Posted on

Nooooo! That's NOT what I meant!

Yesterday, I wrote that this was the perfect time for third candidate in the general election. Today I wake to find the Romney is trying to talk John Kasich into being that third candidate! Nooooo! Do these guys actively try to find ways to keep the country off track?

Don’t get me wrong. Kasich seems like a very nice man. But as a “Republican” and a “Conservative” he is the very same poison that has led to the emergence of a semi-articulate clown as the Republican nominee. He would also have the effect of peeling off very few voters, and all of them from Trump. That is because he is as boring as dry toast. He will not draw a following away from the Democrats.

No, dummies. The whole point of running a third party/independent is to get rid of Clinton and Trump and at the same time put a man in place who will thwart the Four Morons! The Four Morons will abet Trump or Clinton, both of whom think it is the President’s job to “run the country”.

We need a President who will shame Congress into doing their job and not one who will appoint federal judges who believe in safe spaces and the tooth fairy.

At the moment, there are only two viable candidates who can do that: Ted Cruz and Gary Johnson. Johnson has the greatest chance of pulling from both parties, but both could conceivably reach the 30%+ threshold to at least deny the election to Trump/Clinton.

Mitt, I went easy on you when you first stuck your foot in it this year. But it is time for you to shut up! Your good intentions won’t be worth a bucket of poop with Clinton sitting in the White House.

Matt Jordan is a travel writer, political commentator and author of 16 20 24. Get your SIGNED copy here!

Find 16 20 24 on Amazon.

Find 16 20 24 at Barnes & Noble

3 thoughts on “Nooooo! That's NOT what I meant!

  1. Is it Gary Johnson’s view that aircraft carriers should be eliminated, or do I mistake him for another Libertarian?

    1. I have clearly been playing hooky lately. I should have gotten back to you sooner. I have looked for statements from Johnson that state specifically that he wants to eliminate air craft carriers (as in all) and I find no policy statement saying that. I do know that he wishes to take a wrecking ball to the federal budget and thanks to the insane level of spending we have created across the board, there is no way we can spare the military from taking a radical haircut as well. If you make across-the-board cuts in spending, where no entity can say, “Oh no! Cut everyone else’s stuff. Mine is too precious!” then you will have to include our carrier fleet as well. I am a 23 Navy vet and a bit of a hawk. But I don’t believe in limited war and babysitting our allies through eternity. I think we must face financial realities and slash everywhere. If that means mothballing a couple carriers, then so be it. Like the WWII battle ships before them, we can always call them back into action if we need them.

      Also, as president, he can propose such cuts. I doubt he’d find congress wiling to cut that much from the military. But If he asks for 43% across the board and only gets 30% from here and 50% from there and military readiness remains at or near current levels, I am sure he’d be happy with that.

      Your thoughts?

      1. As a disabled veteran from the Army infantry, I am admittedly hawkish as well from the committed belief that, without defense and the resources to effect it, there can be no liberty as we have known it. Our nation continues to be systemically fragmented to the extent that I refer to it as the disunited states. I do not recall an expiration date on my sworn oath to protect this country from all enemies foreign and domestic. And, domestic. I will side with freedom and liberty and justice for all within the limits of the law and every fiber of my being.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *