@Paris Procopis....It would seem to me that the GOP, the party of discipline, would have these lose ends tied up already. This blog piece seems to be an admission what the left has been claiming all along; the GOP is dominated by right wing ideologues. I really think you're making much to do about nothing.

@Lyle Both parties are about big money politics. You still don't get it, Lyle. You are still stuck in your partisan blabbering!

Lyle, the party that's got Katy Perry appearing with their candidate in town today and that is currently running an ad campaign trying to encourage that portion of its base that we're told represents this nation's bright future to not sit home and play video games all day on Nov 6 wouldn't seem to have all its loose ends tied up either, would it?

@Bob McBride...You know we're talking about Republicans, the party of discipline and not the Democrats, the party of chaos. The video game crowd could care less about the election as long as nothing interferes with their gaming. Katy Perry coming in on Saturday is not going to impact the election or turnout at all. Let's keep it real.

Let's keep it real? Lyle, all that stuff IS real. Your side has an ad campaign playing almost constantly now trying to encourage college kids NOT to forget to vote. And your candidate, TPOTUS Barrack Obama, is performing on a double bill with Katy Perry. If none of this is about turnout, why in G-d's name is it being done? Got some extra bucks to burn? Obama's got nothing else going on, so why not hit Milwaukee with Katy Perry?

C'mon, Lyle. Even for Schmitz that would be a lame one....

@Paris Procopis....You think that if Nader hadn't run in 2000 and pulled the votes away from Gore, the nation would have been better off? History is history and hind sight is 20/20, I don't really think there are enough third party supporters to throw the election to Obama.

Ohio and Colorado both have more than 12 presidential candates on their ballots.

@Paris Procopis When Jamie Dimon, the CEO of JP Morgan, appeared before the Senate Banking Committee over the London Whale fiasco, it was reported that the six senators (3 Dems, 3 Repubs) were all on JP Morgan's payroll. They treated Mr. Dimon with kid gloves and sent him on his way. Surprise, surprise.

We have lost our representation in Washington. We cannot condone it!

People should be voting for the 'best' candidate for President?
You got one on the ballot? Not in my lifetime!

Presidential elections are all about voting against the worst.
Keep the very worst guy out of Washington D.C.
One votes 'against' in all Federal elections.

On a Federal level --Vote against the person(s)you don't want 'leading' America!

Jay, I was trying to be positive. The bar is set low when our "best" = "not the worst."

I didn't set the bar or dig the hole to set it below grade;me, I just read the tape measure.

"The PRIVATE NEEDS THE PUBLIC"

*****************

Translation: Since I've been dumped by the private sector, I need my position at UWM.

Nick, I'm fairly familiar with Katy Perry's music and her bio/background - probably more so than you are. Even without the Obama half of the show, I wouldn't be interested. But you go ahead and represent us old white guys. You're no stranger to looking foolish and completely out of touch.

Nick, you're a,lifelong Republican as much as I was born a poor black child. Give it up. The 45th President of the United States, Mitt Romney, will have quite a mess to clean up after 4 years of failure under Obama. GWB first 6 years were very successful that is until Democrats took over Congress. Obama inherited a mess brought on by the Subprime Mortgage mess which Democrats fail to acknowledge. They keep trying to re-write history.

Keith, 9/11 occurred in 2001. There were numerous leadership failures (partially due to extensive presidential vacation time, staff hubris, etc.). The infamous "tax refund" wherein foreign funds had to borrowed to send everyone a silly check, also took place during the first Bush administration. Just keeping the record straight here.

@Keith Best...Was it necessary for you to make the statement "I was born a poor black child"? What's that all about, couldn't you have figured out another way to make your point rather than bring race into it? Now you know why so many claim Republicans are racists.

That's a line from a Steve Martin movie (The Jerk), Lyle...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfAvQp-Uk5I

@Nick: From the dribble you spew it is not possible that you voted Republican- ever!
It doesn't take a profiler to see through you.
Don't try to be something you are not!

That's funny Troy. From my standpoint it seems that the Conservatives are the ones attempting to build bridges and compromise while the Left continues to ram through their agenda. Read some of Nick's comments and you'll see plenty of fear mongering and loathing, falling just short of hatred of those that support the 'immoral, bigoted, Atheistic, Randian, plutocrats'.

There are issues like that on both sides. I agree. I just feel the Conservative Congress has delayed, delayed - then filibustered thier own ideas and legislation they helped write. Think the raise to military families.

And when it comes to ramming through agendas, I can't help but look to our own state. Where was the cooperation when Walker was elected? The answer is there wasn't.

I know we can all go back and forth on the ways and means, but the point is simple. The message just seems to me so one sided.

Compare Walker's alleged 'ramming through' with Doyle's ramming through of his budget repair. Walker's budget repair had a much longer period of debate and consideration than the previous one that Doyle pushed through. As far as asking about the cooperation, the Dem senators left the state rather than bringing up their objections and counter proposals on the Senate floor.

They weren't given the time. Remeber the call that the Republicans were violating the open meetins law.

Again - we can argue the wheres and why fores.

I gave my vibe and opinion. You gave yours. I guess (meaning I am sure) both sides need to repair bridges.

We all have too many problems to not work together.

The dems were already in Illinois for several days when the alleged open meeting law violation was taking place...

@Nothougt Boy

MSNBC is the most unprofessional bunch of hateful losers I've ever seen. They mock, insults and skew anyone who is not a far left wing limpdick liberal.

For you to point the finger at fox, and use msnbc as an example of balance, shows that you are: a NOTHOUGHT BOY.

Nobody's telling you who or who not to vote for. If you want to waste it voting for Johnson, that's your right as a citizen.

Satori and McClusky, good arguments, and ones that need to be made amid all the hostile "wasted vote" crapola. The system encourages this , by not giving us a chance to actually rate the candidates in the ballot box. The candidate with the fewest top ratings gets eliminated, and so on. Our founders believed very strongly in voting for the person and philosophy you believed in, not just the best financed, best looking, best sounding sales person out there. I agree that Libertarians have a long way to go, especially in Wisconsin, to be a consistent threat to the duopoly. But we are pushing the agenda toward smaller government in both the personal and economic spheres, because we are losing our liberties in both, and we cannot continue to spend ourselves into bankruptcy. I don't see us "taking" enough votes from any GOP candidate (or Democrat) to make a difference Tuesday. Besides, there are always people who are not going to vote for the power parties if they have some other options available. That's what we offer, and we are not going away. As for the Paulbots, they need to join with us in building up the LP and getting our candidates more support and help.

What is the purpose of Tuesday's election, Keith? Is it to elect the folks who will be actively involved in the process of governance over the term associated with the position they're running for? Or is it to attempt to establish a viable third party?

That's what it comes down to, Keith.

@Keith R. Deschler Don't listen to Bob. The status quo is not working.

Then why has Rand Paul endorsed Romney?????

@ Keith Best,

Then why hasn't Ron Paul endorsed Romney?

What a shock, a father and son not agreeing about the merits of dad's ambitions...

@Bob McBride The Left can always vote for Jill Stein. Oh, that's right, she is in jail again!

So in lieu of that they'll be voting for Obama.

I'm really not convinced that you "independents" are as large a factor as you think you are, but I do hope you realize you are, indeed, increasing Obama's chances of a victory by voting for Johnson. Maybe that's what you want. If it is, why not just vote for Obama? Nobody REALLY knows. You can still say you voted for Johnson and bask in whatever glory you think doing so provides.

As Jay said above, voting is about voting for the lesser of two evils. Higher aspirations are great, but they don't win. And we are stuck with who wins. You can choose to have some direct say in the issue, or you can pull a Pontius Pilate, vote for someone who doesn't stand a chance and cast your vote for one of the main players indirectly.

I'd love to see have seen the Brewers win the series. If I'd put money on them doing so 3 weeks ago, what do think people would be thinking about that, not only now, but at the time I did so?

@Bob McBride All movements start out small. As long as they persist they do have a chance to grow into something bigger. Remember, it was only a few years ago that hardly anyone even heard of the Libertarian Party. It will take some time, but giving up is not an option.

As for the two major candidates: both are a few steps below mediocre. They have been pre-packaged and paid for by the big wheels who we will never know. They also have their marketing people, just like any product.

We have no idea what either one of them will do after the election. That is how they like it.

Like them or not, one of them is going to win and be the president. Gary Johnson isn't. You can be a part of it directly, or think you're washing your hands of it and be a part of it, indirectly. That's the bottom line.

@Michael McClusky.... If one wants move the voter base(read:results), one needs to address it on a more local level. Much of the 'out of the mainstream' thinking takes hold through individual state elections. The office of Governor is a good place to begin an (I)ndependent 'fight' to influnce voters;think Jesse Ventura, Governor Moonbeam(in the 60's), Scott Walker, Chis Christie, and our own "Fighting Bob" La Follette.

Recall, that the last 'relativity successful' (I) for President was Perot. Before that, the last time an (I) got more than 15% of the vote was the La Follette Progressive / Teddy Roosevelt Bull Moose era.

@Bob McBride To just give in to the machines is not the American way Whatever happened to the strength of the individual who could make a difference? Are we supposed to just let the super powerful make all of the decisions for us, or do we oppose this autocratic way of thinking that is perpetuated by the media and all the other political minions? I think it is time for people to wake up and not support these two gigantic companies. Because that is all they are- companies.

@Jay Sykes To begin any local movement people need to first start thinking out of the box.

Once again, Gary Johnson is not going to win. Either Romney or Obama will win. The election is about who is going to be president for the next 4 years, not whether or not the Libertarian party is going to survive. You're obviously well within your rights to cast your vote any way you see fit, however you need to acknowledge that voting for Gary Johnson will have the same effect on who wins the presidency as not voting at all. You are casting a purely symbolic vote. You are essentially voting against whichever mainstream candidate closest fits the Libertarian model. You are, truly, wasting your vote.

That being said, again, it's obviously your right to do so. Personally, I think it's a mistake and a miscalculation regarding the value of your vote.

I can not tell a lie. I am beginning to understand what Conservatives were going through in 2004 when all of the Liberals were voting for Nader.

If I lived in states like -CA - TX - NY, for this election cycle , my vote would not change the Electoral College outcome, I would give serous consideration to voting third party.

@Michael McClusky....You should be listening to two of the most pragmatic commentators on this thread. Bob McBride and Jay Sykes are right on the money with their comments. In a close race, your third party vote is a throw away vote. Jay is correct in his statement, if you lived in a heavily red or blue state, a third party protest vote wouldn't make any difference. You also need to recognize that libertarianism is unworkable in today's world; we don't live in a vacuum.

@Lyle Libertarians have long ago accepted the fact that they would not get their way most of the time in this country. What they hope to accomplish is to change the trajectory of government; irresponsible spending, wreckless programs and obtrusive laws need to be curbed for all of our sakes.. Neither major party is ready to really take on these challenges.

Votes are not wasted by voting for what you believe.in. What state you live in should have no bearing on how you view the federal government Whether I live in Wisconsin or Illinois or wherever, the federal elections are essentially the same except for the electoral college. Just because I live in a so-called battleground state does not change my contempt for the two major parties.

@Michael McClusky....You're a true libertarian, strictly an ideologue regardless of practicality.

@Lyle No, I am a pragmatist. Since the Republicans and Democrats are incapable of making hard choices, then why not turn towards a movement that is more than eager to? The Republicans and Democrats cannot even balance a check book; they have been both bought out a long time ago. Budgets will always be screwy because of the immense secret agendas going on. It is not being practical or wise to show either of them any support.

Then don't. Please.

Hmmmm, sounds like you have been following your talking points ordered by George Soros :)

Sheldon adelson is the 12th-richest person in the US, and has given more than $50 million to elect Republicans.

You may call that a talking point; I call it a perversion of our political system

Wow - a George Soros blast. Nice. It's been since Glen Beck since I've heard something like that.

If any third party is going to be successful, it needs to get its message out there much sooner and its got to be more than just trashing Republicans and Democrats coupled with "vote for so-and-so".

The best I can tell from Gary Johnson's website, the objective seems to be "get 5% of the vote and they have to acknowledge us". That, and pushing Gary Johnson as some sort of charismatic, man's man. I looked at the positions on stuff and it does follow pretty much the conventional Libertarian platform, freshened up a bit.

The hard sell we've been getting around here for the past couple of weeks needed to start about 9 months ago and needed to include, as I mentioned, something more attractive and interesting than trashing the two major parties. That could have been done w/o concerns about the national media covering the candidate. That's true "grassroots" work. "Grassroots" as it relates to the major parties is an oxymoron.

Perhaps it was being done elsewhere. It's been non-existant here. Waiting 'til the last minute and banking on frustration and fatigue generated by endless carping between the two major parties as a catalyst for a last minute third party surge isn't a workable strategy.

As for the election, I'm still pretty much convinced Obama is going to take it, for the same reason he took it first time around - and, again, with an assist from the Republicans via their VP selection - albeit not to the same degree as last time.