I may vote Libertarian

[Burning Petard]

On CNN last nite, the Libertarian presidential candidate was asked: What is the most difficult thing you have ever done?

He replied, "Ride my bicycle 600 miles in 36 hours." That is a man I can embrace (metaphorically). Even help him off his bicycle after a ride like that.

(((((snailgate)))))

[Bicycle Bill]

600 miles in 36 hours?  I'd like to know when and where he accomplished this.  That's an average of about 17 miles per hour, each hour, every hour, for a day and a half — including any and all stops for mechanical problems, food, rest (riding that steady for that length of time you will start hallucinating after about 24 hours), and the occasional bathroom break.

The best I've ever done was 250 miles in 24 hours, and that was riding four-mile laps outdoors on a relatively flat road course in what was more-or-less a solo effort. Perhaps in my prime I could have done 600 in 36 hours, but it would probably have required me to be riding with an equally skilled group in a paceline (drafting) and with a support crew to hand up food and liquids, full medical support including massage therapy, and a mechanic which would have had at least two or three other bikes standing by for an instant change-over in case of a flat tire or other malfunction.

-"BB"-

[Burning Petard]

I too wonder where it was done, but with support crew and pacing it is very possible. RAAM riders do this kind of riding for several days, with no pacing (some other riders or vehicle sheltering you from the wind) If he was on the bike at a 21mph average speed, that would leave more than 7 hours for off the bike.

(((((snailgate))))

[rubato]

On CNN last nite, the Libertarian presidential candidate was asked: What is the most difficult thing you have ever done?

He replied, "Ride my bicycle 600 miles in 36 hours." That is a man I can embrace (metaphorically). Even help him off his bicycle after a ride like that.

(((((snailgate)))))

Perhaps his memory is as bad as Ryan who gave himself a marathon 'best time' of under 3 hours when his real best was over 4 hours?


yrs,
rubato

[RayThom]

600 miles in 36 hours?  I'd like to know when and where he accomplished this...  

Perhaps it was all downhill, no?

[Long Run]

He's the real deal. From his Wikipedia page:

Johnson lives in Taos, New Mexico,[139][140] in a home that he built himself.[64] He is an avid triathlete who bikes extensively. During his term in office, he competed in several triathlons, marathons and bike races. He competed three times (1993, 1997, 1999) as a celebrity invitee at the Ironman World Championship in Hawaii, registering his best time for the 2.4-mile (3.9 km) swim, 112-mile (180 km) bike ride, and 26.2-mile (42.2 km) marathon run in 1999 with 10 hours, 39 minutes, and 16 seconds.[141][142] He once ran 100 miles (160 km) in 30 consecutive hours in the Rocky Mountains.[14] On May 30, 2003, he reached the summit of Mount Everest[143] "despite toes blackened with frostbite."[27] He has climbed all seven of the Seven Summits: Mount Everest, Mount Elbrus, Denali, Mount Kilimanjaro, Aconcagua, Mount Vinson, and Carstensz Pyramid—the tallest peaks in Asia, Europe, North America, Africa, South America, Antarctica, and Oceania respectively.[144] He completed the Bataan Memorial Death March at White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico, in which participants traverse a 26.2 mile course through the desert, many of them in combat boots and wearing 35-pound packs.[145]

[rubato]

He doesn't belong in the GOP.


yrs,
rubato

[Burning Petard]

That is why is running as a Libertarian

[oldr_n_wsr]

I am leaning in the Libertarian direction.

[Bicycle Bill]

I am leaning in the Libertarian direction.

I understand your feeling, oldr (and you too, BP), and were Trump not in the election I would probably do the same myself.  But like it or not, Trump *IS* very much in this election and unless something really out-of-the-ordinary happens at the convention in Cleveland he will likely be the GOP's standard-bearer.  And if that happens, I feel it is far more important to make damned sure that the only way he ever sees the inside of the Oval Office is on the White House tour by voting for the candidate who has the best chance of beating him.  And like it or not, that would be Hillary R. Clinton.

Sure, voting for Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson or Jill Stein of the Green Party or any of the other 'fringe' candidates is not a vote for Trump; neither, however, is it automatically a vote against him (follow with me on this).  Remember that he does not have to win a majority (51% or more) of the total votes cast; he merely has to win a plurality.  So if 43% of the people vote for him, 42% vote for Clinton, and the other 15% of the vote is scattered across the other parties like the Libertarians, the Greens, and whatever else might be on the ballot, then guess what?  We The People will have to call Donald Trump "Mr. President" for the next four years, at least.

(Yeah, I know, it doesn't run strictly on popular vote either; there's this thing called the Electoral College that actually makes the formal decision after the election determines just how many electoral votes each candidate gets, but it's pretty much always followed the lines of the popular vote count)

Personally, I don't want to see that happen.  So, while Ms. Clinton is also not my first choice, I cannot also take the chance that my absolutely LAST choice (Trump) will prevail.  But since there is no provision to vote for "anybody except Trump!" when Election Day rolls around and I cast my ballot, I will be marking it for the former first lady with one hand while holding my nose with the other.  I urge you to do the same.

-"BB"-

[Burning Petard]

Me, I am hoping Trump has reverse coattails and gets the GOP congress critters out some of their safe districts.

(((((snailgate)))))

[rubato]

Me, I am hoping Trump has reverse coattails and gets the GOP congress critters out some of their safe districts.

(((((snailgate)))))

I'm hoping they get sucked down the drain like turds following tissue down the great siphon.


yrs,
rubato

[Big RR]

BB--as someone who voted Green in 2000 figuring how bad can W be (and then finding out), I agree with you.

Oldr, unless you really don't care if Trump is elected or not (and that's how I felt about W in 2000), the only vote against him that will count is for Hillary. Personally, I voted Green in 200 as a protest vote hoping the dems would learn what they shouldn't take for granted (they didn't) and, as I said before, figuring W wouldn't be that bad (he was worse IMHO). And you have to weigh how a Trump presidency would be (I can't imagine many persons who would be worse as president than him), and decide if you want to take that chance.

[RayThom]

Voting Libertarian would be like voting for Drumpf and that's not going to happen. Trump is a joke, I don't trust Hillary, and all other candidates are there as spoilers wreaking havoc upon any chance for even mediocre governance. At the moment I plan to abstain from voting for any presidential candidate.

By abstaining it will be noted that a loyal -- albeit disgruntled -- voter showed up at the polls yet voted only for all candidates EXCEPT those for president. It will be seen as a protest statement without affecting the outcome percentages. Que sera, sera.

And whatever the final outcome I am prepared to live with. Of course, with different degrees of happiness and/or sadness.

God bless America.

[oldr_n_wsr]

My vote may change depending on how close NY is likely to be.
Right now, clinton is above 50% and trump is in the mid to low 30's, so NY is not in play yet, if it ever will be.
Still have 4 months, so we shall have to see what transpires during that time.

[Burning Petard]

Good on you Ray. The names at the top of the ticket get nearly all the publicity, but it is the names and offices way down below that have more direct effect on our individual daily lives.

[Lord Jim]

If Clinton actually picks Warren to be her running mate I may have to re-think my vote for her and switch to voting for Johnson or not voting...

I didn't think there was much chance of her actually doing that, (I still think it's not likely) but if she picks Warren she will be saying to all the moderate independents and anti-Trump Republicans, "Fuck you, I don't want your votes"...

I give Warren props and applause for the way she needles Trump and gets under his skin, and I hope she keeps it up...

But I certainly do not want her a heart beat away from the Presidency. The only worse pick I can imagine would be Sanders. Her understanding of economics is on a par with rubato's, she's a strident class warfare demagogue, and worst of all an extreme dove on defense and national security.

Completely unacceptable; Warren shouldn't be within a hundred miles of The Oval Office.

As I said, I still think it's very unlikely, even though she is supposedly on the "short list" and is being vetted by the campaign, (I suspect this, like the joint campaign appearance yesterday, is just for show to please the Sanders crowd)

A poll came out a couple of days ago that showed Sanders supporters are now behind Clinton by 81-9 over Trump. Hillary doesn't need Warren on the ticket to consolidate the left-wing base of her party behind her against Trump...

On the other hand, she'll risk losing a much larger tranche of potential votes she could get among moderates and unhappy Republicans if she picks that fiercely partisan leftist firebrand for her running mate.

I strongly suspect that Clinton and her team are fully aware of these facts and that ultimately she'll go with someone far more broadly acceptable, like Tim Kaine.

[Lord Jim]

Me, I am hoping Trump has reverse coattails and gets the GOP congress critters out some of their safe districts.

(((((snailgate)))))

I don't imagine it will surprise you to learn SG, that my position is exactly the opposite...

While I want Trump defeated, and defeated by an historic margin, that makes the GOP retaining control of at least one House of Congress, (preferably both) all the more important, from my perspective. It's essential in order to serve as a check and prevent the Democrats from engaging in the sort of high-handed, hubris driven over-reach that was the hall mark of the first two years of the Obama Administration...

I want a President Hillary Clinton, (my God, did I really type that? ) who will need to fashion policy working across the aisle (which is something she actually showed a talent for when she was in the Senate) not one who will be in a position to steam-roll Republicans the way Obama and Pelosi did at the outset of his Presidency.

[Sue U]

There is no serious chance of the GOP losing a House majority. Even in a worst-case scenario, they probably couldn't lose more than 10 seats if they tried; there might be half a dozen that are seriously in play. Democrats would have to flip 30 seats to get a majority, and that just ain't happening until redistricting occurs after the 2020 census.

[oldr_n_wsr]

but it is the names and offices way down below that have more direct effect on our individual daily lives.

The main thrust of my learning this cycle.
i have always paid close attention to the local/state races, more so than president, especially here in the dem state of NY.
Other than Reagan, I am pretty sure the state has always gone dem's in presidential elections. and it's winner takes all.