Gary Johnson Gary Johnson; Libertarian failure.

[Maltheus]

I don't know many (if any) Gary Johnson supporters, who don't consider Ron Paul to be more well versed on these issues, but Gary is learning and getting better (and the interviewer comes across as a snobbish prick). If I knew that he had a real shot at the presidency, I might be a little more cautious. But for now, he's an adequate enough to vote for and even encourage others to do so, as a vehicle for getting out the message. As for who's the better speaker, I'd had to say it's a tie. They're both sometimes good and both, often bad. In any case, we need to be focused on issues, more than parties or personalities. So long as Gary Johnson is working to promote those issues, I'll continue to respect that and vote for him.

 

[tuggy24g]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1aBJSMG-630&list=UUalnDf4qTFOK4oHID0cbh7w&index=1&feature=plcp

 

[Cleaner44]

I am going to vote for Johnson not because he is a good libertarian or anything like that, I simply want to cause pain to the GOP and make it obvious that there are votes they missed out on. My vote for the Libertarian candidate will register, while my write-in vote for Ron Paul would not. My goal is to break the back of the GOP and Gary Johnson is a tool that suits my purpose.

 

[sailingaway]

Contrast Gary's interview with this:



^^^THAT'S a libertarian candidate I could get excited about.

And that sort of thing gives me hope, because it ISN'T only Ron Paul, it is Ron Paul, a handful of others we know of, and us... So it is just finding the right people.

I agree GJ is not the right people, however, a lot of people here like him and I don't know how we should be handling threads like this. On the one hand, if people are pushing him, people should be allowed to say the other side.....

Dunno what the answer is or where they go, at the moment.

 

[sailingaway]

I am going to vote for Johnson not because he is a good libertarian or anything like that, I simply want to cause pain to the GOP and make it obvious that there are votes they missed out on. My vote for the Libertarian candidate will register, while my write-in vote for Ron Paul would not. My goal is to break the back of the GOP and Gary Johnson is a tool that suits my purpose.

I literally don't see any reason a vote for GJ serves more as a vote for Ron Paul than a write in that also is not a vote for the major parties and is also a person who showed up to vote and refused to eat the presidential dog food. Neither way will it say Ron Paul, and in some states a Ron Paul write in WILL be counted. But I also think everyone's vote is their own, I just honestly don't even get the logic behind that argument.

 

[Peace&Freedom]

The late great Harry Browne on Republicans vs. Libertarians, and what he would do on his first day as President.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/browne/browne43.html

http://www.wnd.com/2000/12/517/

Bonus-- What Paul Would Have Done on Day 1 As President:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul647.html

 

[FindLiberty]

OK, Browne is no longer running, at all. I miss him. I'd vote for Bumper, but he's not on the ballot...

I can't vote for Mitt since I'm so pissed off at the GOP's treatment of Ron Paul and
his delegates. I also can't imagine a worse Vice Pres getting into power than that guy
who's riding with Mitt. They both scare me more than four more years of Obama.

So it's comes down to writing in Ron Paul's name (and that won't count or even get reported in IL),
voting Johnson(LP), or just voting for Obama(D) if Johnson's name is missing from the ballot.

I know better than to watch that OP video clip. Guess I have to vote for Johnson
and not worry about him actually getting the keys to the white house.

So, "hope" returns for four more years. Big deal.

 

[sailingaway]

Again, you don't say why the number who voted for a different person is more accurate in reflecting a Ron Paul vote than a number of those who showed up and voted but refused to vote for ANY names on the presidential ballot. Those numbers are available just as third party numbers are available, neither are really 'reported' and what number gets attention will be the one we pass around after the election.

 

[alex_florida]

I guess the only motive I have for voting Johnson at this point is to try to get a sense of what our numbers are.

This.

 

[AJ Antimony]

Why this guy wants 2% of the national vote rather than a US Senate seat is beyond me...

 

[69360]

Whatever, these threads are getting silly with the nitpicking. Of course RP is better spoken and more knowledgeable than GJ, we know that. GJ is on the ballot and running, RP is not. So I'm voting GJ. He's worlds better than those other 2.

 

[sailingaway]

but the logic to vote for GJ is to create a straw man argument than that he is 'better then the other two' as if being on the ballot mattered if you aren't going to win. You can count those who don't vote for the name on the ballot but still vote by simply math, and spread that number around as easily as whatever Gary gets. And to me voting for Gary makes it seem like I'm ok with Gary and I want Ron Paul.

To me, voting for Gary because you WANT Gary makes sense, but voting for him to show you are voting for Ron Paul (?) makes no sense at all.

 

[specsaregood]

./

 

[shane77m]

+rep

Probably one of the best comments I have read thus far.

Whatever, these threads are getting silly with the nitpicking. Of course RP is better spoken and more knowledgeable than GJ, we know that. GJ is on the ballot and running, RP is not. So I'm voting GJ. He's worlds better than those other 2.

 

[KingNothing]

Not meant to be harsh but I don't believe he is ready to be president of the United States. He really struggles on some key questions about economics.

He built a business from the ground up and became very successful. He was an effective governor. He's in great shape and dedicated to fitness. Say what you will about Gary, but a variety of aspects of his life show him to be a man who sets his mind on something, then gets it done. Combine that track record and his mentality with a sort of "should government be doing this" questioning attitude, and you've got a guy who knows plenty enough about economics to be president.

Now, with that said, I see a write-in vote for Paul and a vote for Johnson as being one in the same. Either works for me, and I haven't decided which way I'll go in November.

 

[Rocco]

Firstly, Gary schooled the interviewer on the booms and busts before the fed. Of course there were upturns and downswings before the central bank, it was and is the natural state of the economy to have ups and downs, the consequence of the fed is distorting the market and not allowing the correction to occur, leading to a large and overinflated bubble. We had several short panics in this country before we had a federal reserve, but it was all in the midst of 10% annual growth despite the downturns which did happen. For the interviewer to almost imply that we'd have constant growth if not for a central bank defies logic....constant growth is impossible.

 

[SewrRatt]

OK, Browne is no longer running, at all. I miss him.

Yeah, because he died... and he was the shit. Candidates since are just shit. Including Gary Johnson who left who knows how many non-violent drug offenders in a cage when he had the power to pardon them. He's the lesser of three evils just because he's pandering hard to us this cycle. But not too hard - can't even be bothered to read a book about Austrian economics.

 

[Okie RP fan]

I will vote for GJ over Romney and Obama any day. Even if just for the reason of spreading the term "libertarian."

However, this video is testament to my, and many others, complaints and worries about Gary Johnson. He's truly clueless and I think he had the "Libertarian" brand thrusted upon him by the party and by grassroots. So, he's taken off and run with it. In that interview, he sounds similar to a progressive Republican trying to be libertarian.

 

[misean]

He built a business from the ground up and became very successful. He was an effective governor. He's in great shape and dedicated to fitness. Say what you will about Gary, but a variety of aspects of his life show him to be a man who sets his mind on something, then gets it done. Combine that track record and his mentality with a sort of "should government be doing this" questioning attitude, and you've got a guy who knows plenty enough about economics to be president.

Now, with that said, I see a write-in vote for Paul and a vote for Johnson as being one in the same. Either works for me, and I haven't decided which way I'll go in November.

Pretty much this.

You can make a pretty good argument that the Libertarian Party candidate should be someone who educates and furthers the debate. Someone like RonPaul has a much better grasp of economics and philosophy than Johnson. People like Harry Browne running or having Rothbard active serve the educationrole well. If the goal is to have someone who could credibly be President then Johnson is the best Libertarian candidate ever. Johnson is someone who could actually BE President. The real world isn't a philosophy or economics exam. A lot of these candidates sound good in the abstract (Ron Paul included) but they have no history of successfully leading anything. I would feel very good about Johnson being President.

 

[Sola_Fide]

Pretty much this.

You can make a pretty good argument that the Libertarian Party candidate should be someone who educates and furthers the debate. Someone like RonPaul has a much better grasp of economics and philosophy than Johnson. People like Harry Browne running or having Rothbard active serve the educationrole well. If the goal is to have someone who could credibly be President then Johnson is the best Libertarian candidate ever. Johnson is someone who could actually BE President. The real world isn't a philosophy or economics exam. A lot of these candidates sound good in the abstract (Ron Paul included) but they have no history of successfully leading anything. I would feel very good about Johnson being President.

But Johnson will never be President. Ever. I don't know why a case would be made based on his electability at this point. He is not electable at all.

Secondly, the reason that candidates like Ron and Harry generated so much enthusiasm and support is their ability to communicate the ideas of liberty in ways that average people can understand. Gary does not have this ability. I would NEVER send someone to a Gary Johnson YouTube in order to educate them about what I believe like I would with Ron or Harry. I get the feeling that a person would be really confused after listening to Gary explain liberty.