Sanford, Johnson, Ventura, or other?

[Peace&Freedom]

I agree 100%.

To be brutally honest...

Johnson - He was governor too long ago for anyone to recognize him
Ventura - Too many people view him as a nut and don't take him seriously
Sanford - Sanford is our best candidate (unless paul runs again)

Sanford/Paul ticket would be incredible.

We have to unite our cause!!!

We either have to pick Johnson or Sanford. We can not be divided.

Excluding the most popular and well-known choice (Ventura), while playing up the worst of the three (pro-war, McCain-and-Bilderberg supporting Sanford) is NOT the way to unify us. Sounds more like the way to sabatoge us.

 

[Captain America]

Paul/Schiff

 

[Lucille]

Sanford-Johnson with Paul as Treasury Secretary.

 

[Call Me V]

Excluding the most popular and well-known choice (Ventura), while playing up the worst of the three (pro-war, McCain-and-Bilderberg supporting Sanford) is NOT the way to unify us. Sounds more like the way to sabatoge us.

Ventura = Fail

He is not a viable candidate.

 

[Call Me V]

Sanford-Johnson with Paul as Treasury Secretary.

I think i'd have a heart attack of joy.

 

[Peace&Freedom]

Sanford-Johnson with Paul as Treasury Secretary.

A President-elect Sanford would probably shock us the same way Obama has shocked his liberal/pro-change supporters by appointing the sameo CFR-approved set of insiders, with no Paulites. How many people in Sanford's current adminstration can be reasonably called part of the liberty movement? i say zero. Sanford = fail.

 

[gaazn]

The RP supporters are already splitting between Sanford and Johnson. Is it a regional split or just preference? I like Sanford more because I don't know who Johnson is because he is in the west. He was not supported initially by the GOP establishment in his run for Congress or Governor, and after becoming Congressman and Governor, he had to battle his own party.

 

[Call Me V]

A President-elect Sanford would probably shock us the same way Obama has shocked his liberal/pro-change supporters by appointing the sameo CFR-approved set of insiders, with no Paulites. How many people in Sanford's current adminstration can be reasonably called part of the liberty movement? i say zero. Sanford = fail.

Well I guess it's just a matter of

A. Who you like
B. Who actually has a chance of winning

 

[Nathan Hale]

Wow some posts in this thread certainly sound like the typical politician Republicans we've had for a long time--"Yeah there are guys like Johnson that better represent our views, but we have to go with Sanford because he's electable!"

Fucking pitiful.

it's not fucking pitiful to choose a candidate that stands a chance of winning. Electability is a viable concern. I believe that Johnson is electable, that's why I voted for him. He needs to work on name recognition, but my support for him is based largely on his electability. Remember, this election won't be decided by we the few, dedicated activists, it will be decided by the people at large - which is why electability is such a major, reasonable concern.

 

[Nathan Hale]

Excluding the most popular and well-known choice (Ventura), while playing up the worst of the three (pro-war, McCain-and-Bilderberg supporting Sanford) is NOT the way to unify us. Sounds more like the way to sabatoge us.

Ventura is not the best choice here. C'mon now. We've already clashed over this, but Ventura carries the shackles of 9/11 trutherism, which effectively destroys any chance he has of winning the presidency.

 

[Nathan Hale]

Are we voting for who we want or who we think has the best shot?

I think we're voting for who will be the best candidate. Now assuming that we're all thinking strategically, that decision involves weighing and balancing both factors you mention above.

 

[Nathan Hale]

Paul/Schiff

Schiff needs to run for a lesser office - VP requires at least some political experience. And Paul is too old. It's sad but true.

 

[johnrocks]

My "long shot" pick is Gary Johnson but I like what I've see with Sanford and so far could support him.

 

[Peace&Freedom]

Ventura is not the best choice here. C'mon now. We've already clashed over this, but Ventura carries the shackles of 9/11 trutherism, which effectively destroys any chance he has of winning the presidency.

You come on now. You've imperiously decreed Ventura unelectable without a drop of proof that his mentioning 9/11 makes him not viable. I've just pointed out that seems to be merely a preoccupation on your part, not the demonstrated view of voters. YOU have a problem with the issue, therefore, of course, you think most everybody else must have a problem. BTW, how are you doing on those 250+ documented 9/11 truth issues I linked you to?

Without question, Ventura is a more interesting speaker, and is more well known nationally than both Sanford or Johnson put together. There is zero evidence so far that Johnson will catch fire, and zero evidence that Sanford is even part of the liberty movement when push comes to shove (again, who exactly are the liberty people in his current administration?). It has yet to be demonstrated how Johnson or Sanford will fare better given the current GOP climate, so I fail to see where any of this dedicated Jesse-baiting is justified.

 

[JoshLowry]

Well I guess it's just a matter of

A. Who you like
B. Who actually has a chance of winning

I'm sure glad I didn't support Romney or McCain because they had a "chance of winning."

Sanford is a trojan horse in my opinion.

Johnson seems to be much more on the right track. I don't care if he has zero name recognition. We changed that once before.

 

[Call Me V]

I'm sure glad I didn't support Romney or McCain because they had a "chance of winning."

Sanford is a trojan horse in my opinion.

Johnson seems to be much more on the right track. I don't care if he has zero name recognition. We changed that once before.

I'd rather have Romney than Obama.

 

[Young Paleocon]

The fact that Ventura is a truther makes him nonviable plain and simple.

 

[ClockwiseSpark]

My "long shot" pick is Gary Johnson but I like what I've see with Sanford and so far could support him.

Johnson is my "long shot" pick as well. Sadly, miracles aside, I will not be supporting Sanford. I trust him about as far as I can throw my house.

The last thing we need is another Reagan.

 

[AJ Antimony]

The fact that Ventura is a truther makes him nonviable plain and simple.

Really? Wanna bet on that?

Let me remind you of a MN poll taken months ago for MN Senate... This was when Jesse Ventura was considering running for the seat.

As an undeclared, Independent, and a "truther," he polled 24% state wide. I'd image if he decided to run, he would have gone up to 30~%.

Sounds viable to me. How did third party candidates do in 2008 again? Anything close to that? Didn't think so.

 

[Young Paleocon]

I'm not saying that this is solely about Ventura, but if our movement gets fully behind a truther for President we will be forever tainted as the truther movement. This is the perception we will give off, and any seriousness original bestowed on us will be relinquished.