GARY JOHNSON RECEIVES >$1 MILLION FOR 2012 CAMPAIGN - ~2BTC donated here

[420]

If anyone hasn't donated because they can't do in bitcoins

I propose to take your donations bitcoins to ME

When i have extra cash equivalent I donate to Gary Johnson

I will donate an ADDITION 10% of my own money to Johnson for each donation I'm getting through this

http://garyjohnson2012.com

Why trust me:

I just sold a working mining rig allowing my payment to be in escrow (over $1,000)
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115621.msg1282243#msg1282243

I made a $200 loan I paid back in the specified time
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=118536.msg1284764#msg1284764

If you're ready; New Donate address:
18gz9b1d7AbXZnafH6Jx5mzpX2EJoG87ss


TOTAL GIFTS I'VE RECEIVED:
0.5BTC @ 11.70/BTC
0.25BTC @ 11.64/BTC
1BTC @ 10.60/BTC
TOTAL: 1.75 donated to Gary by 11-6-12


Gary has received $1,063,698.61 raised from 12770 donors  as of 10:38PM pacific 11-6-12

[1715448474]

1715448474

[1715448474]

1715448474

[1715448474]

1715448474

[1715448474]

1715448474

[1715448474]

1715448474

[koin]

I propose to take your bitcoins and donate the cash equivalent at the time you send me the bitcoins

to be legal, you probably still need to record each contributor's name, street address and possibly occupation / employer, as square does here: https://squareup.com/help/en-us/article/5017-political-fundraising

[nobbynobbynoob]

Wouldn't Bitcoin donations help bypass the restrictions on foreign donors?

[MoonShadow]

Wouldn't Bitcoin donations help bypass the restrictions on foreign donors?

Nope, because no US campaign can accept anonymous donations.  Even cash at the door donations require that the donor be willing to supply the campaign with identifying information for their records.

[nobbynobbynoob]

Wouldn't Bitcoin donations help bypass the restrictions on foreign donors?

Nope, because no US campaign can accept anonymous donations.  Even cash at the door donations require that the donor be willing to supply the campaign with identifying information for their records.

Yes, there's some sense in this law. ISTR in the UK you can make anonymous donations to political parties if the amount is less than GBP 5.000 (but IANAL so don't quote me on this).

[420]

donate to me

i like to donate to gary johnson on my own

get it?

You can legally give me gifts

I can legally donate to Gary Johnson

Nothing illegal. And Bitcoin's legality is questionable itself. Are people scared in this thread?

Are you revolutionaries or cowards

[firefop]

Nah that's ok.

Gary has a serious marketing issue. He's the poster child for fiscal conservatives pretending to be libertarian, although he's at least honest about not being a libertarian. He missed the republican nomination and shouldn't run at all (if he's ethical) because any votes he takes from romney lends to obama getting a second term.

[kokojie]

Nah that's ok.

Gary has a serious marketing issue. He's the poster child for fiscal conservatives pretending to be libertarian, although he's at least honest about not being a libertarian. He missed the republican nomination and shouldn't run at all (if he's ethical) because any votes he takes from romney lends to obama getting a second term.

Yep, anyone who vote Gary Johnson is a fucking idiot, you think you are voting for Gary Johnson, when in reality you are actually voting for Obama.

[nobbynobbynoob]

Yeah, GJ is Obama. *facepalm*

Romney is Obama. Their policies are almost identical and both are bought out by Goldman Sachs.

GJ is such a neocon who wants to cut military expenditure by 43% and legalize weed. Right. (I know, in practice, if any President with libertarian leanings were elected, there's a fair chance he would be either impeached or assassinated within the first two years of office, or Congress full of crookèd Reps and Dems wouldn't rubber stamp the President's plans.)

[Topazan]

Nah that's ok.

Gary has a serious marketing issue. He's the poster child for fiscal conservatives pretending to be libertarian, although he's at least honest about not being a libertarian. He missed the republican nomination and shouldn't run at all (if he's ethical) because any votes he takes from romney lends to obama getting a second term.

Yep, anyone who vote Gary Johnson is a fucking idiot, you think you are voting for Gary Johnson, when in reality you are actually voting for Obama.

Exactly the reason why we need to change from the first-past-the-post vote system.  We really need more agitation for approval voting.

[420]

instant runoff voting would kickass

third party debate tonight:

http://action.freeandequal.org/debate-rsvp/

[grantbdev]

Nah that's ok.

Gary has a serious marketing issue. He's the poster child for fiscal conservatives pretending to be libertarian, although he's at least honest about not being a libertarian. He missed the republican nomination and shouldn't run at all (if he's ethical) because any votes he takes from romney lends to obama getting a second term.

Yep, anyone who vote Gary Johnson is a fucking idiot, you think you are voting for Gary Johnson, when in reality you are actually voting for Obama.

Nope. Anyone voting for Gary Johnson is helping him get the 5% of the popular vote he needs for federal matching funds and ballot access (and potentially debate access) that will change future races forever. And Gary Johnson takes an equal amount of votes from potential Obama voters as well.

I don't see how you think Gary Johnson is a pretend libertarian, name one issue. If anything, he is more libertarian than Ron Paul on abortion, and his stance on legalizing all drugs even makes some "self-proclaimed libertarians" cringe.

[kokojie]

Nah that's ok.

Gary has a serious marketing issue. He's the poster child for fiscal conservatives pretending to be libertarian, although he's at least honest about not being a libertarian. He missed the republican nomination and shouldn't run at all (if he's ethical) because any votes he takes from romney lends to obama getting a second term.

Yep, anyone who vote Gary Johnson is a fucking idiot, you think you are voting for Gary Johnson, when in reality you are actually voting for Obama.

Nope. Anyone voting for Gary Johnson is helping him get the 5% of the popular vote he needs for federal matching funds and ballot access (and potentially debate access) that will change future races forever. And Gary Johnson takes an equal amount of votes from potential Obama voters as well.

I don't see how you think Gary Johnson is a pretend libertarian, name one issue. If anything, he is more libertarian than Ron Paul on abortion, and his stance on legalizing all drugs even makes some "self-proclaimed libertarians" cringe.

Majority of Libertarian would vote Romney if Gary Johnson didn't run.

[420]

Nah that's ok.

Gary has a serious marketing issue. He's the poster child for fiscal conservatives pretending to be libertarian, although he's at least honest about not being a libertarian. He missed the republican nomination and shouldn't run at all (if he's ethical) because any votes he takes from romney lends to obama getting a second term.

Yep, anyone who vote Gary Johnson is a fucking idiot, you think you are voting for Gary Johnson, when in reality you are actually voting for Obama.

Nope. Anyone voting for Gary Johnson is helping him get the 5% of the popular vote he needs for federal matching funds and ballot access (and potentially debate access) that will change future races forever. And Gary Johnson takes an equal amount of votes from potential Obama voters as well.

I don't see how you think Gary Johnson is a pretend libertarian, name one issue. If anything, he is more libertarian than Ron Paul on abortion, and his stance on legalizing all drugs even makes some "self-proclaimed libertarians" cringe.

Majority of Libertarian would vote Romney if Gary Johnson didn't run.

No

[kokojie]

Yeah, GJ is Obama. *facepalm*

Romney is Obama. Their policies are almost identical and both are bought out by Goldman Sachs.

GJ is such a neocon who wants to cut military expenditure by 43% and legalize weed. Right. (I know, in practice, if any President with libertarian leanings were elected, there's a fair chance he would be either impeached or assassinated within the first two years of office, or Congress full of crookèd Reps and Dems wouldn't rubber stamp the President's plans.)

No, that's not true, I know Romney's position very well on the issues I care about, and many of them differ greatly from Obama. I doubt Romney can be easily "bought" since he's pretty rich already.

[myrkul]

Yeah, GJ is Obama. *facepalm*

Romney is Obama. Their policies are almost identical and both are bought out by Goldman Sachs.

GJ is such a neocon who wants to cut military expenditure by 43% and legalize weed. Right. (I know, in practice, if any President with libertarian leanings were elected, there's a fair chance he would be either impeached or assassinated within the first two years of office, or Congress full of crookèd Reps and Dems wouldn't rubber stamp the President's plans.)

No, that's not true, I know Romney's position very well on the issues I care about, and many of them differ greatly from Obama. I doubt Romney can be easily "bought" since he's pretty rich already.

Oh yeah... big difference, here:

[Topazan]

The choice the two parties offer is an illusion.  They are two sides to the same coin.  They really have things worked out well.  All the anger and frustration that would be correctly directed toward the system is directed to one head, then the other head becomes popular because it appears to fight the other.

By the way, kokojie, I'm probably going to vote for Johnson on principle, but if I was forced to vote for a major party member, it would probably be Obama.  So, there's that.

[420]

Oh yeah... big difference, here:

Ron Paul was not included, why?

[myrkul]

Ron Paul was not included, why?

I don't know, I didn't compile that graph. When I've seen him on there, though, he's a little north and to the left of Johnson. Not by much on either, but more north than left.

[nobbynobbynoob]

When I do those political-compass surveys I'm roughly where Rocky Anderson is, maybe a fraction lower and to the left. But of US presidential wannabes I've found Ron Paul and Gary Johnson the most appealing/least unappealing.

[420]

Gary has received $933,010.07 raised from 11075 donors as of 12:47PM pacific 10-24-12

[Explodicle]

Majority of Libertarian would vote Romney if Gary Johnson didn't run.

HELLLLL no.

The choice the two parties offer is an illusion.  They are two sides to the same coin.  They really have things worked out well.  All the anger and frustration that would be correctly directed toward the system is directed to one head, then the other head becomes popular because it appears to fight the other.

By the way, kokojie, I'm probably going to vote for Johnson on principle, but if I was forced to vote for a major party member, it would probably be Obama.  So, there's that.

+1

(sent 0.25 BTC, my identifying info is in my profile)

[MoonShadow]

Majority of Libertarian would vote Romney if Gary Johnson didn't run.

I wouldn't.

[420]

Received two bitcoin donations so far, listed on OP

[TheButterZone]

I wouldn't, but then again, in CA your vote for anyone other than the Democrat isn't counted. Op, op, op, op... Stalin Style.

[420]

I wouldn't, but then again, in CA your vote for anyone other than the Democrat isn't counted. Op, op, op, op... Stalin Style.

many states use first past the post then give all the damn electoral votes to the winner

[grantbdev]

When I do those political-compass surveys I'm roughly where Rocky Anderson is, maybe a fraction lower and to the left. But of US presidential wannabes I've found Ron Paul and Gary Johnson the most appealing/least unappealing.

Political compass questions are awful. I don't think they accurately represent the spectra.

[420]

970K now

by election day, Gary Johnson will have a million dollars in donations
(almost 100,000 bitcoins)

[Littleshop]

Yeah, GJ is Obama. *facepalm*

Romney is Obama. Their policies are almost identical and both are bought out by Goldman Sachs.

GJ is such a neocon who wants to cut military expenditure by 43% and legalize weed. Right. (I know, in practice, if any President with libertarian leanings were elected, there's a fair chance he would be either impeached or assassinated within the first two years of office, or Congress full of crookèd Reps and Dems wouldn't rubber stamp the President's plans.)

No, that's not true, I know Romney's position very well on the issues I care about, and many of them differ greatly from Obama. I doubt Romney can be easily "bought" since he's pretty rich already.

Romney has been bought already along with the majority of the members of the two parties.  Obama has plenty of money and once someone is president money becomes less of a concern since they have retirement and security covered for life.  Speaking roles and advisory positions will bring any president substantial dollars on demand.

[vokain]

I'm really hoping the best for Gary J here, bought a shirt and have been telling everyone about him to vote for him since Romney's gonna win in Indiana anyways. 5%!

[pyra-proxy]

A vote for Gary Johnson is a vote for a tri-party system, here is an explanation why:
http://www.postlibertarian.com/2012/09/the-five-percent-threshold/

so before you waste your vote by voting for the "lesser of 2 evils" or by not making your primary party have to earn your vote please reconsider how much good even a known loosing vote can do for the U.S.  At 5% any party becomes formally declared as a minor party and gets access to the same government funding as a major party gets (proportionally) and can't be shut out of being listed on ballots.  If by some hope a third party reaches a 15% popular vote they have to also be included in all major presidential debates etc. and upon reaching 25% they get full fledged major party status and access to all the benefits of a major party.

Don't waste your vote, vote for a triparty system if nothing else in hopes that politicians are forced to once again start earning your votes again.

Five percent of the vote is definitely within reach for Gary Johnson this year. His name isn’t included in polls all the time, but when it is, he’s hit 7% in New Mexico, 7% in Montana, 5% in Colorado, and 3% in Nevada, to name a few. Nationally he has hit 4% of registered voters (though only 3% of “likely voters”). Another national poll has Johnson at 6% already. They say third-party support tends to dwindle with the increasing gravity of the major parties as we get closer to Election Day, and I would not go so far as to say that it’s likely that Johnson will get 5% of the final vote.

But it’s definitely possible. Johnson is on the ballot in at least 47 states, and he’s arguably the strongest candidate the Libertarian Party has had in years, if not ever. He has demonstrated the ability to win a statewide race twice while racking up solid executive experience as a successful governor. As the Obama administration lies about Libya and the Romney campaign continues to flail, more jaded Americans may be willing to throw support to Johnson. And as many of the above polls indicate, he seems to pull equally from both major candidates, debunking the narratives that he spoils the race for one or the other.

This means that a vote for Gary Johnson is not a wasted vote as many claim. In fact, depending on your state, your single vote may do more to close the gap between Johnson and 5% than it will to close the gap between the “two evils.” If Johnson does cross the five percent threshold, your single vote literally increases the amount of funding available to the Libertarian Party to spread their message in the next cycle. This would actually make a vote for Johnson the least wasted vote possible.

Edit:  And here is a little more fuel to fire descention from the 2 party system...  So please members of the U.S. if your vote for one or the other major parties is merely cast due to red or blue colored lenses, or worse yet because it is due to some misbelief that voting for the lesser of 2 evils is somehow not still voting for evil take note and spread the word that a loosing vote could be a long term win not just for the U.S. but for the world as often seen in political trends often started in the U.S. political machine, this is a good thing for liberty and bitcoin/cryptocurrency as a whole, since limited government and free economies will provide the ideal ecosystem for bitcoin/cryptocurrency growth and acceptance globally.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robin-koerner/will-defecting-from-the-g_b_1866221.html

The liberty movement is united in its belief that America's two-party system, rather than a single party alone has brought America to crisis. Its members understand that those issues of agreement between the parties are much more important than are any issues on which they traditionally disagree.

There are myriad examples. Both parties support a monetary system that systematically moves wealth away from productive earners to a financial elite that operate under special government license; both parties favor cronies with well-paid lobbyists; both support a militaristic foreign policy that leads to loss of innocent life in countries from which we are not threatened; both parties have worked hard to eliminate the first, fourth, fifth and tenth amendments of your Bill of Rights through, for example, the Patriot Act, the National Defense Authorization Act and FinCEN (look it up), to name just a few.

The duopoly has for decades ensured that when the partisan Elephants and Donkeys agree on an issue, the people have no way of democratically acting on their own interests at the ballot box. This used to be the case because it was impossible for any third party to receive enough votes to influence the outcome of an election or even the flavor of politics that would follow it.

[420]

Yeah, GJ is Obama. *facepalm*

Romney is Obama. Their policies are almost identical and both are bought out by Goldman Sachs.

GJ is such a neocon who wants to cut military expenditure by 43% and legalize weed. Right. (I know, in practice, if any President with libertarian leanings were elected, there's a fair chance he would be either impeached or assassinated within the first two years of office, or Congress full of crookèd Reps and Dems wouldn't rubber stamp the President's plans.)

No, that's not true, I know Romney's position very well on the issues I care about, and many of them differ greatly from Obama. I doubt Romney can be easily "bought" since he's pretty rich already.

Romney has been bought already along with the majority of the members of the two parties.  Obama has plenty of money and once someone is president money becomes less of a concern since they have retirement and security covered for life.  Speaking roles and advisory positions will bring any president substantial dollars on demand.

The president's pension is enough for them to buy a brand new toyota corolla every month for the rest of their life

[fishface]

Rocky Anderson was THE MAN in the third party debate. I'll be voting for Gary Johnson to support him getting 5% of the popular vote (though I just don't see it happening), and 420 I will send you a btc donation in support later today.

[420]

Rocky Anderson was THE MAN in the third party debate. I'll be voting for Gary Johnson to support him getting 5% of the popular vote (though I just don't see it happening), and 420 I will send you a btc donation in support later today.

thank you

[MoonShadow]

Yeah, GJ is Obama. *facepalm*

Romney is Obama. Their policies are almost identical and both are bought out by Goldman Sachs.

GJ is such a neocon who wants to cut military expenditure by 43% and legalize weed. Right. (I know, in practice, if any President with libertarian leanings were elected, there's a fair chance he would be either impeached or assassinated within the first two years of office, or Congress full of crookèd Reps and Dems wouldn't rubber stamp the President's plans.)

No, that's not true, I know Romney's position very well on the issues I care about, and many of them differ greatly from Obama. I doubt Romney can be easily "bought" since he's pretty rich already.

Romney has been bought already along with the majority of the members of the two parties.  Obama has plenty of money and once someone is president money becomes less of a concern since they have retirement and security covered for life.  Speaking roles and advisory positions will bring any president substantial dollars on demand.

The president's pension is enough for them to buy a brand new toyota corolla every month for the rest of their life

And that doesn't count taxpayer funded bodyguards for every member of his family till he dies.

[420]

Fucking ridiculous. Special class. Aristocracy. What would our founders thing?

[pyra-proxy]

The president's pension is enough for them to buy a brand new toyota corolla every month for the rest of their life

And that doesn't count taxpayer funded bodyguards for every member of his family till he dies.

This is as much for the protection of the U.S. (and likely its allies) as it is for the protection of these people.  You have no idea what information these people may have been exposed to while their husband/father/whatever was in office and its pretty common knowledge that the president directly would be exposed to lots of information.  So the protection is more protection of that information (note the till he dies part) more than the people themselves.  I would be frankly surprised if any government that has meaningful heads of state don't all do the same but I don't know ALL world government policies so this is just an assumption.

[420]

The president's pension is enough for them to buy a brand new toyota corolla every month for the rest of their life

And that doesn't count taxpayer funded bodyguards for every member of his family till he dies.

This is as much for the protection of the U.S. (and likely its allies) as it is for the protection of these people.  You have no idea what information these people may have been exposed to while their husband/father/whatever was in office and its pretty common knowledge that the president directly would be exposed to lots of information.  So the protection is more protection of that information (note the till he dies part) more than the people themselves.  I would be frankly surprised if any government that has meaningful heads of state don't all do the same but I don't know ALL world government policies so this is just an assumption.

that is not a free society

[TheButterZone]

The president's pension is enough for them to buy a brand new toyota corolla every month for the rest of their life

And that doesn't count taxpayer funded bodyguards for every member of his family till he dies.

This is as much for the protection of the U.S. (and likely its allies) as it is for the protection of these people.  You have no idea what information these people may have been exposed to while their husband/father/whatever was in office and its pretty common knowledge that the president directly would be exposed to lots of information.  So the protection is more protection of that information (note the till he dies part) more than the people themselves.  I would be frankly surprised if any government that has meaningful heads of state don't all do the same but I don't know ALL world government policies so this is just an assumption.

Kinda sounds like if the Secret Service is outgunned, and down to its last man on the detail (the rest are killed or incapacitated), he becomes the executioner of the protectee.

[420]

The president's pension is enough for them to buy a brand new toyota corolla every month for the rest of their life

And that doesn't count taxpayer funded bodyguards for every member of his family till he dies.

This is as much for the protection of the U.S. (and likely its allies) as it is for the protection of these people.  You have no idea what information these people may have been exposed to while their husband/father/whatever was in office and its pretty common knowledge that the president directly would be exposed to lots of information.  So the protection is more protection of that information (note the till he dies part) more than the people themselves.  I would be frankly surprised if any government that has meaningful heads of state don't all do the same but I don't know ALL world government policies so this is just an assumption.

Kinda sounds like if the Secret Service is outgunned, and down to its last man on the detail (the rest are killed or incapacitated), he becomes the executioner of the protectee.

we could only hope

[myrkul]

The president's pension is enough for them to buy a brand new toyota corolla every month for the rest of their life

And that doesn't count taxpayer funded bodyguards for every member of his family till he dies.

This is as much for the protection of the U.S. (and likely its allies) as it is for the protection of these people.  You have no idea what information these people may have been exposed to while their husband/father/whatever was in office and its pretty common knowledge that the president directly would be exposed to lots of information.  So the protection is more protection of that information (note the till he dies part) more than the people themselves.  I would be frankly surprised if any government that has meaningful heads of state don't all do the same but I don't know ALL world government policies so this is just an assumption.

Flaw in your logic: You assume the US president is a "meaningful" head of state. He's just a figurehead/scapegoat.

[MoonShadow]

The president's pension is enough for them to buy a brand new toyota corolla every month for the rest of their life

And that doesn't count taxpayer funded bodyguards for every member of his family till he dies.

This is as much for the protection of the U.S. (and likely its allies) as it is for the protection of these people.  You have no idea what information these people may have been exposed to while their husband/father/whatever was in office and its pretty common knowledge that the president directly would be exposed to lots of information.  So the protection is more protection of that information (note the till he dies part) more than the people themselves.  I would be frankly surprised if any government that has meaningful heads of state don't all do the same but I don't know ALL world government policies so this is just an assumption.

Flaw in your logic: You assume the US president is a "meaningful" head of state. He's just a figurehead/scapegoat.

Like in the book Hitchicker's Guide to the Galaxy, the President of the Universe is simply aposition to create controvery and distract the public from the actions of the true seat of power, one insane king and his six regents.

[420]

Gary Officially breaks $1 Million in donations, probably a day or two ago when I didn't check