Gary has the same problem that many of us have. He focuses on small disagreements with allies, and doesn't spend enough time bashing the worst opposition. Hammer Obama and Hillary, try to follow the Reagan rule with allies. Don't let interviewers bait you into in-fighting.
I don't even care whom he wants to bash if he traveled or hosted rallies 1/20 the frequency by either Ron or Rand in their sleepiest political season, just to show himself not as lazy as everyone else implied by his finger wagging, if not to educate and galvanize because he turns people off by shrugging his shoulders too much during interviews
He would have made a nice addition to the Senate
Why? In terms of ideas and principle there is no shortage of either from candidates selected amongst this coalition. some of our best picks thus far in fact are shown as ones with not much politicking experience, legislative, executive or otherwise.
I don't get why the hell people say things about him being nice for anything, based on what? The fact that lines like that had been repeated a thousand times over and had taken on a form of some urban legend of its own special style? The last thing we need is another Libertarian demagogue playing the social justice card in any position of power at all--no one cares, deal with it. If you're trying to create the most indistinguishable difference between you and other libertarians by the most elaborate social justice rhetoric, just don't bother. Or join Hillary, she is more powerful so you might have better luck with your 'cause'.
And i don't get why people mention the governor credential. Obviously nobody else outside libertarian camp seems to care. If people cared, it would have mattered in 2012. it did not. The governor title is only for people who have family backgrounds and built up connections with the establishment during their governorship, and orders are passed for every MSM journalist to repeat his 'governor your highness' x1000 times over each article and to
give them interview for exposure, so people hear that governor title, that's how they matter with their little governorship titles when national debate starts and they already have name recognition as their royalty highness. Nobody in msm cares about Johnson enough to mention his name, so his governorship doesn't matter. This means he gets to compete from ground zero, same starting line as everyone else purely with his on-stage abilities, perseverance, tirelessness to travel and gain his own name recognition and everything else, etc. "GJ god em' great resume cos he waz a governator" I don't want to hear that stupid line ever again. Governorship doesn't matter one bit because it's a msm title and msm does not care about him. God i hate GJ and his parrot band-wagoners. if there is one justified drivel it should be people who supported GJ over Ron in 2012. Nobody should ever forget that
I like Gary, but running for President was not useful. Being in the Senate is. And he could win.
It should be more and more evident to the rest of you now that if he ever ran for the senate, his wouldn't be Gary Johnson. So why don't we get over that at some point.
Johnson is neither an ideas guy like Thomas Massie nor a superb orator like Rand Paul, and media has little care for advertising his governorship, hence it is a moot advantage, it matters less than Rand being an ophthalmologist and a baseball coach before he was elected, or Thomas Massie being some city council guy. as mentioned, some of those shown to be our best picks thus far are people with zilch governorship or legislative experience.
If you want legislative histories/achievements to use as reference when speaking to voters, you can easily do what Rand does regularly when you there is none of your own--have aides organize couple folder full of documents, memorize them, and use other people's legislative experience at your disposal when you need examples of effective legislation/executive decisions during public policy debates. so no, having experiences of your own at being a governor or legislator actually matters little, and it might actually become an impedement if those experiences ever become the source of hubris to inhibit you from further learning. This seems to be what's happening with Johnson, and I doubt lazy GJ would bother putting in 3% equivalent of Rand's effort at this point. Can GJ's name never come up again, like ever, into the future? He had enough attention in 2012, and he didn't do shit with it. People should learn their lessons in people read
