Never Gary Johnson: He’s Not Conservative and Not Even All That Libertarian - James Spiller

[ligant]

Danno, it's not that. It's about honestly looking at Johnson and determining whether he deserves being tagged as a liberty candidate by this forum. I never thought Trump should be, but I also don't think Johnson merits it either. I mean, look at his positions honestly, Danno.

Dave Brat merits it?
Because:

The latest effort to force a vote on the ongoing US war against ISIS, this time by Rep. Barbara Lee (D – CA), failed once again, with the amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) shot down 138-285, in a vote heavily along party lines.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2016/roll210.xml

http://news.antiwar.com/2016/05/18/h...authorization/

[dannno]

Volutaryists are very close relatives to libertarians.



Ron claims to be one.

Yet Ron also takes part in the political process and votes..

Here's the thing, I totally agree with all the statements in that post you quoted, but I am also totally ok with using the electoral process to achieve more liberty. They aren't incompatible. You can say, "I wish we didn't have electoral politics or the political process, I don't advocate using them, but I am still going to try and maximize the amount of liberty I have by participating in electoral politics because it rules over me."

Was it Plato that said if you don't participate in politics, you will be ruled by your inferiors?

[Ronin Truth]

Yet Ron also takes part in the political process and votes..

Here's the thing, I totally agree with all the statements in that post you quoted, but I am also totally ok with using the electoral process to achieve more liberty. They aren't incompatible. You can say, "I wish we didn't have electoral politics or the political process, I don't advocate using them, but I am still going to try and maximize the amount of liberty I have by participating in electoral politics because it rules over me."

Was it Plato that said if you don't participate in politics, you will be ruled by your inferiors?

When it comes to ruling me, they are ALL always my inferiors, whether I'm involved in politics or not. Always have been, always will be.

Screw 'em and the horse they rode in. That goes for Plato too, for that matter.

[dannno]

When it comes to ruling me, they are ALL always my inferiors, whether I'm involved in politics or not. Always have been, always will be.

Screw 'em and the horse they rode in. That goes for Plato too, for that matter.

You are inferior to yourself?

That sounds more like a tantrum than a solution.

[farreri]

It's about honestly looking at Johnson and determining whether he deserves being tagged as a liberty candidate by this forum.
I also don't think Johnson merits it either. I mean, look at his positions honestly, Danno.

Do you think Johnson is closer to liberty candidates, or closer to authoritarian candidates?

[younglibertarian]

Do you think Johnson is closer to liberty candidates, or closer to authoritarian candidates?

I don't doubt he is on our side.

I just don't think he is the right man for the job, especially due to his personality....

[farreri]

I don't doubt he is on our side.

I just don't think he is the right man for the job, especially due to his personality....

Who do you think is better that will also have a good chance of winning over the rest of the country? It doesn't do any good to select the most libertarian candidate if they are hardly going to get any votes.

[Ronin Truth]

You are inferior to yourself?

Sometimes.

That sounds more like a tantrum than a solution.

What solution? What's the problem? No ruler, no problem.

//

[erowe1]

I am not enamored with any of the top 3. Philosophically I align with Petersen. I like McAffe because he shoots right from the hip. I think Johnson is the most electable.

I am prepared to support any of them if fr no other reason than breaking the 2 party system. But if history is any indicator, the young rabid libertarians will not pull together after the primary. 2/3 rds will slink off and put, proudly refusing to vote for the lesser evil who won the nomination.

Which makes pandering to them pointless.

That's pretty much where I am.

But I still just may not vote in November.

[specsaregood]

That's pretty much where I am.

But I still just may not vote in November.

My #1 issue and reason I initially supported Dr. Paul was his position on the federal reserve. The CP candidate openly says on his website under issues that he would repeal the Federal Reserve Act. (http://castle2016.com/issues/) As long as I have a candidate that will say that, then that candidate will get my vote. He has as much of a chance of winning as GJ.

[GunnyFreedom]

Sorry but I need to spread some reputation around... But THIS ^^.

He's not perfect, he might not really be a hardcore conservative or hardcore libertarian. He is however not a crony. He is a guy who has a heart. He has a record as a two term governor and it's certainly not a bad record! He did well as a governor, he might have been able to do better as a dictator but we don't want dictators, do we ?

I am a strict Constitutionalist. If a candidate wants my vote, then they will uphold and defend the Constitution. Johnson spent most of the 2012 pissing on the Constitution. If I am still outside of my grave, then I will not vote for this anticonstitutional ass clown.

[dannno]

The CP candidate openly says on his website under issues that he would repeal the Federal Reserve Act. (http://castle2016.com/issues/) As long as I have a candidate that will say that, then that candidate will get my vote.

[GJ] also states that he would not veto a bill that would end the Federal Reserve.

He has as much of a chance of winning as GJ.

LOL...

[GunnyFreedom]

That's pretty much where I am.

But I still just may not vote in November.

There is almost certainly a downballot race of some sort that needs your help.

[specsaregood]

saying one would not veto a bill is not nearly the same thing as advocating. it just furthers my impression that GJ is a giant vagina. and as I said, he has just as much chance (which is to say none) but 2nd, 3rd, 4th doesn't matter when only the winner needs moving vans.

[dannno]

saying one would not veto a bill is not nearly the same thing as advocating. and as I said, he has just as much chance (which is to say none) but 2nd, 3rd, 4th doesn't matter when only the winner needs moving vans.

Dude, you are really picky...at least he is ok with abolishing it...99.9% of other politicians would say, "No, but we NEED the federal reserve!!"

...Johnson supported ending the Federal Reserve when questioned about the issue in an online town hall

He's not pure, not perfect, but he's pretty good..

[acptulsa]

saying one would not veto a bill is not nearly the same thing as advocating. it just furthers my impression that GJ is a giant vagina. and as I said, he has just as much chance (which is to say none) but 2nd, 3rd, 4th doesn't matter when only the winner needs moving vans.

Third can mean everything. Just throwing an election to the House would be a major victory.

[specsaregood]

Dude, you are really picky...at least he is ok with abolishing it...99.9% of other politicians would say, "No, but we NEED the federal reserve!!"

I'm not picky, it just happens to be my #1 issue and like I said, the main reason I discovered and started supporting Dr. Paul. I read Castle's issues page and I'm in 100% agreement. it works for me, GJ has always come across as a petty douche, there is simply nothing he could say at this point that would win my support for him.

[dannno]

I'm not picky, it just happens to be my #1 issue and like I said, the main reason I discovered and started supporting Dr. Paul. I read Castle's issues page and I'm in 100% agreement. it works for me, GJ has always come across as a petty douche, there is simply nothing he could say at this point that would win my support for him.

If it's your #1 issue then you would see the advantage in choosing somebody who is open and willing to go with your position on the issue, especially when the tide is completely against it.

[undergroundrr]

So, you're advocating for a lesser of 3 evils thing? That's your choice, of course, but that's not what makes one a liberty candidate.

I disagree with Gary Johnson on some things, and I agree that he may not deserve an A or even an A- as a liberty candidate. But Gary Johnson doesn't even get close to evil. Voting for Gary Johnson is voting for a good. It's not even in the same ball park as trumpary.

The two GJ stances (to me) that might exhibit evilness are:

1. Pro-choice. But his policy stance is identical to Ron Paul's - leave it to the states. He's firmly in 10th amendment liberty camp with that. GJ has vocally encouraged the overturn of Roe vs Wade as a fundamental policy stance.

2. Pro-humanitarian wars. Although he doesn't exactly subscribe to Ron Paul's Augustinian Just War theory, he's policy-wise the same as Ron and Rand Paul - get a declaration of war. Going after Kony is a bad idea, but it's orders of magnitude less evil than Bush interventions and the kind of interventionist attempts at ISIS eradication and oil stealing that trump is proposing. And it's irrelevant anyway if there's not a congress who will take it on their shoulders to declare it. I'm not bothered with his keeping drones on the table. The president is commander-in-chief and should be prepared to take the gloves off with a full arsenal if the country truly, truly needs to be defended.

I changed my mind. A-

[GunnyFreedom]

If it's your #1 issue then you would see the advantage in choosing somebody who is open and willing to go with your position on the issue, especially when the tide is completely against it.

Why vote for a guy who is with your prime issue at 40% when there is another guy with an equal chance of winning who is with your prime issue at 98%?

[dannno]

Why vote for a guy who is with your prime issue at 40% when there is another guy with an equal chance of winning who is with your prime issue at 98%?

CP does not have equal chance of winning, GJ is at 10% in the polls and he could get a lot of support from disaffected Sanders supporters and/or Republicans/libertarians. That's why I'm glad he takes the position he does on gay marriage and other leftist pet issues, like abortion. People need to get over that $#@! and unite on what is important, taxes, spending, foreign policy, etc, we can clear up the details later.

[specsaregood]

If it's your #1 issue then you would see the advantage in choosing somebody who is open and willing to go with your position on the issue, especially when the tide is completely against it.

Somebody that merely pays lip service to my #1 issue but does not advocate or even understand why he should support the same position is not anything better. It is somebody not worth trusting.

I dare say that if a candidate simply said, "I wouldn't veto a bill decriminalizing marijuana," that candidate wouldn't get your support. You'd be just as untrusting of them as I am on ending the fed.

[younglibertarian]

I am a strict Constitutionalist. If a candidate wants my vote, then they will uphold and defend the Constitution. Johnson spent most of the 2012 pissing on the Constitution. If I am still outside of my grave, then I will not vote for this anticonstitutional ass clown.

Have you looked into Austin Petersen?

He is a libertarian who believes and would uphold the constitution.

[Feelgood]

Wouldn't it be awesome if one of these years they held an election and nobody showed up to vote?

You wouldn't even know it though. Media would falsely report record turn out and voting. Would falsely report the numbers as they came in from the Diebold machines. It would be business as usual, and no one would be the wiser.

[Ronin Truth]

Have you looked into Austin Petersen?

He is a libertarian who believes and would uphold the constitution.

Then I seriously have to doubt that he's really a libertarian.

[unknown]

I would agree with the article that Johnson isnt the best Libertarian option.

That having been said, between Chump and Hitlery, I would damn near prefer Satan.

Since Rand isnt the nominee, I will almost definitely vote for the Libertarian candidate.

Have you looked into Austin Petersen?

He is a libertarian who believes and would uphold the constitution.

I think Austin has a better understanding of Liberty than Johnson.

[Ronin Truth]

I would agree with the article that Johnson isnt the best Libertarian option.

That having been said, between Chump and Hitlery, I would damn near prefer Satan.

Since Rand isnt the nominee, I will almost definitely vote for the Libertarian candidate.




I think Austin has a better understanding of Liberty than Johnson.

Since Satan rules and controls ALL human governments, you ALWAYS get your damned near preference, regardless.

[GunnyFreedom]

Have you looked into Austin Petersen?

He is a libertarian who believes and would uphold the constitution.

Can't stand him. He decided to hate on Ron Paul when it really counted, so even when he says 'good' things I question his sincerity. I don't believe a word he says.

[William Tell]

Why vote for a guy who is with your prime issue at 40% when there is another guy with an equal chance of winning who is with your prime issue at 98%?

And why vote on electability rather than principle?

[cajuncocoa]

CP does not have equal chance of winning, GJ is at 10% in the polls and he could get a lot of support from disaffected Sanders supporters and/or Republicans/libertarians. That's why I'm glad he takes the position he does on gay marriage and other leftist pet issues, like abortion. People need to get over that $#@! and unite on what is important, taxes, spending, foreign policy, etc, we can clear up the details later.

I honestly think disaffected Sanders supporters are more likely to go Green Party than LP.