Any Rand believed in private property rights and capitalism. The UN has stated their desire to do away with capitalism, could not be any plainer. They have also stated that private property owned by individuals is "unsustainable", and that it has to end. If they are against what Rand told us is of value, how is that a conspiracy? Hitler also believed in environmentalism, and putting nature above people, as a means to an end. The UN has been very clear about their desire to end capitalism. Do you say go with Hillary then, what do you want?She has made clear her love of Marxism. Where is this ideal candidate that will meet all criteria and still result in the winning of an election and the saving of capitalism and property rights? We don't live in the Gulch in everyday life, we share the space with some very uneducated or easily swayed people, who will vote against their own best interests. What do you suggest we do?

"Johnson’s media exposure has skyrocketed in the past month." http://www.abqjournal.com/804170/john...
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07...

I will support Johnson, but probably not vote for him, as voting for him would help Hillary. Its a good time for Johnson to expose Libertarian principles to the populace and gain support, though.

I think Trump breaking up the establishment a little will make it easier for 3rd parties to win in the next election. Sanders was railroaded this time by the democratic system, and I was disappointed he caved into the empty promises of hillary and gave up his "movement"

During my lifetime the "major" parties have never been as fractured as they are now. But by all means, vote Republican no matter how many times they sell you down the river. I'm sure they'll appreciate your support as they continue to fund Obamacare and play "bipartisan" games with the Democrats.

LOL, I don't believe your most polls. An independent hasn't even come close during my life time.

My memory for history has been pretty solid, but this memory had faded. The fact that this memory had faded was part of the Cloward-Piven strategy of overwhelming opposition with so many egregious violations that some of them get through. Thanks for the reminder.

Also, there seem to be a number of clowns in the leadership.

I voted FOR Reagan...that was the last time I willing voted for someone...

Mrs. Clinton is uglier.
In any case, the Trumpeter hasn't named a VP as yet, so we'll see very soon.

Too busy smokin pot now days, I think...erodes the brain after a while...

Most polls show Gary Johnson taking more votes from Hillary than from Trump. And even aside from that, are you willing to perpetually support a failed two-party system just because the Republican is usually a little less bad than the Democrat? That's certainly not a recipe for liberty.

That was the beginning of agenda 21...it was pretty tame then...got worse as time marched on...now it's agenda 2030.
Ya...I wonder too if he's still on board with it...

He is worse now and it isn't irrelevant. The "ecology" movement, aka viros, is a very big part of the statist assault on private property rights.

The viros are intensifying their controls and lobbying for more money. EPA has made new rules for itself controlling arbitrary land in the name of the Clean Water Act, shutting down coal mines, etc. The National Park Service is expanding and imposing more controls with other agencies, bypassing laws requiring Congressional approval using agency rule-making and presidential decrees of National Monuments. Viro activists are suing the government to "force" it through "friendly law suits" in collaboration with ideologues inside the agencies to impose restrictions, including using "Endangered Species" as the excuse. New legislation would provide more money to USFWS to expand with eminent domain. They are on the verge of making the Land and Water Conservation Fund, used to buy private property under the threat of eminent domain, permanent -- as a step towards making it an entitlement immune from appropriations at all. This is very serious.

Donald "eminent domain is wonderful" Trump and "intellectual" Newt "Creationist Contract on the Planet" Gingrich is an ugly combination.

Not sure. The first time I voted was when I voted Against Bill on his 2nd run and I have voted against someone every single time since. Never have had a candidate I could get behind who actually had a chance but I will try to prevent what I see as a worse option.

What happened to the days when we voted For someone and not against someone....

Hey, only if Trump gets in would you get that wish. And you are right, that would be very, very, very entertaining.

No where near as entertaining as Hillary being prosecuted and executed.
I'd better get to producing so I can leave the country ;^)

Nevertheless, they would be a more interesting (than Hildebeast) speed bump on the USA's road to oblivion.......

Hey, since I think we agree that all the current candidates are not what we would prefer, I'm going to vote for the one that will be most entertaining: Trump.

I might have agreed a while back when I was seriously looking into the L party, until I decided that while Johnson said mostly the right words, I came to the conclusion that he had neither the drive nor charisma needed to put a "new" party on the map.

Well! I had forgotten Gingrich's eco-freak mentality.
You've gotta admit it was a while ago. I wonder where he stands on the issue currently. In any case, I still think he'll make a good candidate, and a great hatchet man, which is the V.P.'s primary job. With all of the messes needing cleaning up if Trump wins, I don't think ecology will play much of a part.

I will join you for one also

I do not see any viable candidate to win against Hillary, except Trump, and Hillary MUST NOT BE ALLOWED TO WIN!

Scary as this sounds I would even vote for Jessi Jackson over Hillary, and God knows that would be a HORROR STORY.

I wish that there were someone who could win other than Trump but there isn't so I will vote Trump to prevent Hillary.

I would say either candidate is just a terrible choice. why make a bad choice when Gary Johnson is a solid choice? The way I see it, you are better off picking a third party candidate. You might end up with Hillary but if she is vote in with less than 50% of the vote it will be a very weak presidency. Where she would lack a popular vote it will be difficult for her enact her own agenda. Trust me.

If a 3rd party wins the election, I will disseminate a picture of me eating a hat in the shape of Uncle Sam's topper.