PDA

View Full Version : #NEVER JOHNSON




Krugminator2
07-25-2016, 07:40 PM
I dislike Johnson. I think he is an unethical person who has done none of the homework to be able to represent libertarian ideology. That said, I have gone back and forth on him because I have thought a good Libertarian showing would be good libertarianism. He and his running mate are former governors. I was wrong. http://reason.com/archives/2016/07/25/libertarians-pitch-trump-hillary-bernie/


GILLESPIE: The Supreme Court looms large in everybody's political calculations. Who are the Supreme Court picks you're going to make?

WELD: Well, I don't think you have to panic and say it has to be a way lefty or way righty. Steve Breyer has been a good justice. He was appointed by Democrats.

WELD: A Massachusetts guy. Merrick Garland, I think, would have been a very good pick, and he's nominated by Obama.



I am sorry. Stephen Breyer is a shitty judge and that is disqualifying. If your answer doesn't include Clarence Thomas, then you have bad views. Then he says Merrick Garland would be a good pick? Not Randy Barnett? How about throwing some red meat with the Judge? The consensus on Garland is he is the absolute worst from a libertarian perspective. He is bad on civil liberties and economic authoritarian on things like the EPA. You don't even the liberal upside on some issues.


GILLESPIE: You mentioned far-right and far-left people in Congress. Who are current members of the Senate and the House that you think you can work with? Because if you guys come in, obviously you're not going to have a libertarian Congress.

WELD: Rob Portman, obviously. Kelly Ayotte. Susan Collins, the best of all. Mark Kirk on the Republican side. A guy, he's a challenger, Russ Feingold in Wisconsin. Not saying I'm endorsing him, but he's obviously a person of substantial ability.

GILLESPIE: So these– But, you've named people like Collins. But most Republicans and, even I think, most libertarians would say Susan Collins is terrible. She votes for more spending. She is not great on the Second Amendment. She's a wishy-washy, kind of country club conservative. You disagree, though?

WELD: Yeah, I do.

JOHNSON: I'm going to say they challenge Republicans to be good at what they are supposed to be good at, which is dollars and cents, and they are not good at that at all because they pick and choose. They want to cut from Planned Parenthood, but they want to increase the military budget. Well gee, that just doesn't work. And then Democrats, look, come on! Let's stop dropping bombs. Let's really take a hard look at our military policy. Let's get Congress involved and a declaration of war and how we move forward. And mandatory sending, ending the Drug War. Come on! This is a huge issue–


Weld says the "the best of all" to work with is Susan Collins? She is horrendous on everything as Gillespie pointed out. And he says Rob Portman? . Okay. Mark Kirk? And he apparently supports Russ Feingold over Ron Johnson, a guy who is a big Ayn Rand fan. What libertarian says Kelly Ayotte (Lindsay Graham/John McCain Jr) is who they look forward to working with. I am sorry if the answer on who you will work with doesn't include Jusin Amash, Thomas Massie, Mike Lee, or Rand Paul, your ideas are bad.

We're done. At least I am (which of course means nothing. This is just entertainment, but still.) Awful stuff. This is beyond terrible. This is a new level of terrible. And I have no idea what Johnson is saying in the last paragraph in the quote. It reads like he is tripping on LSD.

r3volution 3.0
07-25-2016, 07:48 PM
#NeverWin

#CircularFiringSquad

#WhyAreSomeOfMyFellowLibertariansSoFuckingStupid

dannno
07-25-2016, 07:51 PM
The comment by Johnson that you quoted was pretty good, could have come from Ron Paul himself.



JOHNSON: I'm going to say they challenge Republicans to be good at what they are supposed to be good at, which is dollars and cents, and they are not good at that at all because they pick and choose. They want to cut from Planned Parenthood, but they want to increase the military budget. Well gee, that just doesn't work. And then Democrats, look, come on! Let's stop dropping bombs. Let's really take a hard look at our military policy. Let's get Congress involved and a declaration of war and how we move forward. And mandatory sending, ending the Drug War. Come on! This is a huge issue–

Smitty
07-25-2016, 07:51 PM
Weld was the price Johnson had to pay to get the neocons to push him.

erowe1
07-25-2016, 07:56 PM
I dislike Johnson. I think he is an unethical person who has done none of the homework to be able to represent libertarian ideology. That said, I have gone back and forth on him because I have thought a good Libertarian showing would be good libertarianism. He and his running mate are former governors. I was wrong. http://reason.com/archives/2016/07/25/libertarians-pitch-trump-hillary-bernie/



I am sorry. Stephen Breyer is a $#@!ty judge and that is disqualifying. If your answer doesn't include Clarence Thomas, then you have bad views. Then he says Merrick Garland would be a good pick? Not Randy Barnett? How about throwing some red meat with the Judge? The consensus on Garland is he is the absolute worst from a libertarian perspective. He is bad on civil liberties and economic authoritarian on things like the EPA. You don't even the liberal upside on some issues.



Weld says the "the best of all" to work with is Susan Collins? She is horrendous on everything as Gillespie pointed out. And he says Rob Portman? . Okay. Mark Kirk? And he apparently supports Russ Feingold over Ron Johnson, a guy who is a big Ayn Rand fan. What libertarian says Kelly Ayotte (Lindsay Graham/John McCain Jr) is who they look forward to working with. I am sorry if the answer on who you will work with doesn't include Jusin Amash, Thomas Massie, Mike Lee, or Rand Paul, your ideas are bad.

We're done. At least I am (which of course means nothing. This is just entertainment, but still.) Awful stuff. This is beyond terrible. This is a new level of terrible. And I have no idea what Johnson is saying in the last paragraph in the quote. It reads like he is tripping on LSD.

All the bad stuff you pointed out is really bad.

But that's all Weld. Why focus on Weld?

Krugminator2
07-25-2016, 08:04 PM
#NeverWin

#CircularFiringSquad

#WhyAreSomeOfMyFellowLibertariansSoFuckingStupid

I am as pragmatic as they come. I voted for Cruz because I thought he was the best who could win. Not to mention I don't like how he is undermining a Republican majority in the Senate. He is praising Russ Feingold. He should be praising Ron Johnson or saying nothing.

Gary Johnson is not going to win. I had hoped for a good showing. These are not small deviations in ideology. These are liberal Republicans. I don't even know what I have in common with Weld. I don't think he would be in the top 175 most libertarian members of Congress. I really don't. He is definitely not good as Paul Ryan. Weld is quite bad. I think Weld is probably on par with Mitch McConnell or John Boehner.

Krugminator2
07-25-2016, 08:05 PM
All the bad stuff you pointed out is really bad.

But that's all Weld. Why focus on Weld?

Because Johnson gave non-answers, which was bad enough. But he let his co-President Weld say this stuff completely unchallenged as he sat next to him.

erowe1
07-25-2016, 08:06 PM
Because Johnson gave non-answers, which was bad enough. But he let his co-President Weld say this stuff completely unchallenged as he sat next to him.

Why do you say "co-president"?

Krugminator2
07-25-2016, 08:13 PM
Why do you say "co-president"?

That is what Johnson said he and Weld are in the CNN Townhall.

William Tell
07-25-2016, 08:19 PM
Who is the worst potential VP? Kaine, Pence, or Weld? Honest question I don't know the answer to.

phill4paul
07-25-2016, 08:26 PM
Who is the worst potential VP? Kaine, Pence, or Weld? Honest question I don't know the answer to.

It's like asking how many licks it takes to get to the bottom of a Tootsie pop.

Krugminator2
07-25-2016, 08:26 PM
The comment by Johnson that you quoted was pretty good, could have come from Ron Paul himself.

It does read like something Ron Paul would say. I don't mean that as a positive. That paragraph is like an Escher drawing.

r3volution 3.0
07-25-2016, 08:26 PM
Gary Johnson is not going to win. I had hoped for a good showing. These are not small deviations in ideology. These are liberal Republicans. I don't even know what I have in common with Weld. I don't think he would be in the top 175 most libertarian members of Congress. I really don't. He is definitely not good as Paul Ryan. Weld is quite bad. I think Weld is probably on par with Mitch McConnell or John Boehner.

July 25 2017: The GOP is in ruins, with conservatives fleeing en masse after a nominee they were barely able to stomach suffers the third catastrophic Republican defeat in eight years. The Democratic Party has won a Pyrrhic victory, putting Hillary in the White House at the cost of permanently alienating their most enthusiastic and fastest growing constituency. Meanwhile, Gary Johnson's surprise victory in Utah and his double digit showing nationwide has the media abuzz about "the rise of the libertarians," as the Libertarian Party is awarded matching funds and automatic ballot access across the country.

...who gives a flying fuck about Bill Weld?

William Tell
07-25-2016, 08:32 PM
July 25 2017: The GOP is in ruins, with conservatives fleeing en masse after a nominee they were barely able to stomach suffers the third catastrophic Republican defeat in eight years. The Democratic Party has won a Pyrrhic victory, putting Hillary in the White House at the cost of permanently alienating their most enthusiastic and fastest growing constituency. Meanwhile, Gary Johnson's surprise victory in Utah and his double digit showing nationwide has the media abuzz about "the rise of the libertarians," and the Libertarian Party is awarded matching funds and automatic ballot access across the country.

...who gives a flying $#@! about Bill Weld?

Everyone who realizes that rewarding bad behavior will cause the LP to nominate an even worse ticket in 4 years, if that is possible. They might pick Pence/Kaine in 2020, and y'all will still be saying we need to all get behind them for moar matching funds.

r3volution 3.0
07-25-2016, 08:36 PM
Everyone who realizes that rewarding bad behavior will cause the LP to nominate an even worse ticket in 4 years, if that is possible. They might pick Pence/Kaine in 2020, and y'all will still be saying we need to all get behind them for moar matching funds.

I'd rather risk the LP's dilution than guarantee it's continued irrelevance.

Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

Danke
07-25-2016, 08:39 PM
Who else? Just don't vote.?

He claims to have vetoed a lot of spending bills as governor, and refused lobbyist bribes. Plus, if he gets over 5% or something, then we get back some of our tax money to the LP.

euphemia
07-25-2016, 08:40 PM
#WhyAreSomeOfMyFellowLibertariansSo%&^(*$#Stupid

Because they believe Gary Johnson is a Libertarian.

Thinking people need to listen to what politicians say and compare it to what they do. Liberty is not top down. It starts with the individual and radiates out from there. Without individual liberty there is no liberty, no matter what label is pasted on.

Feeding the Abscess
07-25-2016, 08:41 PM
July 25 2017: The GOP is in ruins, with conservatives fleeing en masse after a nominee they were barely able to stomach suffers the third catastrophic Republican defeat in eight years. The Democratic Party has won a Pyrrhic victory, putting Hillary in the White House at the cost of permanently alienating their most enthusiastic and fastest growing constituency. Meanwhile, Gary Johnson's surprise victory in Utah and his double digit showing nationwide has the media abuzz about "the rise of the libertarians," as the Libertarian Party is awarded matching funds and automatic ballot access across the country.

...who gives a flying $#@! about Bill Weld?

Rise of the Libertarian Party, sure, but will the Libertarian Party be libertarian after this election?

r3volution 3.0
07-25-2016, 08:44 PM
Rise of the Libertarian Party, sure, but will the Libertarian Party be libertarian after this election?

If it only gets 1%, will it matter either way?

Feeding the Abscess
07-25-2016, 08:47 PM
If it only gets 1%, will it matter either way?

Selling out and only getting 1% is the possible death of the party. Not selling out and getting similar results means it could live to fight another day.

r3volution 3.0
07-25-2016, 08:49 PM
Selling out and only getting 1% is the possible death of the party. Not selling out and getting similar results means it could live to fight another day.

If it can't get more than 1% this cycle, I don't think it ever will.

euphemia
07-25-2016, 09:05 PM
The thing to have done would have been to realize the proposed takeover of the Republican party in 2008 did not work. Lick your wounds and get over it. Then roll up your sleeves, hammer out a decent platform that extends liberty to all and find some articulate and sober candidates to run for office on those issues.

But no, nobody wanted to do that because it's about the individual and we should all have our opinion. Okay. That's what we have now, and the Libertarian ticket is the worst ever.

milgram
07-25-2016, 09:52 PM
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-libertarian-johnson-weld-trump-clinton-perspec-0720-jm-20160719-story.html


Weld: We would propose to hire, ideally, if elected, the very best minds of the Democratic Party, the very best minds of the Republican Party. And we would approach Congress not as partisans, and they would know that half our people were of their party, so they might take it a little better than if we were giving them a sermon that they had to do it this way. They might look and see some familiar faces that they'd known before from their own party. They would not be rigid partisans, though, that would be the difference. So we might get somewhere with Congress by sort of this bipartisan approach that would be easier for us to do than for a partisan administration.

Well it's good they aren't winning

wizardwatson
07-25-2016, 09:58 PM
You know, I thought we had something that covered;

#NEVERTRUMP
#NEVERHILLARY
#NEVERJOHNSON

...it went something like;

#NoOneButPaul

If it ain't broke... :rolleyes:

69360
07-25-2016, 10:15 PM
Your premise is flawed. Nobody expects Johnson to win, therefore scotus is irrelevant. He and Weld serve to further a real third party.

Honestly all of you bitching about a decent guy like Johnson who isn't going to be potus, over some pet issue are counterproductive to the extreme. You will never accomplish anything politically in your life.

dannno
07-25-2016, 11:24 PM
Maybe we should give the OP a break.. I mean he voted for the biggest snake the Republican Party, and a concept as simple as Republicans talking about being fiscally conservative and then acting like a kid in a candy store when it comes to military spending is a complex abstraction of thought for them.

Occam's Banana
07-25-2016, 11:58 PM
Everyone who realizes that rewarding bad behavior will cause the LP to nominate an even worse ticket in 4 years, if that is possible. They might pick Pence/Kaine in 2020, and y'all will still be saying we need to all get behind them for moar matching funds.

Sounds like a great way to make "Libertarian" as much of an arbitrary and meaningless label as "Republican" and "Democrat" already are ...

Natural Citizen
07-25-2016, 11:58 PM
Honestly all of you bitching about a decent guy like Johnson...over some pet issue are counterproductive to the extreme. You will never accomplish anything politically in your life.

A presidential candidate who is recklessly being promoted under the banner of Liberty and who openly admits a rejection of Individual Liberty's most fundamental principle is in no way a "pet issue." Not today. Not tomorrow. Not any day. If one is so led to accept that a presidential candidate's openly admitted rejection of Individual Liberty's most fundamental principle is some kind of "pet issue", then one's priorities are misguided. And if ones priorities are misguided to that extent, then, one likely has no fundamental understanding of or regard for what Liberty fundamentally and truly is.

The government has one role. It's only role is to protect Individual Liberty. Nothing else. That said, you'd likely do well to try to think things through better if you're going to pop your mouth off in such a pompous way about political counterintuitiveness, scooter. Because if you're organizing in a political manner to promote a presidential candidate who openly admits a rejection of Individual Liberty's most fundamental principle, then, you're functioning in a manner that is politically and patently aggressive toward the concept of Individual Liberty fully.

To your credit, though, it is true that most people who are led to indulge in coercion understand little of its function and often demonstrate very little regard for its consequence. People want to feel like a participant. People want to feel relevant. They want to feel like they are contributing to something. I get it. I really do. And while pride is certainly an ignorant sin, I can't be that Judge. Nor will I attempt to be. But if you're going to make a claim like you just did here about Individual Liberty's most fundamental principle being a "pet issue" or regard for it being extremely counterproductive, then, you'd sure as sht do well to think it through because you're going to be expected to support the claim.

Lovecraftian4Paul
07-26-2016, 02:24 AM
I'm not for Johnson this time, but these #NeverX movements are getting really old.

luctor-et-emergo
07-26-2016, 02:28 AM
If you won't vote for Johnson, then please don't tell me you're about to vote for Trump or I'll die laughing.

Occam's Banana
07-26-2016, 02:35 AM
I'm not for Johnson this time, but these #NeverX movements are getting really old.

I agree! #NeverNeverX

r3volution 3.0
07-26-2016, 02:36 AM
I'm not for Johnson this time, but these #NeverX movements are getting really old.

#NeverNeverX

r3volution 3.0
07-26-2016, 02:37 AM
You stole my thought banana, #NeverBananas

Occam's Banana
07-26-2016, 02:43 AM
You stole my thought banana, #NeverBananas

Great minds. #AlwaysBananas ;)

CaptUSA
07-26-2016, 04:12 AM
Great minds. #AlwaysBananas ;)

http://www.quickmeme.com/img/7f/7fa4d0e7a1fdeb05fc22a375806218222712f0ba10beb7fa40 281c72d28f5b2a.jpg

Occam's Banana
07-26-2016, 05:06 AM
Ron Paul is my President.


http://www.quickmeme.com/img/7f/7fa4d0e7a1fdeb05fc22a375806218222712f0ba10beb7fa40 281c72d28f5b2a.jpg

(Best "Bad Lip Reading" episode ever ^^^)

ligant
07-26-2016, 05:58 AM
If your answer doesn't include Clarence Thomas, then you have bad views.


You mean the same Clarence Thomas who:

1. Voted for this: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?497257-Supreme-Court-Rules-Illegally-Gathered-Evidence-Can-Be-Used-Against-Defendants
2. Dissented in Lawrence v. Texas
3. Dissented in Boumediene v. Bush, Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, Rasul v. Bush

???

presence
07-26-2016, 06:28 AM
It does read like something Ron Paul would say. I don't mean that as a positive. That paragraph is like an Escher drawing.

well there was a pretty substantial typo by the reporter / transcript you have to read past



Let's get Congress involved and a declaration of war and how we move forward.
Let's get Congress involved and get a declaration of war before we move forward.


And mandatory sending, ending the Drug War.
End mandatory sentencing, ending the Drug War.

undergroundrr
07-26-2016, 09:54 AM
I want to see Johnson(/Weld) do really well this election. And I want to see it done with stolen leftwing votes. Johnson and Weld should not pander to "conservatives" AT ALL. They should keep reiterating that they're minority-friendly, pro-choice, pro-gay marriage and at the same time present fiscal conservatism as something liberals can get behind. In the process they will pick up moderate republican votes en masse and leave the miniscule pack of alt-right banshees in their moms' basements.


Weld: We would propose to hire, ideally, if elected, the very best minds of the Democratic Party, the very best minds of the Republican Party. And we would approach Congress not as partisans, and they would know that half our people were of their party, so they might take it a little better than if we were giving them a sermon that they had to do it this way. They might look and see some familiar faces that they'd known before from their own party. They would not be rigid partisans, though, that would be the difference. So we might get somewhere with Congress by sort of this bipartisan approach that would be easier for us to do than for a partisan administration.

I think the idea of forming coalitions that are 1 part Democrat, 1 part Republican, chosen from non-partisans is outstanding. As romantic as Tom Woods and Judge Napolitano in the cabinet sounds, a (L)ibertarian president would have no choice but to engage the two major parties head on. This is super-sensible and honestly attractive to me. And I bet it sounds great to disaffected repubs and dems.

Also, I'm delighted Weld didn't pick Clarence Thomas as a good example because it's pretty much the same as endorsing Dick Cheney for anybody on the left.

I'm not sure what the OP means by unethical (is this about the fake pistol again?), but Gary Johnson is the Archangel Gabriel compared to 99% of Washington, DC.