Gary Johnson wins the Libertarian Nomination

[Modernity has failed us]

New Mexico will probably be his best state. Will he crack 5%?

If he's lucky.

[Modernity has failed us]

Jim Gray is the VP nominee.

The ticket will be Johnson/Gray 2012.

[Rooney]

Despite the fact that I was an avid R. Lee Wrights supporter and even donated to his cause I realize that Governor Johnson is the best choice of all the candidates in the field. If he was somehow elected president (you know if God has an off-day) he would be the least likely of all the other candidates in the field to destroy freedom. In my opinion that is about as good as it gets in terms of presidents of the United States.

[Modernity has failed us]

Despite the fact that I was an avid R. Lee Wrights supporter and even donated to his cause I realize that Governor Johnson is the best choice of all the candidates in the field. If he was somehow elected president (you know if God has an off-day) he would be the least likely of all the other candidates in the field to destroy freedom. In my opinion that is about as good as it gets in terms of presidents of the United States.

He criticizes Romney for flip flopping on the issues, yet he openly stated he would consider military interventionism for "humanitarian" reasons, but now he says that he doesn't support military interventionism. He's one of the phoniest people i've ever heard in my life. Don't get me wrong, I probably line up with him more than Romney, but he has no shot of winning. The fact that he thinks he can win (or even crack 15% to be able to participate in the debates) is astounding. He is not John Hospers. He will not do what John Hospers did. He may crack 5% nationally if he's lucky. As I stated before, Holden Caulfield is rolling in his grave at this guy.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

Despite the fact that I was an avid R. Lee Wrights supporter and even donated to his cause I realize that Governor Johnson is the best choice of all the candidates in the field. If he was somehow elected president (you know if God has an off-day) he would be the least likely of all the other candidates in the field to destroy freedom. In my opinion that is about as good as it gets in terms of presidents of the United States.

He criticizes Romney for flip flopping on the issues, yet he openly stated he would consider military interventionism for "humanitarian" reasons, but now he says that he doesn't support military interventionism. He's one of the phoniest people i've ever heard in my life. Don't get me wrong, I probably line up with him more than Romney, but he has no shot of winning. The fact that he thinks he can win (or even crack 15% to be able to participate in the debates) is astounding. He is not John Hospers. He will not do what John Hospers did. He may crack 5% nationally if he's lucky. As I stated before, Holden Caulfield is rolling in his grave at this guy.

For the record, John Hospers endorsed Bush in '04 and Holden Caulfield was a spoiled brat who whined for about three hundred pages, so I'm not really seeing the problem here.

In all seriousness Jake, what is your problem here? You're supporting Mitt Romney for god's sake. Why the hell are you outraged at any perceived lack of purity from the LP? Would you be supporting Wrights if he got the nomination? Bullsh*t man.

Cut out the pious baloney.

[Modernity has failed us]

I never said Mitt Romney wasn't a phony, but he actually has a shot of winning. He's not blowing his chances out of proportion. I understand the minor parties run candidates for President to get their names out there, but when they actually believe they're going to win? Nuh uh.

The point I was making about Hospers was that he won an electoral vote in '72. Johnson won't win an electoral vote.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Despite the fact that I was an avid R. Lee Wrights supporter and even donated to his cause I realize that Governor Johnson is the best choice of all the candidates in the field. If he was somehow elected president (you know if God has an off-day) he would be the least likely of all the other candidates in the field to destroy freedom. In my opinion that is about as good as it gets in terms of presidents of the United States.

He criticizes Romney for flip flopping on the issues, yet he openly stated he would consider military interventionism for "humanitarian" reasons, but now he says that he doesn't support military interventionism. He's one of the phoniest people i've ever heard in my life. Don't get me wrong, I probably line up with him more than Romney, but he has no shot of winning. The fact that he thinks he can win (or even crack 15% to be able to participate in the debates) is astounding. He is not John Hospers. He will not do what John Hospers did. He may crack 5% nationally if he's lucky. As I stated before, Holden Caulfield is rolling in his grave at this guy.

For the record, John Hospers endorsed Bush in '04 and Holden Caulfield was a spoiled brat who whined for about three hundred pages, so I'm not really seeing the problem here.

In all seriousness Jake, what is your problem here? You're supporting Mitt Romney for god's sake. Why the hell are you outraged at any perceived lack of purity from the LP? Would you be supporting Wrights if he got the nomination? Bullsh*t man.

Cut out the pious baloney.

Sorry Jake, you know I you 'ya but this post is kinda right. I would prefer Wrights over Johnson, but Wrights is not a former Governor who has a chance of getting 10%.

[Modernity has failed us]

I would've much preferred Wrights, yes, but Johnson claims he's a lifelong Libertarian, yet he was a Republican when he served as Governor of New Mexico. Wrights never betrayed the party to serve as Governor, Senator, Representative, etc. as a Republican. Just like Bob Barr, Johnson figured his easiest path to a party's nomination was through the Libertarian Party. He dropped his GOP bid that he had no chance of winning to run for the nomination of a party that he had all but every chance of winning. Wrights may not have had a chance of winning, but he's stuck with the party his entire life and didn't sacrifice the 'L' for an 'R' just to serve in politics.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

I never said Mitt Romney wasn't a phony, but he actually has a shot of winning. He's not blowing his chances out of proportion. I understand the minor parties run candidates for President to get their names out there, but when they actually believe they're going to win? Nuh uh.

The point I was making about Hospers was that he won an electoral vote in '72. Johnson won't win an electoral vote.

That was through a damned faithless elector. That doesn't really require skill to win. As I recall, the John Edwards '04, Ronald Reagan '76, and Harry Byrd '60 general election campaigns never really got off the ground.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

I think Johnson claimed he had been a lifelong libertarian.

When Johnson says he's a non-interventionist, he's talking about a general orientation.  He believes America should be much less interventionist than we are now, but it's not an absolute statement.  I can recognize that doesn't sit well with more rigorously consistent libertarians, but it doesn't mean he's a fake.

I wish the debate had been really more of a debate, so that these issues could be clarified.

[tpfkaw]

The first LP nominee ever *not* to support cutting taxes - at all!  I guess he needs to pay for invading Uganda.  It'll all be worth it; he'll "challenge Congress on marriage equality," as he said in his passionless platitude-filled focus-grouped speech in which he didn't take a single position that would be out of place in The New Republic.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

I never said Mitt Romney wasn't a phony, but he actually has a shot of winning. He's not blowing his chances out of proportion. I understand the minor parties run candidates for President to get their names out there, but when they actually believe they're going to win? Nuh uh.

The point I was making about Hospers was that he won an electoral vote in '72. Johnson won't win an electoral vote.

If you're going to sell out, be my guest. But don't act indignant and self-righteous just because Johnson wants to boost some (well-needed) morale for the LP.

You really think that Johnson thinks that he'll win?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

citation

Nobody runs a campaign saying they're going to lose (especially not with fleeting bedfellows such as yourself.)

Besides, John Hospers got like, 3000 votes and his one electoral vote was astroturf. If anything, Johnson would actually be in okay shape to get an electoral vote since Paulites are taking over State Conventions (which, in some states, choose electors.)

For the sake of argument, I'll cede that Johnson's candidacy (and support) is predicated on the fact that he can "get votes." Romney's entire existence has been about getting votes, principles and results be damned. What's your beef?

But hey, if you're content to stay on the GOPlantation and vote for nominees that have literally nothing in common with you, then go ahead.

... just to serve in politics.

Well, I must admit that campaigning in a Republican primary on a platform to legalize gay marriage and marijuana is generally the mark of a shrewd politician.

[Reluctant Republican]

I don't think Johnson or Gray honestly believe they're going to win. I recall the Badnarik campaign in 04 used similar rhetoric. "We were never expected to win the nomination, so if we can do this, we can win the general!" They really had  a lot of us believing that we were going to win for a few weeks, because they said they were going to hire  a media firm that would get them on all the major news shows,and that would lead to a surging of support. naive as I was, I believed it, but so did many others. The point is, that kind of talk is sort of a rally cry. People like to back candidates that say they can do more then get .5 of the vote.

Johnson and Gray's main goal seems to be getting into the debates, which I think is far fetched at best. But it's a powerful motivator. If it did happen, that would be a game changer, and activists know that. It's really do or die time. If Libertarians can't poll more then .05 with this ticket, they probably never will. Wrights goal of getting a million votes is more attainable, but that seems less exciting, and it's harder to measure the progress towards.

[Modernity has failed us]

My apologies for coming off strongly recently. I've been sleep deprived and angry and for some reason I took it out on the Libertarian Party. I don't dislike the Libertarian Party and I've been extremely arrogant in my past few posts. My deepest apologies.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

New Mexico will probably be his best state. Will he crack 5%?

If he's lucky.

He was at 15% in a PPP poll, but I don't see that happening.

[Svensson]

The first LP nominee ever *not* to support cutting taxes - at all!  I guess he needs to pay for invading Uganda.

Thank you for once again reinforcing my decision to cut ties with libertarianism completely. Your hyperbolic dogma never ceases to dumbfound me.

Have fun voting for Virgil Goode.

[Mechaman]

The first LP nominee ever *not* to support cutting taxes - at all!  I guess he needs to pay for invading Uganda.

Thank you for once again reinforcing my decision to cut ties with libertarianism completely. Your hyperbolic dogma never ceases to dumbfound me.

Have fun voting for Virgil Goode.

Dude, that's a cruel thing to wish on anyone.

Just saying.

[Svensson]

The first LP nominee ever *not* to support cutting taxes - at all!  I guess he needs to pay for invading Uganda.

Thank you for once again reinforcing my decision to cut ties with libertarianism completely. Your hyperbolic dogma never ceases to dumbfound me.

Have fun voting for Virgil Goode.

Dude, that's a cruel thing to wish on anyone.

Just saying.

Is it not just about all he'll have left, at this rate, what with the tendency of libertarians to crucify anyone who doesn't agree with them to the last punctuation?

[Associate Justice PiT]

     I like Gary Johnson. He might not be the most orthodox libertarian ever, but he'll bring attention to the party while being a much better representative of the cause than Barr or WAR could have ever hoped to be.

[Jerseyrules]

Why is it that even in third parties the establishment candidates always win?