I know it is a long shot, but what are the chances Johnson gets enough steam to carry a few states here and there (i.e. New Mexico, Vermont, etc.)? And with that, could those states be enough to keep either Trump or Hillary from hitting 270? Talk about a circus...

Edited June 3, 201610 yr by bugatti

I know it is a long shot' date=' but what are the chances Johnson gets enough steam to carry a few states here and there (i.e. New Mexico, Vermont, etc.)? And with that, could those states be enough to keep either Trump or Hillary from hitting 270? Talk about a circus...[/quote']

 

That would be great.

I'm still leaning toward Johnson. Really would like to see him part of the debates.

This is spot on Jim.

 

Unfortunately, way too many people care too much about being able to boast that they "voted for the winner", than casting a vote that makes a difference.

 

Disagree, as I have said before your candidate has to get out there and make him self known. Other than you, I dont hear a darn thing about him.

I know it is a long shot, but what are the chances Johnson gets enough steam to carry a few states here and there (i.e. New Mexico, Vermont, etc.)? And with that, could those states be enough to keep either Trump or Hillary from hitting 270? Talk about a circus...

 

Then the state legislatures get to have some face time for a while.

Disagree, as I have said before your candidate has to get out there and make him self known. Other than you, I dont hear a darn thing about him.

 

The media doesn't want you to know about him. He can't make them put him on their shows and in their papers. He also doesn't have the bankroll that the elephants and donkeys have. He's kind of behind the 8 ball. One of the reason folks need to pay attention to what the two major parties are doing and make a move now so our kids and grandkids have much better options than Trump, Bush and Clinton offspring running for office.

The media doesn't want you to know about him. He can't make them put him on their shows and in their papers. He also doesn't have the bankroll that the elephants and donkeys have. He's kind of behind the 8 ball. One of the reason folks need to pay attention to what the two major parties are doing and make a move now so our kids and grandkids have much better options than Trump, Bush and Clinton offspring running for office.

 

I've seen Johnson a couple of times on CNN, NBC, and CBS. I think if we had any other dem and rep candidates we would hear more about Johnson, but he also wouldn't be nearly as strong.

 

Interestingly, he and Weld have aimed their sights at Trump. Weld has gone so far as to compliment HRC, but so did Trump 13 months ago. I guess you learn the right things to say to your electorate.

I've seen Johnson a couple of times on CNN, NBC, and CBS. I think if we had any other dem and rep candidates we would hear more about Johnson, but he also wouldn't be nearly as strong.

 

Interestingly, he and Weld have aimed their sights at Trump. Weld has gone so far as to compliment HRC, but so did Trump 13 months ago. I guess you learn the right things to say to your electorate.

 

 

:lol2:

 

They better learn the right things to say.

He was on Meet the Press yesterday morning I believe.

Politico Link

 

He's starting to get some time. The more Trump talks I think the more looks Johnson will get.

Edited June 6, 201610 yr by Randy Parker

I know it is a long shot, but what are the chances Johnson gets enough steam to carry a few states here and there (i.e. New Mexico, Vermont, etc.)? And with that, could those states be enough to keep either Trump or Hillary from hitting 270? Talk about a circus...

 

Dream scenario. Johnson / Weld target their efforts toward enough swing states to prevent HRC from achieving 270. Maybe they even get some help from the GOP in those states. (Remember, ME and NE award by congressional district rather than winner take all.)

 

As I understand it, if electoral college fails to provide a candidate with 270, the House of Representatives decides the President. They appear to be limited to choose from the top 3 vote getters in the election. (Henry Clay was eliminated from consideration in the 1824 election because he was #4 and threw his support behind Adams which Andrew Jackson later termed the "corrupt bargain" since it appeared Clay may have given his support to Adams in exchange for being named Secretary of State under Adams. Jackson had the last laugh by defeating Adams in the 1828 election.) It also appears that each state gets a single vote (unless I am reading that wrong) in the House of Representatives which would certainly favor the GOP by neutralizing huge electoral states like NY and CA.

 

Basically, this whole season of VEEP is looking at this issue.

I don't understand the logic behind voting for someone you don't believe in just to say you 'picked a winner'. Vote for whomever you believe is the best choice based on your personal beliefs and the candidates stance on those issues. If that happens to be a 3rd party candidate, don't hesitate- VOTE.

Everyone see his facebook post today?