said...

I am voting for Johnson. I am not voting for Trump. I am not voting for Clinton. My vote for Johnson is not a vote for (or against) anyone else. As for your claim that Nader elected Bush, you are dead wrong. You conveniently forget that Pat Buchanan was also a candidate in that race. His vote total in four states, if added to Bush's, would have put Bush over the top in those four states - New Mexico, Oregon, Iowa and one other that escapes me at the moment. Anyway, this is America. I am not obligated to vote for one of two candidates. Furthermore, I do not wish to drive Muslims out of Southie or anywhere else. I have no idea where you get that. You are a font of misinformation and I have no respect for your opinion at all.

Craig said...

Well, I'm slowly homing in on what I'm gonna do come November. It'll be a 'third' party (more like 11th, but once you get past two, the media types lose their ability to count. . .), but not the Libs. Bad news - they're so small, they won't even be on the ballot in my great state of Michigan (the fact that their presidential candidate lives in Michigan notwithstanding). If that makes me an ass+4, I can deal with it. . . ;)

Daryl said...

i adore you ....

Suldog said...

Craig - I guarantee they'll be on the ballot in all 50. That aside, though, vote your conscience. That's all I ask of anyone. So long as you aren't voting for the lesser of two evils - which, as you know, gets you evil - I'm satisfied.

Daryl - And I, you.

Maryellen Bess said...

I, too, am voting for the Libatarians. I watched on CNN the other evening. They made so much sense.