Almost every poll that you see there is a figure of 6 to 8 percent in front of the name of Gary Johnson and around 2 to 3 percent in front of Jill Stein. With these two in place we see the lead of Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump. How real is this "...Read this
Almost every poll that you see there is a figure of 6 to 8 percent in front of the name of Gary Johnson and around 2 to 3 percent in front of Jill Stein. With these two in place we see the lead of Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump. How real is this "third party phenomenon" and will it hold? If we go by what we have seen in the earlier elections, not till the polling day. Already we are seeing how the world is going to spin. Recently, Bill Weld, the Vice-Presidential candidate for Libertarian Party, recently came out and endorsed Hillary Clinton. Early last month he said he’d spend the rest of the campaign attacking Trump exclusively, then had to issue a follow-up statement insisting that he’d campaign diligently for the Libertarian Party after libertarians accused him of disloyalty to their cause. Weld has always been a libertarian in name only: He’s a moderate Massachusetts Republican chosen by Gary Johnson as his VP because the two are pals and because Johnson thought that a ticket with governing experience top to bottom would be an attractive contrast to Clinton and Trump for voters. But Johnson’s poll numbers are fading, and Weld and Clinton have been friends for 40 years. Late September, Weld told Chris Matthews that he wasn’t sure if anyone is more qualified to be president than she is — with Johnson sitting right next to him. Riding on the back of all this, I am sure that the Libertarians and their dream of breaking the 1% vote mark is over. So, what happens to the rest of the 6% votes that are showing as Libertarian in these polls? They go to Hillary. They go to Hillary because that is where they came from. This is the factor that no one is taking ito account. Jill Stein too has endorsed a candidate and she has also done it through her vice-presidential candidate Ajamu Baraka. She retweeted an article by her running mate Ajamu Baraka on Oct 15 titled “Why Hillary Clinton Is More Dangerous Than Donald Trump,” which states:
Greens have been spreading this message heavily on social media and in articles like this that state “Donald Trump as president will do ‘less damage‘.” This may surprise many unfamiliar with Green Party history, but it fully adheres to Green Party tradition. In 2000, Ralph Nader said on several occasions that he would prefer to see George W. Bush in the White House over Al Gore. Green Party leaders were open that their goal was to stop Al Gore. So, essentially if I was Trump or Clinton, I would be looking at the folks who find their candidates almost withdrawing from the race as my potential voters instead of swinging wild. All Trump has to do is sit down with a few environmentalists and say, "I have been educated on some environmental issues and will like to explore more on this in days to come." This will come as a boost for the Green party voters who care for the environment and take Trump's stance of denying Global warming. I know that it is too late to pivot for either candidate and what I suggested above is absurd. But I am sure Podosta and Convay will find a way to bring to bring these supporters home. They just have to focus on it. Close this
The danger to the rest of us is not Trump, but Hillary Clinton.