Evan McMullin

Evan McMullin Could Tip the Election. So Why Isn't He Being Polled?

Another new Utah poll puts the independent at 20%, yet he's not even being measured in swing states like Iowa and Colorado.

|

Evan McMullin. ||| CNN
CNN

Yesterday brought the second great Utah poll result in two days for independent conservative presidential candidate Evan McMullin: Third-place, at 20 percent, more than double up on Gary Johnson (9 percent), within striking distance of Hillary Clinton (28 percent), and certainly with better trend lines than the Mormon-repulsing Donald Trump (34 percent).

While this represents the first Monmouth University presidential survey of the Beehive State, and therefore comes without any comparative data (as did Wednesday's Y2 Analytics poll), Monmouth gets an A+ rating from FiveThirtyEight, and the anecdotal is combining with the statistical to produce unmistakable McMullinmentum. Analysts are writing pieces with headlines like "How Evan McMullin Could Win Utah And the Presidency." "I'll make a prediction," Dave Hansen, a political adviser to the Trump-scorning Rep. Mia Love (R-Utah), told Politico Wednesday. "He's going to win the state."

Well, I don't know about that; it may have just been a particularly good week to be a Mormon conservative presidential candidate who hails from Utah. But what I really don't know is how the former CIA agent and Goldman Sachs employee, who is the favored alternative of #NeverTrump establishment figures like Bill Kristol and Rick Wilson, is shaping up to impact key battleground states such as Colorado and Iowa. That's because, unaccountably, McMullin isn't being polled there. Like, at all.

Take Iowa. According to FiveThirtyEight, the Iowa poll picture this morning looks like this: Donald Trump 45.9 percent, Hillary Clinton 45.9 percent, Gary Johnson 7.0 percent. Though Iowa went to Barack Obama in 2012 and 2008 by 5.9 and 9.4 percentage points, respectively, the state is widely seen as more critical for Trump's path to the White House, especially given his current second-place status in the race. We know that Evan McMullin pulls far more heavily from Republicans and conservatives than he does Democrats (by a 3-1 margin in this Virginia poll, a 3-0 margin in this one), and we know that Iowa is one of the non-Utah states he has said he's targeting, but we have no idea whether he's at 0.5 percent or 5.0 percent there because not a single damned publicly available state poll has included his name. The man could be the difference in luring Iowans away from Donald Trump, yet he may never be measured before that happens. As is true for any state or national poll at this point that does not include the on-all-ballots Gary Johnson, McMullin-free polls in Iowa and other battleground/swing states cannot give an accurate picture of the presidential race, and treating them as if they do borders on journalistic malpractice.

McMullin is on the ballot of just 11 states, with a combined 84 electoral votes—far fewer than Darrell Castle's 24/211 and Rocky De La Feunte's 20/147. Like third-party candidates inevitably do, he talks up the importance of his write-in access to an additional 24, but even given that Google searches on "write-in" this week are "off the charts," there is little historical reason to take that potential numerical impact seriously. In 2012, Gary Johnson was a write-in in Michigan, and pulled just 0.16 percent of the vote, less than one-third of his lowest total in any state where his name appeared.

Still, thanks to his friends in the GOP establishment and media, and to the depth of the #NeverTrump sentiment among some Republicans, and also to his Utah-centrism in a year that Mormons are leading the charge away from Trump, McMullin is cutting through the fog in a way that no other fifth-party candidate can approach. In a national PPP poll after the first presidential debate (one of only three such polls he has been featured in), McMullin beat out the Green Party's Jill Stein, 2 percent to 1 percent.

But it's on the state level where he really should be measured. FiveThirtyEight—which hastily added McMullin to its Utah page this week after his surging performance there—keeps a running ranking of states in order of their "chance of tipping" the election. His name appears on the ballot of #4 (Minnesota), #6 (Virginia), #8 (Colorado), #14 (Iowa), and #15 (New Mexico). Yet the only state outside of Utah where I could find even one poll featuring McMullin was Virginia, where he has averaged around 2 percent. (Interestingly, the Trump campaign reportedly pulled out of Virginia this week, seemingly ceding the state to Clinton.) There is every reason to believe that McMullin could register noticeable support in heavily conservative/Mormon/third-party-friendly Idaho, but that state doesn't really have much of any polls, let alone ones featuring his name.

There are plenty of problems with the policy substance of McMullin's presidential campaign, some of which I'll get to here later today. But as happens with startling frequency in a country that otherwise can't stop talking about this presidential election, the media is largely ignoring the potentially massive impact that third-party candidates could have, except during its periodic freakouts that Gary Johnson could lure unsuspecting Millennials away from their rightful role in coronating the next President Clinton. Evan McMullin is having an impact on this presidential race, and not just in Utah. With less than a month out, the political press might begin taking note.

NEXT: Future Nobel Laureate Warns: The Antichrist Is Coming!

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. So I guess the Mormon’s thought that the real problem with Romney was his hair?

    1. My friend ‘Sarah Bartlett’ makes $95/hour on the internet. She has been laid off for six months but last month her paycheck was $14750 just working on the internet for a few hours.. Go to this website and click tech tab to start your own work…. http://www.Trends88.Com

    2. My friend ‘Sarah Bartlett’ makes $95/hour on the internet. She has been laid off for six months but last month her paycheck was $14750 just working on the internet for a few hours.. Go to this website and click tech tab to start your own work…. http://www.Trends88.Com

    3. I don’t see how anyone could be against Romney’s hair ? that man has the most presidential head of hair that I’ve ever seen…

      (Perhaps McMullin was ashamed to not have a glorious Mitt-Mane and THAT’S why he shaves his head?)

  2. Ive said it before, i can’t stand McMullan. But if he takes votes away from trump and hillary then fine. I’ll still vote for GJ (if he doesn’t convince me to not vote at all).

  3. Kind of on topic.
    I got into a huge political argument with a bernie bro who is voting hillary. When I said I was voting for Johnson and he said then that’s a vote for trump and I’ll be responsible if trump wins, I just lost it.
    I finally hit the wall with this shit I guess.

    1. If you think Johnson can be president, you’re delusional. If you understand that either Trump or Clinton will be president, a vote for Johnson is tantamount to supporting whichever of those two you like least.

      As has been explained a billion times to people too gutless to make a grownup choice but who insist that opting out is some kind of expression of intelligence or bravery.

      1. Get pegged in a room, supper chunks.

      2. Fuck you. Don’t engage me, you worthless bootlicking parasite.

        1. Don’t be so emotional over being presented with arithmetic, how about?

          1. Don’t presume to lecture your moral and intellectual betters, you preening turd.

            1. Wouldn’t my moral and intellectual betters presumably understand basic American election math?

              1. It’s pretty hilarious that you think you do.

              2. Basic electoral math = it only takes one state to deny Hillary and Trump the White House.

                This is a fact. If you don’t understand this basic fact, just for once, shut the fuck up while you’re only mildly humiliated.

                Or, you know, keep trying to carry an argument someone else gave you until the bus of reality crushes you into a pregnancy of shame.

                1. So that’s the strategy? Turn it over to the House to install someone who wasn’t part of any democratic process?

                  I guess that’s better than “Look at me I’m special!”

                  1. It’s not about strategy, considering it is a mathematical impossibility for one vote to swing an election. Voting strategically is quite literally the stupidest and most pointless use of a vote.

                    Of course, I was addressing the stone cold fact that your “arithmetic” concern trolling is based purely on juvenile ignorance. Gee, I wonder why you want to change the subject?

                    1. It’s not about strategy, considering it is a mathematical impossibility for one vote to swing an election. Voting strategically is quite literally the stupidest and most pointless use of a vote.

                      ^ This x 1000

                      There is virtually no chance Clinton doesn’t win this election. There is even less chance Clinton doesn’t win CA (where I live).

                      The point is to deny the victor a mandate and signal we don’t support their policies while suggesting a direction they need to start moving in.

                      Notice how the Democrats suddenly became passionate environmentalists after Ralph Nader’s performance in the 2000 election.

                      Gary Johnson and Rand Paul seriously shook up the establishment this year, and that is going to have a lasting effect no matter what else happens.

                    2. I’m not talking about one vote, I’m talking about an attitude toward voting that enough people could have that could indeed swing the election just as it has before.

                    3. Each person only gets one vote. Thinking that having a (craven) attitude is effective is actually stupider than thinking you can vote for effect. Congratulations on your continuing achievements in the field of Derp.

              3. So what is the Math(TM) of not voting, Tony?

                1. If you favor Trump, it means not giving Trump a vote he could have had. Why is this difficult?

                  1. And if we favor neither?

          2. I will not vote for the lesser of two evils while a morally passable candidate is still standing. What you loathe Tony is democracy itself.

      3. The good news, Tony Toni Tone, is that idiots like you tell me that a vote for GJ is a vote for Trump, while idiots on the right tell me that a vote for GJ is a vote for Clinton. So therefore, everything cancels itself out, and I’m good!

        Go fuck yourself with a railroad spike.

        1. It’s a vote for whomever you support less, so rather than being an expression of your personal moral fortitude (how brave–from inside a private booth!), it’s an expression of your personal ignorance of how elections work in this country. But there are a lot of thick fucking skulls about this year who don’t seem understand this.

          1. How else am I supposed to do that? I volunteer for GJ, I’ve sign waved for him, I’ve given money to his campaign. Don’t fucking presume to tell me I’m a coward for actually having a conscience, unlike you and your compatriots who only seem to care that the boot stomping on them is the correct color.

            1. Tony’s just concerned that Clinton is going to win with less than 50% of the vote. And we all know that 50% + 1 vote means she’s morally just in doing whatever the fuck she wants to do.

            2. How does your having a conscience help anyone? How does your wasting time working for a candidate you know can’t win accomplish any good in the world?

              1. How does your wasting time working for a candidate you know can’t win accomplish any good in the world?

                Why do you troll Reason?

                1. Even Tony can’t stand fellow Dems.

                  1. I think its the other way around.

                    1. I’ll settle for mutual antipathy. Narcissism of petty differences and all that.

              2. Shorter Tony – Vote for Stalin! He’s the only one who has a chance of winning!

              3. How does your having a conscience help anyone?

                Tony’s ethics in a nutshell. Note: his ethics fit in a nutshell with room to spare, because “Fuck all the people i don’t like” doesn’t actually count as an ethos.

                1. “Tony could be bounded in a nutshell,
                  and count himself a king of infinite space,
                  as long as he could still shitpost on Reason.”

                  1. *staggers up to begin prolonged applause*

                    You may have killed my soul, but that was good.

                    1. Billy S. always knows the score.

              4. So what should I do? Hold my nose and vote for someone I hate because screaming harpies tell me how the world’s going to end if the other candidate wins? Not vote?

                I don’t vote for somebody because they can win. I vote for somebody because my views align best with theirs. How fucking hard is that to understand?

                1. It’s not hard to understand, but I maintain that you’re missing the point of an election in a winner-take-all situation.

                  You don’t equally hate Clinton and Trump. That’s not possible. You’d have to be really checked out not to have some inkling of which would make a better president.

                  I think you’re voting third party so that you get go on the Internet and brag about it to strangers.

                  1. I think you’re voting third party so that you get go on the Internet and brag about it to strangers.

                    I think you have it exactly backwards dumbass. Congratulations on being even dumber than I thought you were.

                  2. I’ve voted third party for President every time since the first election I was eligible to vote, which was 1996. Long before there was a Hit & Run or any social media for me to brag on.

                    Stop fucking projecting your own insecurities and stupidity onto others.

                  3. No, i hate them both.
                    Jb, i assume, is voting because he wants the country to be more libertarian.

                  4. You’re right Tony, you’ve totally convinced me to vote against my conscience.

                    Trump 2016!

                    /sarcasm in case you’re too mentally handicapped to get that.

                  5. You don’t equally hate Clinton and Trump. That’s not possible.

                    You don’t equally hate the Giant Douche and the Turd Sandwich. That’s not possible. You must therefore express support for one of them, even if your support makes no difference.

                    That’s good Citizenship.

                  6. Tony|10.14.16 @ 11:50AM| block | mute | #

                    I think ….

                    citation needed

                  7. Classic utilitarianism. Every man must have a perfect ability to quantify and compare evil, in full consideration of every possible outcome, in order to even have a moral compass at all.

                    Sorry Tony, I’m not willing to make a bet that one form of horrific evil is in some sort of grand net sense “less bad” than some other monstrous evil, just to satisfy your bullshit.

                    It’s all fucking evil. You’re evil, Tony.

                2. FOR FUCKS SAKE PEOPLE DON’T FEED IT!

                  1. See, I don’t think Tony is a troll. Trolls say stupid things they don’t actually believe so they can get a rise out of people. Tony is dumb enough that he actually believes what he says.

                    1. So would you care to wager that someone other than Trump or Clinton will be the next president?

                    2. Tony is apparently so stupid, he thinks impossible means unlikely.

                    3. Let me let you in on a secret voting for a ‘winner’ does not make your vote correct.

              5. Tony, you have no honor. You’re just a barking dog.

              6. Ok, shit-stain, let’s say Mao and Stalin are brought back to life and are the two candidates. I find both candidates abhorrent and evil. You’re saying that I’m stupid for not voting for either?

                Tony, you are retarded.

          2. it’s an expression of your personal ignorance of how elections work in this country

            Unless people live in battleground states, its you who’s demonstrating ignorance of how elections work.

            Votes for 3rd parties in uncontested states dont have any impact whatsoever on the outcome and your claims are meaningless.

            In states that are contested, you’re assuming votes for 3rd parties *should* otherwise go to the major 2. Which is false. For many/most, the choice is between not voting, or voting 3rd party.

            1. The choice is Trump or Clinton, because those are the only two possible outcomes.

              People in nonswing states don’t get to demand of swing-state voters that they do the dirty work so that their souls can remain pure. This to me is ethical hogwash. Ohioans are not the Morlocks of American democracy. If it’s the most morally correct action to vote for Clinton or Trump in Ohio, then that choice and only that choice must be the same for someone living in Texas.

              Besides, a state is only solidly red or solidly blue because most people choose to go with the major party. So not only are you saying that swing-state dwellers are servants to your precious conscience, so are the majority of the people in your own state.

              Hey guess what, it’s just voting in an election. If you want people to think you’re so fucking special, then do something impressive that actually requires some effort.

              1. Hey guess what, it’s just voting in an election.

                So why do you care who anyone votes for?

              2. Before you were saying something about “arithmetic” which was false.

                Being show how you were wrong, now you assert thing about “ethics” which are false.

                Is gibberish your fallback plan?

                Look Tony…. you’re stupid. You don’t have any argument. You don’t impress anyone.

                Why do yo waste your time annoying people with your stupidity? It isnt helping your cause. Maybe you should go somewhere your opinion isnt worthless.

                1. Hell, Leo, I ain’t ashamed to say the word – it’s a matter of ETHICS

              3. Fucktard, I live in Florida, the swingiest state there is, and I’m still voting Johnson. Fuck you and your lack of morals.

              4. The choice is Trump or Clinton, because those are the only two possible outcomes.

                This assumes that the only possible impact that election can have is determining the winner. In fact, people can glean other useful and impactful information from how the votes are split.

                If it’s the most morally correct action to vote for Clinton or Trump in Ohio, then that choice and only that choice must be the same for someone living in Texas.

                I could have sworn you were lecturing us on electoral arithmetic just a bit ago.

                1. This assumes that the only possible impact that election can have is determining the winner. In fact, people can glean other useful and impactful information from how the votes are split.

                  This X 1000.

                  I hate Hillary more than Trump, but if Trump has to get slaughtered in the vote count to convince the Republicans not to go full-retard again with their candidate, so be it.

                  Who fucking knew I would pine for the days of Mitt Romney as the Republican candidate?

              5. You’re the only one making demands Tony. And for all you whining about ignorance, you’re apparently ignorant of math (thinking that not voting for a candidate is the same as voting for them, and that one vote is going to decide a presidential election).

              6. If it’s the most morally correct action to vote for Clinton or Trump in Ohio, then that choice and only that choice must be the same for someone living in Texas.

                The failure to understand the basic moral problem with this sentiment is one of the main things that makes people leftists.

              7. Besides, a state is only solidly red or solidly blue because most people choose to go with the major party.

                No – a state is red or blue because the media declares it so based on which of the two establishment parties has a larger plurality.

            2. You are morally obligated to vote for one or the other party because only they have a shot at winning.

              1. Tony’s really testing the lower bounds on the estimates of his IQ with this one.

                1. I’m just calling you idiots out for boasting that your meaningless action is evidence of your moral and intellectual superiority. You could, like, not do that.

                  1. And you’re failing. How’s life working out for you?

                  2. Citation needed

                    Im either not voting, or voting for GJ. No one is suggesting this means anything except you.

                    You have asserted that this somehow means i am electing Trump. You are wrong.

                    Why do you post @ reason?

                    1. Because we’re the only people on the planet who will interact with him at this point, probably. I suppose we should stop.

                    2. We probably should.

                      *pulls out cat-of-9-tails to punish self*

                  3. Shorter Tony – How dare you resist the system?

                    You really are a bootlicker and an insecure little man.

                    1. You’re resisting the system? Really? How brave of you. Everyone clap for the guy who’s a revolutionary one Tuesday in November.

                    2. Resisting? No. Attempting to change? Sure.

                    3. Everyone clap for the guy who’s a revolutionary one Tuesday in November.

                      Because everyone knows that he who votes in the presidential election must not do anything else ever.

                      That’s logic. It’s what Tony has that all the rest of us lack.

                  4. No one is boasting that they are morally or intellectually superior because they are voting for a third party. As far as I can see, only one person is making a claim that voting a certain way makes them morally and intellectually superior, and that’s you.

                    You have cause and effect backwards – voting third party doesn’t make you morally or intellectually superior. It says nothing about your morals or intellect. But having basic morals or intellect makes it EXTREMELY likely that you won’t vote for Trump or Clinton. Only a moral midget could affirmatively endorse either, and only the intellectually bankrupt could actually believe in a strategic value of their vote.

                    1. You don’t get to opt out of the choice before you. You can sit at home eating cheetos on Nov. 8 and you’ll still be endorsing one of the two possible outcomes. What goes on inside your own head is totally inconsequential.

                  5. I’m confused, Tony. Is voting like trying to guess who is going to win or picking the candidate you would most prefer to see as president? Because it seems like you have some insecurity that makes you only want to vote for a candidate if he or she will win. You don’t get a prize for being right, dumbfuck.

                    1. It’s picking who you want to be president between the only two available options. We had a long primary process for choosing among other options to get to this point.

                    2. And staying home sonehow means trump?

                    3. Anything not for Clinton is automatically for Trump. QED

                    4. Except there’s more than just two options.

                      Just because Vanilla and Chocolate are the two most popular flavors at Baskin Robbins doesn’t mean they don’t serve cookie’s n cream or mint chocolate chip.

                      Jesus, are all democrats as retarded as you?

                    5. We had a long primary process for choosing among other options to get to this point.

                      That’s correct. A lot of us are members of party that nominated a guy named Gary Johnson. And weirdly, a lot of us still support him five whole months later.

                      Why do you hate democracy, Tony?

                    6. Tony has to frame it as a two horse race.

                      He doesn’t care that he’s on a third party site, telling 3rd party voters that their party’s candidate can’t win, despite said candidate being, by every legal metric, capable of winning.

                      He knows he’s wrong. He just doesn’t care.

                    7. It is a two-way horse race. I’m not framing or endorsing anything, just stating a fact. If there is a small political movement represented by websites such as these that rejects basic facts of the universe, then isn’t that your problem and not mine?

                    8. “I’m not framing or endorsing anything, just stating a fact”

                      Except Johnson is legally, but the rules of the contest, capable of winning.

                      I’m beginning to think you actually didn’t know that. How funny would that be!

                    9. He’s capable of winning like I’m capable of winning the lottery.

                    10. So you were framing it and it isn’t a fact that it is a two horse race.

                      You lied.

                    11. He’s capable of winning like I’m capable of winning the lottery

                      So given a choice between buying a giant douche, a turd sandwich, and a lottery ticket, which would you advise that we buy?

                    12. It is a two-way horse race. . . . If there is a small political movement represented by websites such as these that rejects basic facts of the universe, then isn’t that your problem and not mine?

                      The hilarious thing being Tony has no idea how much he sounds like the people before 1860 who argued that while slavery is bad, it’s just a fact of reality, and these third parties who are against it are just wasting their votes.

                    13. “It’s picking who you want to be president between the only two available options. We had a long primary process for choosing among other options to get to this point.”

                      If this were Tony’s first day at Reason, this one paragraph would be sufficient to tell us almost everything that we currently know about him.

                    14. “How does your having a conscience help anyone?”

                      I think that one is gonna have some legs.

                  6. I want to thank Tony for sealing the deal for me. All in for GJ. I was on the fence, drinking the duopoly kool aid. Now I see the choice for what it is.

      4. Tony – The Grown Up in the Room

        1. The most grown-up thing you can do is to find a site on the Internet where people you loathe hang out and unleash vapidity on them, then return to your clique and butt-slap one another in congratulations.

      5. Tony’s just telling us how he’s justifying voting for a bigger war monger than George W. Bush because Trump said some mean things.

        Go on, Tony. Please tell us more about how you want to double down on the already doubled down war policies of the Bush era? I know, Hillary just won’t have a choice to do something different. Just like Obama didn’t have a choice. The fact that Bush has endorsed Hillary is obviously not something that should be considered.

        Strap those blinders on tight Tony, it’s really your only option.

        1. I support HRC’s policy positions for the most part (not entirely), and Trump is obviously a raping incompetent buffoon. This isn’t difficult for me.

          1. So, which specific policy of HRC’s is the deciding factor? Her desire to go to war in Syria regardless of the fact it pits us directly against Russia, or perhaps her full-throated support for a $15 minimum wage that even the Democrats themselves admit will result in more unemployment against their own voters?

            Please, enlighten us on what exact policy positions Clinton has that will benefit the nation. It should be worth a laugh.

            1. Mostly it’s the liberal supreme court justices she’ll appoint who will, with a little luck, undo the cancerous damage Republicans have done to democracy in the past few decades.

              1. What damage are you specifically referring to? The fact that a movie could be made to criticize Hillary, perhaps?

                1. Probably he also meant that not every voter fraud method favored by the Dems has been explicitly endorsed by the Supreme Court.

                2. What damage are you specifically referring to?

                  Not voting democrat.

              2. LOL lickspittle for the party of Obamacare wants to talk about legislative damage. Good one.

                1. A law passed by majorities in Congress is not at the top of the list of problems with our democracy.

                  1. So you can’t articulate what damage specifically the minority party has inflicted on the nation through the Supreme Court over the last 4 to 8 years. Got it. The fact you only answer the most facile questions is telling.

                    I imagine, but can’t be sure, that you wish to repeat the 1st and 2nd amendments through the backdoor because you already know that officially repealing them would end the modern Democrat party.

                    I can’t be sure because you will lie about it, just like the party you support.

                    1. I’m specifically talking about the fact that Republicans have a total lock on Congress despite their not receiving support from a majority of voters to the count of millions. Gerrymandering, etc. My hope is that with a liberal enough supreme court legislating from the bench they can undo some of this monstrous distortion of democracy.

                    2. Gerrymandering is only fair when Democrats do it!!!!!1!!

                      Waaaaaahhhhhhh!!1!1!!

                      (for the record, I understand the reason for being able to redraw congressional districts, people move and populated areas become less populated and vice versa, but I’ve often wondered if there was a better way to do it.)

                    3. I’ve often wondered if there was a better way to do it

                      There are proposals for fairly basic rules about how to make sure districts are less distorted. So long as there is a role for politically interested humans to play, though, people will play politics through districting.

                      I’ve wondered if some sort of clustering algorithm could take only population data and then draw things from there, but it could probably be gamed too by changing the parameters (just speculation).

                    4. Tony: A law passed by majorities in Congress is not at the top of the list of problems with our democracy.
                      Tony 17 minutes later:GERRYMANDERING IS DESTROYING OUR SOCIETY!

                      Heh heh heh.

                    5. You heard it here first folks, Congressional districts are drawn up by the Supreme Court. Tony’s intelligence truly knows no bounds, but in a way he does share Hillary’s knowledge of Constitutional roles in government.

                      What you are suggesting, Tony, is that powers that are specifically delegated to a particular branch of government should be found unconstitutional. This is actually not that surprising to me, since you clearly believe in unlimited and unaccountable government even if it’s only when your opposition party is in charge.

                      In other words, you’re a Royalist. Figures.

                  2. A law passed by majorities in Congress is not at the top of the list of problems with our democracy.

                    If said law is in conflict with a higher law, specifically the Constitution, then it should be a problem.

                    And we don’t live in a democracy. We live in a constitutional republic with numerous political and procedural safeguards to prevent democracy. You should have learned that in elementary school civics.

                    1. It was subjected to a constitutional test.

                    2. No, it was argued to not be a tax and a Supreme Court Justice determined that it was, in fact, a tax.

                      Jesus, at least get the facts straight.

              3. “I support HRC’s policy positions”

                “So, which specific policy of HRC’s is the deciding factor?”

                “Mostly it’s the liberal supreme court justices she’ll appoint”

                So, we can add ‘policy positions’ to the mountain of phrases/concepts Tony uses without knowing what they mean.

                1. You’re welcome to go to her website and read her policy platform. I support most, but not all, of that.

                  1. You’re welcome to go to her website and read her policy platform

                    You caught the email that what she says in public is not actually what she believes, right?

                    A lot of us knew that already – why are you still pretending?

          2. And also, as bonus points, it should perhaps be pointed out that we already know you don’t care if Trump were a literal rapist since Hillary Clinton’s husband has far more evidence in favor of his being a rapist than Trump, and Hillary has thrown full throated support behind her husbands wayward antics.

            Therefore you must take issue with the incompetent buffoon part.

            So I’d like to hear more about why you think Hillary is in fact competent. Look at her record in both the Senate and as Secretary of State. What accomplishments specifically indicate she is competent? Be lucid.

            1. The difference is that Clinton has already been tried and judged both in the legal process and the court of public opinion for whatever his offenses were. Oh, and also he’s not the one on the ballot, as much as Trump and his pathetic water carriers would like to distract from that little issue.

              1. So, the Clinton’s didn’t pay off women to shut up about their interactions with Bill? Is this not the exact same thing that Trump is being accused of that you find so vile?

                I guess it’s ok though, since Hillary wasn’t the one doing the touching. She was just the one helping to cover it up (which, notably, she failed at doing that too).

                That’s a pretty discerning difference of you to make in the ‘bad vs. less bad’ argument.

                So tell me more about her supreme court nominees and what specifically it is you think they’re going to do; and what specific things this evil previous supreme court did that you want reversed. You keep evading that for some reason despite it being Hillary’s deciding thing in her favor. Odd, that.

                1. Also, why didn’t you answer the question of why Hillary is competent? I would think you’d have a ready answer for that.

                  1. She’s obviously competent. As for her accomplishments, google them. You won’t accept a single one as valid so there’s no point in my listing them.

                    1. It’s okay Tony, I couldn’t think of any either.

                    2. She flew like eleventy billion miles around the world as SecState! You think that’s so easy, I’d like to see YOU do that!

                      That Russian reset button was truly a sublime slice of brilliance, man.

                2. No Hillary Clinton is not responsible for the misdeeds of her husband for which he, again, has already been judged. He was impeached over them. We’re just not starting on Trump. Or perhaps you think we should ignore his history of sexually abusing women because Bill Clinton something something?

                  1. “Or perhaps you think we should ignore his history of sexually abusing women because Bill Clinton something something?”

                    Honestly?

                    Yeah.

                    You fucking scumbags set the table with that with Bill, now feast.

                    And before you screech “impeached!!”

                    You didn’t impeach him. You wanted to ignore it.

                    1. He was impeached for consensual sexual activity (after a convoluted road to a perjury trap). Trump said he grabs women’s vaginas, and women are coming out of the woodwork to confirm that he was telling the truth.

                      I’m sorry your guy is a creep, but he has also been exposed as an incompetent buffoon for month, so you don’t have any excuses.

                    2. Good point – that was Bill Clinton’s one and only sexual misdeed. Nothing else to see here!

                    3. “Good point – that was Bill Clinton’s one and only sexual misdeed. Nothing else to see here!”

                      I will rebuke you for ignoring Trump’s behavior by ignoring Clinton’s behavior, and suggesting you do as well, but not ignoring Trump’s behavior, and comparing them.

                    4. No, he was impeached for lying.

                      About sexual activity with a subordinate.

                      Caught you lying! Like Bill!

                    5. No, he was impeached for lying.

                      About sexual activity with a subordinate.

                      Under oath.

                    6. Yes thank you.

            2. She’s so super competent! She broke the law with no intent to do so, so it’s all good.

              Just don’t try to do the same thing yourself, peon.

              1. Yes, her record as SOS is so superb.

                1. So, to sum up, Tony is voting for Hillary because Trump said mean words that he doesn’t like even though those mean words mirror things that Hillary’s direct family have done. Hillary may have evolved past things that occurred in the past, I would like to think that, but she has never said that maybe, just maybe, Juanita Broaddrick wasn’t a lying sack of shit or that maybe Monica was taken advantage of by literally the most powerful man in America.

                  Therefore, Hillary’s sweet little #BelieveHer is nothing except bullshit. You’re supporting someone who is either corrupt, or so incompetent that she has somehow tripped her way into scandal after scandal (lets give her nukes!). I suppose you believe there could be some vast right wing conspiracy, but that would be at direct odd’s with your belief that Republicans have no control as well as ignore what the media has actually been saying for the last year. Cognitive dissonance, much?

                  Sorry, Tony. I gave you every opportunity to defend her but your endless bloviating didn’t answer a single point other than the question if you’re able to think and reason. Sadly, the answer is ‘no’. Saying she’s the adult in the room is laughable, she is no more ‘adult’ than Trump at this point. Maybe he dragged her into the gutter, but she was more than happy to avoid substance this election cycle. If anything, you should be happy the nominee was Trump. Hillary would have lost to literally anyone else.

                  *shrug*

                  1. We both know how absurd and pathetic it is to accuse Hillary of being just as bad as Trump for stuff her husband did, right? You’re just playing this card because it’s the only one you and your giant pimple friend have. I just want to make sure we’re on the same page as to the desperation of this argument.

                    I’d support Hillary over any Republican because Republicans have a habit of wrecking everything they touch and believe in stupid things. It just so happens that it’s marginally easier this time considering the Republican nominee is an absurd racist ignoramus.

                    1. Ah, yes. I too fondly recall when Hillary Clinton, upon finding out that there was physical evidence of her Husband cheating on her (in the Oval Office itself, no less) divorced him and launched her own independent political career. It was that moment when I knew she was a strong, independent woman who not only had moral character but also the strength of will to succeed.

                      Too bad none of that ever happened. Instead, she defended her cheating husband and defamed the women who accused him of sexual impropriety as being sluts and fame seekers while furthering her own political career. They are still married, and the accusations against Bill have literally never gone away, they’ve just been ignored for over 25 years.

                      You still haven’t mentioned one single success during her stint in the Senate or as SoS, maybe the Iran Nuclear Deal? The sale of Uranium to Russia? C’mon, there must be something there you love!

                  2. Actually, on reflection, this shouldn’t be surprising since even on the left HRC isn’t liked by 50% of leftists. Only someone as partisan as Tony would think that makes her a qualified candidate though. Don’t misunderstand, Trump is a shit stain but Hillary is the actual turd.

        2. Hello. Those are wars started to FIX BUSH’S MESS.

          Jesus libertarians are stupid.

      6. Real grownups have the courage to do exactly what they’re told.

        1. Real adults observe a social problem and immediately strike on the idea to either criminalize or subsidize it.

          The realest adults go one further and criminalize or subsidize all of the problems resulting from the first fix.

          1. There is nothing more adult or courageous than giving your individual autonomy over wholesale to autocrats.

      7. I’m amazed you can see the computer screen with that cock in your throat.

      8. There are a handful of states where voting for Johnson will result in the tradeoff you are writing about.

        In the rest, a vote for Johnson is an extremely smart move because it might result in better choices in future elections.

        Lye back and enjoy it is always the advice offered by people who want to take something that isn’t theirs to have.

      9. I know you’re an idiot and a shameless hack, but I’m pretty sure this very publication has penned many articles destroying your bullshit rhetoric.

        Why yes, yes they have:

        https://reason.com/blog/2016/09…..h-argument

        https://reason.com/archives/201…..-serious-c

        But I do appreciate the joy of watching a hypocrite spit roast himself for a racist, war monger like Hillary.

      10. It’s been a explained a billion times that it’s precisely that sort of thinking that enables the major parties to pick low quality candidates cycle after cycle, because they know they can take your vote for granted.

        The Dems losing to Trump becausr of Johnson might just be the only thing that would push them away from socialism back toward sanity. More likely, given what we’ve learned about them from you, it would just lead them to try to ban libertarians from elections, given their proclivity for heavy handed regulation.

      11. Your individual vote doesn’t count under any circumstances.

        It serves only as an expression of your preference.

        Therefore a vote for Hillary, is a vote for Hillary and a vote for Johnson is a vote for Johnson.

      12. Tony necessarily assumes that A: there is a Trump or Clinton I “like least”, and that B: I ever would consider voting for either.

        Wrong. There was never a planet where they had my vote. My protest vote would be to stay home if all else failed.

    2. One of my friends that was a Bernie supporter, who is ‘now with her’, had the amusing point of view that Hillary isn’t a hawk. I’m avoiding these people until after the election. I won’t change their mind any more than they’re going to change mine. All it will do is end friendships at this point. They are immune to facts and reason since they are suffering from an acute case of Trump Derangement Syndrome, and they must prevent the next Hitler from taking office no matter the cost.

      This is honestly how some of them feel, and it is driving their voting. The only way to win that debate is not to play.

      1. They believe she can’t be hawk because she’s a woman, and women are incapable of being pro-war — sort of like black people are incapable of being racist.

        Besides that “indisputable” fact, she has said that she’s always been a fighter for children and families, so of course that makes her a pacifist.

        Makes perfect sense, right? But this is what passes for logic with these people.

        1. “Thatcher, Margaret, please pick up the white courtesy phone in the Falklands. Thatcher, Margaret.”

          1. Well of course Thatcher was a hawk, she was a Republican.

        2. I honestly can’t say why he said she’s not a hawk, I was too stunned and drunk to delve into it further, so it’s possible this is the case.

          Either way, with Hillary’s propaganda going full-storm in favor of what appears to be war with Russia I’d love to ask him more about why he thinks she won’t take us into new and interesting wars. He was a Bernie supporter so really I already know he’s voting for Hillary because ‘Trump Bad, Hillary Less Bad’ but the mental contortions these people need to make to justify themselves is the literal definition of cognitive dissonance.

          Tony here is a good example of it too, although I absolutely don’t believe he’s arguing in good faith. I think he’s trolling, whereas I know my friends are at least arguing in good faith even if it’s misguided.

          1. Even if he’s trolling, it’s not like he’s presenting positions and opinions that we’ve never come across in the wild.

            Most everyone here has at least one liberal friend who says the exact same stupid shit.

          2. Wars only kill foreigners and volunteers, right?

      2. Hillary isn’t a hawk

        They need to explain this to Bill Kristol and Robert Kagan and Max Boot and James Kirchick

    3. I’m at the point where I just respond, “Oh, in that case, I guess I’ll just vote for Trump. Since it’s the same thing.”

    4. Why did you expect a conceptually sound or logically valid answer from a looter psychopath? I got the same sort of moronic rants from my redneck fishing buddies and finally posted “The Case for Voting Libertarian” nine years ago. They can’t help thinking it’s about government checks made out to them or charismatic parental personalities. We think it’s about repealing bad laws. The two voting strategies lie in such completely separate universes of discourse that the Venn diagram of one is not even visible from the Venn diagram of the other.

    5. I got the same non-sequitur rants from my redneck fishing buddies and wrote “The Case for Voting Libertarian” to spell out the power of spoiler votes 9 years ago. Rednecks challenged by fractions see every election in terms of charismatic parent figures and filial piety, or at best government welfare checks. The two voting strategies lie in such different universes of discourse that the Venn diagram containing one is not visible from the Venn diagram containing the other. Expecting honesty or valid deduction from a looter is hardly the sort of strategy that pays off.

  4. …the media is largely ignoring the potentially massive impact that third-party candidates could have, except during its periodic freakouts that Gary Johnson could lure unsuspecting Millennials away from their rightful role in coronating the next President Clinton.

    Why would they want to draw attention to a guy who “pulls far more heavily from Republicans and conservatives than he does Democrats” if he’s already doing the job with no coverage?

  5. Proposal: all ballots for all offices should be write-ins.

    1. Counter proposal: all gov’t posts should be filled by lottery, like juries.

      And if anyone tries to get out of it, their families get shot.

      1. “All gov’t posts should be filled by lottery, like juries.”

        I’ve actually seriously proposed this to various people, basically operating under the notion that those who seek to have power over others should be definition be prevented from wielding it. If we absolutely must have “leaders,” our best chance of not having them all be corrupt assholes is to have them chosen entirely at random.

        Every time I’ve tried this argument, outside of libertarian circles, I’ve been greeted with disbelief. I’ve actually had better traction with my alternative proposal: immediately imprison all serving politicians and bureaucrats and fill their posts with current prison inmates. While that proposal is only semi-serious, I firmly believe the overall level of honesty would probably improve and no doubt the amount of liberty for ordinary citizens would likely increase.

        1. Most people think we need leaders telling us what to do because everybody is too dumb to make their own decisions *except themselves ofcourse

      1. What Hugh said. Although I do find Gojira’s family-shooting proposal appealing as well.

        1. Look let’s compromise, okay? All offices will be filled by write-in ballots. Winners and their families will be liquidated at the end of their terms.

    2. Proposal: all ballots for all offices should be write-ins verifiable. In Texas we used to sign the back of the ballot, os in the event of a recount the thing could be verified. This was abandoned circa 1975 but I kept it up as a hedge. Voting machines can spit out QR codes you could use to look up online how your own vote was counted–much like you use an ATM to check how the bank recorded a check you deposited. Until any person chosen at random can check how his or her vote was counted, we will continue to live under what Spooner correctly described as a secret band of robbers and murderers.

  6. Evan McMullin Could Tip the Election. So Why Isn’t He Being Polled?

    Are we doing phrasing anymore?

  7. Oh, he’s being polled, all right.

  8. Off Topic:

    Here’s a shocker!

    Katy Tur Verified account
    ?@KatyTurNBC

    Gloria Allred just announced she’s holding a news conference w new Trump accuser today.

    1. Next week they’ll start parading children he’s molested, then the week after that will be digging up the bodies of the children he molested and then strangled

      1. Donald Trump murdered me!

        (seriously, I think it’s somewhat unfair to presume all the women are lying because they’re coming forth right now, given his history of litigiousness and that this always happens when a high profile person is accused. At the same time, that’s not presuming guilt either, and whenever Gloria Allred gets involved by bullshit meter spikes)

        1. True. I still find it rather convenient that the deluge comes three weeks before the election when he’s been running for president for a year.

        2. The week after that they will dig up the children he strangled THEN raped.

          1. If Trump wins the election, he’ll take the country, he’ll rape us to death, eat our flesh, and sew our skins into his clothing. And, if we’re very, very lucky, he’ll do it in that order.

            1. Isn’t that what Mitt said the Kenyan was about to do?

          2. And it’ll conveniently happen the day after the release of the rape of him saying the children let him do it.

      2. I’m waiting for the digging to get deep enough that they have both Slick Willie and The Donald on Jeffrey Epstein’s “Lolita Express” at the same time. The Donald has not shied away from exposing all of Bubba’s sexual indiscretion’s, so why has he not brought up Epstein and Bubba’s entanglement, unless Donnie is just as guilty. Just sayin’.

        1. You know, Trump is just the sort of guy who would burn it all down and cop a felony on live TV just to not go down alone.

        2. If Journalists didn’t care enough to look into it at the time, I think we’ll be waiting for a cold day in hell for this to come out. Personally, I’ve suspected this for a while but I’m also sure there’s zero proof.

          Even the DA at the time admitted that they knew there were many, many more cases out there when talking about Epstein but they could only prove the one.

    2. So, according to Allred’s history, this means it never really happened, right?

      1. If I were the Hillary Campaign, I would tell Gloria to take a vacation on this one. I am being serious. Other than hiring Nancy Grace, I can’t think of anything that discredits these accusers more than getting Gloria Aldred involved.

        The other thing is that the people who are upset about this are mostly upper middle and upper class white people. Being associated with someone like Aldred embarrasses people like that. Aldred following is among lower middle and lower class whites who are likely to find all of this entertaining and either not care about it or not care enough to go out and vote on it.

  9. I’ve distilled my reasons for voting third party into three.
    1) I am voting for the person I think is the best person for the job, which is the point of voting.
    2) If the LP gets 5% of the vote, they get guaranteed ballot access and federal campaign funds.
    3) If the LP covers the spread of the D and R candidates, then the R’s and D’s will be wise to court those LP voters if they want to win again. They will have to pay attention to people with my views. *

    * I know, they can conspire to make it even harder for third parities, like they do with the debates. But I’m optimistic about it, and I think they will have a harder time getting away with that. I think more people are starting to see through the 2-party system’s bullshit.

    1. Nuh uh! [shits self] /Tony

    2. I realize it is WAY too late for this election cycle, but I still hold out on the courts (I know, I’m stupid and naive) siding with Gary on the CPD. I am by no means a lawyer, but I have difficulty reconciling SCOTUS’s Citizen’s United ruling to what the CPD is doing as legal.

    3. I think more people are starting to see through the 2-party system’s bullshit.

      We’ll have to wait until November 8 to see, but you are much more optimistic than I.

    4. 4) If the LP gets 2%+ in my state, all LP candidates get ballot access (without petitioning) for the next 4 years (including the President in 2020). All candidates. Which means the LP can run a candidate easily in every race. And as many of the state House races are unopposed, this is a very good thing.

      1. Exactly. I was nominated for office this year, but disallowed by the state for missing a deadline – I was nominated several months before the Rs and Ds put forth their nominees.

        GJ hits the threshold, and that won’t happen in 2018 and 2020.

        1. This is so much more important than which version of Hillary Trump we get.

    5. This is the fundamental point.

      If the ultimate goal is to get serious consideration of libertarian principles, and the best way to do this is to convince one of the major parties that they lost the election because of defections by libertarian-leaning voters.

      If your loyalty to the party is such that you can’t abide the thought of Hillary (or Trump) losing, then you should stop pretending to care about issues, vote straight party, and have a beer. Everyone would be much happier.

  10. Reason-Rupe?

    If it’s too expensive, you can limit yourselves to millennials.

  11. I’m pretty sure this McMuffin guy is only running to keep the Never Trump crowd from voting for GayJay. It would be very annoying for the duopoly if the Libertarian Party qualified for automatic ballot access in future elections.

    1. Exactly right. Every thing about McMullin’s campaign from day one has pointed to him actually being intended as a spoiler against Gary Johnson.

    1. That’s some ballsy third-degree exploitation John. Or have you been a BLM supporter all along perhaps?

      1. My only problem with BLM is that they don’t seem to be very interested in picking good cases that will make a difference and instead pick cases that are close calls or really bad examples to use as police misconduct and thus are accomplishing nothing except making anyone who is concerned about the issue look like a crank.

        Do you think these people are lying Tony? Are they just professional victims looking for attention? Did they make this all up? Please do tell.

        1. People actually involved in these issues understand perfectly well that black people don’t suddenly gain all their missing relative privilege by walking into a gayborhood. It’s all contained in the concept of intersectionality. Rightwing assholes who don’t give a fuck about any of it except to mock the parties involved aren’t, it goes without saying, helpful to the cause.

          1. Do you think you help a cause, Tony?

          2. Yeah tony, racism is different when your people do it. Somehow I am not surprised you think that. You really have allowed your mind to be poisoned by identity politics. It is just sad. You can’t even bring yourself to object to racism if it goes against your perceived identity group. What a terrible way to live.

            1. I think I said exactly the opposite.

              1. Blah blah blah privilege blah.

                So, I’m curious Tony, when people treat men more like suspected criminals than women, or let women into bars but not men, or charge higher prices for men, is it female privilege?

                1. Yep, but considering the relative privilege loads, you’d look like a moronic asshole for bitching about them when you never gave thought to the concept of relative privilege before.

    2. While Clinton’s presidency is going to do to the relations between men and women (“Wieners out”) what Obama’s presidency did to the race relations, there’s no reason to be concerned about the effect on the LGBT community. Gay men and lesbians never had much in common.

      1. Scott Adams said something to that effect. If Hillary wins it will be because women voted for her. If only men had the franchise, Trump would win in a Reagan like landslide. So if Hillary does win, her Presidency and all of the harm that results will be fairly said to be the fault of women. I suspect more than a few men will say just that and in the same way Obama’s Presidency and the media calling anyone who disagreed with him racist has cheapened the charge and spawned the beginnings of a white identity movement in this country, Hillary if she is President will cheapen the charge of sexism and spawn the beginnings of a male identity movement.

        1. The problem with that analysis is that men aren’t a homogeneous voting block. Non-white men are overwhelmingly backing Clinton. And you can also find plenty of subgroups of white men (depending on age, geography, education, etc.) that are mostly backing Clinton even if white men as a whole favor Trump by a good margin.

          1. That is true. And of course neither are women. Tens of millions of women will vote for Trump even if he loses. So perhaps it won’t be that women are blamed but instead feminist women who are blamed.

            No sane person I know of blames black people for Obama. They often blame stupid white liberals but not black people. There is much less of a taboo in this country about criticizing women and feminist women in particular than there is criticizing blacks. If Hillary wins it will be a disaster for the country but it is going to be an epic disaster for the left. Look at how badly the Democrats have suffered at the state and Congressional level under Obama. Obama whatever you think of him as a President is largely popular even today. People may not like his policies but they mostly think he is a good guy who means well. No one outside of the people on her payroll and various toadies in the media thinks that about Hillary.

            1. Black people are largely to blame for Democrats winning elections…

          2. I live in a very liberal place. So I don’t think it is Pauline Keal syndrome for me to say that I have never seen a politician as disliked and commands as little loyalty as Hillary. Trump’s negatives may be equal to Hillary, but there are a lot of people who love him and want him to be President. Even though most of the people I live and work with are lifetime liberals and Democrats, I don’t know a single person who even likes Hillary or wants her to be President out of anything but party loyalty and dislike of Republicans and Trump.

            If she does win, and things go South, which you know they will, the fallout is going to be interesting. Do the Democrats stick with her like they did Obama? How big does the Republican majorities in the Congress get in 2018? Think of it this way, Trump got up and told Hillary to her face she was a criminal who belonged in jail and his poll numbers went up. It undid some of the damage the videotape caused. I don’t think a candidate could have gotten away with doing that to even Nixon or Bush at their most unpopular moments. I have never seen anything like it. We could have a President whom everyone on both sides of the isle hates and whom treating with contempt is a politically smart move from the first day she enters office. The fallout of that would be very interesting.

            1. Even though most of the people I live and work with are lifetime liberals and Democrats, I don’t know a single person who even likes Hillary or wants her to be President out of anything but party loyalty and dislike of Republicans and Trump.

              The only people I’ve seen who actually like her are cat ladies, aging boomer hippies, and as you said, the boot-lickers on her staff and in the press. Even people I’ve talked to on FB who act as apologists for her blatant law-breaking, corruption, and paranoia will admit that these are still legitimate concerns regarding her leadership as President, and a lot of them are simply voting for her out of party loyalty, not because they actually like her.

            2. Hillary becomes GHWB, Republicans nominate someone who doesn’t suck and they win in 2020.

    3. I was almost certain it was going to be Chicago, not Philadelphia.

    1. I was going to say Minion but that works too. The funny thing about all of these former Intel, Spec Ops and various spook guys you see in the media and now politics is that none of them ever were any good at their jobs. I first figured this out after working with and getting to know people in the Special Ops community. The Special Ops community is very small. Everyone pretty much knows everyone else. So I asked the ones I knew about the various “Former SEALS and Green Berets” that were always on TV. And the answer was always either “I have no idea who that guy is” or “that guy is an ass clown”. Understand if no one knows who you are in the community, it is because you were not around long and didn’t little or nothing of value. Later, when I got to know people in the intel community, it was the same thing.

      If this guy were any good at whatever he did for the NSA, he would still be doing it or making big bucks for some contractor not shilling for the odd buck on NRO and being Bill Krystal’s Minion.

      1. I was going to say Minion but that works too.

        Goddammit, now i want to dress him in overalls and give him a banana.

        1. And a pair of goggles. One thing about it, this guy never has to stress over what to wear on Halloween. His costume pretty much makes itself.

    2. At least he finally decided to wear a suit.

      I’m no Gilmore, but even I realize that if you’re worse-dressed than the Libertarian, you have a problem.

  12. My only remaining hope for this election is for Trump’s and Clinton’s vote totals to be as low as possible, and for either of them to come in third (or fourth!) in a few states. Anything to give attention to other options, even if it’s after the election is over.

  13. Yea, nobody gives a shit about what we think here in Idaho.

    1. How are the potatos doing?

  14. Evan McMullin Could Tip the Election. So Why Isn’t He Being Polled?

    Was . . . is that a rhetorical question?

  15. I’m just glad that they began selling egg McMullins after 10:30am.

    1. No one I know is voting for Egg McMuffin.

      1. And I myself am voting for Hairy Johnson.

      2. There was a poll the other day that showed that Millinnials wouldn’t know a Big MacMuffin if it came up to them in the street and smacked them in the face. Sad!

  16. #NeverAMormon

  17. Because he is a nut case. I don’t want some idiot bible thumper taking over the LP party. I’d vote for Hillary or Trump before I would vote for McMullin.

  18. This must be the guy all the “caketarians” say we should vote for, until they close the curtain on their voting booth and secretly pull the lever for Trump/Pence.

  19. until I looked at the paycheck saying $4730 , I did not believe that…my… brother woz like actualy bringing in money part time from there computar. . there friend brother started doing this for less than 7 months and resently paid for the morgage on there home and bought a new Cadillac …….

    …….. http://www.jobprofit9.com

  20. Facebook gives you a great opportunity to earn 98652$ at your home.If you are some intelligent you makemany more Dollars.I am also earning many more, my relatives wondered to see how i settle my Life in few days thank GOD to you for this…You can also make cash i never tell alie you should check this I am sure you shocked to see this amazing offer…I’m Loving it!!!!
    ????????> http://www.factoryofincome.com

  21. I am making $89/hour working from home. I never thought that it was legitimate but my best friend is earning $10 thousand a month by working online, that was really surprising for me, she recommended me to try it. just try it out on the following website.

    ===> http://www.NetNote70.com

  22. There are good reasons for ignoring McMuffin. The important one is that one Prohibition spoiler vote was worth 36 ordinary votes over the course of 11 election campaigns before the 18th Amendment made beer a federal felony. One Populist spoiler vote was worth 6 regular votes in the election of 1892 (which added a tax in neither entrenched platform), and worth at least three kleptocracy votes in the Y2k election (after which the Dem platform turned bright Green). Nobody who matters wants this capacity for change discussed openly–NOT with the LP on the ballot in These States. The second reason is that Mormons can in a heartbeat produce hundreds of PhD geologists and historians eager to “prove” that Native Americans are the Lost Tribes of Israel and similar faith-based assertions. This is as appealing to “both” parties’ media as word getting out that over 32000 degreed scientists signed the Petition Project that still prevents Senate ratification of the Kyoto fraud. The Nixon PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN FUND ACT, was enacted to preclude embarrassing open debate.

  23. Peyton . even though Billy `s report is cool… on monday I got a gorgeous Maserati after I been earnin $8985 thiss month and even more than ten k lass month . it’s certainly the easiest work Ive ever had . I started this 9-months ago and practically straight away started bringin home at least $78 per-hr . look at this now

    ……………. http://www.jobhub44.com

  24. Matthew . I can see what your saying… Bobby `s storry is surprising, last saturday I got a brand new Land Rover Defender since I been making $4556 this past 5 weeks and more than ten-grand this past-month . this is definitely my favourite-job I have ever had . I began this 4 months ago and immediately made more than $71 per-hr . More Info
    ????????> http://www.factoryofincome.com

  25. Bella . I can see what your saying… Jesus `s blurb is good, on wednesday I bought a new Lotus Elan after making $9196 this last 4 weeks an would you believe 10/k lass month . this is really the nicest work I’ve ever done . I started this 5 months ago and almost straight away brought home minimum $73.. per hour . read
    ????????> http://www.factoryofincome.com

  26. Anna . I see what you mean… Virginia `s postlng is incredible, last tuesday I got a new Audi Quattro after having made $5000 this last 5 weeks and over 10k this past month . without a doubt it is the coolest work I have ever had . I started this seven months/ago and pretty much immediately started making minimum $85 per hour . view it
    ????????> http://www.factoryofincome.com

  27. Liliana . if you think Lawrence `s blog is incredible, I just purchased a new Honda after earning $5741 this – 4 weeks past and also 10 grand lass month . it’s by-far the most-comfortable job I have ever done . I started this four months/ago and almost immediately began to make minimum $85… p/h .

    see this……………. http://www.BuzzNews10.com

  28. until I looked at the paycheck saying $4730 , I did not believe that…my… brother woz like actualy bringing in money part time from there computar. . there friend brother started doing this for less than 7 months and resently paid for the morgage on there home and bought a new Cadillac …….

    ……………… http://www.jobprofit9.com

  29. until I looked at the paycheck saying $4730 , I did not believe that…my… brother woz like actualy bringing in money part time from there computar. . there friend brother started doing this for less than 7 months and resently paid for the morgage on there home and bought a new Cadillac …….

    …….. http://www.jobprofit9.com

  30. While coming to education, the technology has brought many advantages to students and as well as teachers. showbox For example, students can do their homework or assignment with ease and can complete it faster by using the Internet.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.