With that being said, he has neither the name recognition nor the credibility nor the motivational capabilities of Ron Paul.
I find it interesting that so many people on here have been commenting about Gary Johnson's lack of name recognition. When Ron Paul started out, he had virtually no name recognition, and yet, was successful in making a name for himself -- even if he didn't win. I don't dispute that lack of name recognition is a significant hurdle, but it's not insurmountable.
There are a number of things that make Gary's low name recognition less troublesome than it was for Ron in 2008. For one, he's perceived as being much more mainstream, which reduces the odds of him being marginalized. But the bigger thing is that there is already the "liberty infrastructure" that RP built. Gary Johnson would not be starting from scratch, and that's a huge leg up. We need only look to Rand or Peter Schiff as the perfect examples of this. Regardless of whether or not they win, candidates close to our political views are in a far better position than they were pre-2008, high name recognition or not.
I also think it's interesting that no one has touched on the issue of Ron's age. I'll admit this isn't a problem for me personally, but for most people it will be. And if you don't believe me, just ask your friends who aren't as politically active whether they would vote for a 76 year-old man who's running for president. Again, knowing what shape Ron is in, I have no personal qualms about it. But I think those of you who think Ron's electability is somehow massively greater than it was in 2008 should think about that a little more.
As for Johnson's credibility, I find that argument to be very unpersuasive. As I said in another comment, his record as governor is unparalleled when compared to anyone else in the race. And even compared to Ron Paul in 2008, it is superior. Whether or not his views on the issues are superior to RP is a different question, but his record as governor -- i.e. "mini president" in the eyes of the press/broader populace -- is something that most people will eat up.
Regarding motivational capabilities -- I'd say that remains to be seen. At this point, I'm inclined to agree with that assessment. But that said, I think it's important not to overstate RP's motivational capabilities as well. Ron earned a significant portion of the vote, but let's not forget that he also lost. He fired up a lot of us, but he was not able to catch on to the extent of others in the race (there are obviously many reasons for that; I'm just trying to put this all in perspective). My point is that we really don't know whether Gary Johnson, Ron Paul, or someone else will be best able to persuade and fire up the mainstream conservative base. And like it or not, if people really care about winning, that is what will need to be done -- not just turning on libertarians like us.
