Campaign Evaluation: Johnson / Weld Ticket (POTUS)

[farreri]

weld is an F

An economic conservative and socially tolerant/inclusive politician gets an F?

[younglibertarian]

I motion a B grade

[younglibertarian]

D for weld, however

[afwjam]

An economic conservative and socially tolerant/inclusive politician gets an F?

Niether Weld or Johnson cut spending as governer, it increased along with debt. Welds record on guns is clearly questionable as are his positions on government using eminent domain and affording special privileges. Add to that his chairman status on CFR and you have a very questionable conservative let alone libertarian.

[farreri]

Bill Weld: A personal message for Delegates to the Libertarian National Convention.

https://www.facebook.com/BillWeld201...43221959255516

[afwjam]

Bill Weld: A personal message for Delegates to the Libertarian National Convention.

https://www.facebook.com/BillWeld201...43221959255516

Weld on CNN May 22nd: "I distinguish between hunting guns and guns that don't seem to have any hunting purpose or potential purpose." In addition to his bragging for making Bushes administration the most pro Israel, weld is not our ally.

[farreri]

In addition to his bragging for making Bushes administration the most pro Israel

Ron & Rand are pretty pro-Israel.

[afwjam]

Ron & Rand are pretty pro-Israel.

Thats their problem, but at least they don't make up artificial distinctions between guns.

[farreri]

Thats their problem, but at least they don't make up artificial distinctions between guns.

Keep in mind Weld was a republican governor of one of the most liberal states over 10 yrs ago. Positions can change a lot in 10 yrs.

[afwjam]

Keep in mind Weld was a republican governor of one of the most liberal states over 10 yrs ago. Positions can change a lot in 10 yrs.

Has his position changed since he said it last week?

[dannno]

Ron & Rand are pretty pro-Israel.

Ron is pro-Palestine too

Rand very well might be also, not sure though based on past public statements

[dannno]

Johnson is a solid B-, weld is an F, this puts the ticket in D territory. I'm a bit of a pessimist about these things but I think if we were able to shine some light on the ticket and its motivations it would be an F. I just do not trust people that compromise to win popularity contests.

If they are compromising for liberty, it's all good imo. Have you ever seen G. Edward Griffin's talk called, "An Idea Whose Time Has Come" ?

I think the grade of the candidate should have more effect on the final grade than the grade of the VP.

I would give Weld a D+, GJ a B and overall maybe a C+ or B-

[LibertyEagle]

An economic conservative and socially tolerant/inclusive politician gets an F?

He's not a conservative. Are you kidding??? He's a high-ranking CFR member and the co-chair of the CFR's Task Force to build a North American Union.
http://www.cfr.org/canada/building-n...ommunity/p8102

So yes, he deserves an F.

Johnson merits a C- at the very best.

[Bryan]

Our grading scale has the following:

• Moves Mission forward: A to B
• Maintain status quo: C
• Move Mission backwards: D to F

Note: If the liberty position is the status quo it can be advanced in various ways such as raising public awareness of its importance.

It's clear that Gary is not a pure A / B type candidate as he does not fight against the status quo in some desired areas, but in what way would he make things worse? That would be needed to grade him below a C. If he moves our agenda forward in some ways but is status quo in others he'll be more in the B range; so long as he doesn't have any D-F positions.

[erowe1]

An economic conservative and socially tolerant/inclusive politician gets an F?

You say "socially tolerant/inclusive" like it's a good thing.

[erowe1]

He's not a conservative. Are you kidding??? He's a high-ranking CFR member and the co-chair of the CFR's Task Force to build a North American Union.
http://www.cfr.org/canada/building-n...ommunity/p8102

So yes, he deserves an F.

What exactly is his rank in the CFR?

Why do you refer to a "Task Force to build a North American Union," even using capital letters? Is that the official name of the task force? Do their recommendations include the formation of an NAU? Or is that just your way of smearing them?

Can you quote specific actual words from that task force's recommendations that you think warrant giving any politician who supports them an F?

[LibertyEagle]

What exactly is his rank in the CFR?

Why do you refer to a "Task Force to build a North American Union," even using capital letters? Is that the official name of the task force? Do their recommendations include the formation of an NAU? Or is that just your way of smearing them?

Can you quote specific actual words from that task force's recommendations that you think warrant giving any politician who supports them an F?

I provided a link. Try clicking on it.

[erowe1]

I provided a link. Try clicking on it.

Does anything in that link show a reason to give Weld an F? I couldn't see anything that did. In fact, the link contradicted your entire post. If you have any reasons that you are capable of explaining yourself, that are based on actual facts and not mischaracterizations, please share.

[LibertyEagle]

Gary Johnson holds the same position as Ron Paul on abortion from an executive perspective - he believes it should be up to the states.

Yes and no. Ron Paul was about ending abortion any way he had to do it. Many people missed him talking about his legislation which would have ended Roe v. Wade and that would have made abortion classified as murder. What would have been left up to the states is how they wanted to prosecute it.

So, Ron was actively trying to get abortion ended and he was doing it at the federal level. Have you heard Johnson lay out any of his own plans? Because the President to my knowledge cannot overturn Roe v. Wade. So, his personal belief DOES matter here. He has said he believes in the woman's "right to choose" and his position appears to be that the woman can abort her baby up until the point that it can live outside of the womb. THIS IS MURDER. There is no other definition. So, unless you can show me where he has said what the plans to do what Ron was, Johnson earns an F on this.

He has by far the best foreign policy of any of the other candidates, even much better than Donald Trump who you support.

I don't agree. But, we are talking about Johnson here, aren't we? Trump already received his F.

He is for scaling back the military immensely, I've heard he wants to cut it by 43%.

How? He has said he doesn't want to close any bases in the Middle East, so how does he plan to do it?

Why would he take drone strikes off the table? Rand only took drone strikes off the table for American citizens not actively engaged in combat, he certainly didn't take drone strikes off the table - Ron Paul would probably use drone strikes in the right situation, if congress declared war and it was the most effective means of neutralizing the enemy.

Yes, but did you hear Johnson qualifying their use like the Paul's? I certainly did not.

I think this is highly unlikely, do you have any sources? He said he might want to keep some US bases in Afghanistan, even if we end the conflict. That does not equal "does not want to close ANY military bases". And that's not a deal breaker when he wants to cut military by 43% and massively curtailing our overseas empire.

Did he give any specifics? I could be wrong about the ALL, Danno, but I sure thought I read it somewhere. When I went to find a link however, all I could find are those of him saying he wouldn't close those in the Middle East. http://dailycaller.com/2012/04/09/th...oreign-policy/

Except that effectively he would reduce the number of immigrants by taking away their benefits... that would be much more effective, and more clean and moral than Trump's solution.

I agree. How does he plan to make that happen? He can't do it with Executive Order, so how is this going to happen? Does he have a plan?

I would ding Johnson on the Weld pick from a liberty perspective, but from a strategic perspective he may be a good pick. I don't expect Johnson to win, but I would like him to take away as many votes from Hillary as possible, I want more people to look into libertarianism and be able to get libertarians into political power in the future.

Danno, it's more than a "ding". It is a flat tire. By choosing Weld, he has offered up the entire ticket, if not the LP, to the same people who have corrupted everything else. If the LP is going to welcome in the CFR, it does NO GOOD WHATSOEVER to get "libertarians" in power, because they have SOLD THE HELL OUT.

Gary Johnson believes in liberty at least 90% of the time, which is better than Trump who is probably at around 60% and Hillary who is probably at around 20-30% of the time.

So, back to the lesser of the evils? Is that how we determine a liberty candidate now?

[LibertyEagle]

Does anything in that link show a reason to give Weld an F? I couldn't see anything that did. In fact, the link contradicted your entire post. If you have any reasons that you are capable of explaining yourself, that are based on actual facts and not mischaracterizations, please share.

I didn't mischaracterize a thing.

If you are wanting the cliff notes, there are videos with Ron Paul talking about the CFR and the North American Union.

I don't see why not.

Is that not what you're doing in supporting Trump?

Ironically, I notice every time you use this line (which is a lot), you never dispute that Johnson is the lesser evil.

This thread is to evaluate Johnson. Please stay on topic.

[erowe1]

I didn't mischaracterize a thing.

If you are wanting the cliff notes, there are videos with Ron Paul talking about the CFR and the North American Union.


This thread is to evaluate Johnson. Please stay on topic.

Every single thing in your post was a mischaracterization. You lied about Weld's ranking in the CFR. You lied about the name of the task force. And you lied about its significance in giving Weld an F.

That is unless you can back up anything you said.

And no, irrelevant cliff notes from Ron Paul about the CFR aren't good enough.

You are the one who made those claims as a reason to give Weld an F. So I'm completely on topic.

[SilentBull]

<blankpost>

[undergroundrr]

So isn't the appropriate approach to come up with separate ratings for GJ & WW and somehow average them? Weighted maybe 80% for the pres candidate and 20% for the VP?

[erowe1]

So isn't the appropriate approach to come up with separate ratings for GJ & WW and somehow average them? Weighted maybe 80% for the pres candidate and 20% for the VP?

I agree. By this method, if we give Johnson a score of 85/100 and Weld 65/100, then the weighted average would be 81, which seems reasonable to me.

[William Tell]

I agree. By this method, if we give Johnson a score of 85/100 and Weld 65/100, then the weighted average would be 81, which seems reasonable to me.

What makes Weld rank so high? Or Johnson for that matter.

[LibertyEagle]

Every single thing in your post was a mischaracterization. You lied about Weld's ranking in the CFR. You lied about the name of the task force. And you lied about its significance in giving Weld an F.

No, I most certainly did NOT lie.

That is unless you can back up anything you said.

I have. But, you seem to want me to spoon feed you and I have done that too. But, at minimum, you do have to use your finger to click Play.

And no, irrelevant cliff notes from Ron Paul about the CFR aren't good enough.

So, you won't read about the "Building a North American Community" Task Force and what they proposed, nor will you listen to Ron Paul's views about it. Got it.

This is the best book I've ever read on the topic. Plenty of footnotes, etc.

You are the one who made those claims as a reason to give Weld an F. So I'm completely on topic.

Yes, and I have backed it up. The fact that you hate the result is your problem.

[LibertyEagle]

What makes Weld rank so high? Or Johnson for that matter.

He co-chaired this important task force. Junior members don't do such things. Heidi Cruz was a participant, but Weld was a co-chair.

[William Tell]

He co-chaired this important task force. Junior members don't do such things. Heidi Cruz was a participant, but Weld was a co-chair.

Yeah that's pretty bad.

[erowe1]

No, I most certainly did NOT lie.


I have. But, you seem to want me to spoon feed you and I have done that too. But, at minimum, you do have to use your finger to click Play.


So, you won't read about the "Building a North American Community" Task Force and what they proposed, nor will you listen to Ron Paul's views about it. Got it.

This is the best book I've ever read on the topic. Plenty of footnotes, etc.


Yes, and I have backed it up. The fact that you hate the result is your problem.

Your post is there for all to see. I pointed out several lies. Anyone who checks your words against your own link can see that you lied.

That is, unless you can back up your claims. I notice you still refuse even to attempt that.

I did read about the North American Community Task Force and what they proposed. I doubt that you actually have. I found that they did not propose the North American Union that you said they did. They proposed a bunch of generally innocuous things as well as a bunch of quite reasonable ones. If you are going to say they proposed some supra-national government, then show the quote from their own document that says that.

ETA: You're still doing it. The book you linked to was written in 1988. The task force Weld was on didn't exist yet.

[erowe1]

Yeah that's pretty bad.

What specifically is so bad about it? I've tried asking LE multiple times, but she has never been able to find anything.