You worry about your conscience and I'll take care of mine. As I've said before, I don't agree that Romney is the "lesser of two evils", but Obama IS the devil and he needs to go...my vote's mission is to boot him out sooooooo we can make sure of HAVING another election that we can haggle over (or not)...at which time I will hop on your 3rd party band wagon. Sometimes you have to clear the path before the real clean-up can get done. One step at a time. (I respect your opinion, and even agree to a certain point. Maybe the 3 of you-- you, Mooch, and Benj-- are all right and the rest of us are wrong, but I know that I have hashed this out in my head a million times and I keep coming back to where I am. We have common ground, which is how we all wound up here, but we are not carbon copies of each other and we will not always agree. And if we did how fricken boring would our discussions be? Something I was thinking about earlier, in regards to this topic... I'm hoping for a cleaner, smoother transition of smaller government (as it pertains to the masses and their dependency on a big gov), less regulation, etc etc....instead of a quick, pull the rug out from under the masses kind of a change because I see that as causing a complete uprising that would hurt us all on some level, which is how (I believe) a Ron Paul or Johnson would do it. Don't get me wrong...I'm not completely against an uprising, per se, but I'd rather have a smoother, more gradual change, IF possible. I have elderly parents and sons to consider. I know we will talk more about this after Tuesday and I look forward to it. :)

LS... if your vote does not relfect your values, reason dictates that your conscience should not be clean. I am amazed that here... in "The Gulch" of all places, anyone would even attempt to argue otherwise.

Tim... Ayn Rand was an advocate of REASON... something your post is sorely lacking.

First, saying that my vote for Johnson is a vote that will "count for Obama" is patently absurd. You are assuming that if I didn't vote for Johnson, I would vote for Romney. I would NEVER vote for Romney. His policies are almost as statist as Obama's.

Likewise, your statement that a vote for a Libertarian is a vote for Socialism is silly at best, and just plain nonsense.

My only choice is between abstaining my vote for Prez or voting for Johnson.

Your mistaken belief that Libertarians and Conservatives are "mostly on the same page regarding economics" shows how little you know about the Libertarian Party and the libertarian (small L) movement. Politcians like Romney, Bush, Cheney etc. claim to be conservatives... and then they promote statist policies like massive mandatory health-care programs. Are you really naive enough to believe there is no difference between Libertarians and Conservatives in regards to economic issues?

Next... this election is NOT just about the economy... it is about a way of life. We are either a free people or we are not. Your Conservative cronies might slow the rate of growth of government in the economy... but they will never actually SHRINK the scope and pervue of government... and they would invade my rights as an individual at least as much as the Dems.

Next... Obama does not LOVE Libertarians. In fact, pay attention to what is happening in Colorado, where Johnson is appealing to traditional liberal Dems and threatening to push the state's electorate to Romney.

No "friend"... my vote is a reasoned response to the circumstances of the day and is in keeping with my values. Your vote apparently reflects YOUR values.

I suggest you read Atlas Shrugged again.

I don't doubt for one second that everyone here (in the Gulch) will be voting with a clean conscience on Tuesday. I hope after all of the election dust settles, no matter who wins, that we will all continue to meet here and exchange ideas and opinions and plot a plan for the next election (if there is one). God Bless America! :)

Thank you Ben. I was beginning to think I was alone here.

I too am disappointed in what I have found here. I thought I would find true Objectivists and individuals rooted in reasoned thinking. Instead I'm finding short-term pragmatic arguments about solutions which will simply compound our problems.

Those who advocate that we once again voice our support for something or someone we really don't believe in don't get it... and probably never will.

Those of you who STILL believe that voting for the lesser of two evils is the right thing to do will have to live with your choice later. Your vote will NOT show up as a warning to the statists on both sides of the aisle... you will accomplish nothing.

I, for one, will have a clear conscience. MY VOTE will be a clear message... no more of the status quo... I am an advocate for reason.

"Who is the guiltiest man in the room?"

Francisco was NOT talking about James Taggert.

Think about it!

Well said. Thank you.

Agreed completely, but I consider the entertainment industry part of the media category. Culture is more abstract and is the combination/culmination of all of these elements.

You are so right. But I want to add one. I think we also have to affect Culture/Entertainment. So many Americans nowadays have no interest in anything except entertainment and pop culture. But nearly all entertainment out there celebrates the opposite of the "ideas (not politics)" that will heal us. That is why movies like AS2 are so important. We need more and more entertainment vehicles to deliver these messages to the masses.It saddens me that we have to use these methods, that we can't just read flippin' books. But it is true.

I didn't say you were secondhanded. I said it's a secondhanded thought to compare votes. When I vote, I think of what the best vote is, not what everyone else is doing and if my vote will count more or less than theirs.

The death of the two parties won't be at the end of an election cycle, but the beginning. If people stopped donating to either of the two major parties and attending their events (or conversely started donating to a third party and attending their events) then things would change.

Voting in an election is a short term action. It's what you do the rest of the year that matters.

I come here to find reason, not main stream media mush opinions. I'm disappointed in the members here who hold onto this "voting for Gary Johnson is helping Obama" tripe.

Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan aren't the salvation from Obama. They are just more of the same.

People like Ron Paul and Gary Johnson are the ones who could bring our country back and put it on top again. But it isn't going to happen until we open our eyes and take control. Shrugger is right: "voting for the lesser of two evils is still a vote for evil."

Freedom and liberty mean owning the responsibilities to maintain them, not cowering under the boot of the majority. Those who admonish "looking at reality", to you I say this: We can change the way our country is ran. If every one of you who says "Libertarians are right, but they can't win" would vote Libertarian... they might win. Or at least as Shrugger is pointing out, "get noticed".

For too long the American people have allowed themselves to be silenced and simply compromise with our politics and be forced into a two party system. It's time to stand up for what's right, not the popular choice.

Do the research and make up your own mind. Find out exactly who Obama, Romney and Johnson are. Forget their politic party affiliations and look at what they believe in and stand for. Then make your own choice of who can run our country best.

I will be voting for Gary Johnson this November 6th. Many of my friends and family members will be, also, because we want America back.

Well said.

I live in a blue state. My vote for Romney won't achieve anything anyway, so I had already planned to vote for Gary Johnson. I much prefer him to Romney anyway.

Third party votes usaually affect close elections in a negative way by the third party's standards. Third parties need to build at the local and state level first. This time a third party run for President can only do more damage than good.

More people need to listen to talk radio. Period. And I'll say this one more time... Obama HAS to go...or there might not BE another election. Get B.O. out the door and I'll jump on your third party band wagon (provided foreign policy gets bumped up a bit).

Unfortunately, I have to agree with you, in part. Using the word "FORCED" was not quite correct.

I was probably thinking more about the secondary media market, rather than the main stream media, which I have all but forgotten about.

If the Libertarian vote reached 10%, I believe that the secondary media sources (i.e. talk-radio, commentators, blogs, etc.), would need to sit up and take notice of libertarian values more if they wanted to remain responsive to their listeners/viewers/readers.

In this, I am reminded of how certain conservative talk-radio hosts were eventually "cajoled" into interviewing Dr. Paul ONLY after his followers bombarded them with complaints for their lack of appropriate coverage on his campaign.

There is a cover up going on in the White-house (Benghazi-Gate) and the main stream media is barely talking about it so I wouldn't count on them sitting up and taking notice (of "FORCED" to pay attention) if a Libertarian gets a few votes.

Show me where I'm wrong about Libertarian party's stance on our interests stop at our borders. It isn't reasonable to think that could ever be the case. Consider the Cold War. When someone can send an ICBM to reach us in 30 minutes, we have a vested interest in promoting Freedom throughout the World and we don't have to wait until someone has crossed our shores to cause us harm. That's hardly promoting altruism. This was part of the argument used by Jefferson in response to Barbary Coast pirates.

I disagree with your assessment. Rand was prescient on terrorism against the U.S. Oil aside, in part because I think that will take us down a rabbit hole here on this page, the war in Afghanistan and Iraq was NOT started as an altruistic intervention or nation-building. They were due to acts and serious threats on our sovereign land and our interests abroad. If conquered countries are rebuilt with sound Constitutions in place as described earlier, we should be out of there. Here is the atlas society's position on 9/11 written by Peikoff:

http://www.aynrand.org/site/News2?page=N...

Rand believed in self-defense, but she was not a supporter of intervention, especially for altruistic purposes (i.e., nation-building). She wrote, "Which type of government is more likely to plunge a country into war: a government of limited powers, bound by constitutional restrictions - or an unlimited government, open to the pressure of any group with warlike interests or ideologies, a government able to command armies to march at the whim of a single chief executive?"

She would later reiterate her support for self-defense, but she did NOT support interventionism, at least not in the way it's practiced today.

And most libertarians do not oppose self-defense as a reason for military action. I'm not certain where that premise comes from.

I WON'T be to blame if Obama gets reelected...but you might.

I see four other main techniques:

1. Living your life rationally and productively
2. Talk to your friends when they have an open ear about ideas (not politics).
3. Affect the education system.
4. Affect the media.

You're right. Your vote will count for something. Your vote will count as a vote for Obama. You need to take a hard look at reality friend. You can hold on to the belief that your Libertarian vote is a real vote for change but in reality, your vote is only a vote for Socialism. Here's why - Libertarians and Conservatives are mostly on the same page regarding economics. Social issues and foreign policy not so much but, economics, yep. And what's this election about? It's about jobs and the economy. No one cares about social issues - social issues are just political tools - and no one pays attention to foreign policy.

This election is about the ECONOMY.

Obama LOVES Libertarians, Not their politics, just their mindset. HE LOVES YOU because he knows your Libertarian vote is a vote not for Romney. That's the reality of the situation.

You vote for Johnson and that's +1 Obama.

"You can avoid reality but you can not avoid the consequences of avoiding reality." - Ayn Rand

And by the way, Ayn Rand was an advocate of CAPITALISM not Libertarianism.

I'm sorry LS, but I just can't agree with you. A vote for Johnson is a vote for Johnson, NOT for Obama. If others choose to vote for Obama, they will be the ones responsible for his re-election... NOT YOU!