Maverick Gary Johnson is Always on the Trail as he Eyes the White House 2012

[bobbyw24]

It’s an original approach for a potential GOP presidential contender to take, but former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson said in an interview that the war on drugs hasn’t worked any better than the war in Iraq and if elected president, he would end both.

Preparing for a possible run for the 2012 Republican nomination, Mr. Johnson has by his count addressed 450 different groups, scooted over to Iowa and down to South Carolina four times each and toured New Hampshire six times - all in the past 14 months.

It sounds like a grind, but Mr. Johnson insists it has been fun. On one visit, Mr. Johnson pedaled the 472 miles of the Des Moines Register Annual Great Bike Ride Across Iowa.

A relentless jock, the former construction executive has climbed Mt. Everest, despite toes blackened with frostbite, and competed in the grueling Ironman Triathlon five times.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/feb/6/maverick-nm-politician-always-on-trail/

[Vessol]

Has Gary Johnson talked about potentially competing with Ron Paul? I'm starting to grow a liking to him, but that is my primary worry if both decide to run.

[trey4sports]

i still think this primary is more about getting the message out and educating more so than winning the election.

[TCE]

i still think this primary is more about getting the message out and educating more so than winning the election.

That would be completely pointless. That's what we did in 2008. We don't need education campaigns, especially now that we are winning elections. An education campaign doesn't need funds.

If this PPP poll shows him competitive, he should just run for a winnable Senate seat.

[libertybrewcity]

im down with a senate seat...but i doubt that will happen..

[Vessol]

i still think this primary is more about getting the message out and educating more so than winning the election.

This is my opinion as well. Look how many people the Ron Paul Revolution already has introduced to the ideas of liberty. Another run, even if failed, will only raise that number.

[trey4sports]

This is my opinion as well. Look how many people the Ron Paul Revolution already has introduced to the ideas of liberty. Another run, even if failed, will only raise that number.

+rep

[libertybrewcity]

two voices in the debates wouldn't be such a horrible thing either. I'm all in for RP however

[trey4sports]

That would be completely pointless. That's what we did in 2008. We don't need education campaigns, especially now that we are winning elections. An education campaign doesn't need funds.

If this PPP poll shows him competitive, he should just run for a winnable Senate seat.



An educational campaign is not needed? Seriously?

You think the general population is ready to end the drug war, phase out social security, end the income tax, and end the fiat money system?




To me it's obvious that the fight is about moving these ideas into the mainstream and winning the presidency may not be possible yet.

I hope i'm wrong. Really, I do, but if I were to say that the voting population is ready to end the fiat money system and reign in the empire, it would be nothing more than delusions of grandeur

[pcosmar]

Maverick,
Where have I heard that before?

[TCE]

An educational campaign is not needed? Seriously?

You think the general population is ready to end the drug war, phase out social security, end the income tax, and end the fiat money system?



To me it's obvious that the fight is about moving these ideas into the mainstream and winning the presidency may not be possible yet.

I hope i'm wrong. Really, I do, but if I were to say that the voting population is ready to end the fiat money system and reign in the empire, it would be nothing more than delusions of grandeur

I agree with your after the bold comment, the Presidency isn't possible, but we as a movement need to realize that the public's opinion doesn't matter, it is only those who sit in the halls of Congress who do. Remember how 75% want to Audit the Fed? Well, a real audit will never happen regardless of if that number jumps to 98%. The majority of people were and are against the Health Care bill, but that didn't matter. A grand majority want to end foreign aid, but that will never happen. A grand majority of the public wants to keep Social Security/Medicare/Medicaid but don't want taxes raised.

Seriously, we have to stop caring what the public thinks, it doesn't matter. That is why education campaigns are pointless. Who would you rather have, someone who agrees with us on every single issue but mindlessly votes "R" or "D" every election, or someone who agrees with us on nothing but votes for our candidates (RAND SAYS HELLO!).

[trey4sports]

I agree with your after the bold comment, the Presidency isn't possible, but we as a movement need to realize that the public's opinion doesn't matter, it is only those who sit in the halls of Congress who do. Remember how 75% want to Audit the Fed? Well, a real audit will never happen regardless of if that number jumps to 98%. The majority of people were and are against the Health Care bill, but that didn't matter. A grand majority want to end foreign aid, but that will never happen. A grand majority of the public wants to keep Social Security/Medicare/Medicaid but don't want taxes raised.

Seriously, we have to stop caring what the public thinks, it doesn't matter. That is why education campaigns are pointless. Who would you rather have, someone who agrees with us on every single issue but mindlessly votes "R" or "D" every election, or someone who agrees with us on nothing but votes for our candidates (RAND SAYS HELLO!).

good point

[TCE]

good point

Thank you :)

[BlackTerrel]

Everything I've heard about this guy so far I like.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

More the merrier, but I can just imagine the eternal arguments if Ron Paul loses by some statistical margin because of Gary Johnson. Oh the ruckus. Personally, I don't see Gary getting more than 2%, but having another voice on stage would be nice, then again it is modus operandi for people who believe in liberty to be in the minority in both parties (See: Robert Taft), during the debates. Goldwater was an anomoly, and I would wager his foreign interventionism was the reason he wound up winning. If he had believed in non-intervention he would have lost. The last GOP politician that was a non-interventionist to win the nomination you would have to go back to...Calvin Coolidge.

[trey4sports]

More the merrier, but I can just imagine the eternal arguments if Ron Paul loses by some statistical margin because of Gary Johnson. Oh the ruckus. Personally, I don't see Gary getting more than 2%, but having another voice on stage would be nice, then again it is modus operandi for people who believe in liberty to be in the minority in both parties (See: Robert Taft), during the debates. Goldwater was an anomoly, and I would wager his foreign interventionism was the reason he wound up winning. If he had believed in non-intervention he would have lost. The last GOP politician that was a non-interventionist to win the nomination you would have to go back to...Calvin Coolidge.

no, you need not go further than 11 years ago with the election of Dubya. He ran on a foreign policy of non-intervention but unfortunately that went incredibly wrong.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

no, you need not go further than 11 years ago with the election of Dubya. He ran on a foreign policy of non-intervention but unfortunately that went incredibly wrong.

Dubya never wanted to leave NATO, the UN, GATT, WTO, CAFTA, etc. He never wanted to lift the embargos of Cuba, North Korea, etc. He never wanted to end all foreign aid. Just because he was against our involvement in the Baltics and because he may have been ambivalent about war was no reason to believe he ever was non-interventionist. Moreover, if the people wanted a non-interventionist they would have voted for Pat Buchanan. They didn't. If you go back and actually look you will see that the GOP has always been a majority New England / Midwest elitist establishment party (Big Government aka Special Interest pillaging the people). The voices for liberty in the party have always been a minority even during the New Deal when we were at our strongest (libertarians - classical liberals that is).

Traditionally, the GOP has been less pro-war than the Democrats, but on the whole they were both vastly pro-interventionism. The hey-day of non-interventionism was at a time when we were our strongest (early 20s to late 30s into early 40s).

[Bergie Bergeron]

PPP polled him this weekend for the Senate Race in New Mexico. Maybe he'll change his mind then.

[Imperial]

More the merrier, but I can just imagine the eternal arguments if Ron Paul loses by some statistical margin because of Gary Johnson. Oh the ruckus.

I do find it ironic when we tell people to vote their conscience and then proceed to attack Gary Johnson for spitting the vote.

[RonPaulFanInGA]

This is my opinion as well. Look how many people the Ron Paul Revolution already has introduced to the ideas of liberty. Another run, even if failed, will only raise that number.

How many people exactly do you think it brought in? Ron Paul got 5.7% of the primary vote nationally. I'd imagine that percentage, at least, of Republican primary voters were already receptive to his ideas. How many people actually, truly flipped in the right direction? How many pro-war types who watched that Paul-Giuliani spat in May 2007 really changed sides?

The idea of an "education campaign" has got to be the biggest myth perpetrated here. Sounds like something some minor party came up with to justify their continued donation requests. When most people see a candidate finish with less than 1% of the vote, like all Libertarian presidential candidates but one have, they instantly dismiss them as fringe.

The Libertarian party has been "educating" for forty years now. How about winning something of some importance? Or, at least, cracking double-digits. :rolleyes:

Ron Paul should run to win in 2012. No more "education campaigns."

[Sola_Fide]

Harsh words^^^

[nayjevin]

How many people exactly do you think it brought in? Ron Paul got 5.7% of the primary vote nationally. I'd imagine that percentage, at least, of Republican primary voters were already receptive to his ideas. How many people actually, truly flipped in the right direction? How many pro-war types who watched that Paul-Giuliani spat in May 2007 really changed sides?

I see it more as a sliding scale or gradient, each exposure in the right direction is positive.


The idea of an "education campaign" has got to be the biggest myth perpetrated here. Sounds like something some minor party came up with to justify their continued donation requests. When most people see a candidate finish with less than 1% of the vote, like all Libertarian presidential candidates but one have, they instantly dismiss them as fringe.

A good point in bold, but it is also valid to consider the educational benefits of the campaign along with the potential positive results of victory in analysis. Speaking tours presumably have an effect, or they would not occur outside of campaigns. That folks are liable to listen to a presidential candidate is undeniable, making candidacy a valuable position of influence.


The Libertarian party has been "educating" for forty years now. How about winning something of some importance? Or, at least, cracking double-digits. :rolleyes:

There is a role for the education too though - surely the rightful activist does not just crave power? A 'failed' libertarian campaign long ago was influential in making me more aware.


Ron Paul should run to win in 2012. No more "education campaigns."

It should not be an excuse or appeal to support candidacies which do not produce net benefit. How to determine net benefit? Where to draw the line? My analysis is strict for candidates. In other words I am relatively skeptical that the average candidacy provides net benefit, as are you.

I am comfortable investing in an RP run, to a degree limited by financial and temporal ability, based on my perception of the benefit of the last run. But this is a rare case. Even if I didn't see net benefit in investing in a candidacy, surely I shouldn't spend my time convincing others not to?

[nayjevin]

It’s an original approach for a potential GOP presidential contender to take, but former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson said in an interview that the war on drugs hasn’t worked any better than the war in Iraq and if elected president, he would end both.

I am convinced that this platform would win a candidate a paper ballot election, if it were given equal media exposure. I can see a neocon running on such positions first. We need some announcements!

[bobbyw24]

I am convinced that this platform would win a candidate a paper ballot election, if it were given equal media exposure. I can see a neocon running on such positions first. We need some announcements!

Bump that

[TheTyke]

I agree with your after the bold comment, the Presidency isn't possible, but we as a movement need to realize that the public's opinion doesn't matter, it is only those who sit in the halls of Congress who do. Remember how 75% want to Audit the Fed? Well, a real audit will never happen regardless of if that number jumps to 98%. The majority of people were and are against the Health Care bill, but that didn't matter. A grand majority want to end foreign aid, but that will never happen. A grand majority of the public wants to keep Social Security/Medicare/Medicaid but don't want taxes raised.

Seriously, we have to stop caring what the public thinks, it doesn't matter. That is why education campaigns are pointless. Who would you rather have, someone who agrees with us on every single issue but mindlessly votes "R" or "D" every election, or someone who agrees with us on nothing but votes for our candidates (RAND SAYS HELLO!).

Thank you for saying it!!! Very good points... education is only useful insofar as it creates an environment where our people can get elected without lying. (lol) However, no way we should give up on the presidency... odds may be low, but they're the best we've ever had within our lifetimes! Gotta go for broke!

[fisharmor]

Has Gary Johnson talked about potentially competing with Ron Paul? I'm starting to grow a liking to him

To quote a younger and funnier Eddie Murphy,
If you're starving, and someone throws you a cracker, you're going to think it's the best cracker you ever ate.


The Libertarian party has been "educating" for forty years now. How about winning something of some importance? Or, at least, cracking double-digits. :rolleyes:

Ron Paul should run to win in 2012. No more "education campaigns."

Yes, he should. But he's not going to stop educating and we shouldn't expect him to.
Last week I heard Lew Rockwell call him "The Great Educator" on his podcast.
Think of it this way. If Reagan's fans had gotten him to stop communicating, would he have been the same president?

That is what RP is - an educator. That is what his draw is for, I'd wager, most of his fans.
He does the thing which is the exact opposite of what you want, and then he gives you an education: he explains in comprehensible, common-sense terms why he's not going to do what you want him to do, and why it was the right decision.

It's his biggest asset, and it's the reason I'm such a fan: he has the tools needed to convince the public to go against their immediate wishes for the greater good. And he does it while being one of us - a normal guy who eats canned soup.

Take away the education and you're taking away a large chunk of who he is and how he got this far to begin with. I think we need to face facts: RP has little chance of winning the presidency this time around, because his hair and clothes are terrible, and he's not going to change that - because it shouldn't fucking matter.
He's much more likely to spend his last hoorah convincing as many people as possible that it doesn't fucking matter. He'll do that because it's the smart thing to do: winning one presidency isn't going to make a dent in the system, but convincing the people that the system is evil will.

[TheTyke]

He's much more likely to spend his last hoorah convincing as many people as possible that it doesn't fucking matter. He'll do that because it's the smart thing to do: winning one presidency isn't going to make a dent in the system, but convincing the people that the system is evil will.

As has been explained over and over... education alone doesn't change any policy, period! Winning the presidency DOES matter - he can at least bring the troops home, which hasn't been done for 60+ years. But it's true our Revolution will need to continue and keep electing more informed people. Statists consolidated their power over hundreds of years; we will have to do the same thing to take our country back, and it won't happen over night.