# Liberty Movement > Liberty Campaigns > Liberty Campaign Evaluation >  Campaign Evaluation: Austin Petersen (POTUS)

## Bryan

This thread is intended to be a collection point of the strong pros and cons of any potential liberty candidate / campaign that is being discussed / promoted on the forum. You are welcome to post both positive and not-so-positive attributes about the candidate as they related to the evaluation.


*Information*

*Candidate Information*
Candidate Name: Austin Petersen
Office Sought: President of the United States
Website: austinpetersen2016.com
Social Media:
https://www.facebook.com/producerpetersen
https://twitter.com/ap4lp
https://www.instagram.com/petersenforpresident/
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCc-...BADoa_Y00VDUog
https://www.linkedin.com/in/austin-petersen-5b41353


*Race Information: Competition & Demographics*
Incumbent: Barack Obama
Other Primary Candidates: Libertarian Party, see: http://2016.libertarian-party.org
Non-Incumbent Candidates from Other Parties: Hillary Clinton, Ted Cruz, John Kasich, Bernie Sanders, Donald Trump
Relevant poll numbers: None.



*Evaluation*

*Candidate Profile: Issues*
Civil Liberties: [Rating TBD]
Constitutional Issues: [Rating TBD]
Economic Issues: [Rating TBD]
Foreign Policy: [Rating TBD]
Social Issues: [Rating TBD]
*Overall Issues Rating:* [Rating TBD]


*Candidate Profile: Personal*
Honesty: [Rating TBD]
Issue consistency: [Rating TBD]
Personality: [Rating TBD]
Associations: [Rating TBD]
Personal history: [Rating TBD]
*Overall Personal Rating:* [Rating TBD]

*Candidate Rating:* [Rating TBD]



*Race Profile Rating*
Race Impact Rating: [Rating TBD]
Victory Impact Rating: [Rating TBD]

*Race Profile Rating:* [Rating TBD]



*Overall Rating:*



*Evaluation Commentary*

Key strong points: 

Possible weak points:

Possible deal breakers:

Unknown points for further research:

Rating commentary:

----------


## afwjam

great kid, knows his stuff, needs more experience. A+

----------


## younglibertarian

His pro-life stance is a big thing to consider due to the fact that many libertarian candidates are pro abortion. For me this is a huge thing and gives him a big, fat, A+ for social issues, though I know for others it may do the opposite. 

I'd take off some points for supporting the NSA for sure.

Regarding personality, I think he seems a bit unpolished and over scripted. Something just throws me off. On the other hand he has great passion, understanding of libertarian platforms, and is young. These are pros to me.

In terms of the Libertarian race his impact could be massive due to him taking on the incumbent Gary Johnson. (Who was basically expected to win without a fight.)
On a national scale I don't think he has the credentials yet to harm the establishment significantly.

----------


## afwjam

He supports the NSA?

----------


## presence

> *Austin Petersen*
> 
> Editor
> 
> Austin  Petersen is the founder of The Libertarian Republic, 
> 
> as well as the CEO  of Stonegait LLC.  
> 
> Formerly an Associate Producer for Judge Andrew Napolitano's show  "Freedom Watch", on the Fox Business Network.  
> ...


http://thelibertarianrepublic.com/author/apetersen/

----------


## presence

> *Austin Petersen                        -  Former Guest Speaker at the Leadership Institute*
> 
> 
>  *
> 
> Austin Petersen* is the Director of Production at FreedomWorks, as well as the CEO of Stonegait Pictures, LLC.
> 
> 
> Formerly an Associate Producer for Judge Andrew Napolitano's show,  Freedom Watch, on the Fox Business Network, Austin built Judge  Napolitano's social networks with over 200,000 fans and millions of  clicks a month.
> ...


https://www.leadershipinstitute.org/...cultyID=168905

----------


## presence

https://www.atlasnetwork.org/
http://www.freedomworks.org/
http://stonegaitllc.com/
Freedom_Watch_with_Judge_Napolitano
Libertarian_National_Committee

----------


## presence

> *J. Wilson: Let’s go back to one of the highlights from the  Libertarian Party debate on Stossel: the gay wedding cake/Nazi wedding  cake question. Was there anything you wanted to add to that?*
>  AP: The fundamental libertarian foundation is private property  rights. Freedom of association is in the First Amendment. People should  not be forced to provide a service if they don’t wish to.
> []
> Civil Rights Act overall was a good piece of legislation because it  outlawed discrimination by government. It’s the Title II section of that  which was the camel’s nose under the tent. But let’s get granular and  let’s talk about it. Let’s talk about what it means. If I am President  of the United States I will say that we should defend the right of free  association. That does not mean that I endorse bigotry. I am wholly  opposed to it. I’ve never discriminated.


http://alibertarianfuture.com/famous...e-making-name/

----------


## presence

> * So how do you make the case for a libertarian foreign policy in contrast to the Trump/Clinton strategy?* AP: Well I think as libertarians, we have marketed ourselves  improperly there. We are anti-war, war is the health of the state, we  want to have less war and less killing. But we also want to defend  ourselves and do so according to due process. You know, there are  Constitutional processes that we can follow and still maintain a strong  national defense. We should never go to war without a declaration of  war. But the reality is we do have to fight this new style, fourth  generation, warfare. This isn’t like fighting the Nazi’s, taking down  Berlin, and killing Hitler. This is fighting insurgencies and terrorist  groups. It’s less institutional type of warfare. In order for us to do  that, I think we need to revive the Constitutional letters of marque.  This is…
> *JW: This is what Ron Paul proposed after 9/11 to go after Al Qaeda…*
>  AP: Yeah, and a lot of libertarians give me hell about this because I  bring it up. But if I preface it by saying this is what Ron Paul  proposed then even the extreme pacifists of the libertarian movement  tend to be quelled. There are some people where there is just no end to  their pacifism. They want us all to go down with the ship. They don’t  care if they are killed. They’re more than happy to sacrifice all of us  for their dogmatic ideology of extremist pacifism. That’s fine. People  without guns are protected by people with guns.
>  AP: I think that if Congress were to reinvigorate these letters of marque there are thousands of veterans out of work who would…
> *JW: Or the Turks or the Jordanians or the Egyptians might take us up on the offer perhaps?*
>  AP: Potentially. I would probably trust American veterans first.


http://alibertarianfuture.com/famous...dget-proposal/

----------


## presence

> *Anarcho-Capitalists For Austin Petersen 2016*
> 
> Guest Post
>   January 7, 2016
> 
> 
> 
> by Ricardo Marquez
> 
> ...


http://thelibertarianrepublic.com/an...petersen-2016/

----------


## presence

In terms of which (mcafee johnson petersen) approaches libertarianism and voluntarism from the same austrian perspective as Ron... Petersen is the winner, he gets it... he's looking for the same path to catallaxy.   He may not have the name recognition, but he is the pure candidate if you want a vote with clean anti-state conscience.  Without a doubt he should be considered a "Liberty Candidate".

----------


## younglibertarian

> He supports the NSA?


Try doing the I side with quiz and see his answers. He supports drone surveillance over sovereign nations. He wants to "reel" in the NSA, but not abolish it. I'll link some videos/articles tomorrow but I am a little tired at the moment.

----------


## NewRightLibertarian

He may be a good script reader, but his pathetic vanity campaign for LP is a disgrace. If he wanted to be a serious liberty candidate, he could have ran at the local, county or state level and built a resume. But this egomaniac tries to run for President in a moribund party with no experience and no qualifications other than being a coattail rider and a click bait queen instead.

He can take his watered down pro-aggression bastardization of liberty and shove it. He should go back to the Beltway thinktank scene because that's where this scumbag belongs.

----------


## Suzanimal

Ep 414 Woods/Petersen Clash on Minarchism, Anarchism, and More




http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...C+Anarchism%2C

----------


## brandon

He's memorized all the libertarian talking points and probably has close to an ideal platform. 

But god, I can't stand the guy. He sounds way too rehearsed, is boring, and just too young. I want to support someone who has some serious accomplishments under their belt. Johnson was a governor, McAffee was a very successful engineer and business owner.  What is Peterson? A guy with a $#@!ty blog?

He's just totally unqualified and has zero leadership experience.

----------


## afwjam

> Ep 414 Woods/Petersen Clash on Minarchism, Anarchism, and More
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...C+Anarchism%2C


I'm listening now and I'm not in Petersons camp of libertarianism, whose purpose I think is to head towards an anarcho-ideal. However in the grand scheme of things and particularly in a Presidential election, I believe his grade still stands at an A+, despite not believing in the NAP.

----------


## luctor-et-emergo

He's A+ on the issues, definitely. B- on personality. He doesn't captivate an audience the same way others do. He doesn't appear to speak from the heart, maybe he does but he doesn't appear to. There are issues with that and that is his biggest problem. If this were an election on paper with just the issues, he'd be the absolute winner. 

I'd almost argue that he is too pure as a libertarian to be on the stage.. He needs more exposure and another decade to form his personality and he'll make a great candidate.

----------


## presence

> He's memorized all the libertarian talking points and probably has close to an ideal platform. 
> 
> But god, I can't stand the guy. He sounds way too rehearsed, is boring, and just too young.


Yes... he's pretty Rubioesque in that regard. 




> What is Peterson? A guy with a $#@!ty blog?
> 
> He's just totally unqualified and has zero leadership experience.


I agree he should seek a house or senate seat.   But I don't think his intention is to "win".  Its to run an educational campaign.

----------


## Suzanimal

> He's memorized all the libertarian talking points and probably has close to an ideal platform. 
> 
> *But god, I can't stand the guy.* He sounds way too rehearsed, is boring, and just too young. I want to support someone who has some serious accomplishments under their belt. Johnson was a governor, McAffee was a very successful engineer and business owner.  What is Peterson? A guy with a $#@!ty blog?
> 
> He's just totally unqualified and has zero leadership experience.


Me neither.




> Islamic Terrorism, Ron Paul, And The Problem With Non-Interventionists
> 
> Austin Petersen  January 8, 2015  Political Opinion
> 
> 
> Yesterday, the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity posted a story where Paul attempted to paint the murders of French cartoonists as a form of blowback for French interventionism. As a friend of mine said, If Dr. Paul thinks that French foreign policy is too aggressive, then it’s clear that no level of passivity would meet his standards.
> 
> The attacks by Islamic authoritarians shocked the world for their callousness, and pitiless disregard for free speech and human life. Charlie Hebdo, a satirical weekly newspaper, was targeted specifically due to their cartoons which mocked the prophet Muhammed. It’s the latest in a long line of attacks on artists by Islamic radicals, whose barbarism calls their entire creed into question.
> 
> ...






Read more: http://thelibertarianrepublic.com/is...#ixzz46eW9FQBw 
Follow us:  @TheLibRepublic on Twitter

----------


## brandon

> Yes... he's pretty Rubioesque in that regard. 
> 
> 
> 
> I agree he should seek a house or senate seat.   But I don't think his intention is to "win".  Its to run an educational campaign.


He should try to do something meaningful with his life outside of government. Prove himself successful and then revisit government when he's older.

----------


## Peace&Freedom

Petersen's pro-life credential is a big plus, and even his foreign policy rhetoric at least leads with principle, while adding caveats that connote hawkishness. On that front, the rubber will hit the road concerning how elastic his definition of "defense" is---as in, is every Mideast country going to be considered a 'threat' to us if they have an army and weapons, but are not a US client state? If Israel starts bombing another Arab/Muslim faction, will we regard that as a 'defense' issue for the US? Does he subscribe to regime change and nation building, etc?

Petersen does need an emotion chip installed in him, and/or enough political life experience to naturally engage voter groups. LP and Paul movement groups in the Iowa region need to be monitoring for open seat or special election situations where he could be inserted to run for and win local office, in preparation for his more serious Presidential run in the future.

----------


## presence

> Disagree. He should try to do something meaningful with his life outside of government. Prove himself successful and then revisit government when he's older.


You make it sound like he's only ever flipped burgers.




> Petersen’s passion for limited government led him to a job at the  Libertarian National Committee in 2008, and then eventually to the Atlas  Economic Research Foundation. After fighting for liberty in our  nation’s capital, Petersen took a job as an associate producer for Judge  Andrew Napolitano’s show FreedomWatch on the Fox Business Network.  After the show’s cancellation, Austin returned to DC to work for the Tea  Party institution FreedomWorks, and subsequently started his own  business venture, Stonegait LLC, and a popular national news magazine.


https://www.libertynow.org/

----------


## younglibertarian

To be honest the age really is not an issue for me, I'm happy to see younger people involved. It is merely the experience. If he had ran for even a county level office he would have more credibility.

----------


## NewRightLibertarian

It's sad that libertarians are desperate and pathetic enough to even consider this loser.

----------


## Bryan

> ... to even consider this loser.


Could you explain your position? The point of this thread is to make such evaluations in a fact based and logical manner.

Thanks.

----------


## afwjam

I understand that Austins minarchist, non NAP centered view might be alarming to some libertarians, especially the anarcho-capatalist kind. However this is a presidential evaluation thread, this is not pure NAP, this is practical compromise to best achieve our goals and Austin is very much heading in the right direction and very knowledgable at that. Writing someone off like Austin because he is not pure enough would be crazy, when we have an entire forum full of libertarians trying to convince us that someone like Trump is an acceptable compromise of purity. Austin and the rest of the Libertarian party field are all A material to me, especially if Trump is on the same scale at an F. Well, Gary might get a B... We can already see how destructive the Trump in fighting is in our community(part of the plan me thinks) let us not fight or insult people on the difference between somebody like McAfee and Petersen, they are both pretty good and heading the right way for our cause. Go fight the Trump guys, because they are the ones willing to flush the whole movement for some piss poor ideals, some of the so called leaders who support Trump thought that Rand was not pure enough which is something scary.(or maybe more revealing about the particular hatred they feel towards certain groups of people) I like McAfee better then Petersen, however I would still give Austin an A+ and McAfee an A.

----------


## NewRightLibertarian

> Could you explain your position? The point of this thread is to make such evaluations in a fact based and logical manner.
> 
> Thanks.


I've already explained my position in the thread.

If this pro-aggression dirt bag becomes the standard bearer of the libertarian movement, put a fork in it. Everything Ron Paul did was completely in vain.

----------


## afwjam

> I've already explained my position in the thread.
> 
> If this pro-aggression dirt bag becomes the standard bearer of the libertarian movement, put a fork in it. Everything Ron Paul did was completely in vain.


I'm not sure there is a "standard bearer" in the libertarian movement, and if there is I don't think he or she will be coming from the Libertarian party. But to run with it, would you not think that Austin would be a huge improvement over any other establishment democrat or republican candidate? Your position seems a little dramatic.

----------


## younglibertarian

> I've already explained my position in the thread.
> 
> If this pro-aggression dirt bag becomes the standard bearer of the libertarian movement, put a fork in it. Everything Ron Paul did was completely in vain.


True he does not always adhere to the NAP, but to call him a neo-con is a bit of a stretch in my opinion. He is defiantly supportive of non-intervention and cutting military spending.

----------


## presence

> Could you explain your position? The point of this thread is to make such evaluations in a fact based and logical manner.
> 
> Thanks.


There is a six part series dissecting his anti-NAP position here

*Six Reasons Austin Petersen Doesn’t Understand The NAP, Part 1*http://www.altarandthrone.com/six-re...he-nap-part-1/

----------


## Peace&Freedom

> Austin and the rest of the Libertarian party field are all A material to me, especially if Trump is on the same scale at an F. Well, Gary might get a B... We can already see how destructive the Trump in fighting is in our community(part of the plan me thinks) let us not fight or insult people on the difference between somebody like McAfee and Petersen, they are both pretty good and heading the right way for our cause. Go fight the Trump guys, because they are the ones willing to flush the whole movement for some piss poor ideals, some of the so called leaders who support Trump thought that Rand was not pure enough which is something scary.(or maybe more revealing about the particular hatred they feel towards certain groups of people)


This statement says let's not continue the infighting over Trump, then _continues the infighting_ against "the Trump guys," by accusing them of being "willing to flush the whole movement" because our preferred liberty candidate was not pure enough. This is all kinds of incoherent. If one is seeking a more pure liberty candidate, supporting a less liberty figure like Trump is going in the opposite direction. If one seeks to end infighting, stop infighting. 

And if "an entire forum full of libertarians" may be acting once bitten, twice shy about embracing another "not pure enough" candidate like Petersen, it's because we've just been through the Rand experience, and would prefer a candidacy that in some way _advances the movement_, not just its A+ positions. The "Trump guys" here have simply acknowledged that his candidacy, while not libertarian, holds strategic value or importance for the movement, and thus support the anti-establishment wave he has been riding. Acknowledging this trend does not justify the infighting that has ensued, almost all of which was instigated by the anti-Trump phenomenon side. 

The criticism about Rand centered on how his strategy was flawed or ineffectual given the election dynamics of this year, and how his non-pure edges made no progress in either building beyond the liberty base, or in confronting or disrupting the anti-liberty establishment. On the latter front, Rand mainly failed, but Trump largely has succeeded. Going forward, liberty candidates in either the GOP or LP universe should be viewed in terms of *both* agenda purity and strategic outcome, to best measure our overall progress.

----------


## NewRightLibertarian

> I'm not sure there is a "standard bearer" in the libertarian movement, and if there is I don't think he or she will be coming from the Libertarian party. But to run with it, would you not think that Austin would be a huge improvement over any other establishment democrat or republican candidate? Your position seems a little dramatic.


My opinion is the same one expressed by the Ron Paul Institute. There is no more sure fire way to bastardize the libertarian movement and throw all of Ron Paul's hard work down the toilet than by rallying around this fraud.

----------


## afwjam

> This statement says let's not continue the infighting over Trump, then _continues the infighting_ against "the Trump guys," by accusing them of being "willing to flush the whole movement" because our preferred liberty candidate was not pure enough. This is all kinds of incoherent. If one is seeking a more pure liberty candidate, supporting a less liberty figure like Trump is going in the opposite direction. If one seeks to end infighting, stop infighting. 
> 
> And if "an entire forum full of libertarians" may be acting once bitten, twice shy about embracing another "not pure enough" candidate like Petersen, it's because we've just been through the Rand experience, and would prefer a candidacy that in some way _advances the movement_, not just its A+ positions. The "Trump guys" here have simply acknowledged that his candidacy, while not libertarian, holds strategic value or importance for the movement, and thus support the anti-establishment wave he has been riding. Acknowledging this trend does not justify the infighting that has ensued, almost all of which was instigated by the anti-Trump phenomenon side. 
> 
> The criticism about Rand centered on how his strategy was flawed or ineffectual given the election dynamics of this year, and how his non-pure edges made no progress in either building beyond the liberty base, or in confronting or disrupting the anti-liberty establishment. On the latter front, Rand mainly failed, but Trump largely has succeeded. Going forward, liberty candidates in either the GOP or LP universe should be viewed in terms of *both* agenda purity and strategic outcome, to best measure our overall progress.


I said let's not continue the in fighting among libertarians, trump would be the first to tell you he is not one. I am not suggesting anyone embrace Petersen, I am not supporting him. However I think it's a big leap from Petersen to trump, look at what they are selling. Sure people can buy into trumps anti-establishment sales pitch(lots of evidence that he is establishment) but don't pretend like your buying into quality values that build something positive rather then sell fear and hate. I am all for embracing establishment voters, but not their thirst for blood, I'm all for embracing trump voters but not their thirst for conflict and hate. As for Petersen, he seems to at least focus on selling a positive message, not fear, his supporters are not going around espousing hate and fear, but rather libertarian values. This tent is big enough for Petersen, Rand and even the establishment and trump supporters, but not trump or Cruz and the things they represent.

----------


## iNoob

..

----------


## younglibertarian

bump?

----------


## younglibertarian



----------


## younglibertarian

Austin Petersen seems to be best at appealing to ex-Cruz supporters, his Facebook page gained over 6,000 like after Ted Cuz dropped out.

----------


## younglibertarian

A nice watch: https://alibertarianfuture.com/famou...tions-nowthis/

----------


## Root

Austin talks like a walking meme generator.  I respect that he worked closely with The Judge but I think he delivers the message poorly.

----------


## afwjam

He's good on the issues and has a history of supporting the right people. Let's wrap this one up.

----------


## younglibertarian

I'm gonna post all of his issues videos here from his campaign website..... We should really get this done considering the Convention starts tomorrow.

Taxes and spending



*Military and Defense Policy*



*Free Trade*3. Lower barriers to trade with foreign nations, and allow American companies the leeway they need to develop domestic energy production, in order to create good paying jobs at home.


*Monetary Policy*4. Audit the Federal Reserve first. End it through competition last. Institute a Monetary Commission devoted to studying the implications of replacing central banking with “Free Banking,” and abolishing laws of legal tender. Allow gold and silver to circulate as a currency, removing them from the commodity list, and make precious metal coins free of taxation. Let digital currencies compete against Federal Reserve notes.




*Immigration*5.  Streamline our immigration system by following updated “Ellis Island” styled protocols. Security check. Disease check. Done.
*Constitutional Priorities*6.  Work with congress to institute new protocols that will protect national security while placing the balance of weight towards due process and individual rights. Rein in the NSA, and demand accountability in our security agencies so as to protect our 4th Amendment rights.
*Crime & Punishment*7.  Reclassify the war on drugs as a medical problem, not a criminal problem. Deschedule all drugs at the federal level and end the federal War on Drugs once and for all.
*Reforming Entitlements*8. Allow young people to opt out of Social Security.
*Restoring Health Freedom*9.  Overturn Obamacare. Seek out market alternatives to problems of health and wellness.
*Defending Life*10. Encourage a culture of life, and adoption, and educate Americans about the “consistent pro-life ethic,” which also means abolishing the death penalty.

----------


## farreri

> many libertarian candidates are pro abortion.


List one that's advocating women should have abortions.

----------

