Voting in fear for a statist who will increase the size of government is not rational or objectivist. Sacrificing your principles in fear is not objectvist. Consenting to statist rule in fear is not objectivist.

RE: “Gary Johnson is not a player and those who use their vote to send messages are heard by no one.”

In every presidential election, people are told that they are “wasting their vote” if they vote for the Libertarian candidate.

As one who has voted for every Libertarian presidential candidate since 1972, I think the exact opposite is true. By voting for my principles, my votes over the years have had far more impact than if I had allowed the two “establishment” parties to dictate my choices.

Consider this: no matter how you have voted for President in the past, your vote has never made a difference in the outcome. Nor will it do so in the future. Even if you live in a “swing state” that could go either way, your lone vote will not spell the difference between victory and defeat for either establishment party candidate.

So if you can’t change the election outcome, why vote at all? The answer is that by voting Libertarian, you will be adding to the vote totals of the only party that consistently supports individual freedom. And those vote totals matter – the establishment parties pay close attention when a significant number of voters break with the two-party system, and they will often modify their stands on certain issues to protect their base and prevent further defections.

On the other hand, if you vote for the “lesser of two evils,” you are saying in effect, “I support the political status quo. I have faith in the two-party system, and I’m not interested in supporting candidates from other parties, even if they have fresh ideas that I agree with. I don’t like either of the two establishment party candidates, but I will vote for Establishment Party Candidate X because he is not quite as bad as Establishment Party Candidate Y.” This truly is a waste of your vote, and does nothing to advance the cause of freedom.

Voting Libertarian will put the establishment parties on notice that you are not satisfied with the candidates they offer, and unless they come up with better choices they will not earn your vote in the future.

I live in MA. My vote is irrelevant. Therefore, I will vote for Gary Johnson, because anyone is better than Hillary (even Putin), and even though Gary Johnson has his warts, Gary Johnson is better than Trump. Period.

The assertion that a vote for a third party will be heard by no one, is completely false. It is already heard by two parties mortally afraid that real ideas can make there way into discussion, and their strategy to slip inappropriate positions (e.g. restrictions of social freedom) in under the cover of other more important platforms. US reaction to this crap is why Trump won the republican ticket, and Rubio et al are not wiping the floor with Hillary. We should be duped by the same strategy that go us this idiot (who I hope winds, BTW) yet again?

Fool me one, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

The choices are terrible and the arguments from all sides here I find not compelling. Here are some of my observations:

1. Clinton is a dishonest collectivist. In her debate she talked about investing in ... the middle class? Investing here means using stolen money to buy votes from that fraction of the electorate. There was no mention of individual rights and our government formed by us to secure our rights. No principles.

2. Trump is a dishonest, authoritarian, cronyism advocate. Now I don't fault a business person defending themselves against government abuse by lobbying. I don't fault them taking advantage of any technique to protect themselves from "legal" theft. But Trump wants to punish speech by the media and free trade by businesses. That's fascism - you supposedly own your property but the government dictates its use and disposal. This especially applies to the means of production. Like with Clinton, there was no mention of individual rights and our government formed by us to secure our rights. No principles.

3. in the Republican primaries this year, at least two of the rejected candidates mentioned the issues of rights , so there is some visibility.

4. If your vote for either of the two front runners is of no consequence in your state, like in California, making a protest vote is definitely appropriate.

5. Johnson is flawed but much better that the front runners. He has the concept of individual rights. He is not an anarchist as were the LP founders. As governor of NM, he vetoed hundreds of bills that were anti-individual rights and profligate spending. He disappointingly accepts anthropomorphically caused catastrophic global warming that requires government intervention. He is still a reasonable protest vote.

6. And finally, there's the the issue of populating the SCOTUS. History demonstrates that both parties choices have been mixed at best. Eg. property rights and Kelo a decade ago. Free speech for the successful and Citizens United. Roe v Wade and a woman's right to her body. Net Neutrality - precluding classes of service like the post office and express shipping; airplane cabins with two to four classes of service at different price points.

No one except Objectivists seems to get that RIGHTS refer to freedom of action and never the "right" to the product of another persons' labor. This includes food, clothing, shelter, roads, education, health insurance, health care, etc.

So I recommend voting your values including as a protest vote and accepting the sadly lacking best the field has to offer.

Cultures have changed over history and we need ours to. ARI is studying the lessons of history on culture change through education of next generations and the current technology-based best ways of reaching people, especially young people. Let's do all we can to advance our cause. If anyone here has not seen the changes in attitude at ARI over the last few years under Yaron Brook's leadership, I recommend you look again. See the OCON 2016 site and the description of the talk, "Objectivist Movement 2.0" (Not Objectivism 2.0! :-) ).

Another major advancement is the work of Jean Moroney (Binswanger) on the human interaction, communication, respect, listening, objective communication and thinking discipline. Also see the work of Greg Salameri.

And then there's the morphing of "The Undercurrent" into "STRIVE" see http://striveclubs.org for the college context. This has the leadership development focus as well as the intellectual development focus I have been encouraging for decades.

Vote for the lesser of two statist evils?

When presented with a "choice" between hemlock & strychnine, I will not lend legitimacy to my execution by cooperating in the process. If I am to be poisoned, the executioners will have to hold me down, pry my mouth open and pour it in themselves over my screaming objections.

But on the other hand, if poisoning is inevitable maybe I should at least choose the less noxious tasting one? So maybe I'll vote for Trump, as his antics may at least be a bit more amusing to watch as Rome burns.

While Trump makes me uneasy Hilary terrifies me. Hillary is fundamentally dishonest and hypocritical and Trump is easily distracted by trivia. Is Trump an ideal candidate? Far from it. But when one considers the alternative "The Donald" is clearly the only game in town. Sadly, we are faced not with who will do the most good but who will do the least harm. I think the answer to that is obvious.

Sorry, but only two of those reasons were actual endorsements. And the Supreme Court argument falls flat. Look at the GOP nominee Chief Justice John Roberts and his support of Obamacare. Many moderate judges were appointed by Democrats. You never know what a justice is going to do once they are on that bench. That's a weak argument.
Economics? Trumps supports Tariffs and starting trade wars. That will spell disaster for consumers who will only see prices on nearly everything rise.
The third is that Hillary is corrupt. Yeah, so is Trump. He calls his ability to "take advantage" of existing laws to give him a leg up on others a positive. It shows that he not only doesn't oppose cronyism, but that he supports it!
The final, if you really want someone who will FIGHT the establishment... Vote for Gary Johnson. He's not perfect, but literally no one running is. Or honestly ever will be. But he is the only one who at least claims to support the cause of Liberty.

He's right.
The USA is truly on the brink. If Trump loses, the country formerly known as the United States of America will cease to be, and will be the same in name only. By the end of 4 years it will have become a socialist state in totality and the Republican Party as well as all other parties will no longer be strong enough to ever regain a majority. This will lead to the one party system of a dictatorship. We've seen it happen over and over. Goodbye Columbia.

Yes, Trump

Four compelling reasons to vote for Trump:
1. Never Hillary!
2. Never Hillary!
3. Never Hillary!
4. Never Hillary!

I'm going for the "sure" way to beat Clinton...THAT is voting my conscience (thank you, Ted Cruz, for that advice).

...and the danger of Hillary being elected (from my btother):

Yesterday I saw and heard Hillary Clinton make this cryptic declaration:

“It’s not just my name on the ballot. Every issue you care about – think about it, because in effect it’s on the ballot, too. The next 40 days will determine the next 40 years.”

We all know that she refers to the Supreme Court.

Yes, yes, yes and yes.
And goofy Gary is a LINO.
Mr. Imperfect Bad Hair Day is all the old dino sees left to vote for and he may be this country's last chance.
The USA needs a fireman to the rescue and we need one now.
Me dino ain't someone who will ever rejoice over making some hollow self-righteously Objectiivist point by sitting back and letting the Republic of the United States burn the rest of the way down.
Do not delude yourselves into thinking some beautiful Objectivist phoenix shall then magically arise from the ashes with everyone reading Ayn Rand.
We'll be lucky if our half-starved children aren't all goosestepping and prayerfully chanting praises to some Chairman Chucklehead like that stupid punk who runs North Korea. .
And such an outcome may arise from the ashes quicker than that.

The reason to vote for Trump is SCOTUS. If SCOTUS is handed over to Hillary the rest of it matters little.

I don't think a vote for any party will produce any different results. Trump has shown that he is about purchasing influence, he bought the Clintons when Bill was in office. He has used the 'law' to get the property of others (eminent domain) by convincing local 'authorities' that they would collect more taxes from his business than that of private property owners. He has never failed to use the system to his benefit and never once fought against collectivism, except when it did not benefit him. Voting for either (any) is voting for the same, the only difference is what lie they will tell you to get elected. I agree with Mark Twain; "If voting actually accomplished something do you think they would let you do it?" (May be somewhat paraphrased)
The only vote that counts is when you can vote not to participate by refusing the governments demand for your property. Listen to what the 'conservative Republicans' say about Obamacare; "We must repeal and replace it." A promise to give you back the same pig with lipstick and tell you everything is now different.
As far as thinking you exert some kind of influence on those who see all others as slaves to the state, no matter how loudly you complain do you think the slave masters will realize a mistake has been made and decide to change their position? The only mistake they will realize is to realize they haven't sold the majority on being slaves. Keep asking the slave masters for permission to be free, I don't think you will ever be granted your wish.

Omitted is the complete unpredictability with Trump, plus all his negative policy ideas. He is a pragmatist who will do whatever he feels like in the end. I don't want to vote for someone who so badly represents the "capitalist" side and is so despicable a person. And I don't want to vote for a Libertarian - and a bad one at that. So I say no vote.

I am constantly amazed by grown adults who actually contemplate voting for Trump. The man is such a fundamental waste of skin, it is bizarre that people still attempt to justify him as a legitimate candidate. If you don't want to vote for Clinton, fine. Vote for Johnson. He is still orders of magnitude better than a knuckle-dragging mouth breather like Trump. Work to destroy the Republican Party as it has become a cesspool of religious wackos and fear-mongers and help it rise as a new party, or work to get the Libertarians ahead.

I have never met a Trump supporter, or at least someone who admits they are a supporter, because admitting such a thing is to admit you are not a rational thinker and completely hate your country. Do Americans who support this buffoon actually visualize him as President? Just picture it for a second. Do you really want someone who has failed at pretty much everything he has attempted and is a compulsive liar as your President? The first insulting tweet he gets from some guy in Pakistan and he will send in the troops. He man is an embarrassment to the ideals of what America should be.

Sorry, I have met a Trump supporter. An ex-student of mine who on Facebook also goes on about how 9/11 is a hoax and how the Jews are controlling everything with their holocaust hoaxes. Kind of says it all.