The Gary Johnson thread

I think part of the problem is that voting populace don't fully understand the cause-and-effect of the government being as big as it is. They're personally not seeing direct effects on their lives, or they think "It's the other party's fault!!!".

I agree, most don't comprehend it. Heck there is a bill being worked up right now which will allow the FBI to completely ignore the 4th amendment and access your Internet browsing history without a warrant and without your knowledge at all. Most people probably don't know that, and many probably won't care anyway because "I'm not doing anything wrong." All of this under the guise of making it easier to catch terrorists or potential terrorists.
 
I agree, most don't comprehend it. Heck there is a bill being worked up right now which will allow the FBI to completely ignore the 4th amendment and access your Internet browsing history without a warrant and without your knowledge at all. Most people probably don't know that, and many probably won't care anyway because "I'm not doing anything wrong." All of this under the guise of making it easier to catch terrorists or potential terrorists.

I am reading a very interesting book now by Peter Pomerantsev, Nothing Is True and Anything Is Possible.
Americans have absolutely no clue just how rare and precious it is to have a government that abides by the rules, a government of laws, not a government of men. Yana Yakovleva found out just how precious that is. And her experience was painful.
Americans seem bound and determined to flush down the toilet the idea that the government is bound by laws. They will miss it when it is gone, and it will be a sad thing. And it will be extremely difficult to get back once it is gone.

"No, no. It's okay. I belong to the donkey party. Anything they do is okay with me, so long as they win."
 
I am reading a very interesting book now by Peter Pomerantsev, Nothing Is True and Anything Is Possible.
Americans have absolutely no clue just how rare and precious it is to have a government that abides by the rules, a government of laws, not a government of men. Yana Yakovleva found out just how precious that is. And her experience was painful.
Americans seem bound and determined to flush down the toilet the idea that the government is bound by laws. They will miss it when it is gone, and it will be a sad thing. And it will be extremely difficult to get back once it is gone.

"No, no. It's okay. I belong to the donkey party. Anything they do is okay with me, so long as they win."

My wife has experience with an overbearing government that few Americans can comprehend. More and more often, she encounters people who are eager to have the government intervene in their lives. My wife can not understand this attitude. Why throw away your freedom? How dare you want to throw away your neighbor's freedom? The response is always that the government has your best interests at heart. No, they don't. A government big enough to give you everything you think you want can take away everything you have. They can take away your father, your uncles, your business (multiple times), your home (multiple times). They can prevent you from going to school. They can bar your little sister from getting medical care. Sadly, my wife's experience doesn't even cause a lot of people pause. They just want their "free" stuff, not knowing or caring how much it costs or will cost.
 
Last edited:
It is astonishing to think, as mediocre as Romney, McCain, Kerry, and Gore were that they would be running away with the election this year. As for Johnson and the viability of the Libertarian Party, #1 I get the impression that Johnson really has no desire to win. I understand calling it an uphill battle is a major understatement. But when I listen to him speak, I am so underwhelmed. I can't help but think others feel the same way. But then #2. I don't think most Americans have any desire to trim back the control the Federal Government enjoys today. Oh the Rs like to talk about social programs, and the Ds like to talk about the military, but ultimately BOTH sides want to grow the federal government. And most citizens fall right in line. Conservatives tend to be quite ok letting the Feds mettle in your personal lives. Liberals are completely ok with letting the Feds mettle in your financial lives. So the appetite for true Libertarian philosophy becoming policy is simply not there.

While a large government can certainly meddle in the personal lives of citizens, a small government (congress, president, and Supreme Court only) with a tiny budget can be just as meddlesome. It's not just the size of the federal government that is a problem, but it's also the creeping scope of federal power.
 
While a large government can certainly meddle in the personal lives of citizens, a small government (congress, president, and Supreme Court only) with a tiny budget can be just as meddlesome. It's not just the size of the federal government that is a problem, but it's also the creeping scope of federal power.

That is essentially what I said. The problem is two-fold. The size, which equals the massive amount of federal debt we are burdened with today. And, also, the power or as I put it in my post, the control that the Federal Government enjoys today.
 
Does Gary Johnson have the right people in place for campaign management? Public relations?

Should he ask for a visit with the Mexican president?

I would like to see more from his camp involved in the campaign myself.

I realize the media is more of an obstacle than anything else for the Libertarian party but at some point it seems like perhaps more could be done from his campaign.
 
Does Gary Johnson have the right people in place for campaign management? Public relations?

Should he ask for a visit with the Mexican president?

I would like to see more from his camp involved in the campaign myself.

I realize the media is more of an obstacle than anything else for the Libertarian party but at some point it seems like perhaps more could be done from his campaign.


Money and media exposure are obviously big hurdles.
 
It's a shame Johnson wasn't included in the event last night. Along with the Green Party candidate. Now that we are past the primaries...ALL the parties candidates should be included in every debate, town hall meeting, media events, etc.

Ironically for all those not supporting Trump....this kind of prejudice is why Trump has such a large following.

People are sick of the status quo.
 
BTW....given my previous post.....I was also wondering if Johnson should have run as a Republican candidate.

He could still maintain all his current Libertarian views, couldn't he?

Opinions?
 
BTW....given my previous post.....I was also wondering if Johnson should have run as a Republican candidate.

He could still maintain all his current Libertarian views, couldn't he?

Opinions?
He seems to be as knowledgeable about foreign affairs as the current republican candidate.:eek2: Too bad, I was going to vote for him (GJ) but now not sure.:conf2:
 
BTW....given my previous post.....I was also wondering if Johnson should have run as a Republican candidate.

He could still maintain all his current Libertarian views, couldn't he?

Opinions?

No chance, as evidenced by the droves of republicans who still support the clown instead of the man who's platform is based on individual liberties. If Johnson would pander by mentioning "two Corinthians" or similar it might help.
 
BTW....given my previous post.....I was also wondering if Johnson should have run as a Republican candidate.

He could still maintain all his current Libertarian views, couldn't he?

Opinions?

They can run however they want but if the media decides to ignore them they will be ignored. See Ron Paul's run.
 
Advertisement

Trending content

Advertisement

Latest threads