Gary Johnson Why Gary Johnson is not running for U.S Senate in New Mexico

[qh4dotcom]

GJ came down to an event in Fort Lauderdale last Wednesday sponsored by the Libertarian Party of Broward County. About 70 people showed up and he took questions...so I asked him if he had considered running for US Senate in his home state of New Mexico where he would have a good chance of being elected. He responded that he never considered it because he does not agree with the 17th amendment nor he wants people to expect him to bring back earmarks to New Mexico.

 

[giovannile07]

He also stated in an article forgot how many months ago, but he was saying he didn't want to be a senator he wanted to be president.

 

[idiom]

He also stated in an article forgot how many months ago, but he was saying he didn't want to be a senator he wanted to be president.

If you have a source for that, that is the best reason not to vote for him.

 

[giovannile07]

If you have a source for that, that is the best reason not to vote for him.

Alright, I found the source, seems as though I distorted his wording a bit, so sorry about that, but here's the thread.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...s-his-campaign-is-dying-hits-Paul-on-earmarks

 

[Captain America]

I would of answered the same way. I will vote for any classical liberal. Paul, Johnson, Jim Rogers, Judge N. Why are we letting them steal?

 

[BrooklynZoo]

When I discussed it with him (Johnson) at CPAC last year, he essentially said that it didn't make sense to him to run for Senate because he had executive experience, not legislative and that's the direction he saw himself going in. He saw President as being the next logical step to effect change after his run as Governor.

 

[tttppp]

Who cares? Senators don't do anything. Nothing will get done with him as a Senator because there are way more people who oppose him. It will just be like Ron Paul in Congress. Ron Paul has proposed many positive pieces of legislation which all go nowhere.

 

[matt0611]

Who cares? Senators don't do anything. Nothing will get done with him as a Senator because there are way more people who oppose him. It will just be like Ron Paul in Congress. Ron Paul has proposed many positive pieces of legislation which all go nowhere.

Huh?

So you want to just forfeit the congress and senate? Even if you got Gary Johnson or Ron Paul as a President you couldn't do much with the people in congress now.

Senators do A LOT. These are the people who are in charge of writing and passing the bills that the president signs you know? We need to get as many Ron Paul's in the congress and senate as possible.

 

[Gravik]

I personally think he should run for senate. Then he can get his name out there. Right now, he doesn't have near enough name recognition. Everytime I tried to talk with people about Johnson, they're like "Who is Gary Johnson?"

He's a good man and has good ideas, but he just doesn't have enough exposure yet. He's 20 years younger than Ron, so he has plenty of time on his hands. Heck, Johnson is younger than any of the candidates running.

 

[tttppp]

Huh?

So you want to just forfeit the congress and senate? Even if you got Gary Johnson or Ron Paul as a President you couldn't do much with the people in congress now.

Senators do A LOT. These are the people who are in charge of writing and passing the bills that the president signs you know? We need to get as many Ron Paul's in the congress and senate as possible.

If you got 20-30 decent Senators elected, maybe that would do something. But one guy in the Senate isn't going to do much.

Being a Governor is a lot more responsibility than a Senator with no accountability. Taking a Senator job is a clear step down. The logical step for a successful governor is to run for president, like he is doing.

And yes I would like to forfeit the congress and senate. Just eliminate them and hold the president accountable for everything. No more of this bs where everyone just blames each other for everything.

 

[libertybrewcity]

That is the worst answer I've ever heard. Because he doesn't believe in earmarks?

 

[bluesc]

GJ came down to an event in Fort Lauderdale last Wednesday sponsored by the Libertarian Party of Broward County. About 70 people showed up and he took questions...so I asked him if he had considered running for US Senate in his home state of New Mexico where he would have a good chance of being elected. He responded that he never considered it because he does not agree with the 17th amendment nor he wants people to expect him to bring back earmarks to New Mexico.

That is an awful excuse.

 

[giovannile07]

If you got 20-30 decent Senators elected, maybe that would do something. But one guy in the Senate isn't going to do much.

Being a Governor is a lot more responsibility than a Senator with no accountability. Taking a Senator job is a clear step down. The logical step for a successful governor is to run for president, like he is doing.

And yes I would like to forfeit the congress and senate. Just eliminate them and hold the president accountable for everything. No more of this bs where everyone just blames each other for everything.

What do you mean by eliminate them?

 

[bluesc]

If you got 20-30 decent Senators elected, maybe that would do something. But one guy in the Senate isn't going to do much.

Being a Governor is a lot more responsibility than a Senator with no accountability. Taking a Senator job is a clear step down. The logical step for a successful governor is to run for president, like he is doing.

And yes I would like to forfeit the congress and senate. Just eliminate them and hold the president accountable for everything. No more of this bs where everyone just blames each other for everything.

Running for President when you have zero chance of winning is a step down.

He should work at the Libertarian party convention to elect a competent chairman. Then completely ignore the Presidential race and focus on a single state in which you can elect true Libertarians to the state house and senate. NH, New Mexico, Nevada. Gain the majority in that state then go for the governorship. Once you have control of the state, do something useful with it.

That, or spend your entire budget gaining ballot access in all 50 states.

And the Libertarian party wonders why it has no success.

 

[tttppp]

What do you mean by eliminate them?

Eliminate the congress and senate.

 

[tttppp]

Running for President when you have zero chance of winning is a step down.

He should work at the Libertarian party convention to elect a competent chairman. Then completely ignore the Presidential race and focus on a single state in which you can elect true Libertarians to the state house and senate. NH, New Mexico, Nevada. Gain the majority in that state then go for the governorship. Once you have control of the state, do something useful with it.

That, or spend your entire budget gaining ballot access in all 50 states.

And the Libertarian party wonders why it has no success.

If he was able to get into the republican debates he would have had a decent chance. In the debates he was in, he was clearly the second best candidate. If a scumbag like Santorum can have success, there is no reason Johnson can't

 

[bluesc]

Eliminate the congress and senate.

This man has the answer. Heil Obama!

 

[bluesc]

If he was able to get into the republican debates he would have had a decent chance. In the debates he was in, he was clearly the second best candidate. If a scumbag like Santorum can have success, there is no reason Johnson can't

He can't have success because he is running third party.

 

[tttppp]

He can't have success because he is running third party.

He's only running third party because they wouldn't let him in the republican debates. I don't think there is anything wrong with what he is doing. The only potential negative I see is that Ron Paul may be taking away some of his support. Although it could be a positive once Ron Paul retires.

He probably won't win this year, but IF he can get into the debates he can build his support for the next time and build off of that.

 

[bluesc]

He's only running third party because they wouldn't let him in the republican debates. I don't think there is anything wrong with what he is doing. The only potential negative I see is that Ron Paul may be taking away some of his support. Although it could be a positive once Ron Paul retires.

He probably won't win this year, but IF he can get into the debates he can build his support for the next time and build off of that.

He would have had 1% in Iowa, 1% in NH and gone third party anyway.

Paul is not taking support from Johnson. You have it backwards. Paul is the one people support. Johnson is a token vote of protest. Paul leads a movement.

You're clearly a Jonhsonbot.