Unfortunately, I don't think Johnson is politically savvy enough to market himself online as one of the only anti-SOPA candidates. Don't confuse that with a lack of ideals or integrity.
I have a question for my fellow HNers. Is SOPA a big enough deal for you that if Obama actually signs SOPA into law and the Republican nominee is someone who voices opposition to it, you'll vote Republican (for those who typically vote Democrat)?
SOPA has changed my political views. I used to be a democrat, but watching politicians discuss the internet has firmly convinced me that as little government as possible is for the best. I'll be voting for Gary Johnson, the little known libertarian candidate who sadly is too simple and honest a man to be elected.
Very possible since, at this point in time, I'm just looking for the least terrible candidate to get behind. I'm having trouble thus far since all have proved pretty terrible thus far.
Unfortunately that is what it comes down to when I vote... the lesser of the two evils.
Opposing SOPA with a vote in Congress isn't the only way for real leaders to register dissent. There's no excuse for Romney or any other candidate to avoid informing the American public that as President, they would veto any future SOPA-like legislation restricting Internet freedom.
Unfortunately, the parent poster was pretty clearly advocating Ron Paul for president. This makes citing reasons for not wanting Ron Paul for president fair game.
This back and forth tedium is one of the reasons why Hacker News tries to avoid political posts in the first place. I'm afraid that legitimate criticism of the post requires you to actually debunk the claim.
The post was downvoted to the max, so apparently I'm not the only one that feels this way. Furthermore, I believe you are wrong on both statements you present as fact in your own statement.
