Moved posts about Gary Johnson candidacy

[realtonygoodwin]

Why would you vote for a ticket including Gary Johnson over a ticket including Ron Paul?

A vote for a Romney /Paul ticket could easily be considered more pro-liberty than an Obama /Biden vote.

And I would argue a Romney /Paul ticket would be more pro-liberty than a Gary Johnson ticket. You can’t protect liberty and at the same time support a mass genocide of the unborn.

 

[rockandrollsouls]

Right? Clear divide here. Those that think liberty is a single person and those of us that believe we can all unite behind freedom.

it´s allways so suprising how some people react when people are trying to create unity...

That´s what we need, unity!


"we don´t need to agree on all of the things, we just must agree that we all need to be free"

 

[rockandrollsouls]

Same old, same old. A lot of GJ bashing, but nothing to back it up. I've seen a lot of hatred from many people, but no one can tell me.

And, still, this is coming from the same person that would vote for Romney if a Paul was on the ticket.

I really disagree, but people can have whatever speakers they want. I just wonder if it makes it less likely Ron attends.

 

[sailingaway]

abortion isn't my main reason, but I have stated them in many threads, and they are in this forum, already.

 

[sailingaway]

Same old, same old. A lot of GJ bashing, but nothing to back it up. I've seen a lot of hatred from many people, but no one can tell me.

And, still, this is coming from the same person that would vote for Romney if a Paul was on the ticket.

I've given my reason many times when you have been in the discussion. You are being disingenuous and are trying to make Gary Johnson a subject of Ron's campaign forum where he doesn't belong.

and again, you are misleading on what I said. In fact going through your last two hundred posts yesterday, roughly the first half seemed to be pushing GJ or insulting those who didn't like him, and roughly the second half, by that point, were this vendetta against me for moving posts about Gary out of Ron's forum, and saying I would vote for Ron if Ron were Romney's VP candidate nominated from the floor DESPITE Romney's wishes, because I'd trust him to speak out at every need, and it would be sort of a replacement for the visibility of his house seat given that Obama and Romney are pretty much the same. This was in the context of Wead suggesting Ron be nominated on the floor as VP and MY point was that since Ron was unlikely to win to be VP, we should instead nominate him as President. As it happens, I can't think I WOULD vote for Rand in that position because after his endorsement I don't have that same faith as I do in Ron that he won't bend.

but no matter what, I'm not voting for GJ because I don't like him. And abortion isn't the issue, per se, although GJ's inconsistency is. The ONLY way I see him as a liberty candidate is that he is fiscally conservative, as is Jim DeMint, and I wouldn't call either of them liberty candidates. I think it depends on what your hot button issues are. Ron hits all of them because he works from a consistent set of principles. GJ seems to be much less principled in his decisionmaking process and as a 'cost benefit weighting' pragmaticism may or may not come out where I would find it to be acceptable. He approved corporatist NAFTA. He never made a big point of civil liberties as governor when he absolutely could have done so. Etc.

I have explained this in detail and only do it here (being utterly disinterested in GJ one way or the other) because you are campaigning to convince people my intentions and views are different than they are.

Stop it. This is your warning.

 

[atomicsink]

Why would you vote for a ticket including Gary Johnson over a ticket including Ron Paul?

A vote for a Romney /Paul ticket could easily be considered more pro-liberty than an Obama /Biden vote.

And I would argue a Romney /Paul ticket would be more pro-liberty than a Gary Johnson ticket. You can’t protect liberty and at the same time support a mass genocide of the unborn.

That's insane. Romney as president over Gary Johnson? That's what you call more pro-liberty??? A pinko over a libertarian?

We commit mass genocide of the unborn everyday - hundreds of thousands of sperm die on a daily basis per male and 2 eggs a month per female.

 

[rockandrollsouls]

That's a pretty ridiculous and generalized statement. The man has never said anything of the sort.

I will once again remind you, before Ron announced he was running he was asked who he would support as president in 2012. He said, without hesitation, Gary Johnson. If GJ is good enough for the doctor, he's good enough for me.

It's becoming absurd the lengths people will go to discredit an individual who has always stood by liberty. As a governor, his record is flawless. It wouldn't matter to me if it was a different person with the same record....people here need to stop trying to thwart other great, liberty candidates.

As someone who has fought for liberty far longer than you, and with you simply being an armchair quarterback for this election cycle (how come you weren't fighting in 08?) I am disheartened to see how this liberty movement we've been fighting decades for has been nearly co-opted. Yes, we've always loved Ron and what he's done but we've always supported those that supported liberty. GJ is one of those people, and you're trying to divide us and make it about a person.

How you're acting and what you're promoting is incredibly divisive to what we've been trying to accomplish for years and years now. It needs to stop.

I don't believe that somebody who supports mass genocide can be pro-liberty.

 

[atomicsink]

I just hope the Ron Paul uber alles people don't leave the liberty movement when he retires this year. We need to keep the momentum going.

 

[erowe1]

Why is GJ still counted as an opposing candidate?

The Republican primaries are over, and GJ isn't running in them any more. He's running in the general election against the other candidates running for that election, of which Ron Paul is not one.

 

[LudwigVonMisoSoup]

Ron Paul isn't winning the nomination, regardless of much you delude yourself into thinking so. That being the case, we should promote anyone who believes in individual liberty over Obamney. This is a chess, not checkers. We need to be pervasive in the minds of the electorate and stay as relevant as possible or our views won't be spread.

 

[realtonygoodwin]

That's insane. Romney as president over Gary Johnson? That's what you call more pro-liberty??? A pinko over a libertarian?

We commit mass genocide of the unborn everyday - hundreds of thousands of sperm die on a daily basis per male and 2 eggs a month per female.

They are only human when they are combined.

 

[atomicsink]

Why is GJ still counted as an opposing candidate?

The Republican primaries are over, and GJ isn't running in them any more. He's running in the general election against the other candidates running for that election, of which Ron Paul is not one.

Some people feel Gary Johnson as a Libertarian will distract the efforts to put liberty candidates in the Republican Party, the strategy endorsed by most Ron Paul supporters. So even if Ron Paul has no chance of being president people will treat Gary Johnson as a competitor.

He's got my vote even though I think the take over the GOP is the best strategy. Unfortunately some people see GJ and the take over the GOP effort as mutually exclusive, and I can't completely disagree with that sentiment.

 

[atomicsink]

They are only human when they are combined.

Just curious... why?

Personally I view human sentience as what makes us human, it's interesting to hear other explanations though.

 

[realtonygoodwin]

That's a pretty ridiculous and generalized statement. The man has never said anything of the sort.

I will once again remind you, before Ron announced he was running he was asked who he would support as president in 2012. He said, without hesitation, Gary Johnson. If GJ is good enough for the doctor, he's good enough for me.

It's becoming absurd the lengths people will go to discredit an individual who has always stood by liberty. As a governor, his record is flawless. It wouldn't matter to me if it was a different person with the same record....people here need to stop trying to thwart other great, liberty candidates.

As someone who has fought for liberty far longer than you, and with you simply being an armchair quarterback for this election cycle (how come you weren't fighting in 08?) I am disheartened to see how this liberty movement we've been fighting decades for has been nearly co-opted. Yes, we've always loved Ron and what he's done but we've always supported those that supported liberty. GJ is one of those people, and you're trying to divide us and make it about a person.

How you're acting and what you're promoting is incredibly divisive to what we've been trying to accomplish for years and years now. It needs to stop.

You have NO idea how long I have been fighting for liberty, first of all. I was over at the DP in the previous election, not here. And to accuse me of being merely an armchair quarterback this time shows me you have no clue what you are talking about.

You are the one being divisive by trying to get people to support your candidate over Ron Paul.

 

[sailingaway]

Why is GJ still counted as an opposing candidate?

The Republican primaries are over, and GJ isn't running in them any more. He's running in the general election against the other candidates running for that election, of which Ron Paul is not one.

Ron AND HIS DELEGATES are running until convention. There are more state conventions this weekend. Ron and his delegates won Iowa last weekend. They had artificial hips dislocated and fingers broken to get delegates in Louisiana shortly before. We support the delegates through convention, at least, in Ron's CAMPAIGN forum.

 

[atomicsink]

You are the one being divisive by trying to get people to support your candidate over Ron Paul.

Is it possible that rockandrollsouls is an ideologue supporting liberty and supports any candidates who support liberty? Ron Paul, Gary Johnson, they're all good people whom we need more of and we should support them all.

 

[G-Wohl]

But not all of Paul's beliefs. For example Paul's emphasis on strict Constitutionalism, strictly regulated (if no nearly outlawed) abortion, and Paul's stance on heavily guarded borders to prevent illegal immigration are all things the LP disagrees with him on.

That Paul endorsed Chuck Baldwin and The Constitution Party last go around, thinking that one minor disagreement o pornography was better than three major disagreements on how the nation should be run, shouldn't be discounted. That the CP nominated Barr saddens me, but I still agree with their overall platform a lot more than I do the LP.

The problem is that it is Ron Paul who displays the ideological inconsistency, and I don't necessarily blame him for it - anybody his age and of his upbringing shouldn't be expected to advocate the same things that Johnson does. We have to remember that Ron Paul was successful at getting the "message" out because he was the most legitimate-appearing person preaching it, considering his demeanor, his age, and his political experience. He isn't 100% perfect (not that I expect anyone to be), but Gary Johnson is closer to that perfection than RP is.

I haven't seen any evidence of Johnson being contrary to Paul's views on Constitutionalism. But as far as abortion goes, Gary Johnson is on the winning side of the argument here. Ron Paul's message is inconsistent with his severe hatred for abortion, as well as his "illegal immigration" issue. If government exists to protect individual rights, as he claims, then it is fallacious to assert that that same government should not allow somebody, who doesn't pose a threat to the rights of others that live there, to enter. Just as it is fallacious to assert that natural rights extend to non-human entities just because they happen to be growing inside of a human. Humans are defined by their rational faculties (READ: not to be confused with rationalism) and unborn children, except for those very far along pregnancy, simply don't possess those faculties. To suggest they have rights is like suggesting a cow or a monkey has rights. They don't, and neither, for the most part, do the unborn.

 

[G-Wohl]

You have NO idea how long I have been fighting for liberty, first of all. I was over at the DP in the previous election, not here. And to accuse me of being merely an armchair quarterback this time shows me you have no clue what you are talking about.

You are the one being divisive by trying to get people to support your candidate over Ron Paul.

The appeal to authority here is not helping you make your case. Neither does the fact that you just lied about a very honest, kind, and friend of liberty.

 

[sailingaway]

That's a pretty ridiculous and generalized statement. The man has never said anything of the sort.

I will once again remind you, before Ron announced he was running he was asked who he would support as president in 2012. He said, without hesitation, Gary Johnson. If GJ is good enough for the doctor, he's good enough for me.

It's becoming absurd the lengths people will go to discredit an individual who has always stood by liberty. As a governor, his record is flawless. It wouldn't matter to me if it was a different person with the same record....people here need to stop trying to thwart other great, liberty candidates.

As someone who has fought for liberty far longer than you, and with you simply being an armchair quarterback for this election cycle (how come you weren't fighting in 08?) I am disheartened to see how this liberty movement we've been fighting decades for has been nearly co-opted. Yes, we've always loved Ron and what he's done but we've always supported those that supported liberty. GJ is one of those people, and you're trying to divide us and make it about a person.

How you're acting and what you're promoting is incredibly divisive to what we've been trying to accomplish for years and years now. It needs to stop.

No he didn't. He was asked whether he would support GJ and he said he didn't know who else he would support but he couldn't really at that point.

 

[atomicsink]

To me Paul has seemed to be more of a paleo-conservative and Johnson more of a libertarian. Paul's views on immigration and abortion back that up. Both philosophies are fine with me, we should try to have a big liberty tent if we hope to have any permanent role in political power.