i say you may be off base. We the people will not allow another crony federal government. Unfortunately the baggage of the current group of "anti-establishment" candidates have not gained enough traction due to the current seemingly crony system. I like RP too, but know a vote for anyone besides the established republican is a vote for the communist. We the People can only hope the rising stars of Rand And Gary Johnson like candidates can soon be an option. BUT UNTIL THEN, ABO - its our only hope.

not speak up against government, but to present ideas of a solution like John Galt presents in the novel.

On the other hand, as much as I hate to say it, maybe Obama needs to win again to the country really sees what his vision is and the backlash could ctapult Johnson to the fron tof the pack.

I'm not saying your vote is a "bastard" as you put it. I'm saying that if we can get someone to start to trun things in the right direction then prehaps Johnson stands a great chance next time around.

I can see on the side bar that you're commenting but it's not showing here unless you reply to the post one position in from this one.

Who decides who has a "legitimate" chance? You are saying that because I choose a 3rd party that my vote is a bastard.

On top of that, it may be seen as worse to vote for a shining light of hope if that individual has no chance of winning when you could've chosen the "lesser of 2 evils" and salvaged a better future from which you still ahve a chance of fighting another day.

Have you read the novel Sue? The role of John Galt was not to speak up against government, but to do quite the opposite.

Reply to the post above if you mean to respond...I don't think we can go into a sub-topic when we're in this far.

I keep replying below but it isn't posting. I've let the admins know. What I was saying is: I don't think I am compromising my morality by voting for Romeny if he has a legitimate shot over Obama, assuming Johnson doesn't have a shot.

I figure this either needs to be a politician who understands this or a businessman who speaks out loudly against all the red tape he & his business has to get through.

But we need a John Galt.. someone to speak up against our government and continue to speak out even when the government shuts them out. Someone to bring this country together. Because just posting these simple little posts online of our opinions isn't going to make a difference.. we need a John Galt. We Need The People to come together.

I like to think that there are John Galt's everwhere out there. They fight the good fight and get back up whenever they're knocked down. They jump thorugh hoops and climb mountains to make their businesses run.

John Galt is a fictional character in a romantic novel. He's meant to represent an ideal, not predict the existence of an actual person.

I don't believe I am compromising morality. If I believe Romney would be better than Obama and Romney has a legitimate chance then I'm fine with voting for Romney, given that Johnson has no chance.

So then Gary Johnson?

“Don’t blame me, I voted for Kodos. ” -Homer Simpson

That John Adams quote is perfect. It's a choice between right and wrong and there is no compromise. I can't accept the "lesser or two evils" justification. We shouldn't compromise morality for popularity.

Voting for the lesser of two evils is still a vote for evil. I will vote for Johnson.

If you are not going to be real than how can you expect it of others

Beautiful.

The only problem with voting for the right person this time around is the risk of splitting the conservative vote in an already close race. That is exactly how Clinton got into office, and we cannot afford to risk 4 more years of BHO, the messiah.

Actually no. I like Ron Paul, but his isolationism I strongly disagree with. His monitary policy is great and I would love to see Romney choose him as secretary of state.

To me Ron Paul has mostly good values that stand the test of reason (with the exception of his isolationism), however he has been largely ineffective as he lacks the charisma to sway others to his views. As secretary of the treasury he would have the unique opportunity to put his sound monetary policies in place. As a congressmen he has shown an inability to get the support needed to get things done. This may be due to charisma, it may be do to the fact that in many ways he has been alone as a guard of fiscal sound thinking. Either way he would be better as a Secretary of treasury than as a congressmen or a president.

Again with all due respect, that would be like having a failing railroad company and settling for a bailout from a generous DC politician. .

Voting for the lesser of two evils is the reason that we have two evils.