Log in ·
Asked at Lawrence Public Library on July 1, 2016
Tim Frieden, painter, Lawrence
“Probably. I’m not really satisfied with my options this year. It’s hard to tell.”
Grace Oliver, student, Lawrence
“At this point, I don’t believe a third party would stand a chance. In a perfect world, I would vote for Bernie (Sanders), but now I’m voting for Hillary (Clinton).”
Zach Warren, security guard, Lawrence
“Depends on who it is.”
Leighton Watts, food service, Lawrence
“Maybe. It’s kind of hard to say. I’m really focusing on whether the (Democratic) nominee will be Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders.”
Related story, June 30, 2016, LJWorld.com
“Read more:Green Party candidate Jill Stein to campaign in Lawrence”
I expect the third party candidates to do well in the Plains and Mountain West, states that both Cruz and Sanders won easily.
1 year, 4 months ago
Govs Gary Johnson and Bill Weld will be getting my vote. . .
Is Ralph Nader running again?
In the past I've voted third party sporadically. This year I'm *definitely* voting for Gary Johnson - in terms of both stances and prior qualifications he's a far better option than either Clinton or Trump.
I would be interested to know; if you are voting for a third party candidate, which one, and if no third party candidates were running, would you vote for Trump or Clinton or no one for president?
"I don't think a third party will stand a chance" - This is the problem with American politics, it is all about winning and being on the team that wins, screw your principles! Life isn't always about winning people!<br></br><br></br>
Johnson/Weld will have ballot access in all 50 states and they have 16 years of executive experience between them since they both were 2 term Governors of NM and MA. In my opinion, Clinton carries too much baggage and Trump is... well an idiot.
If forced to vote for either Clinton or Trump, I would reluctantly stay home and forgo my right to vote.
If forced to vote for #NotTrump or #NotClinton, I'd still write in Gary Johnson.
In that scenario, with write-ins possible, I would do the same :)
Or maybe you would go write in 'none of the above'?
Truth be told, considering who the two major parties are going to field, just know who and what you are voting for and we shouldn't try to fool ourselves about who we checkmark. You've got a lot of bad choices. I may vote for Gary Johnson myself...though the thought of a Hillary Presidency is beyond anathema to me, forcing me to vote for Trump.
I just don't know.
As bad as the candidates are this year, yes. Thinking inside the box doesn't cut it. Jill Stein will get consideration.
“I’m trying to appeal to the majority of Americans whom I think are libertarian, it’s just that they don’t know it." -- Gov Gary Johnson
Many are, but would never admit it, or just do not realize it.
I want to see GJ in the debates. He needs to be in the debates this year. Hell, throw in the Greens too.
We need more than just two parties controlling the narrative, we need more options.
Can some find White Owl and get him to run? What about that guy with the boot on his head?
Everybody gets free ponies!
In 1992, I was part of the KU Libertarians. We got 14% of the Presidential vote in Lawrence to go for Andre Marrou. Statewide was about 1%.
Clinton is going to be president, I don't see any way Trump could get enough votes - seems like way too many people hate his guts.
I am NOT voting for Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump.
If Bernie drops out I am voting for Jill Stein. These are two excellent candidates.
Social Responsibility IS NOT Socialismhttp://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/5/...
Presidential Debate Inc is a fraud .....
LEAGUE REFUSES TO "HELP PERPETRATE A FRAUD"
WITHDRAWS SUPPORT FROM FINAL PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE
WASHINGTON, DC —"The League of Women Voters is withdrawing its sponsorship of the presidential debate scheduled for mid-October because the demands of the two campaign organizations would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter," League President Nancy M. Neuman said today.
"It has become clear to us that the candidates' organizations aim to add debates to their list of campaign-trail charades devoid of substance, spontaneity and honest answers to tough questions," Neuman said. "The League has no intention of becoming an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American public."
Neuman said that the campaigns presented the League with their debate agreement onSeptember 28, two weeks before the scheduled debate. The campaigns' agreement was negotiated "behind closed doors" and vas presented to the League as "a done deal," she said, its 16 pages of conditions not subject to negotiation.
Most objectionable to the League, Neuman said, were conditions in the agreement that gave the campaigns unprecedented control over the proceedings. Neuman called "outrageous" the campaigns' demands that they control the selection of questioners, the composition of the audience, hall access for the press and other issues.
"The campaigns' agreement is a closed-door masterpiece," Neuman said. "Never in the history of the League of Women Voters have two candidates' organizations come to us with such stringent, unyielding and self-serving demands."
Neuman said she and the League regretted that the American people have had no real opportunities to judge the presidential nominees outside of campaign-controlled environments.
"On the threshold of a new millenium, this country remains the brightest hope for all who cherish free speech and open debate," Neuman said. "Americans deserve to see and hear the men who would be president face each other in a debate on the hard and complex issues critical to our progress into the next century."
Neuman issued a final challenge to both Vice President Bush and Governor Dukakis to "rise above your handlers and agree to join us in presenting the fair and full discussion the American public expects of a League of Women Voters debate."
The CLINTON Name is NOT A ECONOMIC SAVIOR
Oops there is still more
There Is No Santa Claus and Bill Clinton Was Not an Economic Savior
The Untold Story Of How Clinton's Budget Destroyed The American Economy
--- NOTE TO HILLARY CLINTON : CLINTONOMICS WAS A DISASTER FOR MOST AMERICANS.
UNDER BILL CLINTON, WALL STREET CREATED A RUINOUS BUBBLE, WHILE WORKERS LOST WAGES AND POWER
No. Nader stuck us with GWB.
No a bad run Gore campaign, a rotten supreme court ruling,too many voters staying home and hacked electronic voting machines gave you GWB.
BTW conservatives own the electronic voting devices. You know the devices that can be programmed to lie.
Nader ran again and the USA got stuck with Obama in spite of a Nader campaign.
Full LJWorld.com site
© 2017 LJWorld.com