Can Libertarian Gary Johnson Get 5% Of The Vote?


#1

Can Libertarian Gary Johnson Get 5% Of The Vote?

I don’t know if it’s possible (notwithstanding the incredible unpopularity of Clinton/Trump). But achieving 5% of the popular vote nationwide would mean “major party” status for a third party for the first time ever.

I guess I won’t go to bed too early tomorrow night.


#2

For the first time since the 1920s or 1930s.

3rd parties hit their lowest point in the 1950s at the dawn of the Cold War and have been slowly building since then.


#3

I didn’t vote Libertarian, but I do support third parties, and it would be great to see an alternative to what we currently have. Achieving five percent means that the party will receive public funding and automatic ballot access in all fifty states (I think). This would be huge, since the Libertarian Party can focus their energy on things besides trying to get ballot access every four years. Good luck to them!


#4

I doubt it. In 2012, the Libertarian (Gary Johnson again) won its largest share of the vote ever - just shy of 1%.

It would be a tall order to quintuple your largest vote share ever.


#5

Indeed.

Frankly, I think the Constitution Party’s candidate, Darrel Castle, is probably a better candidate than Johnson … but I also appreciate the idea of making one’s vote count, so I believe I will vote GEJ. :thumbsup:


#6

This advice would make sense to me if I believed in the platform being put forth by the Libertarian Party.

Unfortunately, the Libertarian Party favors abortion rights as a part of their platform and that is not a political party that I want to gain traction in this country.


#7

BTW, in my district, in the congressional race, there is the incumbent (Democrat) going up against a Libertarian and an Independent. There is no Republican option.

I will be voting for the Independent candidate (I’ve looked up what he’s running on and it pretty much mirrors that of the Constitution Party).

I can’t in good conscience vote to empower another pro-abortion political party.


#8

Maybe you’re right. I think this election cycle has affected my basic sense for standards of “a good candidate”. In a word “settling”.


#9

OIC. An article said it would be the first time … but I don’t believe everything I read. :cool:


#10

Side question: Did anyone here vote in the Libertarian primary? I wasn’t able to because of where I live; but I was hoping that Austin Petersen would win it. (He’s pro-life, so I could have gotten behind him more than I can Johnson.)


#11

johnsonweld.com/15_reasons_why_a_vote_for_gov_gary_johnson_matters


#12

For the first time since 1996.


#13

Indeed. “The Reform Party’s presidential candidate for the 2000 election was due [to] federal matching funds of $12.5 million, based on Perot’s 8% showing in 1996.” (Wikipedia)

Interesting times, what with Ross Perot, Donald Trump, and Pat Buchanan.:cool:


#14

P.S. But when you come down to it, I think the big difference between Perot and Trump is that Trump understood what Perot (and Buchanan) did not: that despite what anybody might say about “independents”, the Presidential election should come down to 2 candidates, then everyone can express themselves through voting for one of those two.

Debaters will probably never agree as to whether Perot was responsible for the first Bush losing his re-election bid, but what they don’t talk about is, Could Perot have won a head-to-head race against the first Clinton? I think he absolutely could have.


#15

I don’t like the two party system. You shouldn’t be forced to vote for someone that doesn’t represent you because that’s kind of the antithesis to democracy anyway. Now, with regards to the “wasted vote”, well, it’s my vote to waste. I voted third party, and Trump still won, so…how was I giving Clinton my vote? I did not vote Johnson because of the abortion issue. Though, he was on my ballot. With regards to Perot…if it came down to Clinton and Perot, and these were the only ones I could vote for, I’d vote for…neither, I was four years old in 1992. Now, with the “protests”(I was watching the live feed with my mother, they were riots, not protests, protests are fine, riots are not) going on, I am even more disgusted with the two party system. I wish I could wake up from this two party nightmare. I apologise if I offended anyone, but Trump has said…some messed up things about people with American Indian backgrounds (which I have). That’s not to say other parties are exempt, for instance. Democrats did little to stop the spread of slavery in the 1800s and Republicans in recent years seem to be obsessed with war. There’s got to be more to life than anger at the president having a (D) or ® next to their name. There are warmongering Democrats, and pro choice Republicans, so I can’t just put this all under one party. America needs to come together. I’m sorry for my rant Peter. On the upside, an independent Candidate got a good chunk of the vote in Utah. Unfortunately, Google says Utah is still counting votes (it’s been 78% for a while now…)


#16

I’m not sure she did get your vote (though I wouldn’t put too much past her ;).)

Actually, notwithstanding my statement that “Trump understood what Perot (and Buchanan) did not: that despite what anybody might say about “independents”, the Presidential election should come down to 2 candidates, then everyone can express themselves through voting for one of those two”, I myself threw my vote away on a third party … but then, it was clear that HRC would win my state in any case, so I don’t see it as throwing much away.

I did not vote Johnson because of the abortion issue. Though, he was on my ballot. With regards to Perot…if it came down to Clinton and Perot, and these were the only ones I could vote for, I’d vote for…neither, I was four years old in 1992. Now, with the “protests”(I was watching the live feed with my mother, they were riots, not protests, protests are fine, riots are not) going on, I am even more disgusted with the two party system. I wish I could wake up from this two party nightmare. I apologise if I offended anyone, but Trump has said…some messed up things about people with American Indian backgrounds (which I have). That’s not to say other parties are exempt, for instance. Democrats did little to stop the spread of slavery in the 1800s and Republicans in recent years seem to be obsessed with war. There’s got to be more to life than anger at the president having a (D) or ® next to their name. There are warmongering Democrats, and pro choice Republicans, so I can’t just put this all under one party. America needs to come together. **I’m sorry for my rant Peter. **

Well at least it was interesting. :slight_smile:

Anyhow, my personal fear – aside from the possibility that DJT will do something crazy – is that he will become the new standard for how Republicans speak and act. :frowning:


#17

you and I are in agreement on that sir


#18

The Libertarian candidate, through the years

**1996 **
Harry Browne
485,759 votes, 0.5% of total

2000
Harry Browne
384,431 votes, 0.36% of total

2004
Michael Badnarik
397,265 votes, 0.32% of total

2008
Robert Barr
523,715 votes, 0.4% of total
**
2012**
Gary Johnson
1,275,971 votes, 0.99% of total

2016
Gary Johnson
4,058,200 votes, 3.2% of total

That’s a pretty dramatic rate of increase as of late.


#19

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.