There is another option: https://www.khou.com/article/news/l...te-running-against-cruz-orourke/285-598147074
I probably have as much of a chance of getting the votes from any of the self-identifying "liberterians" here as Dikeman. No... all those "independent" voters will vote as they always do... as republicans.
He libertarians I’m talking about aren’t random people on the internet, these are people that volunteered on Ron Paul and Gary Johnson’s campaign along with local officials. The people on this go under issues, then trade.
but thats not breitbart, which you said is the only reliable source of info. how can you trust this article? isnt everyone but breitbart "leftist" and liars? by the way, if trump wasnt president and the GOP hadnt gone bat-s*** crazy this is the candidate i would be voting for...ive always voted for 3rd party candidates as a protest vote against the two-party monopoly, but trumpublicans forced me to chose sides and im voting straight ticket democrat until republicans get some sanity back.
libertarian candidate on the issues... he is solidly against trump and the trumpublicans on many issues including spending, debt, trade, drug legalization and gay rights. https://www.nealdikeman.com/issues
Fixed it for you. I'm embarrassed for my country and the way these "red pill" people have lost their collective minds. In what world can a "christian" or "conservative" think Drumph and his Indicted Friends are the doing what is good for the people of this country.
Someone here had asked me about what news sources I watched, and here is a YouTube channel I watch quite often: Stefan Molyneaux, FreeDomain Radio (this one is on the SCOTUS hearings). I agree with about 80-90% of what he says, in general. He definitely leans Libertarian. FWIW and for anyone who interested.
Electric shock experiment? Intended or is the link wrong? sorry. This is in response to BruceAndre's clip.
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/ne...ter-registration-record-with-1-6-13258057.php Should be a fascinating watch on election night to see how, or if, all these new voters vote.
Interesting but not surprising. I don't feel that I have personally attacked anyone here, although I feel that has happened to me. ("tool" etc.) It must be that some people find ideas injurious -- which says more about them than me, IMO.
No, you saw the video I posted. I agree with you, I didn't understand that part either. Like I said, I agree with 80-90% of what he says. He goes off on a tangent occasionally. The part of the SCOTUS hearings was on the mark, IMO. Whatever point he was making about the Nazi experiments did not make sense. Overall, Molyneaux is very incisive and compelling with his takes on current events, and it's a narrative you won't hear in the MSM.
See, people are misunderstanding me -- perhaps willfully. I haven't said what I think about "free trade" (if there ever can truly be such). What I said above was that I don't think that the imposition of tariffs by Trump undoes the good that the tax cuts bring. (If indeed the tariffs have brought US consumers any harm at all.) Further to the point, the tax cut is not just benefitting individuals, it is benefitting businesses. It isn't a coincidence that we have a white hot economy now, and the arguably the lowest unemployment ever, in the wake of the tax cut. Now, as far as free trade/tariffs go, I am somewhat mixed in my view -- which goes against your statement that I think anything definitive about it. I am generally for free trade. But can you really have "free trade" when wages, worker/environmental protections, etc., are often so wildly different between countries? To say nothing of currency manipulation. If you take some of these issues into account, some sort of tariff may be warranted in some situations. Moreover, if you look at the history of the United States, the hyper industrialization and the US's consequent rise to world power in the latter nineteenth century was very much made possible by the strong tariffs that existed (imposed by the US on other industrial nations) at that time. So, tariffs can be useful and serve a purpose. Yes, that was then and this is now. Here's another more recent example: NAFTA, which is ostensibly a free trade arrangement. Perhaps in many ways it has been beneficial to the US and Mexican economies. But there it also made some problems worse. It has been pointed out to me that Mexican farmers that wanted to grow corn, and export it to the USA, could not really compete with corn produced in the US, which is subsidized. And because of this, it was suggested to me (by someone who has dual US-Mexico citizenship) that Mexican farmers "had to" turn to growing....let's just call it "other crops." I'm generally for free trade. But as you can see from the above, things are often (maybe always) complicated, and I, at least, recognize that.
thats hilarious coming from someone who dismisses any news that does not come from breitbart or some random youtube channel as leftists and liars. forget "ideas", you find facts injurious. so much so that you dismiss any news sources that report said facts as "leftist". again, you are so far out there that you actually said fox news, bloomberg and the wall street journal are leftist...and you said the only reliable sources of info are breitbart and some random youtube channel. it says everything we need to know about where youre coming from.
