I'm well aware of what 5% does. My comment remains the same. After selecting that retard, they don't deserve anything. Maybe they should have picked someone better and they would have gotten 5%. If you can't get 5% with these two candidates running, it's pretty clear your own candidate is a fuk up

I'm well aware of what 5% does. My comment remains the same. After selecting that retard, they don't deserve anything. Maybe they should have picked someone better and they would have gotten 5%. If you can't get 5% with these two candidates running, it's pretty clear your own candidate is a fuk up

Seems like he did a decent job as governor of New Mexico. Of course I didn't live in New Mexico at the time so I don't know the details on his leadership. Other than that, his TPPP support sucked, open borders sucked, lack of foreign policy understanding sucked but he's anti drug war (very important), anti domestic spying (very important) and wants to cut the size of the government which I think is probably one of the most underrated things someone can do.

Austin Peterson will be the candidate in 2020. It would have been real nice to have the automatic ballot access and matching funds for him.

Derpa derps telling me a vote for GJ was a vote for HC when it was shown all along likely to help DJT. The LOL of it is, now it's the HC camp that are mad at third party/GJ voters.

Did Gary Johnson and Jill Stein Voters Cost Hillary Clinton The Election?

Now that Donald Trump is president-elect, despondent Hillary Clinton supporters need someone to blame.

Of course, they could blame the Democratic Party for willfully tipping the scales in favor of ensuring the nomination of a candidate who The Intercept's Glenn Greenwald aptly described as "a deeply unpopular, extremely vulnerable, scandal-plagued candidate, who — for very good reason — was widely perceived to be a protector and beneficiary of all the worst components of status quo elite corruption."

http://reason.com/blog/2016/11/09/ga...voters-clinton

The Democratic meltdown continues. Perhaps they should blame the people who nominated a candidate who the 7m 3rd party voters found unacceptable rather than blaming those voters for not voting for a candidate they found unacceptable. It's incredibly arrogant to just assume that your candidate is the "lesser of two evils" that all 3rd party voters should have voted for when all of those people, in fact, did not vote for your candidate despite common knowledge of how bad the other major party candidate was.

Had the Dems nominated Jim Webb, I would have supported him over Trump in a heartbeat. Clinton? Not so much. It's THEIR fault, not mine.

Source? You realize privatization of prisons happened a long time ago right? I agree it's not an idea on paper I'd agree with either, but I need to see details, like the "but dem open borders mate!" from those who have not actually examined the full plan. For example, he feels the reason the prisons are bursting with people is due to the failed "war on drugs" which he'd end if we could, and he's right. So, look at the big picture and don't allow hyperbole to guide you.

It's true that prison privatization isn't a new concept, but the impact and details matter. The focus should be on understanding the full plan rather than reacting to slogans or misconceptions like "open borders." Addressing issues like the failed "war on drugs" could indeed alleviate overcrowding. Let's consider the big picture and avoid being swayed by hyperbole.