Libertarian debate w/ Stossel on Fox Business April 1 & 8- FULL VIDEO ADDED

[mac_hine]

So who won? I say Mcafee. Peterson second. Johnson a distant third.

[r3volution 3.0]

Bottom line, Gary will get the most votes.

He'll be the nominee if the LP has any sense.

[r3volution 3.0]

LOL, immediately following the Libertarian debate Fox is airing a propaganda piece about how the military is underfunded.

[kahless]

Did they discuss immigration and securing the border at all?

I wish FBN or someone would do a Constitution Party debate.

[Rothbardian Girl]

[r3volution 3.0]

^^^That was unfortunate, I winced.

[bunklocoempire]

Now bake me a cake, handsome? (the smooch?)

I guess I missed that part.

[Libertas Aut Mortis]

Here is my take:

Johnson:
Worse than I thought. His social policy is in no way libertarian, it is purely libertine. He wants to use government coercion to implement socially "liberal" policy. I am just not okay with government having any sort of role whatsoever in that regard. I am so sick of hearing that libertarians are "socially liberal". I am for one, not, at all. However, that is my private virtue. Anyone who has seen A Clockwork Orange should understand that forcing morality completely destroys morality. You have to accept the fact that people have different values. Forcing "conservative" social law is no worse than forcing "liberal" social law. GET RID OF THE DAMN LAWS. PERIOD. END OF STORY. His economic policy is absolutely clear that he is in no way respectful of property rights or individual liberty. He is an egalitarian leftist who leans towards fiscal responsibility. No thank you.


McAfee:
He is charming in a weird sort of way. I've called him "a character with a character". I really like his genuineness. However, I am measuring policy, not person (or at least im trying not to). I think he is fantastic when thinking about Cyber Defense, but I am not sure how he could implement it in a constitutional or libertarian way. Outside of this, I have relatively few complaints, he seems well rounded, a little more pragmatic than principled perhaps, but overall, a solid candidate.

Peterson:

Peterson is a complete f*ckboy. However; if I support any of the 3, it will be him. I have no desire to be a Freedom Ninja...actually, that sounds kinda cool....but behind his stupid slogans and mannerisms, he has a fantastic philosophical mindset. He is a Constitutionalist when attempting to 'get things done', such as war with ISIS, but bringing back Letters of M and A. That is a fantastic position. He respects Liberty and Property clearly...and of very particular interest to me, he respects life with the same vigor. I do not really care how you craft the argument of pro-choice as an issue of Liberty, it is an issue of Life for the child. Now, if this issue did not exist...Peterson would still be my guy of the 3. He simply comes off as a Paul-ite.

So if i could mix and match them all.

I would take Petersons policy positions and philosophy, his youthful and upbeat energy and enthusiasm, and maybe a few of his corny jokes, and cross them with McAfees ruggedness, real world intellect, and weird persona....and I would go fly Johnson to the Sanders campaign so he can start making stump speeches for his ideological ally.


EDIT: I like McAfee more and more every time I hear him. I am highly concerned that Peterson is all Slogan, no Backbone. It's not that I dislike Peterson, it is that he seems more concerned about sound-bites and saying something edgy than a mature articulation of his philosophy. McAfee suffers from the exact opposite issue. I would like to see them run together.....and Johnson can take a hike.

[Libertas Aut Mortis]

McAfee's Time in Belize, Video Released by his YouTube Channel (i don't know how to pop the video up in the thread itself, so either click the link or do me a favor and link it correctly ) The second link is Alex Jones and McAfee in talking about Belize.

https://youtu.be/fIaUlqhLmaw

https://youtu.be/irS5GRQt_KE

Thank you Opal....ahhh, why is this hyperlinked...I wish I was capable of understanding technology

[opal]

here ya go



well crapamundo! the link shows in the edit.. but I forgot, I can't see vid embeds .. still no clue why

[afwjam]

Crappy but something, debate starts at 2hr48m

[ThePaleoLibertarian]

I'm not with McAfee on everything, but he's by far the best out of the three. I still say we should sell the SF Bay Area to him, whole-cloth. Give him ultimate and complete executive power over running the place, and see what he does over a five year period.

[misterx]

^^^That was unfortunate, I winced.

That was just plain weird.

[RonPaulGeorge&Ringo]

Petersen opened by calling himself an "anti-establishment" candidate. What a f@cking joke. He has trolled hardcore for the establishment on 9/11 and any other number of issues. He really needs to STFU.

[Bern]

Here is my take:

Fair enough, but I don't think anyone outside of the LP and remnants of the Ron Paul crowd are going to take him seriously. He's just too young and his quick, canned answers don't inspire confidence that he has really given things serious thought. Imo, of the 3, he would likely do the worst in the general election. He really should try and cut his teeth on a local or statewide race and get some experience in the great sausage factory. Would help his credibility tremendously.

I really wanted GJ to shine as he has some credibility having been a two term governor with a record to back his rhetoric, but I really thought McAfee won round 1. He (McAfee) seemed a bit nervous at times, but he still managed to be responsive, clear and coherent and present himself as a serious individual. I thought of the 3, he is the most likely to capture some interest from the broader electorate (outside the LP) based upon what I saw last night.

[jct74]

Part 1 of debate aired on April 1



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iib0nyobUQM

[jct74]

Stossel interview on Fox News yesterday promoting the debate



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jK5snyfGX84

[Jan2017]

found this about Petersen . . .

Austin Petersen on the Perception of Isolationism

You know, obviously terrorism is a threat but we have got to resist these politicans who are going to fear monger as an excuse to take away our liberties.
Stand up to people who use every tragedy as an excuse to take away our constitutional rights.

Now listen. Thomas Jefferson had the Islamic terrorists of his day. He still managed to fight them Constitutionally.
After 9/11, Congressman Ron Paul went to the Congress and asked for Letters of Marque and Reprisal. Congress should update these letters.
Article I, Section 8 of the US Constitution would give us powerful tools to fight ISIS in a way that doesn’t involve invasion, occupation, and nation building.

http://austinpetersen2016.com/peters...rum-responses/


---------------
Not really sure what he means though when he said. . . "Congress should update these letters" - misspeak or misunderstanding.
Letters of Marque were used hundreds of times in the War of 1812

---------------
There is a poll on the debate . . . not very many responses.
http://theconservatarianusa.com/poll...e-or-petersen/

[farreri]

I'm cool with a Johnson/McAfee ticket.

[undergroundrr]

Brilliant article by a young fellow at... of all places... The Blaze. Totally echoes my views and I'll bet those of many others here.

http://www.theblaze.com/contribution...g-libertarian/

Excerpt:

"When Paul dropped out in February to focus on his Senate campaign, I was in shock. I couldn’t forgive Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) for his foreign policy and his betrayal of criminal justice reform, along with his position on the USA Freedom Act. Gov. John Kasich (R-Ohio) is a delusional man pretending to be the “moderate” choice in this three-man race. And Trump is a progressive masking himself as a right-wing populist who has given the greatest performance in the history of American politics.


I chose the Libertarian Party after Paul dropped out. My beliefs in limited government, restrained military action, immigration reform, ending the War on Drugs and protecting civil liberties clashed too much with the Republican Party. I cannot in good conscience vote for a Democrat, a televangelist, or a moderate.

I agree with the Libertarian Party far more than I agree with the Republican Party. They espouse limited government and believe in it, unlike “Republicans” such as Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Trump. They understand that it is the free-market, not the government, that creates jobs. They understand the War on Drugs has gone too far and that is has done nothing but make things worse. And most importantly, they understand that the neo-conservative foreign policy the United States has implemented for the past twenty-five years is a disaster.

Paul did, but he’s gone now."

[Jordan Liberty]

Johnson, as a former governor, has the best chance of getting more votes in an election. Personally, I like McAfee, but his personality and questionable history would hurt him in an election. Petersen says all the right things, but he just seemed to be pandering to the libertarian audience the entire debate. I'm sure he believes what he says, but it seemed like he was looking for the applause like a libertarian Rubio (yuck). I'll be voting for McAfee in the primary. He understands the libertarian philosophy, and he brings something to the table that none of the other candidates can, cybersecurity. His explanation of a terrorist plot pattern analysis has me intrigued. It may sound like science-fiction ala The Minority Report, but I would like to hear more details on how he can build such a system. I would happily vote for Johnson if he's the LP nominee. For some reason Petersen rubs me the wrong way, but he'd be a better option than the mainstream choices.

[afwjam]

Mcafee.

[farreri]

Personally, I like McAfee, but his personality and questionable history would hurt him in an election.

What questionable history?

[staerker]

I think if McAfee got into the general election debates, he would actually have a chance of winning.

He seems smart, rugged, and comprehensible. Has a toned down Trump vibe, but everyone will be sick of both Hilary and Trump.

[Jordan Liberty]

What questionable history?

This was addressed in the debate. He was a person of interest in a murder case in Belize. Some actually believe McAfee did it, but it was never proven. He was also convicted of a DUI. He has a nice response to these accusations, however. He cleared up that he was only a person of interest, not a suspect, and he owned up to the DUI. I just know that if he were an actual threat to the mainstream candidates the media would hammer him on these accusations.

I think if McAfee got into the general election debates, he would actually have a chance of winning.

He seems smart, rugged, and comprehensible. Has a toned down Trump vibe, but everyone will be sick of both Hilary and Trump.

Agreed. He has way more personality than Johnson, and he provides clear and concise answers.

[luctor-et-emergo]

This was addressed in the debate. He was a person of interest in a murder case in Belize. Some actually believe McAfee did it, but it was never proven. He was also convicted of a DUI. He has a nice response to these accusations, however. He cleared up that he was only a person of interest, not a suspect, and he owned up to the DUI. I just know that if he were an actual threat to the mainstream candidates the media would hammer him on these accusations.

His story goes as follows;

-He went to Belize to live a nice life and to spend some of his millions in researching antibiotics through new techniques which he was hoping to find material for in the jungle there.
-He was approached to do a 2mln$ donation by a local politician.
-He refused.
-His lab got raided, his dog was shot with a US supplied assault rifle, he was handcuffed and not treated well while they destroyed half a million dollars worth of his property.
-They didn't find any evidence of illegal drug production.
-No chargers were filed, he was released.
-Shortly after, same politician comes back to him, says he's sorry about what happened to him and if he reconsidered his donation.

-He then claims to have at some point donated a bunch of computers to the government of Belize onto which he installed key-loggers and other monitoring software.
-He then claims to have uncovered a lot of criminal activity by high placed officials in the Belize government. [Including selling fake identities]

-At some point in all of this he had fights with his neighbor about his dog that barked.
-His neighbor had made complaints about that.

This is near the end;

-At some point McAfee's dog was killed.
-Then his neighbor was killed.
-Then he ran off because he felt like he was set up.



Now this is the story I remember him telling from several interviews. I believe all the facts are as he mentioned them.

As far as I'm aware his story isn't contradicted by anyone.

[jct74]

Justin likes Austin Peterson

[RonPaulGeorge&Ringo]

Considering he also likes natural-born Canadian Ted Cruz, that's really not saying much.

[chudrockz]

If only the LP had someone with the charisma and persuasive skills of a Harry Browne this time around...!

[undergroundrr]

His story goes as follows;

-He went to Belize to live a nice life and to spend some of his millions in researching antibiotics through new techniques which he was hoping to find material for in the jungle there.
-He was approached to do a 2mln$ donation by a local politician.
-He refused.
-His lab got raided, his dog was shot with a US supplied assault rifle, he was handcuffed and not treated well while they destroyed half a million dollars worth of his property.
-They didn't find any evidence of illegal drug production.
-No chargers were filed, he was released.
-Shortly after, same politician comes back to him, says he's sorry about what happened to him and if he reconsidered his donation.

-He then claims to have at some point donated a bunch of computers to the government of Belize onto which he installed key-loggers and other monitoring software.
-He then claims to have uncovered a lot of criminal activity by high placed officials in the Belize government. [Including selling fake identities]

-At some point in all of this he had fights with his neighbor about his dog that barked.
-His neighbor had made complaints about that.

This is near the end;

-At some point McAfee's dog was killed.
-Then his neighbor was killed.
-Then he ran off because he felt like he was set up.



Now this is the story I remember him telling from several interviews. I believe all the facts are as he mentioned them.

As far as I'm aware his story isn't contradicted by anyone.

Thanks. That's a helpful summary.

If he's a candidate, he'd better be ready to answer that succinctly, convincingly and with a smile about 300 times, because it will be the first line of questioning in any major media interview. Discussions of substance about ideas would be few and far between with the constant derailing about his background.

I also have the perception from articles I've read that he's lived basically as a transient out of his vehicle for years on end and has a background of substance abuse and general libertine-ism.

I honestly think this would all get him tons of press and a degree more visibility in the end than even Gary Johnson. But he would have to play the campaign flawlessly and without any chinks in his rhetorical or personality armor, turning weaknesses into strengths to develop and maintain credibility. Otherwise, the LP would have a hard time living down the resulting image and wouldn't be taken seriously for many years.