Gary Johnson: 'The Next Ron Paul' or a Whole Lot More? (huffpo)

[muzzled dogg]

Matt Simon
Posted: January 13, 2011 11:48 AM

Gary Johnson: 'The Next Ron Paul' or a Whole Lot More?

Only a year or so remains until the 2011 New Hampshire primary, and for those of us who live in the Granite State, campaign season is already beginning and potential candidates are already jockeying for position.

At this point, it does not seem likely that President Obama will face a serious challenge from within his own party. Thus, it appears that the candidates swarming New Hampshire in 2011 will all be running as Republicans. If every candidate who's expected to run does so, Republican primary voters will have a deep and ideologically diverse field of candidates from which to choose.

We might recall that in 2007 and early 2008, there was only the very beginning of a visible ideological split in the GOP - a split which has since grown into a fully-developed schism pitting "tea partiers" and other limited government advocates against the establishment on many issues. With the notable exception of Ron Paul, the 2008 GOP primary candidates mostly continued to preach the Bush-Cheney era party line with little apparent regard for the long-term sustainability of U.S. foreign and domestic policies. Despite his not-always-hopeful-sounding campaign rhetoric, Paul surprised mainstream observers with the level of support and enthusiasm his campaign was able to attract. We should also thank him for contributing some of the only memorable, thought-provoking moments of the GOP debates.

It's true that Paul only received about 9% of overall votes cast nationwide, but his impact on the race was undeniable. He fulfilled the role of a modern-day Socrates within the GOP, forcing Republican voters to reconsider the wisdom and the very conservative-ness of positions most had previously accepted without question: blanket support for the foreign policy decisions that followed the 9/11 tragedy, for the Federal Reserve System, the "War on Drugs," the PATRIOT ACT, etc.

Every Republican and every American benefits when questions like these are thoughtfully raised in an open forum, but rather than thanking Paul, the establishment-friendly candidates took turns attacking him for his disloyalty to conventional party wisdom. Nobody forced Paul to drink hemlock, but finally, just days before the primary, Fox News did resort to outright censorship when it refused to allow Paul to participate in the final televised debate. This was a dark moment in the history of U.S. media. As I observed in a blog published the day of the primary (Jan. 6, 2008), "The decision to exclude Paul was so indefensible, following his record-breaking fundraising efforts and a double-digit result in Iowa, that the New Hampshire GOP withdrew as a partner in the forum."

The New Hampshire GOP may have been more willing than Fox News to tolerate Ron Paul as a candidate, but Paul's 8% finish was still an enormous disappointment to the hundreds of activists who had swarmed to the "Live Free or Die" state to campaign for the candidate they admired.

However, Paul's influence increased dramatically after he was eliminated as a candidate for the 2008 nomination. He kick-started the movement that came to be known as the Tea Party, and after the housing bubble burst in 2008 (a catastrophe Paul and other "Austrian school" economists had been virtually alone in predicting), many of his views quickly ascended to a position of relevance within mainstream discourse and even within the Republican Party. Once completely ignored by the media, Paul suddenly became a frequent guest on cable news shows, and two years later, his son Rand pulled off two enormous election upsets (beating an establishment Republican in the primary and an establishment Democrat in the general) to become a U.S. Senator.

Debates between the 2008 candidates demonstrated that the Republican Party establishment had not yet moved on from the Bush-Cheney era of ideology, strategy, and rhetoric, but today, only a few years later, much appears to have changed. As one piece of evidence proving that fact, we need only look to the friendly reception former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson received on his recent trip to New Hampshire.

Johnson has been touring the country and doing media appearances as honorary chairman of his "Our America Initiative," a platform which allows him to raise money and promote his ideas. Many expect he will soon announce his candidacy for the Republican presidential nomination.

Journalists at New Republic, Politico, and elsewhere have already wondered aloud if Johnson might become "the next Ron Paul," but for now he seems to be focused on just being Gary Johnson, and this strategy already appears to be paying dividends in New Hampshire. Johnson recently spent a week in the Granite State and was treated very respectfully by both the mainstream media and members of the Republican establishment.

A Jan. 6 editorial in The Concord Monitor, one of New Hampshire's most influential newspapers, exemplified the response Johnson has been getting. After meeting with Johnson, the Monitor described him as "a thoughtful politician with serious, if provocative, policy proposals" and concluded by saying "We would be pleased to learn that he anted up his $1,000 to run in the 2012 New Hampshire primary.

Like Paul, whose 2008 candidacy he endorsed, Johnson believes the United States is broke and in danger of experiencing an unprecedented economic meltdown. He advocates serious cuts to the federal budget ("I want to balance the budget tomorrow," he says), including the military budget, and he calls for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan. Johnson also advocates for the legalization and regulation of marijuana. Are Republicans in New Hampshire responding well to these not-traditionally-Republican messages?

The answer, according to Johnson's lone New Hampshire staff member, is "so far, so good." Manchester resident Brinck Slattery took his first job in politics as a field coordinator for Paul's campaign in 2007, and he accepted a job with Johnson's organization in November of 2010.

"People have been responding very well to Governor Johnson and showing him a lot of respect," Slattery observed. "It certainly appears that New Hampshire GOP voters are ready to shake their party up a bit and consider some fresh, thoughtful policy proposals."

Whereas Paul was never embraced by mainstream Republican groups and his candidacy was only endorsed by three state legislators, Johnson was guest of honor last week at the New Hampshire Young Republicans' Christmas Party, and a weekday luncheon across the street from the New Hampshire state house drew no fewer than 18 state representatives interested in speaking with Johnson.

It's too early to make any serious predictions about Johnson's chances in 2012, but these early indications suggest he could in fact become more than just "the next Ron Paul." If his ideas continue to resonate with the voters he meets, it's easy to imagine he could surprise and become a serious contender for the GOP nomination.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/matt-simon/gary-johnson-the-next-ron_b_808570.html

[klamath]

I see the Huff post has jumped on the idea of splitting RP's base.

[Churchill2004]

I see the Huff post has jumped on the idea of splitting RP's base.

"Ron Paul's base" is not supposed to be about Ron Paul, as the good doc himself has always been the first to point out.

[klamath]

"Ron Paul's base" is not supposed to be about Ron Paul, as the good doc himself has always been the first to point out.
What ever. I just hope it are the violent RP supporters the desert for GJ.

[sailingaway]

Easy answer: 'No.'

[Churchill2004]

What ever. I just hope it are the violent RP supporters the desert for GJ.

Well, that's thoroughly despicable of you.

[Kotin]

Or a whole lot less..

[Mr.Fish]

What ever. I just hope it are the violent RP supporters the desert for GJ.

Regardless of views, solidarity is the key to getting the good doctor to the White House. Violent or not, RP is needed in the White House to finally initiate a real "change we can believe in", and so any vote for Dr. Paul is a welcome one.

[speciallyblend]

Paul/Johnson Ticket sounds very good to me!!!!! they couldn't play the age issue since gary would be an excellent vp. The Platform would sell to voters!! If enough liberty republican delegates come out and support both these candidates. We could basically elect a Paul/Johnson 2012 Bring Our Troops Home Ticket in the GOP!!

I would trust gary enough not to knock off the prez for power!!

[Vessol]

Is it me, or did I just read an article from HuffPost that was positive about RP, did not fake the numbers of voters he obtained, and actually admits that Austrian economists were right in their predition of the collapse of the housing bubble?

WTF!?

As for Johnson..I'd wholly support a Paul/Johnson ticket. Honestly the more I read about Johnson, he seems like a generally close candidate to Ron Paul's platform.

[klamath]

Regardless of views, solidarity is the key to getting the good doctor to the White House. Violent or not, RP is needed in the White House to finally initiate a real "change we can believe in", and so any vote for Dr. Paul is a welcome one.
Maybe it is but if the RP supporters themselves are imbracing the split then I hope it are the violent ones that go. There is a reason Libertarians are the .5 percent party and it is reinforced every day around here.

[sailingaway]

I think GJ would cannibalize Ron's support just as Palin and Huckabee cannibalize eachother's support in polls. This isn't rocket science. People have a right to prefer whom they like, but I would expect Ron Paul forums to support Ron Paul, and to not push a competitor for an election, during the election. A vote GJ gets is one Ron doesn't get, and particularly with them aiming for the same events like CPAC, I think we need to see that promoting GJ in the election context is just like promoting Huck or Palin or any other competitor. Not that we have to cut them down, by any means, but we wouldn't showcase them, either.

Personally, I think GJ is trying to use Ron to springboard his own campaign, which is what you would logically expect, but isn't in Ron's best interest with Ron runnning for President against Gary, nor in our best interest assuming we want Ron to show his best in polls and straw poll votes. Note Gary Johnson did NOT donate to Rand, for example, in his campaign, the support seems pretty one sided, with Ron putting Gary up at Rally for the Republic, saying many nice and NOT 'qualified' things about GJ in the media (GJ's praise of Ron seems always to be qualified with a 'but' designed to present himself as better), and showcasing GJ at the LAST CPAC in C4L forums at CPAC (something GJ currently is using to show his ties to CPAC while not mentioning Ron, at all, just other speakers Ron brought in, to bolster GJ's status.)

I hate politics, in the office cutthroat sense, and that is what I think I see here, on GJs side. Ron has gone the extra mile for him, on Ron's side.

[SilentBull]

Having both Ron and Gary participate in the debates would be very good thing, even if you don't agree with some of the things that Gary might have said, which in my opinion, he might not even believe. Remember, even Rand sounded like a neo-con sometimes, but the smart ones like me knew he was just playing politics.

We need more than one person talking about what the role of government should be. If Ron Paul is the only one there, they can treat him as the crazy one again. Think strategy guys! Johnson and Paul in the debates is an awesome thing!

[sailingaway]

Having both Ron and Gary participate in the debates would be very good thing, even if you don't agree with some of the things that Gary might have said, which in my opinion, he might not even believe. Remember, even Rand sounded like a neo-con sometimes, but the smart ones like me knew he was just playing politics.

We need more than one person talking about what the role of government should be. If Ron Paul is the only one there, they can treat him as the crazy one again. Think strategy guys! Johnson and Paul in the debates is an awesome thing!

I disagree with this being a benefit to Ron, I think it is disingenuous. However, I'm not suggesting trying to maneuver Gary out of the debates, just not promote him, since he is a competitor. If he were running for Senator or Governor it would be different. Meanwhile, many people have been waiting and keeping organizations open so Ron's organization would be there for him when he needs it -- not be there for someone running against him, as I see it.

[jtstellar]

charismatic* leaders are things of the past.. the type of persons we need are humble ones who aren't afraid of devoting efforts on the sideline without being overly obsessed to take the center stage.. somebody like ron or dozens of other liberty activists. unless johnson was encouraged by rp to split votes, his ambition is perhaps a weakness. honest libertarians work in the private sector and raise awareness in their own ways, until called upon. what's johnson been doing? after a public office, he immediately seeks after the next?

[Matt Collins]

I think GJ would cannibalize Ron's support just as Palin and Huckabee cannibalize eachother's support in polls. This isn't rocket science. People have a right to prefer whom they like, but I would expect Ron Paul forums to support Ron Paul, and to not push a competitor for an election, during the election. A vote GJ gets is one Ron doesn't get, and particularly with them aiming for the same events like CPAC, I think we need to see that promoting GJ in the election context is just like promoting Huck or Palin or any other competitor. Not that we have to cut them down, by any means, but we wouldn't showcase them, either.EXACTLY.

However though, I would say that if GJ is a more acceptable version of Ron to the mainstreamers, he might pick up some people who are looking for something like Ron, without actually going to Ron. In otherwords GJ might be the "safe" libertarian candidate.


In other words, middle part of last century, instead of kids listening to what was called "race music" they would listen to "Pat Boone" doing covers of "race music". It was "safer". Pat Boone tried to sterilize and bring "race music" to the white masses. Coming from Pat Boone it was easier for many of them to accept it instead of listening to someone like Little Richard. Instead of kids my age first listening to the Sex Pistols, they would instead listen to GreenDay because it was a 'safer' kind of punk.

The point being that a lot of GOPers might not ever want to come over to Ron, but if a safer more "sterile" individual who espoused Ron's views but just in a different approach existed, they might pick up voters that would've never have gone to Ron, but instead to someone like Palin or Huck.

Rand sort of did this in KY. Remember how many talking head conservatives who hated Ron in 2008 absolutely loved Rand? Rand was a bit more mainstreamed.

As long as GJ doesn't erode support from Ron there is a good possibility that he might pick up people from other candidates and move them more into the liberty camp because he is a lot more "acceptable" in their minds than Ron is.

[SilentBull]

EXACTLY.

However though, I would say that if GJ is a more acceptable version of Ron to the mainstreamers, he might pick up some people who are looking for something like Ron, without actually going to Ron. In otherwords GJ might be the "safe" libertarian candidate.


In other words, middle part of last century, instead of kids listening to what was called "race music" they would listen to "Pat Boone" doing covers of "race music". It was "safer". Pat Boone tried to sterilize and bring "race music" to the white masses. Coming from Pat Boone it was easier for many of them to accept it instead of listening to someone like Little Richard. Instead of kids my age first listening to the Sex Pistols, they would instead listen to GreenDay because it was a 'safer' kind of punk.

The point being that a lot of GOPers might not ever want to come over to Ron, but if a safer more "sterile" individual who espoused Ron's views but just in a different approach existed, they might pick up voters that would've never have gone to Ron, but instead to someone like Palin or Huck.

Rand sort of did this in KY. Remember how many talking head conservatives who hated Ron in 2008 absolutely loved Rand? Rand was a bit more mainstreamed.

As long as GJ doesn't erode support from Ron there is a good possibility that he might pick up people from other candidates and move them more into the liberty camp because he is a lot more "acceptable" in their minds than Ron is.

Excellent point!

[klamath]

EXACTLY.

However though, I would say that if GJ is a more acceptable version of Ron to the mainstreamers, he might pick up some people who are looking for something like Ron, without actually going to Ron. In otherwords GJ might be the "safe" libertarian candidate.


In other words, middle part of last century, instead of kids listening to what was called "race music" they would listen to "Pat Boone" doing covers of "race music". It was "safer". Pat Boone tried to sterilize and bring "race music" to the white masses. Coming from Pat Boone it was easier for many of them to accept it instead of listening to someone like Little Richard. Instead of kids my age first listening to the Sex Pistols, they would instead listen to GreenDay because it was a 'safer' kind of punk.

The point being that a lot of GOPers might not ever want to come over to Ron, but if a safer more "sterile" individual who espoused Ron's views but just in a different approach existed, they might pick up voters that would've never have gone to Ron, but instead to someone like Palin or Huck.

Rand sort of did this in KY. Remember how many talking head conservatives who hated Ron in 2008 absolutely loved Rand? Rand was a bit more mainstreamed.

As long as GJ doesn't erode support from Ron there is a good possibility that he might pick up people from other candidates and move them more into the liberty camp because he is a lot more "acceptable" in their minds than Ron is.
This is the worse myth out there that GJ would somehow become more acceptable to the republican electorate.
Pro abortion. Yeaw that is going to fly with the republican base.
Very current MJ user. Despite what many libertarians like to believe that is not going to fly with the GOP base. California the most MJ liberal state just voted down legalization. GJ is already typecast himself as the pot candidate and shows no tendancy to distance himself from that image.
Very many voters take into consideration politicians personal lives. GJ made a wreak of his. Rand and Kelly and their family is what sold a huge amount of Republicans on Rand. I can tell you Fred Thompson lost a huge chunk of the womens vote when women saw how young his wife was. That DOES NOT sell well with older married women.

Many many republicans will fight a war if they believe someone is directly threatening America but totally reject nation building and peace keeping missions (Humanitarian wars). To many republicans GJ has sided with the neoconservatives and against defending America as many republicans wrongly believe the Afganistan war is. When Rand made statements that people wrongly called neoconservative, they were really defend America statements. Rand did not say that we should get involved in humanitarian wars as GJ has suggested. Whether GJ is just saying these things to appeal to more mainstream or not I don't know but what he has done is alienate the strong defence conservatives in an attempt to appeal to the neoconservatives. This constant blurring of the lines between strong defence conservatives and neocons by libertarians will come back to bite.

GJ flat out has less main stream republican apeal than RP. GJ apeal is to left libertarians.

[pcosmar]

Huffpo endorsement,,,

Not exactly "warm and fuzzy".

[Elwar]

This is the worse myth out there that GJ would somehow become more acceptable to the republican electorate.
Pro abortion. Yeaw that is going to fly with the republican base.

I see this all the time as someone who follows GJ closely. People who are obviously not Ron Paul supporters saying "I like what this guy is saying". They've either not heard Ron Paul say the exact same things or just don't like Ron Paul for whatever attack articles they believed from 2008.

The key is to be ready to bring those folks into the Ron Paul camp once Johnson steps down. Otherwise they'll all just jump to Romney because he's another "fiscally conservative ex-governor".

[sailingaway]

EXACTLY.

However though, I would say that if GJ is a more acceptable version of Ron to the mainstreamers, he might pick up some people who are looking for something like Ron, without actually going to Ron. In otherwords GJ might be the "safe" libertarian candidate.
.

So those who might otherwise go to Ron might think 'no, GJ is the same and not as out there' when otherwise they MIGHT go to Ron. Ron isn't 'out there' but has been painted such. We want to convince the main bulk of the party Ron is the one they want, not give them someone media is willing to paint as 'oh so close but more conventional' to keep from growing Ron's support. GJs support would be at the cost of that GROWING support. I think the ways GJ is 'more conventional' are detractions from his candidacy, but if media pushes him to split Ron's support, it will keep Ron from getting the support he needs to make this campaign what we want it to be.

If you like GJ it is an opportunity for him, but at the cost of opportunity for Ron. It is a choice, not something that comes at no expense.

[sailingaway]

I see this all the time as someone who follows GJ closely. People who are obviously not Ron Paul supporters saying "I like what this guy is saying". They've either not heard Ron Paul say the exact same things or just don't like Ron Paul for whatever attack articles they believed from 2008.

The key is to be ready to bring those folks into the Ron Paul camp once Johnson steps down. Otherwise they'll all just jump to Romney because he's another "fiscally conservative ex-governor".

That counts on Johnson stepping down. I've seen no indication that would happen, have you?

[Elwar]

So those who might otherwise go to Ron might think 'no, GJ is the same and not as out there' when otherwise they MIGHT go to Ron. Ron isn't 'out there' but has been painted such. We want to convince the main bulk of the party Ron is the one they want, not give them someone media is willing to paint as 'oh so close but more conventional' to keep from growing Ron's support. GJs support would be at the cost of that GROWING support. I think the ways GJ is 'more conventional' are detractions from his candidacy, but if media pushes him to split Ron's support, it will keep Ron from getting the support he needs to make this campaign what we want it to be.

If you like GJ it is an opportunity for him, but at the cost of opportunity for Ron. It is a choice, not something that comes at no expense.

The media trying to split the GJ/Ron Paul support would only work if we let it.

The only way they can make it happen is by propping one up over the other. Which requires that they prop one up...which is something Ron Paul never say in 2008.

[sailingaway]

The media trying to split the GJ/Ron Paul support would only work if we let it.

The only way they can make it happen is by propping one up over the other. Which requires that they prop one up...which is something Ron Paul never say in 2008.

No, they only have to 'prop' GJ up until it splits Ron's vote, then both are neutralized. They don't have to say he's better just do what HuffPo just did. The left did that with Rand in the primary, thinking he'd be easy to beat...... something I think they regret now.

[Elwar]

That counts on Johnson stepping down. I've seen no indication that would happen, have you?

Yes, he has indicated that he's "in this for the long haul", a nod toward 2016.

Unless he gains huge support for whatever reason this time through, it's more of a name recognition tour this election season.

[klamath]

I see this all the time as someone who follows GJ closely. People who are obviously not Ron Paul supporters saying "I like what this guy is saying". They've either not heard Ron Paul say the exact same things or just don't like Ron Paul for whatever attack articles they believed from 2008.

The key is to be ready to bring those folks into the Ron Paul camp once Johnson steps down. Otherwise they'll all just jump to Romney because he's another "fiscally conservative ex-governor".
GJ has no base except three congression districts in a democratic swing state. RP has way way more name recognition and support across the country. What I see is complete contempt for GJ with most of the republican base because of his pro pot stand mixed with his heavy and recent past use.

[Keith and stuff]

I see the Huff post has jumped on the idea of splitting RP's base.

Matt wasn't directed to write the article by the Huff. I know Matt. He works for Our America Initiative.

Also, people that support liberty have the ability to look at the issues and decide who to support. I know a Free State Project participant that moved to NH and worked for the Ron Paul campaign in NH last season and currently works for Our America Initiative right now.

[Keith and stuff]

Regardless of views, solidarity is the key to getting the good doctor to the White House. Violent or not, RP is needed in the White House to finally initiate a real "change we can believe in", and so any vote for Dr. Paul is a welcome one.

? Ron Paul ran twice to educate people. If he runs again, it will be to educate/info people. He certainly isn't running to win because he cannot win.

[sailingaway]

Matt wasn't directed to write the article by the Huff. I know Matt. He works for Our America Initiative.

Also, people that support liberty have the ability to look at the issues and decide who to support. I know a Free State Project participant that moved to NH and worked for the Ron Paul campaign in NH last season and currently works for Our America Initiative right now.

Well, Our America Initiative is Gary Johnson's pac, so this is basically writing about themselves and cutting Ron down to 'A Whole Lot Less'?

I mean, I can see their point of view if they prefer GJ, but not why people would think Ron's supporters would consider that great.

[Keith and stuff]

Is it me, or did I just read an article from HuffPost that was positive about RP, did not fake the numbers of voters he obtained, and actually admits that Austrian economists were right in their predition of the collapse of the housing bubble?

WTF!?

As for Johnson..I'd wholly support a Paul/Johnson ticket. Honestly the more I read about Johnson, he seems like a generally close candidate to Ron Paul's platform.

Matt because a Huff blogger because he created this group, http://nhcommonsense.org/ The New Hampshire Coalition for Common Sense Marijuana Policy. I am not sure if he still runs that group.

[specsaregood]

Well, Our America Initiative is Gary Johnson's pac, so this is basically writing about themselves and cutting Ron down to 'A Whole Lot Less'?
I mean, I can see their point of view if they prefer GJ, but not why people would think Ron's supporters would consider that great.

So this is Gary Johnson's PAC belittling Dr. Paul. So Gary Johnson continues to prove his douchebaggery......

[klamath]

The media trying to split the GJ/Ron Paul support would only work if we let it.
The only way they can make it happen is by propping one up over the other. Which requires that they prop one up...which is something Ron Paul never say in 2008.
And the best way to keep from letting the media split the base is to keep the base informed that GJ is not the winable candidate as is being spun in the media.

[klamath]

Matt wasn't directed to write the article by the Huff. I know Matt. He works for Our America Initiative.

Also, people that support liberty have the ability to look at the issues and decide who to support. I know a Free State Project participant that moved to NH and worked for the Ron Paul campaign in NH last season and currently works for Our America Initiative right now.
The Huff chose to publish it. Do they publish Texas Straight talk?

[Churchill2004]

So this is Gary Johnson's PAC belittling Dr. Paul. So Gary Johnson continues to prove his douchebaggery......

It takes some serious self-delusion to read that article and come away with "Gary Johnson's PAC is belittling Dr. Paul".

[Keith and stuff]

So this is Gary Johnson's PAC belittling Dr. Paul. So Gary Johnson continues to prove his douchebaggery......

Not at all. If anything, the article is a positive article, as far as how it treats Paul. And, I don't think it works that way. Gary didn't tell Matt to write the article, likely. He certainly didn't tell him which exact words to use.

There is no need to be so negative.

[Keith and stuff]

And the best way to keep from letting the media split the base is to keep the base informed that GJ is not the winable candidate as is being spun in the media.

You really think Ron Paul can win? I'm sure he is 100% sure that he cannot win. I don't think Johnson can win, either.

[UtahApocalypse]

Can someone start a GaryJohnsonForums.com so us at RON PAUL FORUMS can focus on winning and not dividing support. I would quickly support GJ in a Senate race but can only vote for ONE President per an election. Until Ron says he is NOT running he gets mine (and should be these entire forums) 100% support.

[low preference guy]

That counts on Johnson stepping down. I've seen no indication that would happen, have you?

I think he'll step down but get ready for 2016 if Ron runs. He is young. He wants the support of RP's base. He won't ever get as much of it if he runs at the same time as Ron. He already will not get as much support because of his statement about humanitarian wars.

[Anti Federalist]

I'm going to have to agree with klamath here.

(Much to his horror I imagine, since I'm pretty sure I'm at the top of his list of "violent" assholes he wishes would go away.)

I'm in it for Ron Paul, not based on some misplaced "hero worship", but because a public record of political and personal integrity that stretches over 40 years.

When Ron retires, or decides he's not going to run or passes away, then and only then, will I consider other alternatives.

[Anti Federalist]

What ever. I just hope it are the violent RP supporters the desert for GJ.

My reply, from a non slave holding, non chickenhawk, rabble rousing, "violent", patriot:

"If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." -- Samuel Adams

So blow that out 'yer ass...

[sailingaway]

You really think Ron Paul can win? I'm sure he is 100% sure that he cannot win. I don't think Johnson can win, either.

You sure say a lot of this sort of stuff:


And libertarian Republicans too. But seriously, hardly anyone in the world takes Ron Paul seriously. I guess it's time you know the truth. I used to run the Memphis Ron Paul Meet-up but of course I always knew that he wasn't one of the top tier candidates in 2008 and he won't be in 2012 either. No offense, this is extremely obvious and well known stuff.



I'm pretty much concluding you are for Ron only to the extent he is NOT running against Gary for President.

And as for the article tone, the title says 'Or a Whole Lot More?', suggesting GJ is just that. I'd say that is suggesting Ron really 'isn't that much' in comparison to Gary Johnson.

I don't say this Mike person shouldn't have done it, if challenged, I suspect John Tate would say similar in reverse, but we wouldn't expect Gary Johnson for President supporters to like it. And frankly, I wouldn't expect Tate to submit such an article to Huff Po, because Ron doesn't make a name for himself by pushing others in the liberty movement down, he never has.

[specsaregood]

What ever. I just hope it are the violent RP supporters the desert for GJ.

I may have to start promoting GJ on some white collectivist websites.

[Elwar]

I may have to start promoting GJ on some white collectivist websites.

lol

they'd attack him on his immigration stance

[Matt Collins]

This is the worse myth out there that GJ would somehow become more acceptable to the republican electorate.
Pro abortion. Yeaw that is going to fly with the republican base.
Very current MJ user. Despite what many libertarians like to believe that is not going to fly with the GOP base. California the most MJ liberal state just voted down legalization. GJ is already typecast himself as the pot candidate and shows no tendancy to distance himself from that image.
Very many voters take into consideration politicians personal lives. GJ made a wreak of his. Rand and Kelly and their family is what sold a huge amount of Republicans on Rand. I can tell you Fred Thompson lost a huge chunk of the womens vote when women saw how young his wife was. That DOES NOT sell well with older married women.



So those who might otherwise go to Ron might think 'no, GJ is the same and not as out there' when otherwise they MIGHT go to Ron.There is a segment of people who will never go to Ron no matter what, even if they agree with him 100%. Those are the people that GJ could attract and help bring into the fold.

[sailingaway]

There is a segment of people who will never go to Ron no matter what, even if they agree with him 100%. Those are the people that GJ could attract and help bring into the fold.

These are people in the GOP? He would also be trying to go for the rest who'd be open to Ron, even if there are a handful more open to Gary than Ron in the GOP.

I'm not saying he shouldn't run, it is his call. I'm saying it would split the vote Ron might otherwise get, which I think is pretty much fact, not opinion. The cross over would be clear, which is why he is being promoted here.

[Anti Federalist]

I may have to start promoting GJ on some white collectivist websites.

Hah! Lulz.

[Keith and stuff]

I'm not saying he shouldn't run, it is his call. I'm saying it would split the vote Ron might otherwise get, which I think is pretty much fact, not opinion. The cross over would be clear, which is why he is being promoted here.

I'm not even sure if anyone is promoting GJ on this forum.

[LisaNY]

I'm tired of hearing Johnson being referred to as "the next Ron Paul", as if Ron is dead or retired. EVERY SINGLE article I've found on Johnson has Ron's name attached to the headline. And these articles tend to surface on sites that aren't friendly to Ron - National Review, Cato, now the Huff Post. Ron's own son was able to make a name for himself without being constantly compared to his father, why can't Gary Johnson? I feel this is a deliberate attempt to split up the Ron Paul supporters and I for one am not biting.

[Anti Federalist]

I'm tired of hearing Johnson being referred to as "the next Ron Paul", as if Ron is dead or retired. EVERY SINGLE article I've found on Johnson has Ron's name attached to the headline. And these articles tend to surface on sites that aren't friendly to Ron - National Review, Cato, now the Huff Post. Ron's own son was able to make a name for himself without being constantly compared to his father, why can't Gary Johnson? I feel this is a deliberate attempt to split up the Ron Paul supporters and I for one am not biting.

That ^^^

[Sola_Fide]

QUOTE=LisaNY;3064747]I'm tired of hearing Johnson being referred to as "the next Ron Paul", as if Ron is dead or retired. EVERY SINGLE article I've found on Johnson has Ron's name attached to the headline. And these articles tend to surface on sites that aren't friendly to Ron - National Review, Cato, now the Huff Post. Ron's own son was able to make a name for himself without being constantly compared to his father, why can't Gary Johnson? I feel this is a deliberate attempt to split up the Ron Paul supporters and I for one am not biting.[/QUOTE]



^^^Yep

[pcosmar]

I'm not even sure if anyone is promoting GJ on this forum.

Well there are currently 4 threads on this page, not to mention posts in other threads.

Someone is pushin' it.

[specsaregood]

And these articles tend to surface on sites that aren't friendly to Ron - National Review, Cato, now the Huff Post.
Indeed.

[Elwar]

I'm tired of hearing Johnson being referred to as "the next Ron Paul", as if Ron is dead or retired. EVERY SINGLE article I've found on Johnson has Ron's name attached to the headline. And these articles tend to surface on sites that aren't friendly to Ron - National Review, Cato, now the Huff Post. Ron's own son was able to make a name for himself without being constantly compared to his father, why can't Gary Johnson? I feel this is a deliberate attempt to split up the Ron Paul supporters and I for one am not biting.

I agree, I see it all the time. And Johnson has been trying to downplay it as well in many interviews though acknowledging it.

[trey4sports]

let the chips fall where they may, and realize that there is only one Ron Paul. Gary's a damn good candidate but he's no Ron Paul

[klamath]

My reply, from a non slave holding, non chickenhawk, rabble rousing, "violent", patriot:

"If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." -- Samuel Adams

So blow that out 'yer ass...
Another fine quote from a failed businessmen. elitist, tax collector, politician and Chicken hawk.... "As Hancock and Adams made their escape, the first shots of the war began at Lexington and Concord."

[klamath]

There is a segment of people who will never go to Ron no matter what, even if they agree with him 100%. Those are the people that GJ could attract and help bring into the fold.
So there goes the theory that GJ will bring these people into the party and then they turn to RP when GJ drops out expanding the base.:rolleyes: Dondero comes to mind.

[Anti Federalist]

Another fine quote from a failed businessmen. elitist, tax collector, politician and Chicken hawk.... "As Hancock and Adams made their escape, the first shots of the war began at Lexington and Concord."

On supporting the cause of revolution:


Every friend to the liberty of his country is bound to reflect, and step forward to prevent the dreadful consequences which shall result from a government of events.
Henry Knox

Henry Knox fought throughout the campaign for independence, from the Sons of Liberty to Yorktown.

I suppose he isn't "real" enough for you, either, since no one is exempt from bad decisions or petty greed.

When is your next walking on water demonstration?

[tangent4ronpaul]

Or a whole lot less..

+1

[klamath]

On supporting the cause of revolution:



Henry Knox fought throughout the campaign for independence, from the Sons of Liberty to Yorktown.

I suppose he isn't "real" enough for you, either, since no one is exempt from bad decisions or petty greed.

When is your next walking on water demonstration?
Ah finially you were able to quote someone that wasn't a Chickenhawk. Congratulations! Now that quote of Knox's wasn't exactly endorsing a revolution every few years now was it. So what was Knox fighting for? Was it for the right for Adams to continue to be a goverment politician collecting taxes and making eloquent speaches. Was it so Jefferson could contiue to drink fine wines made by his slaves and write about watering the trees of liberty?
The constitution came about not because of the war but in spite of it. It came about because there were such huge and sometimes hypocritical differences between the founding fathers. People like Adams voted to take loyalist property and expel them from the land many had lived on for generations. What was a loyalist? Someone that was happy to pay taxes to a king versus a tax collecter politician chickenhawk like a Adams.

[nathanmn]

Ron Paul didn't run a serious "in it to win it" campaign for 2008, and I haven't seen any indication that he would try to do it now. He ran an educational campaign, and then got tons of money that his incompetent campaign staff didn't really know what to do with. What I would find likely is that Ron Paul might run this year, but likely drop out early and endorse Gary Johnson if GJ has a good showing.

The idea that we are being disloyal to Ron Paul by thinking someone else would be a better choice for president in 2012 is ridiculous. Ron Paul hasn't shown any indication that he really wanted to be president in the first place. His goals have been to educate and set a good example.

Even if Ron Paul was going to run a serious campaign he has a lot of downsides that get pointed out, like his lack of accomplishments in passing legislation and his age. I think they are both valid criticisms. Gary Johnson is a doer, and has a huge list of accomplishments from when he was governor. Anyone that is concerned with the deficits and budget can look at his track record and see that he has the credibility and ability for the job. What we need and what he has done line up pretty perfectly in my opinion, and if he is able to get his message out and get a fair shake I'm sure a lot of other people will realize that.

Probably a lot of people here will attack me, but IMO everything I've said is pretty truthful and accurate. I was a huge Ron Paul supporter for 2008 and still love him, I supported Rand Paul and BJ Lawson... but Gary Johnson is a better choice for 2012.

[specsaregood]

Gary Johnson is a better choice for 2012.

Who is that?

[sailingaway]

Ron Paul didn't run a serious "in it to win it" campaign for 2008, and I haven't seen any indication that he would try to do it now. He ran an educational campaign, and then got tons of money that his incompetent campaign staff didn't really know what to do with. What I would find likely is that Ron Paul might run this year, but likely drop out early and endorse Gary Johnson if GJ has a good showing.

The idea that we are being disloyal to Ron Paul by thinking someone else would be a better choice for president in 2012 is ridiculous. Ron Paul hasn't shown any indication that he really wanted to be president in the first place. His goals have been to educate and set a good example.

Even if Ron Paul was going to run a serious campaign he has a lot of downsides that get pointed out, like his lack of accomplishments in passing legislation and his age. I think they are both valid criticisms. Gary Johnson is a doer, and has a huge list of accomplishments from when he was governor. Anyone that is concerned with the deficits and budget can look at his track record and see that he has the credibility and ability for the job. What we need and what he has done line up pretty perfectly in my opinion, and if he is able to get his message out and get a fair shake I'm sure a lot of other people will realize that.

Probably a lot of people here will attack me, but IMO everything I've said is pretty truthful and accurate. I was a huge Ron Paul supporter for 2008 and still love him, I supported Rand Paul and BJ Lawson... but Gary Johnson is a better choice for 2012.

I just don't like Gary Johnson and I have tried to. I am now starting to DISLIKE him, based on his backhanded compliments (really insults) of Ron in the media, and those of his PAC, after Ron has been so generous in helping to raise Gary's profile over the last two years. While both may be fiscal conservatives (except GJ in foreign policy), that is only part of Ron's appeal, or I could be supporting Jim deMint. As one of several policy points, I find it important to push for the most local government possible where individuals can impact policy, which means local, then state, then only if Constitutional, federal, and not global (WTO etc.) I think self determination of an individual, a locality, a state, and a nation, needs to be protected. I don't see agression interfering with another countries internal affairs as protecting autonomy but as actually setting precedent for the idea that self determination needs to give way to collective preference of nations. I am absolutely against that, and have never seen any signs from Gary that sovereignity is even something he cares about.

Gary Johnson isn't even my second choice, so how Ron manages campaign funds doesn't even come to mind, to me. Plus, his record of consistency is what is crucial to me, not 'accomplishments' which would have required selling out. The fact that he has consistently been fighting for liberty in congress DESPITE lack of reward or company in what he is doing is part of what is so amazing about him. It is a matter of character.

But you are free, obviously, to prefer whomever you like. I doubt you will find much support on Ron Paul Forums for Gary Johnson over Ron Paul, however.

And specsaregoood, I'd +rep you, but I've done it too recently, and the forum won't let me.