I am afraid that the difference made will hurt the Rs
more than the Ds, resulting in a 3rd BHO term. . not
a pretty sight. -- j
.

I have been thinking along the same lines; words have meaning. Whenever I heard the phrase 'crony capitalism' I felt the taint against the word capitalism. The taint was by design. I will continue to educate those who misuse that phrasing.

And, we'll unstink this mess -- how?

The internet makes a difference. Before the MSM controlled the polling and what/who was presented to them. With the Internet, "trending" changes that. If we daily do searches for "libertarian", and "Gary Johnson" that will move him up in the trending list and thus draw attention. I also think, the MSM wants someone else to come in and mix things up more. The want another November of hanging chads. I think Johnson will do that. But he has to get that exposure

Ayn Rand criticized the Libertarians of 40 years ago for not having a solid philosophical basis for their principles. Since then the Libertarians have gained a large infusion of Objectivist members and philosophy. It was her associate, Peter Schwartz, who most strongly condemned the Libertarians of that day for wanting to cut off all foreign aid, and that would have hurt Israel. That was the main strike against Libertarians. Today's Libertarians are more aligned with individual freedom than any other political group.

I agree that it is unfortunate that the meaning of capitalism (the still unknown ideal) is being tainted by being coupled with "crony", but it is not incorrect. "Cronyism" alone can apply in other contexts of collusion.

We have to use words as people understand them. With ordinary folks I have some success in equating capitalism with the popular Kickstarter program.

Stick to your principles. Don't be cowed into voting based on fear induced by statist propaganda. That's how this stinking mess happened. HRM Donnie can't be trusted any more than Empress Hillary.

GOP is filled with frauds. the so called republican party (now the rightwing of the left).
They do not have any solutions to issues. For example :Healthcare costs are exorbitant. With ACA Obamacare .There was a crisis at emergency rooms filled with uninsured people using them like office visits causing ambulances to reroute during critical emergencies in major metro areas often with fatal results.That could be fixed with a different approach.

It is obvious the healthcare system is bloated with uncontrollable expenses the way the current system dysfunctions. A huge expense is CYA. Brought about by a vulgar legal liability.
Enabled by the AMA--- they allow bad doctors to continue to practice. (10% of Doctors cause 90% malpractice cases).
Health Insurance money is massive and wasteful in addition to taking away an individual's self determination how to spend their own money. Republicans lack a solutions based approach to opposition of ACA.

So they are an easy target from the left . They say
" see Republicans don't want you to have healthcare"
Same story on many issues. They are weak on creativity and consciousness.

So called public servants ( Kakistocrats) spend most of their time raising $ to be reelected.
They don't get the message out about the disaster of failed welfare programs or personal responsibility.
The list goes on and on.

Your knowledge is right on the money. However, having it happen this November is a fantasy. I have come to the conclusion of anyone except Hillary. Even if it is Trump -- so be it. If Trump turns out bad, Mrs. Clinton will be X10.

Agree! It seems like eons that I have been holding my nose when walking into a voting booth.

I agree about the GOP, they are idiotically suicidal. How can they botch an election that wa all but a sure thing after 8 years of O?

I hope you are right. If not, she or sanders is exactly what we'll get.

The Political Future of Freedom (Edward Hudgins): Found in Wikipedia: Politics: involves the use of power by one person (read: "entity" or "political party") to affect (read: "compel") the behavior of another. There are no political candidates to vote "for", only "against". I know with some degree of animosity where Hillary and Sanders will take this country; Trump will endorse the whim of the day or the hour; Johnson has little to offer except chasing the electoral votes away from others. -- I believe the more appropriate venue for attention is the US Senate and then the House which vie for cronyism and collusion in the acidic name of compromise. The members of the legislative herd abdicated long ago.

I like what I hear from Johnson and Weld -- mostly. But I have always thought that the Libertarian Party was not a "serious" party. In the past it has been a vehicle for people calling themselves Libertarians to have a more intensive debate every 4 years or so. To be a real party, they must raise lots of money, get grassroots organizations growing nationwide, and laboring 24/7 to make it relevant in the eyes of voters. It just reminds me of people still playing house though having grown up. I'll take them seriously when they take themselves seriously.

PS: Some idiot doing a chubby strip doesn't inspire seriousness.

“Now, that’s the side of Bernie that has to do with pro-choice, pro-marriage equality, let’s stop with the military interventions, that there is crony capitalism, that government really isn’t fair when it comes to this level playing field, legalize marijuana,” he said. “Look, 73 percent of what Bernie says I agree with. We come to a T in the road when it comes to economics. I would really argue that if we absolutely had a fair system of economics, that free markets, that we would do a lot better than going down the– going down the path of socialism.” - Gary Johnson

However, since all the demrep candidates are looting liars who will never do the pro-liberty, free-market things they say, it doesn't matter if Johnson "agrees" with what Bernie says because Bernie is a looting liar.

FWIW, I took the "test" at www.isidewith.com and agreed most with Johnson, and least with Hillary. Hillary, Bernie and Jill sloshed around near the bottom with HRM Donnie in the middle of the disgusting bottle of poison. Only Johnson rose to the top.

Right now, a third party would only benefit the opposing party from which the third party is created. If a third a party viable candidate campaigns with ideas and principles throughout a campaign, then it would make a difference. At this point NO.

At this point it all sounds like cry baby stuff, "I don't like it so I won't play", even if it means fundamentally changing the supreme court for the next few generations into the future.
Every intelligent argument I've heard or article I've read is either a year too late or 3 years too early. The time has come, the battlelines are drawn. It's time to join the battle and try to influence the next four years. Anything less is just commentary.

Politics must follow philosophy as AR said. Its way too early to expect anything good out of elections now

There are just not enough voters to win an election yet. All it will do now is help elect that witch Hillary

Agreed. We (America's Citizens) have allowed the Supreme Court to usurp too much power...way more than the Constitution ever granted (anyone remember 3 EQUAL branches of government...Judicial, Executive, Legislative)
Now, (IMHO) a vote for the President is going to sway this out of control branch for generations to come. I will not vote for Hillary because of this, as well as several other factors. A Trump vote is the only way to block the liberal ideology from being further ingrained into our society. Something could/should be said of the lack of quality candidates in all parties. I, for one, am tired of holding my nose when walking into the voting booth..."Lesser of Two-Evils" argument.

If one looks at the unbelievable bashing of Trump, one can easily see what would befall the Libertarian party if they were even moderately successful.

Libertarians are so far from both of the established parties that they will get it from all sides.

As Trump says- he just wants the voters, and thats what the libertarians need BEFORE they make a big splash politically.

All the libertarian party would do now is help elect hillary.

So somebody asked about the quote from Gary Johnson. I found it along with the entire quote on Breitbart at http://www.breitbart.com/video/2016/0...

For once it looks like voting Libertarian won't automatically elect the Dimocrat. Johnson is pulling equally from Dimocrat and Republican bases.

Libertarians need to find the big money requited to present their case with massive ad campaign.
The lefty "mainstream" media surely won't help them.
The key commentators at Fox News appear to now be backing Trump regardless of what each personally may have to say about that.

Just a gentle reminder that Ayn Rand vehemently opposed Libertarianism. Also, although I know it has wormed its way into the vernacular, there is no such thing as crony capitalism. Cronyism is corruption. Those who involve themselves in cronyism are not capitalists; they are criminals. Capitalism does not support cronyism. To use the terminology "crony capitalism" taints the concept of capitalism, and is useful as a tool for the socialist/progressive/Marxist axis who are masters of language manipulation, e.g. progressive, liberal, etc. Thoughts?

Libertarian candidate does not need to get to 270 EC votes. Just needs to stop Mr. Trump and Sec Clinton from getting to 270 EC votes. Then Presidential Election goes to new US House where the top 3 EC candidates are eligible and there is one vote per State as determined by that States Representatives (or perhaps some other process in their States Constitution). If the choice that new House faced is Mr. Trump, Sec Clinton, Gov Johnson... I could see 26 States voting for Gov Johnson.

The VP is another matter, only top two got to US Senate so R or D choice for VP would be new VP depending on how US Senate elections go in November. Gov Weld is there to try to help win a State or two in the NE US.

spot on...excellent post and analysis...i have posted your presentation to facebook...