I know this happened a while back, but I didn't see a thread made for this. Justin Amash, who represents Michigan's 3rd Congressional District, has been an avid opponent of Trump, and is known to have libertarian views left the GOP on July 4 of this year.

As a huge fan of Rep. Amash, this news has sparked mixed emotions for me. While I am adamantly opposed to the GOP, I know this will definitely hurt Amash's chances at getting re-elected in 2020, but I find it exciting that Amash could stand as an Independent in Congress, should he be re-elected. I'm not sure at all about his chances for getting re-elected, but he has been fairly popular, and was the first member of congress ever to post on social media his vote on every single bill, and a detailed explanation as to why he voted the way he voted.

I'm wondering if Amash going Independent in a very red district will lead to a competitive 3 way race in 2020? If Amash gets re-elected, will this help/bring some momentum third parties/independents? He hasn't ruled out running for President in 2020 - Johnson was the most popular 3rd Party Candidate of the 21st Century last Presidential Election, and if Amash were to run he'd more or less catering to the same exact crowd and have a very similar platform, could this give the Libertarian ideology some momentum going forward if he were to outperform Johnson?

Historical election results in that district strongly suggest Amash running as an independent will disappear quickly.

https://ballotpedia.org/Michigan%27s...election,_2016

Third party candidates in that district have gotten approximately 3% of the vote in the last three elections.

Assuming Trump support in the GOP ranks remains strong, Amash has almost no chance of being re-elected.

If he runs for president as a third party candidate, its unlikely he will get enough air time to make much of an impact. His entire POTUS campaign platform will be, "I hate Trump", and there is already the DNC who occupies that space.

It seems he would have done better to remain a "loyal opposition member" of the GOP, instead of dropping out of the party.

amash is intelligent and actually has some integrity. it would be a shame if some maniac republican unseats him next year.

There were Trump-endorsed opponents in the primary, so there wasn't too much hope that he'd win the primary.

You don't think that Amash being the incumbent gives him a bigger advantage than past third parties in his district?

No, I don't think being the incumbent will matter.

If Amash runs as an independent (whichever 3rd party he chooses), he's going to face the assertion from whichever GOP candidate wins the primary that Amash will be excluded from House committees, and therefore will not be an effective representative for the district. This has already happened, and will therefore be a difficult problem for Amash to overcome. Amash will try to argue that he's the best person to represent the district -- but on what objective criteria? How would he be better equipped to represent the district compared to a GOP candidate, given that they largely occupy the same political ground?

Whether he runs for the House seat or POTUS, his campaign platform is essentially going to be, "I hate Trump" (whether it is actually true, or merely how he'll be characterized by his GOP opponents), and that's the lane of the DNC candidate, so its going to be very difficult for him to create a campaign that will attract followers.

it will be good for the dems if he gets on a general election ballet. so that will be helpful for america at least if he can siphon some votes. probably one of his few positive contributions to the country.

Amash>>>>>>>>>>Democratic Candidate>GOP Candidate. Are you familiar with Amash?

Amash is a rarity in politics in that he seems to actually have conviction in his beliefs and is willing to stand by them even if it hurts his career. That said I disagree with his political stances on virtually everything outside of his opinion of Trump, so think he would be a terrible choice for president (but still better than Trump ldo).

He can point to his transparency, being the same on the campaign trail and in congress, and his record as a congressman.

Amash is so far off from the Republican party, to the point that he makes most sense as a registered Libertarian, because that's where his views lie. The Libertarian Party is not even close to the GOP, so I think it's pretty unfair to say that Amash and the GOP challenger will be super similar.

I don't think voters in the 3rd Congressional District in Michigan are that concerned about whether or not their congressman will be a member of committees or not.

Kamala and Biden both seem <<< Amash


They’re both SIGNIFICANTLY more likely to increase military spending and keep marijuana illegal.

Amash is a betting favorite to be better on immigration than both.

Whats his position on social security/medicaid, tax cuts for the wealthy, green energy? Standard libertarian?

Yeah. Economic stuff is not as big a deal for the Pres imo. Climate change is bigger, but not nearly as immediately pressing (as in right ****ing now today affecting people breathing air) despite the alarmism.

Military + Immigration are two extremely urgent issues the Executive controls disproportionately. I’d much prefer someone I can trust on those.

yeah.. standard dumb libertarian stances with some religious conservative flair thrown in.

pro-birth, anti-environment, pro-isolationist, anti-healthcare/mental health..

none of it is new, exciting, or appealing to any non selfish individual.

Amash is Ron Paul 2.0

He is not better than any of the Democratic candidates.

I agree that the religious stuff is very unfortunate along with being pro-life, but I don't think that should disqualify a candidate.

He believes in free trade, so definitely not an isolationist, but yes is very anti war, and doesn't want to give other countries our money, but what's wrong with that?

Also, he doesn't want government run healthcare at the federal level, but what's wrong with that? It's very unfair to make the implication that he wants people to die due to not having good healthcare just because he doesn't like big government.


It's not just you, but you definitely did go there by calling me selfish - you are not a morally superior individual because you believe in big government. I don't support either major party, but since you're speaking from a more leftist perspective, while I don't agree with the Democratic Party, or going much further to the left, socialism, BUT I don't say "I'm a better human being than you because I don't believe in the government robbing me of larger sums of my paycheck," like come on, as adults we should be able to discuss these topics without getting like that.

I'm a probably a bit younger than everyone in this thread, but Ron Paul was the one that really got me into politics and made me become a supporter of the Libertarian Party/any possible libertarian Republicans.

I know Congress is a humungous hurdle, but say Ron Paul won in 2008, I'm very confident if he had served two terms instead of Obama that we'd be in less wars (if any), we'd be in a better deficit/debt standing, we'd have better criminal justice reform (drug war, mandatory minimums, etc.), literally every single person would be paying less in taxes, government surveillance programs would be eliminated, there'd be less deportations and more pro-immigrant policies, and so on. Minus the paying lower taxes, those are things that most leftists should support, and I'm not confident that any realistic Democratic Candidate would fulfill more than two of the things I listed.

Couldn't agree more

you realize that taxes support programs that help less fortunate people right? or are you one of those sillies that believe social safety net programs keep people poor? and that they should just bootsrap it up..

if you had two people:
person A agrees to pay 1% more taxes to help support millions of people that are less fortunate than him

person B excitedly takes his 1% and pretends to ignore the millions of less fortunate and packs it in his investment account.

what are we supposed to call the relationship between those people? because they sure aren't the same.

Ron Paul is a racist kook grifter.

I call person A extremely generous and person B normal, and they're doing nothing wrong. Yes, it's nice to help people out, but they also aren't entitled to his/her money, and person B shouldn't feel guilty/ isn't doing anything wrong

Pure name calling contributes literally nothing positive

Is the contribution of spreading lies about bands of black teenage girls stabbing people with AIDS needles positive or negative?

Red herring

Uh, it's part of Ron Paul's core brand. It made him millions of dollars.

He did vote against the Securing America's Future Act, against the Criminal Alien Gang Member (suspected) Removal Act, against the No Sanctuary for Criminals Act, against Kate's Law, against Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, so he's certainly better than most Republicans. He worse than most Democrats on policy, but since keeping money away from the cops and prisons is actually more important than most other policies he would probably be better than the West Wingy Dems who think you can throw a ton of money at the police, prisons and military and expect good results.