Gary Johnson Gary Johnson: ‘I Will Continue The Ron Paul Revolution’

[Shotdown1027]

Johnson has been a member of the LP since 1992, I think. His name has been on the registration rolls for well over a decade, I know that.

This is just ridiculous. The guy is genuinely part of our movement. And it isn't like you have to be concerned about how he'll ACTUALLY rule (although it'd certainly be 100% better than Romney/Obama), your vote will simply be one of protest. As a protest, would you rather people see "Didn't Vote" and think "Lazy." or would you rather them see "Libertarian" and think "Ron Paul supporter, probably."

No, the LP isn't some electoral vehicle of repute. It is a tool for punishment. When the GOP ignores libertarian wishes, it does so at its own peril---and we punish it by voting for Libertarians (or whomever else is acceptable and on the ballot).

 

[Travlyr]

Gary Johnson should endorse Ron Paul and throw all his support behind him.

 

[hammy]

Let me say this one more time.

No one.

But Paul.

 

[Original_Intent]

Gary Johnson is the Bill Gates of liberty.

Other than that he is not a bazillionaire and doesn't market himself well.

 

[thoughtomator]

Johnson has been a member of the LP since 1992, I think. His name has been on the registration rolls for well over a decade, I know that.

Show me some proof of this. I looked and find none whatsoever. It would be extraordinary for a sitting Republican governor to be registered as a Libertarian.

The guy is genuinely part of our movement.

No person who refuses to find fault with the Federal Reserve, and who affirmatively asserts that no crimes were committed by bankers in this crisis (echoing Obama in this I might add) is part of our movement.

 

[thoughtomator]

Gary Johnson is the Bill Gates of liberty.

A marketer posing as a technologist who made his name on someone else's product? That is a pretty good analogy.

 

[69360]

Gary is a good honest guy with 90% correct views. Those of you who need 100% purity are setting yourselves up for disappointment. If RP is not on my ballot I will vote for Gary.

 

[KMX]

No one but Paul.

 

[thoughtomator]

Gary is a good honest guy with 90% correct views. Those of you who need 100% purity are setting yourselves up for disappointment. If RP is not on my ballot I will vote for Gary.

I don't need purity, I need someone who understands the #1 issue facing the nation today, the monetary policy under which the wealth of America is being looted and which allows bankers to use free printed money to buy our representation out from under us.

Johnson's adamant, repeated refusals to properly address this issue indicates to me that he is at best clueless about the big picture, and at worst a Trojan Horse.

Also he believes in the global warming hoax, a major disqualifier; and he supports falsely-named "free trade" agreements (in reality, one-way perpetual giveaways in which the US is the sucker) which have eviscerated our industrial base.

If someone shows me they "get it" I can tolerate a lot more than 10% disagreement. Gary Johnson has repeatedly made clear in no uncertain terms that not only does he not get it, but he does not want to get it.

 

[Nathan Hale]

Johnson has been a member of the LP since 1992, I think. His name has been on the registration rolls for well over a decade, I know that.

This is just ridiculous. The guy is genuinely part of our movement. And it isn't like you have to be concerned about how he'll ACTUALLY rule (although it'd certainly be 100% better than Romney/Obama), your vote will simply be one of protest. As a protest, would you rather people see "Didn't Vote" and think "Lazy." or would you rather them see "Libertarian" and think "Ron Paul supporter, probably."

No, the LP isn't some electoral vehicle of repute. It is a tool for punishment. When the GOP ignores libertarian wishes, it does so at its own peril---and we punish it by voting for Libertarians (or whomever else is acceptable and on the ballot).

THIS!

All of these Gary Johnson haters are Johnny-come-lately libertarians who hadn't even heard of Ron Paul, let alone Gary Johnson, before 2007. Those of us who were in the trenches before it was cool know beyond a shadow of a doubt that Paul and Johnson have both been part of libertarian circles for a loooong time. Johnson was actively recruited by the LP since he was in office!

 

[LibertyEagle]

THIS!

All of these Gary Johnson haters are Johnny-come-lately libertarians who hadn't even heard of Ron Paul, let alone Gary Johnson, before 2007. Those of us who were in the trenches before it was cool know beyond a shadow of a doubt that Paul and Johnson have both been part of libertarian circles for a loooong time. Johnson was actively recruited by the LP since he was in office!

Do you want to bet?

Johnson has a few good points, but Thoughtomator pretty much hit the nail on the head.

 

[Travlyr]

I don't need purity, I need someone who understands the #1 issue facing the nation today, the monetary policy under which the wealth of America is being looted and which allows bankers to use free printed money to buy our representation out from under us.

Johnson's adamant, repeated refusals to properly address this issue indicates to me that he is at best clueless about the big picture, and at worst a Trojan Horse.

Also he believes in the global warming hoax, a major disqualifier; and he supports falsely-named "free trade" agreements (in reality, one-way perpetual giveaways in which the US is the sucker) which have eviscerated our industrial base.

If someone shows me they "get it" I can tolerate a lot more than 10% disagreement. Gary Johnson has repeatedly made clear in no uncertain terms that not only does he not get it, but he does not want to get it.

Exactly. He doesn't get my vote until he proves he understands the big picture.

 

[Nathan Hale]

I don't need purity, I need someone who understands the #1 issue facing the nation today, the monetary policy under which the wealth of America is being looted and which allows bankers to use free printed money to buy our representation out from under us.

Johnson's adamant, repeated refusals to properly address this issue indicates to me that he is at best clueless about the big picture, and at worst a Trojan Horse.

Also he believes in the global warming hoax, a major disqualifier; and he supports falsely-named "free trade" agreements (in reality, one-way perpetual giveaways in which the US is the sucker) which have eviscerated our industrial base.

If someone shows me they "get it" I can tolerate a lot more than 10% disagreement. Gary Johnson has repeatedly made clear in no uncertain terms that not only does he not get it, but he does not want to get it.

1. Monetary policy - Johnson gets it. He always talks about the fed in interviews and he doesn't go around advocating a gold standard he has said in town halls that he would accept, as Paul advocates, competitive currency.

2. Global warming - I think people who call it a hoax are as deluded as people who believe it is manmade. global warming has a basis in scientific fact, but it's something that needs debating right now, as opposed to the ignorant dismissal thrown at the issue from both sides.

3. Free trade - you'd need to clarify your position on this, because I don't see it in Gary's platform or interviews.

 

[Travlyr]

1. Monetary policy - Johnson gets it. He always talks about the fed in interviews and he doesn't go around advocating a gold standard he has said in town halls that he would accept, as Paul advocates, competitive currency.

2. Global warming - I think people who call it a hoax are as deluded as people who believe it is manmade. global warming has a basis in scientific fact, but it's something that needs debating right now, as opposed to the ignorant dismissal thrown at the issue from both sides.

3. Free trade - you'd need to clarify your position on this, because I don't see it in Gary's platform or interviews.

Here is his stated position on the Federal Reserve System: "Restrict Federal Reserve policy to maintaining price stability, not bailing out financial firms or propping up the housing sector." http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/issues/economy-and-taxes

That is not liberty. The Fed has to be ended for people to enjoy liberty, peace, and prosperity. Tomorrow would not be too soon.

 

[thoughtomator]

@NathanHale, addressing your points

1 - Johnson does NOT get it on monetary policy. http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...es...just-made-incredibly-bad-decisions.-quot

2 - Global warming is a proven scientific fraud. See: Climategate

3 - My position is that actual free trade is fine, with economies that are similar and with nations whose values are similar. Unrestricted trade with nations who practice slavery or modified forms thereof is morally unacceptable. Unrestricted trade in the context of major differentials in regulatory burden is economically suicidal, as our experience with China post-MFN status and with Mexico post-NAFTA have proven beyond any reasonable doubt.

Also, what has masqueraded as "free trade" in recent decades is anything but - these agreements consistently allow the foreign country to maintain most or all of its restrictions while eliminating ours, enabling mercantilism to be used successfully as a weapon of economic war against us.

 

[Nathan Hale]

Here is his stated position on the Federal Reserve System: "Restrict Federal Reserve policy to maintaining price stability, not bailing out financial firms or propping up the housing sector." http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/issues/economy-and-taxes

That is not liberty. The Fed has to be ended for people to enjoy liberty, peace, and prosperity. Tomorrow would not be too soon.

Johnson has also stated that his platform is about his plans for the coming term of office. He is not as severe as Paul on the fed, I'll give you that - he wants them audited and accountable, and he would support eventual repeal if the support were there, but instant repeal isn't part of his first term executive agenda and thus not part of his platform. But even Ron Paul doesn't support "tomorrow would not be too soon". Here's his policy statement from his platform:

As President, Ron Paul will work for passage of comprehensive audit legislation, and he will also fight to legalize sound money so Americans will have alternatives to the Fed’s inflated paper money.

Ultimately, he will lead the charge to end the dishonest, immoral, and unconstitutional Federal Reserve System, enabling America to take a giant step toward economic security, financial responsibility, and lasting prosperity.

 

[Nathan Hale]

@NathanHale, addressing your points

1 - Johnson does NOT get it on monetary policy. http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...es...just-made-incredibly-bad-decisions.-quot

Thanks for the update, Bill Still.

2 - Global warming is a proven scientific fraud. See: Climategate

Oh please.

3 - My position is that actual free trade is fine, with economies that are similar and with nations whose values are similar. Unrestricted trade with nations who practice slavery or modified forms thereof is morally unacceptable. Unrestricted trade in the context of major differentials in regulatory burden is economically suicidal, as our experience with China post-MFN status and with Mexico post-NAFTA have proven beyond any reasonable doubt.

Also, what has masqueraded as "free trade" in recent decades is anything but - these agreements consistently allow the foreign country to maintain most or all of its restrictions while eliminating ours, enabling mercantilism to be used successfully as a weapon of economic war against us.

Odd, because Ron Paul's problem with NAFTA is that it wasn't free trade, but 250 pages of regulations. He would have supported free trade with nations that you would have opposed.

 

[Travlyr]

Johnson has also stated that his platform is about his plans for the coming term of office. He is not as severe as Paul on the fed, I'll give you that - he wants them audited and accountable, and he would support eventual repeal if the support were there, but instant repeal isn't part of his first term executive agenda and thus not part of his platform. But even Ron Paul doesn't support "tomorrow would not be too soon". Here's his policy statement from his platform:

As President, Ron Paul will work for passage of comprehensive audit legislation, and he will also fight to legalize sound money so Americans will have alternatives to the Fed’s inflated paper money.

Ultimately, he will lead the charge to end the dishonest, immoral, and unconstitutional Federal Reserve System, enabling America to take a giant step toward economic security, financial responsibility, and lasting prosperity.

The Fed is the entity causing all the problems we face today. The unemployment, the housing crisis, poverty & homelessness, perpetual wars. Gary Johnson either does not understand that, or he does and doesn't want to do anything about it right away.

Ron Paul has been working for competing currencies for a long long time. Maybe he would not End The Fed tomorrow, but I'm sure he would like to see HR 1098 passed this afternoon. Which would be fine with me too.

 

[Nathan Hale]

The Fed is the entity causing all the problems we face today. The unemployment, the housing crisis, poverty & homelessness, perpetual wars. Gary Johnson either does not understand that, or he does and doesn't want to do anything about it right away.

Neither does Paul, that's my point. Both men want to audit and restrain the fed as a matter of executive agenda. Only Paul speaks about eventually ending the fed, but you know what, if we stopped being so divisive, I'll bet that eventual agenda would filter better throughout the entire movement.

 

[specsaregood]

Odd, because Ron Paul's problem with NAFTA is that it wasn't free trade, but 250 pages of regulations.

Incorrect, his main stated problem with NAFTA was a loss of national sovereignty.

I opposed both the North American Free Trade Agreement and the World Trade Organization, both of which were heavily favored by the political establishment. Many supporters of the free trade market supported these agreements. Nearly six decades ago when the International Trade Organization was up for debate, conservatives and libertarians agreed that supranational trade bureaucracies with the power to infringe upon American sovereignty were undesirable.
Source: The Revolution: A Manifesto, by Ron Paul, p. 96 Apr 1, 2008

What you are thinking is that he said you don't need all those pages of regulations for "free trade", just a single sheet of paper. But that was not his core reason for being against it. His reason is/was loss of sovereignty.