# Liberty Movement > Liberty Campaigns >  Sen. Johnson??

## itshappening

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0211/49823.html

----------


## Matt Collins

Wow.... this could be awesome!

If he runs during Ron running for President, we can give money to him too. I think we can get him elected. If he wins the Senate seat he'll have legislative experience in DC and executive experience in NM. That could make him ripe for a Presidential run later on.

----------


## TCE

Okay, now this should be priority #1, push Ron to the side for a second. If Gary runs, he wins the seat easily. We have to do something to get him to run. Ideas? This could be the easiest Senate seat we've ever picked up. And for all of you pot lovers, he's openly Pro-Marijuana, so there you go, we'd have one Senator introducing bills on that.

----------


## EndSlavery

Best news of today - this is a huge opportunity to elect another one of us.  I still want him running for prez though to at least be in the debates.  Could be a great 2+ years ahead for GJ.

----------


## gls

I agree this would be a great pickup but hasn't Johnson claimed numerous times that he's not interested in running for U.S. Senate?

----------


## TCE

> Best news of today - this is a huge opportunity to elect another one of us.  I still want him running for prez though to at least be in the debates.  Could be a great 2+ years ahead for GJ.


I'm not so sure it would be a good idea to have him in the Presidential Debates. The home folks tend to not like that. It would be better if he focused solely on New Mexico and coasted to victory for the Senate seat.

GLS: Links? And even so, we can still try and convince him, it's worth a shot.

----------


## gls

> GLS: Links? And even so, we can still try and convince him, it's worth a shot.


http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...my-day-at-CPAC




> I went to Gary Johnson's booth and introduced myself to him (I've e-mailed him via the garyjohnson2012.com site but never met him). He said "Oh Chad!" and gave me a big hug. I spoke to his son for a bit and he pretty much ruled out any run for Senate saying that position wouldn't fit him very well (his experience is in the leadership and executive role).

----------


## TCE

> http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...my-day-at-CPAC


That is one depressing link. I hope he changes his mind or at least reconsiders. This would be such a big step for us to have two Senators.

EDIT: Thank you for providing the link.

----------


## Matt Collins

> I agree this would be a great pickup but hasn't Johnson claimed numerous times that he's not interested in running for U.S. Senate?


 That was before the seat was open.

----------


## TCE

> That was before the seat was open.


That's pretty much what we have to hang our hats on. He knew the impact that seat would have before, but now he'll have to do less work to get it. The poll has also come out showing him the most electable Republican in the state.

----------


## R3volutionJedi

NM US Senate Gary Johnson
Prez Ron Paul

----------


## HOLLYWOOD

US Senator Gary Johnson... of New Mexico

No more tyranny of the Patriot Act.

----------


## eduardo89

I really hope he runs for Senate, I've already written him to urge him to run

----------


## itshappening

Wasn't there a guy who was his chief of staff who was running for Lt. Gov or something? what happened to him?  could be a TEA party alternative if Johnson doesn't run and he was very much a Johnson protege

----------


## libertybrewcity

I would love for Johnson to run for senate, but unfortunately, there is nothing we can do or say that will persuade him. He has been establishing his national infrastructure for months and has plans to announce his pres run in a few. It is a shame that he is wasting such a great opportunity.

----------


## itshappening

Does anyone know who i'm talking about or am I blowing smoke? 

There was a Johnson protege with political ambitions in NM, i'm sure of it..

----------


## trey4sports

Gary has said that he has no intentions other than the presidency

----------


## trey4sports

> Does anyone know who i'm talking about or am I blowing smoke? 
> 
> There was a Johnson protege with political ambitions in NM, i'm sure of it..


+1 for Kokesh. We need to fund him heavily this time (if he runs for senate)

----------


## eduardo89

> Gary has said that he has no intentions other than the presidency


If is ambition is to be president, why doesn't he do the logical choice of being a senator for 4 years first to gain some national recognition and funding. he's been out of the spotlight in NM for a decade now and he's never really had any national attention! running for senate, especially if its a relatively easy win, is the best first step!

----------


## libertybrewcity

> If is ambition is to be president, why doesn't he do the logical choice of being a senator for 4 years first to gain some national recognition and funding. he's been out of the spotlight in NM for a decade now and he's never really had any national attention! running for senate, especially if its a relatively easy win, is the best first step!


That would be the logical thing to do.

----------


## Matt Collins

> +1 for Kokesh. We need to fund him heavily this time (if he runs for senate)


Not gonna happen. He isn't electable in that sort of office, and word on the street is that he doesn't know how to run a campaign (his last attempt gives a lot of credence to that rumor). And I like Adam, he's a good guy who is solid on the issues.

----------


## qh4dotcom

> Wow.... this could be awesome!
> 
> If he runs during Ron running for President, we can give money to him too. I think we can get him elected. If he wins the Senate seat he'll have legislative experience in DC and executive experience in NM. That could make him ripe for a Presidential run later on.


You think the country's problems that need to be addressed can wait until Johnson is sworn in as President on 2017?

----------


## libertybrewcity

> +1 for Kokesh. We need to fund him heavily this time (if he runs for senate)


lol, he couldn't win a Republican primary for a US house seat. You think he going to win a senate seat?

----------


## RP Supporter

http://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/38701985645608960

Still, Johnson really needs to run. His chance at the presidency is null, especially if Ron decides to run for president. He might not like the senate, but he could do a lot of good in it, and if he serves in there for 4 or 8 years he could be a really credible candidate for the presidency. Maybe we should do an email bomb to convince him to run, or even set up a sort of pledge thing promosing him money and support if he runs for senate. If he sees  overwhelming support for a senate bid, maybe he'll pursue it.

----------


## eduardo89

> http://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/38701985645608960
> 
> Still, Johnson really needs to run. His chance at the presidency is null, especially if Ron decides to run for president. He might not like the senate, but he could do a lot of good in it, and if he serves in there for 4 or 8 years he could be a really credible candidate for the presidency. Maybe we should do an email bomb to convince him to run, or even set up a sort of pledge thing promosing him money and support if he runs for senate. If he sees  overwhelming support for a senate bid, maybe he'll pursue it.


I'm all in for an email bomb, I even have multiple accounts I can use :P 

Just let me know when/what email and I'll do it.

----------


## Yieu

I hope Johnson runs for Senate, so that he does not run for President, so that he does not detract from Ron Paul's run for President.

----------


## eduardo89

Can anyone write a good template letter to send him and to get other to send. And an email to send to!!

----------


## TCE

> Can anyone write a good template letter to send him and to get other to send. And an email to send to!!


Something like:

Dear Governor Johnson, 

You have heard by now that Senator Bingaman will not be running for re-election to the Senate seat in New Mexico. This changes the dynamics of this race dramatically as it now becomes an incredibly winnable open seat contest. Public Policy Polling recently did a poll that showed you having sizable leads against all potential Democratic opponents New Mexico could throw your way. Running for this high profile seat and winning it would put you in great position in four years to run for President in 2016. You will have name recognition and experience in multiple high-qualification jobs. If you run for this seat, I guarantee you will have the support of Ron Paul's national fundraising infrastructure behind you and we can rival, if not beat the amount of money we raised for Rand Paul in 2010. Having you in the New Mexican Senate seat would be a monumental step forward for liberty that I hope you consider. Should you decide to run for the Presidency this year instead, I wish you luck but will not be supporting you monetarily. 

Thank you for your time,


Josh

----------


## MozoVote

Gary's national "infrastructure" could still help him in donations for a senate campaign. It sure worked for Rand Paul, ya know?

----------


## BamaFanNKy

You know how you get Gary to run for Senate. He needs to know he has financial backing. Someone needs to get him on the phone with donors.

----------


## eduardo89

> Gary's national "infrastructure" could still help him in donations for a senate campaign. It sure worked for Rand Paul, ya know?


That's an important point to remind him of. If he runs for Senate, many of us here will gladly chip in. If he runs for president, I'd go ahead and say most of us will give what we can just to Ron

----------


## TCE

> Gary's national "infrastructure" could still help him in donations for a senate campaign. It sure worked for Rand Paul, ya know?


That was my point. If he runs for Senate, all of us will work hard to make sure he gets help with boots on the ground and as much money as he'd need. For President, he's a lone wolf. I can't see why he believes he can win the Presidency, especially if he alienates us, the one group that support(ed)s him.

----------


## TCE

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes...gaman-retires/




> The most intriguing Republican name is that of their former governor, the strongly libertarian-leaning Gary Johnson. A recent survey by Public Policy Polling found that Mr. Johnson remained reasonably popular and ran even with or slightly ahead of potential Democratic candidates. The questions are to whether Mr. Johnson would be interested in the seat, since he may run what is likely to be a fairly quixotic campaign for the Republican presidential nomination instead, and if he were to run, whether he would win his primary.
> 
> On the plus side for Mr. Johnson, New Mexico’s Republicans selected the more moderate candidate, Ms. Martinez, rather than the more conservative Allen Weh, as their gubernatorial candidate in 2010. And Mr. Johnson’s libertarian positions are consistent in principle — if not necessarily in practice — with those of the Tea Party. Still, the Public Policy Polling survey found that his favorability ratings were only slightly better among New Mexicans who voted for John McCain in 2008 than those who voted for Barack Obama, so the primary would not necessarily play to his strengths.
> 
> If Mr. Johnson is not nominated, Republicans will probably wind up with former U.S. Representative Heather Wilson, or current U.S. Representative Steve Pearce, who ran against one another for the party’s Senate nomination in 2008. In recent years, Mr. Pearce has generally gotten results that are no better, and perhaps slightly worse, than what might be expected based on the local and national political environment in the races he was running. Ms. Wilson’s performance has been slightly more encouraging — she narrowly held onto her House seat in 2006, for instance, in an increasingly Democratic-leaning district — but statewide polls suggest she has become somewhat unpopular.


Nate Silver's take on the Senate race. Basically, Johnson is the GOP's best candidate, every other possibility means much easier Democratic hold.

----------


## Elwar

I spoke with his son about this. He said that his dad's experience is more executive than legislative.

He owned his own business and was governor.

----------


## eduardo89

> I spoke with his son about this. He said that his dad's experience is more executive than legislative.
> 
> He owned his own business and was governor.


Which means he needs some legislative experience. He also badly needs national name recognition, fundraising abilities, connections and a voting record to be a serious candidate for president.

----------


## eduardo89

I started a thread about convincing him to run

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...nce-him-to-run!!

----------


## Maximus

We need him to run for that seat, I'd send money his way

----------


## eduardo89

> We need him to run for that seat, I'd send money his way


help by taking part in the email bomb...i posted the link to the thread above

----------


## hotbrownsauce

If Paul runs for Pres. Johnson needs to run for Senate. Otherwise who else but Johnson would be a good candidate for Pres?

----------


## itshappening

wow I made the front page

----------


## Gage

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Gary-J...02285763120625

DRAFT GARY!!!

----------


## Sola_Fide

Draft Gary!

+++

----------


## MozoVote

I'd consider donating to a Johnson senate campaign. Heck I gave $50 to Peter Schiff and I didn't *seriously* expect him to win that.

But I don't see donating to a presidential campaign. He's from a small state and has not been in public office for a while. He would stand a *much* better chance in a 2020 presidential campaign after serving in the senate for 8 years.

----------


## MozoVote

BUMP

Charlie Cook mentions Ron Paul as a plausible entrant to the 2012 presidential race ... but Johnson does not even make the "speculation" list.

http://nationaljournal.com/columns/c...-open-20110303

----------


## Flash

Here's his recent interview on Free Talk Live.

http://www.freetalklive.com/files/garyjohnson.mp3

Once again hints about running for President.

----------


## HardyMacia

Being a US Senator isn't going to give Johnson any more national name recognization than winning the Republican Primary and then running for President. Johnson has the executive experience which makes him more electable than Paul at this position. Paul is a great educational candidate, but at his age and his focus in Congress he's not going to put in the effort needed to win.

----------


## erowe1

> Being a US Senator isn't going to give Johnson any more national name recognization than winning the Republican Primary and then running for President. Johnson has the executive experience which makes him more electable than Paul at this position. Paul is a great educational candidate, but at his age and his focus in Congress he's not going to put in the effort needed to win.


Of course winning the GOP nomination would boost his name recognition. But that's irrelevant, because he won't win it. Johnson running for president in 2012 will do for his name recognition what it did for John Cox's name recognition in 2008, which is a whole lot less than what he would gain by running for Senate, and probably winning.

You're in a fantasy world (the bad kind) if you think Johnson is more electable than Paul.

----------


## Nathan Hale

> Of course winning the GOP nomination would boost his name recognition. But that's irrelevant, because he won't win it. Johnson running for president in 2012 will do for his name recognition what it did for John Cox's name recognition in 2008, which is a whole lot less than what he would gain by running for Senate, and probably winning.


Well, Cox/Johnson (lols aside) is an apples/oranges situation b/c Cox was below the credibility line and Johnson is well above.  Johnson's problem is solely that he didn't use the time between 2008 and 2011 to build his brand the way that he needed to in order to give himself the national name recognition necessary to enter the GOP primary as a major player.




> You're in a fantasy world (the bad kind) if you think Johnson is more electable than Paul.


Gotta disagree with you here.  Yes, at this point I would agree that Paul has more celebrity than Johnson and thus will be positioned best among the liberty candidates in the GOP field (and thus the most capable of getting attention and possibly the nomination).  However, speaking from a position of "electability", Johnson is the superior candidate.  He's got a better approach angles than Paul (I've never met a candidate who could better sell radicalism as mainstream), he's a term-limited executive from a blue state with a successful conservative track record, and he has an interesting story (hugely successful businessman, triathlete, and Everest ascendee).

----------


## Nathan Hale

> Being a US Senator isn't going to give Johnson any more national name recognization than winning the Republican Primary and then running for President. Johnson has the executive experience which makes him more electable than Paul at this position. Paul is a great educational candidate, but at his age and his focus in Congress he's not going to put in the effort needed to win.


Hardy, I agree that Paul is in terrible shape to run a Presidential campaign.  However, I disagree that Johnson gains nothing by winning a Senate seat.  Rand Paul, for instance, is a perfect example of how you can use a Senate seat to stay in the spotlight.  That man is all over the news networks and the blogosphere.  Johnson could benefit in the same manner.  To be honest, I'd rather see Paul and Johnson both run for their respective Senate seats and leave the 2012 GOP field to the usual suspects.  Rand in 2016 is our equation for success.

----------


## HardyMacia

Assuming Paul runs, I'd much rather see GOP debates with two liberty candidates ganging up on the neo-cons than having Paul up there all alone. Having a governor supporting Paul's positions will make Paul's positions that much stronger.  I'm not sure why so many Paul supporters are trying to brush Johnson aside when they should be fully supporting both these candidates. Yes, money's limited, but debate spotlight time is where it's at.

----------


## Feeding the Abscess

Johnson won't support Paul in the debates, he'll criticize him for being pessimistic (which he did the other night on Freedom Watch). He'll avoid talking much on substance and instead try to win by being an Obama-type candidate (hope and change, optimism, etc).

That will be his campaign ploy.

----------


## erowe1

> Johnson won't support Paul in the debates, he'll criticize him for being pessimistic (which he did the other night on Freedom Watch). He'll avoid talking much on substance and instead try to win by being an Obama-type candidate (hope and change, optimism, etc).
> 
> That will be his campaign ploy.


Also, GJ can't win the nomination. RP might have a 1 in 50 chance. But GJ has a 1 in 1,000,000 chance. Being avowedly pro-choice will destroy his chances. No pro-choice candidate has ever been able to counter the automatic weakness holding that position gives them in the GOP primary, no matter what other advantages they bring to the table, including candidates with a lot more going for them than GJ, like Pete Wilson and Rudy Giuliani. He should run for senate.

----------


## Thomas

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Gary-...3120625?ref=ts

----------


## Nathan Hale

> Johnson won't support Paul in the debates, he'll criticize him for being pessimistic (which he did the other night on Freedom Watch). He'll avoid talking much on substance and instead try to win by being an Obama-type candidate (hope and change, optimism, etc).
> 
> That will be his campaign ploy.


Criticism on a friendly TV show is not a guarantee, or even much of an indicator that he'll sell Ron out in a debate.  Gary runs on his positions, and his positions often coincide with Ron Paul.  He's not going to jump in front of any attacks launched by other candidates (except to agree with Pauls given answer), but I highly doubt he'll launch an attack himself.  That's not a 'campaign ploy', that's how Gary campaigns.  He's historically been very issues focused, and yes, he's optimistic, but he's not vague or lacking for substance.

----------


## TCE

My respect of Johnson has plummeted in the past couple months. He has proven himself incredibly selfish and hopefully he goes back to how he prior to 2010.

----------


## Flash

> My respect of Johnson has plummeted in the past couple months. He has proven himself incredibly selfish and hopefully he goes back to how he prior to 2010.


Yeah same here. If you listened to the Free Talk Live interview with Johnson, you will get the impression he wants to run for President since he wants to actually change things. Let's face it, him being a Senator wouldn't get much done at a federal level. I don't believe the Senate and the House will ever have a majority of liberty-loving politicians, EVER.  Senators like Rand Paul will always be fringe. So I don't expect Gary Johnson being elected into the Senate will change much. *However* it's the education that counts. He COULD be the guy to make standard Libertarian beliefs, such as open borders & drug legalization, mainstream. He could influence hundreds of state legislatures to reconsider their stance on drugs, prostitution, illegal immigration, etc.. and then we can get a true Libertarian movement going at a local level. Johnson should strive to be the Ron Paul of the Senate, who cares if he's not going to actually change the minds of other Senators-- we don't need them.

Note: It would also be cool if Johnson ran for President and got to talk about things like drug legalization in the Republican debates. He would get a decent amount of news coverage, but it would all disappear once the campaign ends. In the Senate he'll get a full *six years* of free publicity for libertarian issues.

----------


## Thomas

Everyone please Like and Share this draft page!

http://www.facebook.com/garyjohnson4senate

----------


## RabbitMan

I'm actually excited for Johnson to be running for President.  He's a go-getter, has charisma, and can explain himself in easy to understand ways without meandering as Paul tends to.  He's been planning this campaign out for some time--he's the type of person that will only set out if he thinks he has a pretty good chance of succeeding.  I love Dr. Paul, but I think someone of his intellectual calibre and 'fringe' leaning needs to be eloquent and able to articulate himself clearly.  In his interviews over the last year, I have not seen that.  

Gary Johnson has experience getting things done, and a pretty incredible record to boot.  What Paul has in passionate followers will be rivaled quickly by the fact that Johnson has already proven he can get done what the Republican party has '*said*' it wants to get done.  Whether or not that is winning material, who knows.  I do know that he would be wasted on the Senate.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a big Ron Paul supporter since '07.  Ron Paul is a great funnel for people to realize they are liberty minded, with his great depth and golden consistency.  I just think in order for him to be more than a funnel, we'd need the Ron Paul from 1988, not the Ron Paul from 2012.

----------


## MozoVote

Although I'd rather see a senate run, I think that opportunity has slipped away now that other candidates are stepping forward.

While Gary's life policy is difficult as a presidential nominee, he would add to the ticket as VP. He'd help with regional balance, as well. Most of the names we keep hearing as potential front runners are easterners or midwesterners.

----------


## Wren

> My respect of Johnson has plummeted in the past couple months. He has proven himself incredibly selfish and hopefully he goes back to how he prior to 2010.


Yeah. It seems that the majority of Johnson supporters are only supporting him over RP because of age or other small, irrelevant issues like abortion/immigration. Never mind the fact that Johnson seems to have little to no understanding of Austrian economics, the FED, or foreign policy. His only strong point is drug legalization, and he seriously expects to win over the republican nomination with that as his key issue? The fact that he ignores a call to the senate in order to seek an unattainable win at the presidency (plus it's very likely RP might announce) makes him an arrogant douchebag in my book. If RP does not win the republican nomination this time around, you can bet Gary Johnson will be part of the blame. Most of us aren't supporting RP this time around to educate, we're supporting him so he can win. If Gary Johnson enters this race expecting to win the presidency with his positions, then I've lost hope for the movement in terms of the presidency because our small voter block will inevitably be split up. Those who support Johnson being in the debates are unaware if he will drop out before voting begins and are purely speculating. Nobody knows, and it's better to assume you don't in case the opposite happens.

----------


## Nathan Hale

> Yeah. It seems that the majority of Johnson supporters are only supporting him over RP because of age or other small, irrelevant issues like abortion/immigration.


No.  The largest liberty movement support sector for Johnson has come from moderates who feel that Johnson can engage inside the overton window while putting out the same liberty memes that Paul does.




> Never mind the fact that Johnson seems to have little to no understanding of Austrian economics, the FED, or foreign policy.


From where do you get this?




> His only strong point is drug legalization, and he seriously expects to win over the republican nomination with that as his key issue?


Even the most ardent Johnson supporter is critical of his decision to always harp on this.  It's the Johnson equivalent of Paul in 08 never shutting up about Iraq.




> The fact that he ignores a call to the senate in order to seek the presidency (even though it's very likely RP might announce) makes him an arrogant douchebag in my book.


Even though it's been obvious from 2008 that he intended to run?  There is no moral call to demure to Ron Paul.  If anything, the Reform Party example from the 90s should guide us away from the cult of personality approach of backing the same candidate twice.




> If RP does not win the republican nomination this time around, you can bet Gary Johnson will be part of the blame.


Well, I can bet he'll be blamed, by folk like yourself.  But will he be part of the actual equation behind Paul's failure?  Doubtful.  Remember also that most candidates drop out by Ames, I would imagine that Johnson and Paul will have reached an accord by that point (i.e. the weaker guy drops before the serious fundraising begins).




> Most of us aren't supporting RP this time around to educate, we're supporting him so he can win.


Good - that's the only reason to support a candidate.

All of this said, I don't support Johnson for President.  I think that he had his chance to build his name recognition these past few years and he missed the opportunity.  Right now, his best move is to run for the Senate.  But I don't think he's some douchebag because he's sticking to a plan that he invented years ago (and albeit executed poorly).

----------


## Wren

> No. The largest liberty movement support sector for Johnson has come from moderates who feel that Johnson can engage inside the overton window while putting out the same liberty memes that Paul does.


Perhaps, but it's the vibe I get off this forum. 




> From where do you get this?


Every interview I've watched. He's demonstrated very basic criticism of the FED but seems to lack a thorough understanding of it along with Austrian economics. All you need to do is watch his interview with Sean hannity to understand that he's clueless on foreign policy. 






> Even the most ardent Johnson supporter is critical of his decision to always harp on this.  It's the Johnson equivalent of Paul in 08 never shutting up about Iraq.


Fair enough. Except the difference is Iraq is not RP's only strong point. 






> Even though it's been obvious from 2008 that he intended to run?  There is no moral call to demure to Ron Paul.  If anything, the Reform Party example from the 90s should guide us away from the cult of personality approach of backing the same candidate twice.


Because Ron Paul has proven himself to be trustworthy with a much better understanding of the issues. Why aren't we supporting someone other than RP, you ask? Why is this even called the "Ron Paul Forums" or the campaign logo called "The Ron Paul Revolution"? Because he's still the best person for the job and we haven't found a suitable match, although Rand has been proving himself as of late. 






> Well, I can bet he'll be blamed, by folk like yourself.  But will he be part of the actual equation behind Paul's failure?  Doubtful.  Remember also that most candidates drop out by Ames, I would imagine that Johnson and Paul will have reached an accord by that point (i.e. the weaker guy drops before the serious fundraising begins).


Absolutely, he will be blamed if he does not drop out and not just by "folk like myself". Once again, you're purely speculating. You have no idea what will happen and neither do I. If GJ happens to gain enough support to stay in the race, he WILL split up the vote.

----------


## Chester Copperpot

I dont know much aBOUT johnson but I know alot of people on here like him alot so I say we get him in there..

----------


## Nathan Hale

> Every interview I've watched. He's demonstrated very basic criticism of the FED but seems to lack a thorough understanding of it along with Austrian economics. All you need to do is watch his interview with Sean hannity to understand that he's clueless on foreign policy.


He offers a basic criticism of the fed, as do many people.  Does he have to harp endlessly on the fed in order to be considered sufficiently austrian?  As for the Hannity interview, what about it belayed some cluelessness on foreign policy?




> Fair enough. Except the difference is Iraq is not RP's only strong point.


And marijuana isn't Gary Johnson's only strong point.  The man was a remarkably successful governor with a powerful track record on many issues.




> Because Ron Paul has proven himself to be trustworthy with a much better understanding of the issues. Why aren't we supporting someone other than RP, you ask? Why is this even called the "Ron Paul Forums" or the campaign logo called "The Ron Paul Revolution"? Because he's still the best person for the job and we haven't found a suitable match, although Rand has been proving himself as of late.


You could say that, but you could just as easily say that Ron Paul supporters are falling victim to the problem I posited in my last post - the cult of personality dilemma.  People believe Ron Paul is the best, but is that an academic claim based in strategic analysis, or is that an emotional claim because of 2007?  I think it's the latter, and the behavior of people on these boards toward strategic or pragmatism criticism of Paul is evidentiary.




> Absolutely, he will be blamed if he does not drop out and not just by "folk like myself". Once again, you're purely speculating. You have no idea what will happen and neither do I. If GJ happens to gain enough support to stay in the race, he WILL split up the vote.


You're forgetting that Johnson and Paul are friends.  Sure, there's a chance that GJ will stay in the race, just as there's a chance that Paul will stay in the race even if pre-Ames polling identifies GJ as the stronger candidate.  But to assume either will do anything malicious toward the other is faulty.  Let's not condemn the man for something that has yet to occur and, for that matter, is unlikely to occur.

----------


## TCE

These are Johnson's only options:

1. Run for President as a Republican, get smashed in the Primary. 
2. Run for Senate and win.
3. Stay out of politics for the time being. 

And there you have it.

----------


## trey4sports

> He offers a basic criticism of the fed, as do many people.  Does he have to harp endlessly on the fed in order to be considered sufficiently austrian?  As for the Hannity interview, what about it belayed some cluelessness on foreign policy?
> 
> 
> 
> And marijuana isn't Gary Johnson's only strong point.  The man was a remarkably successful governor with a powerful track record on many issues.
> 
> 
> 
> You could say that, but you could just as easily say that Ron Paul supporters are falling victim to the problem I posited in my last post - the cult of personality dilemma.  People believe Ron Paul is the best, but is that an academic claim based in strategic analysis, or is that an emotional claim because of 2007?  I think it's the latter, and the behavior of people on these boards toward strategic or pragmatism criticism of Paul is evidentiary.
> ...



Great post +rep

I'm all in for Paul but i think GJ will be great up there on stage. People (especially on this forum) don't recognize (or are in denial) that Ron has some very negative connotations attached with his name. Now the extent of those connotations are something we'll find out for BETTER (hopefully) or worse. My point being that Gary might catch fire. Hell no one really knows, and if he does I'd love to be able to support him if he has a chance to win.

We shouldn't have a cult like obsession with one person (trust me, i'd just as guilty as the next bloke) but i'm willing to put away my ego and support THE MESSAGE whoever may catch fire with it.

I've talked to GJ, in person as well as on twitter and I personally asked him if he would eliminate the FED if he were president and he said that he would if Congress passed the bill. Not only that he is a follower of Austrian Economics. 

Granted, the FED isn't his pet issue and that's okay. His issue is the drug war which isn't a glaring national issue *YET* and it probably wont help him in the republican primary but how many REAL candidates have we had the chance to support in the GOP primary? Very very few and it seems to me that having more than 1 person on the stage supporting our views will only legitimize that the GOP is _CHANGING_! 

We get so many $#@!ty Romney, Palin, Huck candidates that we NEED to grow our base and maybe Johnson can bring some folks in who previously wrote off Paul?

My point being that we need to grow our base and GJ will help, and unfortunately everyone whats to alienate him..... and for what reason? Because he's not perfect? Pshhh, we'll never get anywhere if we continue this cult of personality

----------


## Wren

> He offers a basic criticism of the fed, as do many people.  Does he have to harp endlessly on the fed in order to be considered sufficiently austrian?  As for the Hannity interview, what about it belayed some cluelessness on foreign policy?


It's easy to offer basic critisim of the FED. Sarah Palin does that too. Does that mean she's knowledgeable about it? No. If you watch the hannity interview, he basically agrees with hannity that Iraq, a broke nation, owes us money for liberating them. He's utterly clueless.






> And marijuana isn't Gary Johnson's only strong point.  The man was a remarkably successful governor with a powerful track record on many issues.


Is that the theme of his campaign? He's done countless interviews on the sole topic of marijuana legalization. When it comes to marijuana he can suddenly talk for hours but offers basic responses on the other issues like the FED. That's why I said it was his only strong point, during interviews at least. 






> You could say that, but you could just as easily say that Ron Paul supporters are falling victim to the problem I posited in my last post - the cult of personality dilemma.  People believe Ron Paul is the best, but is that an academic claim based in strategic analysis, or is that an emotional claim because of 2007?  I think it's the latter, and the behavior of people on these boards toward strategic or pragmatism criticism of Paul is evidentiary.


I don't think it's the latter and have no idea where you get that vibe from. People support Ron because he's still the best man for the job, it's that simple. There are always those who get attached emotionally to a candidate but you should post up a poll if you're doubtful. 






> You're forgetting that Johnson and Paul are friends.  Sure, there's a chance that GJ will stay in the race, just as there's a chance that Paul will stay in the race even if pre-Ames polling identifies GJ as the stronger candidate.  But to assume either will do anything malicious toward the other is faulty.  Let's not condemn the man for something that has yet to occur and, for that matter, is unlikely to occur.


Are they really friends? Then why has GJ been distancing himself from RP by calling him too "pessimistic". From politico: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0211/49366.html 


> “There was a big difference between Ron Paul and me when it came to the ‘no,’” Johnson told POLITICO. “His ‘no’ was philosophical. It was reasoned. It was right. My ‘no’ actually put a stop to legislation. It cut spending. Mine carried further than just no. I had to follow through with the debate, discussion and dialogue on why my ‘no’ wouldn’t result in people starving, schools being shut down and the delivery of services to the poor wasn’t going to be curtailed.”


He's saying that Ron's "No" is weaker than his "No" and basically calling RP impotent as a politician. This is why I called him an arrogant douchebag. If Gary had any loyalty to the liberty movement he would realize running for Senate is something he can accomplish.

----------


## Flash

> He's saying that Ron's "No" is weaker than his "No" and basically calling RP impotent as a politician. This is why I called him an arrogant douchebag.


Yes, and he's right about that one. A Governor's veto is much more powerful and influential than some Congressman's lone "no" vote in the House. That wouldn't be arrogance, it's just politics. I'm sure Ron Paul would much rather be a Senator or Governor if he were given the option. 




> We get so many $#@!ty Romney, Palin, Huck candidates that we NEED to grow our base and maybe Johnson can bring some folks in who previously wrote off Paul?


Gary Johnson would be able to grow the Republican Party immensely if he were elected to the Senate. A short-lived Presidential run isn't going to accomplish that much in the long run. So once again.. GJ for Senate 2012.

----------


## Nathan Hale

> It's easy to offer basic critisim of the FED. Sarah Palin does that too. Does that mean she's knowledgeable about it? No.


But that doesn't mean she isn't knowledgeable about it either.  Your only line of logic seems to be that unless you make the fed a pet issue, you're not knowledgeable about it.




> If you watch the hannity interview, he basically agrees with hannity that Iraq, a broke nation, owes us money for liberating them. He's utterly clueless.


I don't think it's such a slam dunk, though I disagree with it.




> Is that the theme of his campaign? He's done countless interviews on the sole topic of marijuana legalization. When it comes to marijuana he can suddenly talk for hours but offers basic responses on the other issues like the FED. That's why I said it was his only strong point, during interviews at least.


I wouldn't call it his "strong point", I'd call it his pet issue.  Just like Ron Paul goes on for hours about the FED and foreign policy, we don't call his position on his secondary issues "weak", but just accept that he, like all politicians, has issues that are closer to his heart and issues that are not so much.  Gary Johnson gained a lot of fame for his work in marijuana law, so he gets a lot of play because of that and thus ends up spending a lot of interview time talking marijuana.  I disagree with his making that a central issue, but I wouldn't call it his "strong point" and other issues weak points.




> I don't think it's the latter and have no idea where you get that vibe from. People support Ron because he's still the best man for the job, it's that simple. There are always those who get attached emotionally to a candidate but you should post up a poll if you're doubtful.


It's neither here nor there - no poll will ever scientifically show that, it was just a vibe I get from the boards.




> Are they really friends? Then why has GJ been distancing himself from RP by calling him too "pessimistic". From politico: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0211/49366.html


Perhaps it's something he believes.  They don't need to be holding hands and skipping through the tulips every time they're in front of a camera - I know for a fact that they're friends because I've been in a room with the two of them when there weren't cameras rolling - one of the fringe benefits of maxing out in donations to Paul during his alterate convention in 08.




> He's saying that Ron's "No" is weaker than his "No" and basically calling RP impotent as a politician. This is why I called him an arrogant douchebag.


That's not what he's saying.  He's saying that Ron's "no" amounts to a vote because Ron is part of the legislative branch.  Gary was an executive - the buck stops there.  When Gary said "no", he was directly in the line of fire for logistically figuring out how to make that "no" work.  It's nothing personal, simply a distinction between a guy whose job is voting, and a guy whose job is dealing with the consequences of votes.




> If Gary had any loyalty to the liberty movement he would realize running for Senate is something he can accomplish.


I agree, I support Gary for Senate, but I see no problem with him entering the presidential primary to see where he would stand in the field so that an Ames Accord could be reached between him and Paul.

----------

