Gary Johnson Video: Elect One of Our Own. One Time.

[Nathan Hale]

Also, you're right, liberty candidates are discussed here all the time. Just not when they're in direct competition with the man we're supporting.

That's a horseshit complaint. No credible strategist would say that Ron Paul is still running to be President, so don't even try to sell that they're in direct competition.

And even if Ron drops out, the presidency is seen as a much bigger office that people are less willing to compromise on like say the house or senate candidates. Gary Johnson has too many compromising positions or too little understanding of his *own* positions for people to take him seriously.

*in your opinion*. Don't assume that you can judge for this entire board.

 

[Wren]

Like me? Assumptions are your business, and business is good.

I'm only using assumptions to attack your own. If you refer to Paul supporters as a cult, then you're targeting everyone here, not just a minority.

I'm here because I trust Ron Paul too - he's a great part of this movement.

I'm sure you trust him, but quit the lying please. You're here only to promote Johnson, that's pretty evident by now. As is rockandrollsouls and as was cheapseats.

That's a horseshit complaint. No credible strategist would say that Ron Paul is still running to be President, so don't even try to sell that they're in direct competition.

You're right, opinions are a wonderful thing. I ain't selling, that's just a mere fact whether you or the strategists agree with it or not. My opinion and yours are irrelevant as to whether he can win or not.

*in your opinion*. Don't assume that you can judge for this entire board.

No, I can't; I merely speak for myself. But Johnson speaks a lot more for himself, he doesn't need to say anymore.

 

[ronpaulhawaii]

So I provide you video proof that he's commuted sentences. He's granted pardons. It's still not good enough for you or anyone else here. I show you one, and you say "Show me more."

Yet prior to that information, you and others were claiming he's never pardoned a prisoner, never commuted a sentence, etc etc. You guys sure know how to change your tune right quick.

Show me prisoners of non-violent drug crimes he's turned away. You still haven't done so. Instead, you turn around and take the proof I've provided you and say "that wasn't a non-violent drug crime," when the governor clearly explains the commuting of the sentence was due in large part because it was to support a drug habit.

Since when has a politician's (self admitted "unofficial") claims in an interview during an election ever constituted proof? And your pardon example is ridiculous in context of this debate. He pardoned her crime of the theft of $1000 to support her drug addiction. (Sadly, I suspect calculated grandstanding in this case on GJ's part...)

Again, the issue at hand is his use of corporate prisons for overcrowding problems. Is that civil and just decision making?

Listen, long story short it's evident you have personal issues with GJ, but it's one thing to have your opinion and another to make baseless claims about someone's record to further your own opinion. I don't like Mitt Romney, but I'm not going to go around and make something up, like saying he eats children, just to tarnish his name further.

You must be out of your mind. About all you have done here is make stuff up about me, including the eats babies innuendo right above.

Considering Ron... [and] Jesse..., have come out in support of GJ

Really? Where? gotta link?

I'm pretty much done with you rrs. You obviously just wanna play with your strawmen.

So we're both guilty of lumping. I apologize.

The LP is a horrible party with a long history of bad choices. I was attracted to them when I first discovered my political identity, and I worked for years to try and bring them around to accepting they were an actual political party and not some debate society - you could imagine how I was treated for that. What excites me about them lately is that they're finally coming around to embracing a bigger tent and political action. But yes, for the longest time they were populated by tip-of-the-diamond minarchists, which made debate a rather rude affair.

I think the dichotomy you draw - that we either support Operation GOP or we support the Libertarian Party - is a false dichotomy. Voting Libertarian this year does not derail the Pauls' efforts in the GOP and in fact helps along the cause of liberty. After all, we had no problem supporting the few liberty candidates who ran on the Democrat ticket.

Hence why I remain "post partisan" and have no moral problem with using existing machinery to move the ball down the field. I'm seeing great success in Paul's leadership and am sticking with it.

Getting off the trail Paul has blazed to actively campaign for GJ does in fact slow progress of his strategy. That should be simple math. It also justifies the misinformed rank and file who see Paul as a Libertarian in an elephant suit...

I don't think I am drawing a dichotomy and quite frankly don't care what an individual does in the privacy of a voting booth/etc. Nor do I care what they write on Facebook/etc. The only place I am raising this is here, on RPFs, where GJ is an OPPOSING CANDIDATE (and has been since announcing) and where his shills have continually tried to siphon off Paul support for their lessor of evils candidate.

Again, I think Paul's strategy of retaking the GOP from the neo-cons is working, and I am strongly in support of the grassroots who are making the effort necessary for that strategy. IMO seeing a bunch of shilling for an opposing strategy going unchallenged on RPFs is demoralizing. So, I finally spoke up.

 

[Nathan Hale]

I'm only using assumptions to attack your own. If you refer to Paul supporters as a cult, then you're targeting everyone here, not just a minority.

I don't refer to Paul supporters as a cult. I consider cult-like the people who venerate Paul over the cause itself.

I'm sure you trust him, but quit the lying please. You're here only to promote Johnson, that's pretty evident by now. As is rockandrollsouls and as was cheapseats.

Join date: Jun 2007.

You're right, opinions are a wonderful thing. I ain't selling, that's just a mere fact whether you or the strategists agree with it or not. My opinion and yours are irrelevant as to whether he can win or not.

Hence the discussion about him. But don't begrudge that the discussion is happening, as it happened in 08 without such dramatic fanfare.

No, I can't; I merely speak for myself. But Johnson speaks a lot more for himself, he doesn't need to say anymore.

So long as you're aware...

 

[Nathan Hale]

Hence why I remain "post partisan" and have no moral problem with using existing machinery to move the ball down the field. I'm seeing great success in Paul's leadership and am sticking with it.

Here here! I *agree* with the Paul's strategy. It's an important arm of the liberty movement. But it should not be the totality of our strategy.

Getting off the trail Paul has blazed to actively campaign for GJ does in fact slow progress of his strategy. That should be simple math. It also justifies the misinformed rank and file who see Paul as a Libertarian in an elephant suit...

Saying it's simple math doesn't make it simple math. The rank and file already see Paul as a libertarian in an elephant suit. But his plan is viable in spite of this because now GOPers see libertarians as just as large a part of their party as centrists, social conservatives, and neocons. Rand, for instance, has entered the halls of GOPower despite such a label attached to his name.

I don't think I am drawing a dichotomy and quite frankly don't care what an individual does in the privacy of a voting booth/etc. Nor do I care what they write on Facebook/etc. The only place I am raising this is here, on RPFs, where GJ is an OPPOSING CANDIDATE (and has been since announcing) and where his shills have continually tried to siphon off Paul support for their lessor of evils candidate.

GJ is not a lesser evil candidate - if anything, the Paul GOP strategy is a lesser evil strategy, so don't even try to twist that around. And GJ is not an opposing candidate, he's a liberty candidate. He has spoken numerous times about demurring to Paul if he won, and he's only campaigning as hard as he is now because he knows that Paul isn't going to win. I've been writing on these boards since 2011 about how it was a good thing that there were two liberty voices in the primary, and how GJ has always ceded primacy to Paul. There is just a large contingent of Paul supporters who aren't here anymore for some pie in the sky convention battle. This same thing happened in 2008 (discussion of other liberty candidates after it became clear that Paul was out) and I don't recall such fervent black/white divide.

Again, I think Paul's strategy of retaking the GOP from the neo-cons is working, and I am strongly in support of the grassroots who are making the effort necessary for that strategy. IMO seeing a bunch of shilling for an opposing strategy going unchallenged on RPFs is demoralizing. So, I finally spoke up.

I disagree that the strategy cannot work hand in hand with Paul's strategy, especially since GJ is *on our side*. As I say numerous times, if you spoke to a libertarian back in 2004 and told him that in 2012 supporters of GJ and supporters of RP would be at each other's throats, he'd laugh you out of the room. GJ and RP go WAY back, as any of us who have been active libertarians before 2007 are aware.

 

[Wren]

I don't refer to Paul supporters as a cult. I consider cult-like the people who venerate Paul over the cause itself.

It isn't over the cause itself. It's about supporting someone consistant and who doesn't contradict himself. If this is a cult, then it's a cult of integrity. Johnson fanboys like yourself insist there's a cult of personality going on, thats why they will never get it. In fact, look in the mirror. No matter how stupid Johnson makes himself look, you will be on the frontline defending him. I am convinced that you are either on the payroll, or will just blindly follow anyone in the L party.

Join date: Jun 2007.

congratulations. typical forum dweller behavior and an irrelevant point. For the past year and a half youve done nothing here except to promote and do damage control for johnson even before RP ran for Potus. You even had the nerve to tell people to donate. I hope you're only getting minimum wage for this job, because you suck at it.

 

[Nathan Hale]

It isn't over the cause itself. It's about supporting someone consistant and who doesn't contradict himself. If this is a cult, then it's a cult of integrity. Johnson fanboys like yourself insist there's a cult of personality going on, thats why they will never get it. In fact, look in the mirror. No matter how stupid Johnson makes himself look, you will be on the frontline defending him. I am convinced that you are either on the payroll, or will just blindly follow anyone in the L party.

You're becoming unhinged, Wren. Put down the Kool Aid.

congratulations. typical forum dweller behavior and an irrelevant point. For the past year and a half youve done nothing here except to promote and do damage control for johnson even before RP ran for Potus. You even had the nerve to tell people to donate. I hope you're only getting minimum wage for this job, because you suck at it.

How dare you lead that paragraph full of trollisms by saying that I'm using "typical forum behavior"?

 

[Wren]

You're becoming unhinged, Wren. Put down the Kool Aid.

nice troll response. whats the pay like, nathan? Is Gj hiring spin doctors to post on Daily Paul too?

How dare you lead that paragraph full of trollisms by saying that I'm using "typical forum behavior"?

What are you trying to prove to me by posting your forum date? That you have a mighty e-penis? That is standard forum behavior, so the troll is in the mirror.

 

[Revolution9]

I don't refer to Paul supporters as a cult. I consider cult-like the people who venerate Paul over the cause itself.

I consider clowns who support GJ uninformed as in depth research shows him to be a Rockefeller shill.

Rev9

 

[Revolution9]

You're becoming unhinged, Wren. Put down the Kool Aid.



How dare you lead that paragraph full of trollisms by saying that I'm using "typical forum behavior"?

Yer full of it. Put down the frikkin' koolaid indeed. Yer the one voting for the "just another politician" Johnson. We are still backing Ron. Piss up a rope.

Rev9

 

[Revolution9]

Here here! I *agree* with the Paul's strategy. It's an important arm of the liberty movement. But it should not be the totality of our strategy.

Johnson is not a part of the Liberty train. He is riding coattails and had to be prompted to read stuff that 15 year olds interested in Ron have read. Are we gonna spend four years training this dumb ass about liberty issues in the extreme outside chance that Obama and Romney die and he gets shammed into office. The deal is that these LIBOR investigations could take down Romney and then RP is in the catbird seat. Someplace that GJ will never, ever be.

Rev9

 

[Indy Vidual]

+1776
The 1 minute spot is very good, and helps the movement.

 

[Travlyr]

Johnson is not a part of the Liberty train. He is riding coattails and had to be prompted to read stuff that 15 year olds interested in Ron have read. Are we gonna spend four years training this dumb ass about liberty issues in the extreme outside chance that Obama and Romney die and he gets shammed into office. The deal is that these LIBOR investigations could take down Romney and then RP is in the catbird seat. Someplace that GJ will never, ever be.

Rev9

For sure. Gary Johnson doesn't even understand Liberty. He should have read some Ron Paul before running for office.

 

[Indy Vidual]

• Can anyone find a single idea in the new GJ video which they do not agree with?*

*With perhaps one exception: "Rebuild America."

 

[TheTexan]

• Can anyone find a single idea in the new GJ video which they do not agree with?*

*With perhaps one exception: "Rebuild America."

GJ is a manipulative pandering liar. His one-liners are often great, but once you put his positions under a microscope you see its made out of plastic. Such as "I will abolish the IRS" but then in fine print it says "and replace it with a revenue neutral fair tax"

He thinks this would stimulate the economy. Hint: it wouldn't. Any revenue neutral tax changes are going to have a net zero effect on the long term economy. The only change this would make is I wouldn't have to fill out tax forms each year, which is great don't get me wrong, but isn't itself a goal worthy of my support when there are so much larger issues that need to be taken care of.

 

[rockandrollsouls]

1. You still haven't provided a solution to deal with the prison situation. Again, wishful thinking for mass applications for commuting of sentences and pardons is not viable. I'm not going to continually argue with you about this issue. We're clearly at odds and though I do not support prison expansion or the privatization of prisons, what do you do when you have overcrowding, you can't build a state prison because of legislature resistance, and you can't simply set a portion of the prison population free. What do you do?

2. Before Ron threw his hat in the ring, when asked who he would support for president in 2012 he said Gary Johnson. It's been posted on this forum!
I'm laying that to rest right now - "Everybody's been aware of it, even during the last campaign," says Paul, whom Johnson informed of his intentions in April 2008. "I don't remember when anybody didn't assume that he would run for president." Fortunately for Johnson, Paul, while not ruling out a second act, has shown little appetite for one. ("I have made no plans," he told me.) And if he doesn't run, he'll "most likely" throw his weight behind Johnson. "I can't imagine endorsing anybody else," he says. The path, then, looks clear for Gary Johnson to become the Ron Paul of 2012[.]" Source - http://reason.com/blog/2010/11/04/ron-paul-on-gary-johnson-i-can

"Asked to name other potential presidential candidates he could support, Paul replied, “I guess the best one would be Johnson from New Mexico — Gary Johnson.”
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2010/06/21/r...rtarian-minded-nominee-in-2012/#ixzz22oJhgJNw

Jesse: http://dailycaller.com/2012/06/14/jesse-ventura-wants-you-to-vote-for-gary-johnson-cnn-edits-it-out/
Napolitano: http://www.dailypaul.com/244579/judge-andrew-napolitano-praises-gary-johnson

There's all the links you need. You have your "strawmen" to refute it?

And this is where our fundamental disagreement is - this is a Ron Paul movement for you. I'll tell you, in the 70s and early 80s when I was a part of this freedom movement, it wasn't the Ron Paul movement. Ron Paul was one of the freedom candidates we ended up supporting. We supported many liberty candidates, including GJ in the 90s. That is why freedom is making a comeback now. Not because Ron suddenly threw his hat into the ring in 08. Because we built up this movement for years and years. Blocking other liberty candidates is what will TRULY slow the progress of this movement many of us have been working in for DECADES.

Just as the neocons hijacked the Republican party, the new faces are hijacking the freedom movement. As I've continually stated, the success of this movement pivots on one thing - the degree to which we unite and support all liberty candidates. Ron is doing it, throwing support behind FAR less candidates such as Ted Cruz. Yet the same strategy Ron has signed onto is one you've decried. Many of us will build coalitions. You can remain on the board and debate the purity of all candidates that want to strip back government, if only because it doesn't go "far enough" for you. In the meanwhile, we'll blaze the trail further.

Since when has a politician's (self admitted "unofficial") claims in an interview during an election ever constituted proof? And your pardon example is ridiculous in context of this debate. He pardoned her crime of the theft of $1000 to support her drug addiction. (Sadly, I suspect calculated grandstanding in this case on GJ's part...)

Again, the issue at hand is his use of corporate prisons for overcrowding problems. Is that civil and just decision making?



You must be out of your mind. About all you have done here is make stuff up about me, including the eats babies innuendo right above.



Really? Where? gotta link?

I'm pretty much done with you rrs. You obviously just wanna play with your strawmen.



Hence why I remain "post partisan" and have no moral problem with using existing machinery to move the ball down the field. I'm seeing great success in Paul's leadership and am sticking with it.

Getting off the trail Paul has blazed to actively campaign for GJ does in fact slow progress of his strategy. That should be simple math. It also justifies the misinformed rank and file who see Paul as a Libertarian in an elephant suit...

I don't think I am drawing a dichotomy and quite frankly don't care what an individual does in the privacy of a voting booth/etc. Nor do I care what they write on Facebook/etc. The only place I am raising this is here, on RPFs, where GJ is an OPPOSING CANDIDATE (and has been since announcing) and where his shills have continually tried to siphon off Paul support for their lessor of evils candidate.

Again, I think Paul's strategy of retaking the GOP from the neo-cons is working, and I am strongly in support of the grassroots who are making the effort necessary for that strategy. IMO seeing a bunch of shilling for an opposing strategy going unchallenged on RPFs is demoralizing. So, I finally spoke up.

 

[rockandrollsouls]

The common libertarian problem. If it doesn't go far enough, it isn't good enough. Hence, instead of stripping back government one step at a time, you wait decades for the "perfect position." What happens? Bigger government over the time of that wait, because you're too self righteous to vote for a guy that has steps in the right direction towards the ultimate goal.

It's like saying to a child "I can only afford this gift for this Christmas, but I can get you the other gift next Christmas." Your response "No, I don't want either gift then." Doesn't make ANY sense.

GJ is a manipulative pandering liar. His one-liners are often great, but once you put his positions under a microscope you see its made out of plastic. Such as "I will abolish the IRS" but then in fine print it says "and replace it with a revenue neutral fair tax"

He thinks this would stimulate the economy. Hint: it wouldn't. Any revenue neutral tax changes are going to have a net zero effect on the long term economy. The only change this would make is I wouldn't have to fill out tax forms each year, which is great don't get me wrong, but isn't itself a goal worthy of my support when there are so much larger issues that need to be taken care of.

 

[Nathan Hale]

nice troll response. whats the pay like, nathan? Is Gj hiring spin doctors to post on Daily Paul too?

Boy, you're living proof of the saying "when you point a finger, you point three fingers back at yourself".

What are you trying to prove to me by posting your forum date? That you have a mighty e-penis? That is standard forum behavior, so the troll is in the mirror.

You'll do anything to duck the truth - if you can't gather why I posted my join date (post #44 for anybody else who happens to be reading this) then I really don't care to explain myself. As I said in the other thread, defending myself against your bitter, petty anger is pretty much a total waste of my time.

 

[rockandrollsouls]

The kid just got out of college. Don't go too hard on him

Boy, you're living proof of the saying "when you point a finger, you point three fingers back at yourself".



You'll do anything to duck the truth - if you can't gather why I posted my join date (post #44 for anybody else who happens to be reading this) then I really don't care to explain myself. As I said in the other thread, defending myself against your bitter, petty anger is pretty much a total waste of my time.

 

[Wren]

Boy, you're living proof of the saying "when you point a finger, you point three fingers back at yourself".

again, look in the mirror.

You'll do anything to duck the truth - if you can't gather why I posted my join date (post #44 for anybody else who happens to be reading this) then I really don't care to explain myself. As I said in the other thread, defending myself against your bitter, petty anger is pretty much a total waste of my time.

Think I cant see your join date under your username? If you read my previous post you would know why it was irrelevant to post. You are also wasting my time by being a paid shill that does nothing here except be a spin doctor for GJ. These are Ron Paul forums. Go play with your johnson somewhere else.