Hillary Clinton

10 Reasons to Vote Johnson/Weld, Even Though They Suck

Posted on Updated on

This entire election season is a joke. In terms of numbers, Clinton and Trump have more disapproval than approval ratings. The libertarian party, being the most popular 3rd party, really had a chance to shine. They had the opportunity to stand as a clear, level-headed, real alternative that reasonable people on both sides could choose. The libertarian message appeals to both progressives and conservatives, while simultaneously applying a consistent principle of liberty to all areas of life. Libertarians generally want to decrease corruption, get the government out of your personal life and let you live your life the way you see fit, support the troops in the most reasonable way possible, reform failing programs (like education and health care) that will produce real results, protect our natural rights here at home, and stimulate the economy in real, meaningful, and long-lasting ways.

But we ended up with Gary Johnson and Bill Weld.
*heavy sigh*

screen-shot-2016-11-04-at-10-26-43-amI can only imagine that the delegates who chose these two were thinking of name recognition and experience as successful republican governors in democrat-heavy states. And I suppose that makes sense, from a superficial perspective. Johnson and Weld view libertarianism as the best of republicanism and the best of progressivism, even if that’s not how libertarianism is meant to be understood.
Libertarianism should be seen as a consistent application of individual liberty in all areas of life, not some kind of random smattering of this and that. If we view libertarianism like that, neither Johnson or Weld are libertarians. They approach social issues like progressives, in that they favor using government force to get people to cooperate. This is not tolerance, it is totalitarianism. With Johnson’s numerous gaffes [#WhatIsAleppo #IShouldGetSmarter], he has shown himself to be less than an ideal candidate, to put it very lightly. And Weld has shown himself to be nothing more than a Hillary Clinton apologist, which is profoundly disappointing. No, Hillary Clinton is not “honest” or “a good kid”, you butt-hole.

However, even though they both suck, I am still going to vote for them.
And here’s why:

  1. I’ve heard your arguments and I’ve responded to them all.
    • A vote for a 3rd party is not actually a vote for Trump or Clinton. Trump/Clinton never had my vote, so refusing to vote for Trump/Clinton isn’t “mathematically” a vote for Clinton/Trump.
      Stop saying that.
    • The only truly wasted vote is a vote that isn’t cast. Or a vote for someone you hate. I refuse to waste my vote. If everyone “wasted their vote” this year, we could have Johnson in the White House.
    • I am not voting against Trump because he’s said mean things. I’m not voting against Clinton because she’s a woman. I’m voting against both of those idiots because they have terrible political philosophies, bad policy plans, and they’re awful people who are dragging American political discourse through the trash.
    • If Trump/Clinton really needed my vote, perhaps they should have been more libertarian.
    • The reason a 3rd party can’t win is because no one votes for a 3rd party, and the reason no one votes for a 3rd party is because a 3rd party can’t win. It’s a vicious circle. Break the cycle.
    • I am voting on principle, not for some lame, lesser-of-two-evils, pragmatic utilitarian reason.
    • Exactly how evil do the two main candidates have to be before we vote against them both?
      I choose the 2016 election.
  2. When you compare the platforms of Johnson/Weld to the platforms of the other candidates that will be on my ballot (I’m in NY, so it’s Trump/Pence, Clinton/Kaine, Johnson/Weld, and Stein/Baraka), I am much closer to Johnson/Weld than I am to any of the other ones.
  3. I have considered myself a libertarian for several years, and if I’m going to vote along “party lines”, that would be the libertarian party. That entails a vote for Johnson/Weld. I don’t consider it a “hold my nose and vote” vote, because I agree with a fair amount of what they have done and said in terms of policy proposals.
  4. Johnson/Weld will not win. I’m not stupid. However, there is a remote possibility that Johnson could win, but it is actually impossible for Weld to win. Let me explain.
    • In order to win the presidency, a candidate much get 270 electoral votes. If this doesn’t happen (because 3rd party candidates won some states), the president is chosen by the House of Representatives. They choose the president from the top 3 (which will be Trump, Clinton, & Johnson) and the vice president from the top 2 (which will be Pence & Kaine).
      It is a slim possibility, but it’s not impossible to have a Johnson/Pence white house, and that is a combination I can support without feeling violated.
  5. Johnson has said that he does not plan on running in the 2020 election, and I am so happy. Perhaps we can get a principled libertarian who is also a good communicator in for 2020. I don’t think voting against Johnson is going to send an audible message to the moronic delegates who chose him for this election.
  6. If the libertarian party gets 5% in the election, they will qualify for federal funds for elections. I’m not saying I approve of my tax dollars going towards political propaganda, but if there’s nothing we can do about the existence and purpose of the money, I’d like to see the libertarian party get some of it. This will change the way libertarians run for president, and that’s a good thing. And the libertarian party is the only party that might actually repeal the tax-dollars-for-political-campaign-propaganda crap!
  7. I am more concerned with voting against Trump and Clinton than I am with voting for Johnson. If Johnson didn’t exist, I’d likely write in Darrell Castle of the Constitution Party or cast a blank ballot. I am voting 3rd party as a protest vote against the Republican/Democrat duopoly. It is clear that neither the republicans or democrats represent anything close to what I believe.
  8. Abortion. Yes, I know. Johnson is pro-choice.
    But Johnson also recognizes that the federal government should have never gotten involved in the abortion debate, because the constitution has not explicitly given abortion to the federal government.
  9. It has been 108 years for the Cubs.
    It has been 156 years for a 3rd party candidate. #AbrahamLincoln
    IT’S THE CURRENT YEAR!
    Q.E.D.
  10. I’ve always wanted a president without eyebrows.

Are You Seriously Voting 3rd Party? Why!? – Elijah’s Blog

Posted on Updated on

I voted for Mitt Romney in 2012, but I didn’t disagree with Romney on most things. So I was voting FOR Romney, not just against Obama. I thought of myself as a conservative in 2012.

I voted for John McCain in 2008, but I wasn’t really all that informed back then. That’s when I was going through my atheism/apologetics phase, so I really wasn’t paying much attention to politics. But my parents were conservative and what they said made sense, so I went along with what they said.

I was 17 in 2004 so I didn’t vote.

My chosen candidate has lost 100% of the elections in which I’ve voted. Granted, it’s only 2 elections, but I don’t know what it’s like to have voted for a winner.
I know only loss.

This election is different for me for a number of reasons.
photo-1428976343495-f2c66e701b2bThe primary reason is that I consider myself a libertarian, not a conservative. And this is due to diligent study in the areas of economics and political philosophy. I remember, in 2013, thinking to myself, “this political game is so stupid. I don’t know what news sources to trust, I don’t know what I think the government should do, I don’t know any economics or political philosophy… I don’t know anything. And I need to know.”
I was near the end of my undergraduate studies in biology & philosophy, so I started studying. I didn’t know which direction to go, so I followed a clue given to me by 2 things:

1. A very convincing argument by professor James Stacey Taylor, who explained how a free market in human kidneys made the donor and the recipient more well off. From this, I had a direction to go in terms of economic study. I figured, if the data pointed in that direction for something as important as organ donation, it could probably work in other, less important areas.

2. The anger I felt when I was pulled over for not wearing a seatbelt. Who was the government to tell me that I had to be protected from myself? From this, I had a foundational principle on which to guide my study on the government role in our social lives. If the government was not justified in legislating something that only effected me, what role did it have?
(if you’re interested, I go more into that here )

From there, I’ve read books, watched debates, read articles, listened to podcasts, engaged with people of different perspectives, and ultimately landed on what many would call “minarchism”.
Minarchism is the idea that the government should be here to serve very few, very limited purposes. It is here to protect our natural rights (the rights we have by simply being a member of the human community), and to insure that we have maximum liberty in the social and economic spheres.

I say all of this because it helps lay the backdrop for why I absolutely refuse to vote for either Trump or Clinton. They do not represent me, nor do they come close to representing what I see as a proper function of government. I don’t care that Trump has said nasty things or that Clinton has a shrill voice. I care because when you vote for someone, you are consenting to being governed by them. I do not consent to being governed by either one of them.
I see them as authoritarians.
I see them as restricting liberty.
I see them both as doing damage to the US, economically and socially.

You may disagree. That’s fine. You’re wrong but I’m done trying to change your mind. However, I find it incredibly strange that so many people believe that I ought to sacrifice everything I’ve studied and believe and vote for someone who I think is slightly less totalitarian than the other.
Why can’t I vote against totalitarianism?
Why is a vote against authoritarianism a bad thing?

I have to wonder… how absolutely awful do the two primary candidates have to be before we, as informed people, think “wow, these two really, really suck. I can’t reasonably vote for either”.

Many people have chosen to vote against different flavors of totalitarianism before now. The 2016 election is so obviously that time in my mind. Perhaps 2020 will be that time in your mind.
Maybe 2024.

I’m choosing to vote 3rd party while that option still exists, even if the 3rd party candidates don’t really have a chance at winning.
I am voting against Trump.
I am voting against Clinton.

I am doing this because I care about my country.
I am doing this because I care about my kids. I care about your kids.

We have a long road ahead, but REAL change starts today.
Please join me in voting against both flavors of totalitarianism.

The Stupidity of American Political Discourse – Elijah’s Blog

Posted on Updated on

14479600_1312542195422967_2896391346849603603_nRemember when you were in 5th grade and someone called you a doodoo brain knuckle head? You couldn’t think of a witty response right off the bat, so you pulled out ol’ faithful:
I know you are but what am I? I’m rubber you’re glue, whatever you say bounces off of me and sticks to you!

Man, what a comeback, right? What were they going to say after that? Something dumb like, “no! … YOU’RE GLUE and I’M RUBBER, stupid!” So lame!

It got a little more complicated once you emerged out of elementary school, but not much. If someone called you a loser in middle school, you just pointed out that they sit with the nerds in lunch. And in high school, if someone mocked you for your glasses, you mocked them for their shoes.

This “I know you are but what am I?” response apparently never gets old, because even the 2 primary candidates for the highest office in one of the the most powerful countries in the world embrace it in the same way that those jerks in middle school did. I hate to say that I expect it from them, but it’s true. They are not promoting anything close to reasonable discourse about issues, but that’s not entirely their fault. Some of it is, but not all of it.

People, the voters, gets bored when they talk about the issues. They’d rather hear quips and personal attacks, instead of substantive critiques or solutions. As evidence of this, just look at your facebook newsfeed. If it’s anything like mine, people who otherwise don’t care about political issues, share memes of one-line zingers. They share short videos of Trump threatening to send Clinton to jail. A short list of the dirty things that Trump has said. It’s a profoundly shallow form of political engagement that most people should be ashamed of. Just a snarky meme with no substance.

I’d like to encourage you to raise your level of political engagement.
Please.

EDIT:
After writing this and scheduling it to be released several days after I wrote it, someone took the same idea and made it into a video meme. It’s gold. lol
Click here to watch it.

 

What is Really at Stake in the 2016 Election? – Elijah’s Blog

Posted on Updated on

ballot-voteLet’s imagine that you are a part of the vast majority of human beings in the US who thinks that Trump and Clinton are the two worst possible candidates for the president of the united states. On one hand, we have an openly corrupt, morally inept, economically illiterate, inconsistent, lying, totalitarian maniac. And on the other hand, we have an openly corrupt, morally inept, economically illiterate, inconsistent, lying, totalitarian maniac.

What should we do?

Well, there are only 2 options. But not the options you think.
Here is the real binary choice for those of you who can’t stand Trump or Clinton:

  1. Sacrifice your principles on the altar of utilitarian pragmatism and vote for corruption, lies, immorality, and totalitarianism.
  2. Retain your principles, vote against both grossly immoral, corrupt, lying, disgusting candidates, vote against the two-party system.
    Oh and the people voting for Trump & Clinton will try to guilt you into voting for their disgusting candidate, as if their candidate deserves your vote or something.

Now which one is a better option?
Should you sacrifice your principles?
Or should you retain your principles and endure a little bit of uninformed ridicule?

The choice is clear.
Principle > Party.
Principle > Pragmatism.
Principle > Utilitarianism.

A Clear Lens Podcast – Elijah’s Blog

Posted on Updated on

Hey! So I was a guest on A Clear Lens podcast this last week, and it was a lot of fun.
Click here to listen to that on iTunes or visit their site to listen to it there.

cropped-cropped-acl-header-for-website-2-e14326951544161I got a chance to play in one of their games (I got completely destroyed; didn’t answer a single question correctly), and they had a chance to ask as many questions as they could think of and stuff it all into just over an hour and a half.
The title of the episode is Abortion & the Presidential Candidates with Elijah Thompson, and the main focus of the conversation was where the national election and abortion meet. As many followers of the Fetal Position podcast know, I’ve been going through a mini-series on that topic, so the conversation I had with the guys at A Clear Lens was abbreviated, but very packed full of information, including stuff on the supreme court justices (which isn’t something I covered on my show).
A Clear Lens is one of my favorite podcasts, and I had a gr8 time with them. And I was on after the following guests:
Mary Jo Sharpe, Holly Ordway, Brian Godawa, Craig Hazen, Greg Koukl, David Wood, and J. Warner Wallace. Needless to say, I am very glad for their contribution to the apologetics world and I am excited to have been a guest on their show.

Definitely check out A Clear Lens.
And after you listen to this episode, listen to all of the rest! You won’t regret it 🙂