you got that right!

I know the argument, and I plan to vote LP if Arizona (my state) looks like it is in danger of going for Clinton, in which case I will vote Trump.

To me, this election is not Trump v Hillary because there are too many other things at stake.

The Supreme Court, for example, Hillary regards Ruth Bader Ginsburg as her model Supreme Court justice, and I think Ginsburg is one of the worse ever appointed. Trump's potential nominees (he named 11) are all approved by the Cato Institute, a think tank to which I give high respect.

This same thing will happen down the line of regulatory agencies such as the EPA, Labor Board, etc., all of which have been strangling business even more than taxes have.

As for the defense of the United States, Peace through Strength, the Eisenhower policy, will be the Trump policy. I expect Trump will, like Ike, Nixon, and Reagan negotiate with enemies and adversaries from a position of strength. But negotiate. Hopefully Trump will make Russia an ally to go after ISIS and America's endless wars will come to an end.

Where Clinton will continue all of the policies that produced the unacceptable present, Trump will get rid of as much of the Establishment (Dems and GOP) as possible and change Washington as it has not been changed since Ronald Reagan rode in from the West.

For these, other, reasons I think we need to rally around Trump.

I am sure by now you have heard many discussions about whether voting for a third party is a wasted vote or not. In California especially, since it is heavily a Democratic state, voting for Johnson will make no difference if the usual patterns of votes is followed. But for every vote he receives in this state his percentage and the libertarian percentage goes up. Politicians pay attention to those percentages. If you are in a swing state, then I can see the nervousness about having the one you hate the most win because you voted for a third party. But lets face it, both candidates are pretty awful. With Clinton you can expect more of the same with the government growing exponentially bigger if she were elected. With Trump, probably the same will happen since he show no signs of decreasing federal spending. So again, there is no loss in voting for someone who would make a difference, and make a good difference if elected. And you know, it just might happen. It just might happen.

HBD, While I very much agree with you that I too am outraged by the demands of the gay community to force their commerce upon small businesses, NONE of the articles you sent said a word about delivering or serving said cake. I read all 3 articles.
So, if the lawsuit is over refusing to create a generic wedding cake I see no difference between that and serving a black at a lunch counter.

It doesn't (as long as it is a private diner or bus).

It's an issue and it's slippery slope that Johnson does not elect to fight. He wants to move on to more important , easier to explain winnable issues
(in his judgement) and not get bogged down in other areas.

Johnson won't win. Clinton or Trump will. Given waht is at stake with future court and agency appointments, we better rally around Trump or find 4 more Ginsburgs on the bench and a bunch of Comeys (and worse) running the federal agencies.

so much for liberty from a libertarian candidate for president...

I'm getting 'old' but I agree !! I LOVE seeing the establishment on BOTH sides in a panic over Trump !!

Johnson has said he thinks a guaranteed min income might be a good idea.

Forget him.

They might have that sign, but I don't think it allows them to do that. As far as I'm aware it is illegal to discriminate on a number of qualities such as race, religion, handicap or familial status.
Any constitutional or civil rights attorney's on this site (probably not !) who can inform this question ??

Hmmm, are you SURE that the bakers refused on the grounds that they had to serve the cake ? Delivery, probably, as I think that is SOP for a bakery for a multi-tiered large wedding cake, although it might be an optional charge if the customer wants to save the delivery fee and pick it up themselves. But 've NEVER heard of a bakery SERVING their cake at a wedding though. That is handled by the catering company I believe. So, let's go on the assumption that I'm correct, and all a baker is being asked is to MAKE a generic wedding cake (ie. no personalization such as "Mary and Judy Congratulations on your wedding!"), can or should the law require them to make and sell a generic cake ? And if not, how would that be different from racial discrimination ??
As 'they' say, the devil is in the details !

Besides business not being forced to give a service other than when paid for, a business can not use government to stay in business when the business discriminates against potential customers by religious-political beliefs. One is in business to serve customers and sometime that means getting a bit of bile in you mouth. I had to put up with a lot of nonsense in my business. I only quit one elderly woman because I let politics get in the way. She kept wanting Universal Service so that certain miscreants would be put into proper their places. I just could not let that pass, considering that the draft, after a great political fight, had recently been stopped in favor of a voluntary military.
The whole idea that somehow an association is enough to pass evil to another is a very primitive way of seeing reality. Got a business, do the business and serve your customer and save mental reforming for later. If dealing with a gay couple will harm you in some way mentally, then you have an integrity and self esteem problem.
As an atheist, I have dealt with theists all my life. Should I have avoided dealing with them? I have a gay brother. Should I stop being his brother and disassociate with him for the rest of our lives? I have an alcoholic-drug addicted brother who had stolen my identity which got me arrested until the police could collect some fines to take off the cuffs. In that case I have not associated with him for over 30 years mainly because he still considers me to be the cause of his life going bad and why it was OK to threaten to kill me on several occasions.
In business you serve any customer who is civil and not threatening in some way. In a way, business ethics is divorced from certain personal beliefs. E.g., one does not concern oneself with the personal value structure of the customer. You give him the benefit of the doubt as one should do to any stranger and even those whom you know.

There are a bunch of us oldsters (I'm 73) here and we pretty much are on the same page......

He is not what he was a few years ago..........

Good use of pastries!!!

Answer: As to the lunch counter, it doesn't. That leads us back to the 1964 Civil Rights law. Johnson remembers what happened to Barry Goldwater who voted against that law. He just wants votes and wants to avoid this whole topic because he is afraid of being called anti-gay or racist (which is exactly what happened to Goldwater).

" I will govern according to the Constitution, regardless of the political consequence." "I will order investigations - to be available to the public, into all extra -Constitutional actions by the previous administration." Those are the words of a leader...too bad one isn`t running.

What? How does that make sense? That would be such an obvious ploy that I don't think the baker could get away with it.

Ever notice how many businesses have a sign about their 'right to refuse service to anyone'? Noticed one last night.

Yes, he's crazy PC! Thanks.
Now I have two reasons gained in one day.
I was already thinking he is a wimp.

I agree. I am old. I just need him to slow it down until I die. Also, I love seeing the Establishment in such a panic --- beats most modern movies for entertainment.

Agree! According to Johnson, let them eat cake just not the icing. Doesn't he realize how crazy PC he is sounding.

FOF (disguised as those in support of freedom)! I am inclined to believe that we have more to dread from those claiming our values than from those who openly, and with full cognizance of the logical consequences of their premises, mouth their evil.