Gary Johnson Runs Again: The Best Third Party Option?

Posted by ObjectiveAnalyst 9 years, 3 months ago to Politics
115 comments | Share | Flag

Governor Johnson runs as a Libertarian again... again...

Is he high? Has his memory been so adversely effected that he can't recall his past failures? :)

Okay, all joking aside; Gov. Johnson has some attractive policies. But, does he now have the persona or the persuasive capacity to be a viable candidate, or will he just be seen as a despoiler in the next election?

It seems clear Sen. Paul is not likely to get the GOP nomination. Should he run as a third party candidate? Could/should he join forces with Gov. Johnson, or run against him for the Libertarian party support?

I know some of you will relish a third party alternative, while others will not.

Let the contest begin!

Respectfully,
O.A.


All Comments


Previous comments...   You are currently on page 3.
  • Posted by Lnxjenn 9 years, 3 months ago
    I never thought he was that bad. Definitely worse out there! And he's definitely a better option than a good majority of "Establishment" and Democrats! I'd definitely vote third party. I like Paul; I thought he could do well as third party. But who knows... People are sick of both parties... GOP is almost extinct. I don't even think they are Democrat Light anymore!
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 9 years, 3 months ago
    I frankly would welcome an expansion from the existing two-party system. The US is one of the few republics where politicians are pretty much restricted to two parties. I'd love to see a breakdown more like this:

    Progressive Party: Hillary Clinton (and most Democrats).
    Socialist Party: Bernie Sanders and other Democrats. Of course, that depends on whether or not any of them really can tell the difference between a Progressive and a Socialist ;)
    Republican Party: (Establishment Republicans) Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush, John Kasich
    Big Business Party: Donald Trump, Carly Fiorina
    Constitutional Party: Ted Cruz, Bobby Jindal
    Libertarian Party: Rand Paul
    Evangelical Party: Rick Santorum, Mike Huckabee

    The one I am having a hard time placing is Dr. Ben Carson.

    Feel free to add your quibbles. This was just a quick "feel" separation - not an exhaustively researched opinion.

    I think that it does serve another purpose, however - to point out why the "Republican" Party is so badly fractured. What we really have in this country are Democrats and Everyone Else. It's what we've seen really since Perot ran against Bush and Clinton and we really started seeing a major divide in the country as the Democrats slid Progressive, the Republicans slid towards more Social Democrats and left pretty much everyone else in the lurch.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 9 years, 3 months ago in reply to this comment.
    "As Gulchers know, the LP doesn't fit at all into the left/right, progressive/conservative political model. In reality progressives would agree with at least 40% of our platform and conservatives would agree with at least 40% of our platform, but instead of progressives supporting the LP because they approve of gay marriage, complete legalization of drugs, non-intervention in foreign affairs, no federal abortion ban, and no corporate welfare, they focus on our support of bakeries turning away any customer they choose, 2A, property rights, right-to-work and no civilian welfare. Then the conservatives play the same game."

    Well said. It's very easy to focus on the differences, but very difficult to focus on similarities, but it is in the similarities where we find political allies.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Timelord 9 years, 3 months ago in reply to this comment.
    " moderate libertarian candidate " I sincerely hope never to encounter such a candidate! A Libertarian candidate should be libertarian. It's very hard to find candidates who are 100%, and there are even a few legitimate disagreements within the LP, but he as least has to be close!

    A Libertarian is justified in agreeing to incremental improvements in law and policy, that's how we got where we are, after all. But his goal, or his fondest wish, should be the full Libertarian position.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Timelord 9 years, 3 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Libertarian friends of mine took over the Republican party in a small Connecticut city. Unfortunately every seat held by R in that town was because of minority representation rules. They never, or nearly never, influenced policy. After a few years the old-guard Republicans regained control and remain as ineffective as ever.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Timelord 9 years, 3 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Harry Browne, a hero of mine who I met twice, has been around so long that he's dead. ALS, as I recall.

    I used to be an enthusiastic Ron Paul supporter, but he might be as crazy as Ben Carson. He at least used to be a creationist, young earther, evolution denier. In his favor, though, that was never part of his politics and he was spot on with Libertarian principles almost all the time - much more so than Rand. He demonstrated over decades that his religious beliefs were his own and didn't dictate his politics. Maybe I just talked myself into staying a fan.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Timelord 9 years, 3 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I long ago decided that I would never vote for the lesser of two evils. I will only pull the lever for a candidate that I actually want to win. Being afraid of helping a D or R is a losing game. When people whine to me about some politician I can say, "why did you vote for him?" Nobody is ever happy with that question. On the other hand they will hear "I didn't" no matter which elected criminal he's accusing me of supporting.

    Historically LP candidates take slightly more votes from R than D, but not by much. The thought of being a spoiler and swinging an election fills me with great joy and I would admit that even to the editorial boards of the NYT and WSJ. It means that we have influence and that enough people support our policies to make a difference. It's our path to the center ring rather than sitting at the kids' table (love mixing metaphors).

    [[... would rather settle for a traditional establishment Democrat than risk getting a Republican]] Really? Why? Carefully consider what would be different if Mitt Romney had won. We'd still be at war with exactly the same people we're at war with now, Mitt was a cheerleader for the collectivist takeover of health care in MA so we'd probably have Romneycare instead of Obamacare. Romney is no friend of gun owners. He likely would have continued with the Bush and Obama penchant for EO's and signing statements. No doubt he'd have taken very nearly the same path with regard to energy policy. There would still be plenty of Solyndras, it would just be Romney's crowd instead of Obama's. Romney would SURELY be less corrupt and arrogant. Mrs. Heinz-Romney would definitely not have destroyed school lunches like Shelly Obama did (but "Ketchup is a vegetable" would be a constitutional amendment). For better or worse we would probably have a more coherent policy about sticking our noses into other countries' business. (I'm in favor of an immediate and complete withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan (and Turkey) but I think Obama's wishy washy flip-flopping do-nothing-but-make-speeches-at-them policies have enabled the real Islam to come to the surface, and other destructive groups, too. Uncertainty at the core directly empowers increased chaos at the fringe. I've been a lifetime watcher of the edges of things, the edge in every sense, physical objects, virtual objects (like computer code), and conceptual objects (conceptual objects, ha!, oxymoron alert), things like political parties or any organized group of biological objects).

    Imagine a sphere of liquid spinning within a vessel of less dense liquid. Everything will be quite stable and the boundaries of the denser sphere will be just a little fuzzy but still well defined. Another feature is that, because of friction, the liquid at the center will be spinning faster than at the edges. Now imagine slipping a thin shaft into the center through one of the poles and releasing a latch and a small square pops out of the side of the shaft. That will introduce terrific turbulence into the rapidly spinning center and it will ripple quickly out to the edge. When it reaches the boundary a large part of the outer layer will be perturbed and you'll witness a chaotic dispersal of that material. The Obama administration is the tiny square that introduced destructive, chaotic turbulence into the powerful center and a lot of the chaos and violence that sprung up at the boundaries of humanity was the direct result.

    Granted it's been happening since before Obama but on a much smaller scale. I've heard it said that Kennedy was the first president who was subjected to inspection of his personal life by the media. He was assassinated when I was 8 mos. old so I don't have first hand knowledge. The rapid progression of communications technology since then has made scrutiny by the masses more and more intense. It seems to me that the current mode of promoting a presidential candidate by trying to systematically rip apart your opponents on every issue, both political and personal, started in earnest with the G. W. Bush vs Al Gore election and devolved from there very rapidly. I think the Clinton administration was the direct cause. Millions of people saw Bill and Hillary as pathological liars, chronic cheaters, surrounded by political cronies, viciously attacking their enemies, viciously attacking former friends, corrupt to the core, power seeking regardless of the methods required, and possessed with a reprehensible moral code. Then millions of other people saw Bill Clinton as a charismatic, country bumpkin messiah who only wanted to save us all (from ourselves) and all the bad news about them was just a conspiracy by internet wackos, radio hosts, and unhinged Republicans who were making it all up. Those were the same people who looked directly at a certain blue dress and heard first hand what went on under the desk in the oval office and closed their eyes, plugged their ears and said, "La la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la!"

    Aside from instant runoff voting my greatest desire would be to have a line on the ballot for None of the Above. I would want 55% of the population to vote the party line for NOTA. I want a Constitutional amendment that when NOTA wins it's illegal for the endorsed D and R who just lost to run again. Maybe even put them in prison or an induced coma, as long as there's no chance we'll hear a peep out of them until the next election is held.

    I wish that every 6 months we had the opportunity to vote the speaker of the house and the senate president out of those positions. I wish election day was every year on Nov 11, 4 days before federal income tax forms are due. What better way to honor our veterans? What better way to ensure that everyone has the day off for voting? I wish letters address to US Congressman and Senators were postage free and I wish it was a felony for them not to be opened and read within 48 hours of hitting the congressional post office. Related, I wish schools would resume teaching grammar, spelling and punctuation so those letters would be intelligible.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 3 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Conservative is a meaningless term. Neocons are leftists looking for votes. Liberal is also a meaningless term. Use their definitions they own you.It's only grey if you color it that way. Another name for smoke, mirrors, and spin.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 3 months ago
    Let's change the parameters.

    Suppose Governor Johnson ran for Vice President. Specifically. and for nothing else.

    Positives. Record of fiscal responsibility as a leader. Can be the Presidents point man on that issue. I set up the same argument for Jindal

    He would bring in a lot of conservatives, libertarians some objectivists. The possibility of a strong economic Randist Allison if he's not to old. other splinter parties with the coalition method, independents minus the Bernie types, disaffected, disenchanted, and disenfranchised that any of th eother remaining candidates could not influence

    Questions - How was he on the border issue? Don't count on La Raza they are Guevaristas.

    Negatives - The one in that position needs to be young enough to do eight and eight. On the other hand if he resigned the President selects his own VP.

    Permanent Negative. Would not bring in the looter faction. that's Trumps area.

    Coalition to attract support. Find out what is sacred ground. Example For me is Constitution. Prioritize list of goals of each faction. What is most common area of agreement. Might be something as simple as defeat Hillary regain Citizens over Government. Might. Not my place to give more than examples.

    Offer something. A seat at the table or in some part of Government. Cabinet Secretaries etc etc. All who fit best are a Coalition of...pick a suitable name with no bad connotations.

    Do the same for non traditional disaffected groups. Latinos come instantly to mind. Middle class and elderly church going blacks comes to mind. Won't get all but you will get some....

    all based on who gets the top spot nomination and can they be trusted make a deal and keep it. Which leaves trump out and probably All Establishment Rinos. Bush, Christie, etc etc.

    One test is are you willing to consider forming a new party out of the remnants of the old one.

    Apply the same methods to any and all source of votes at all levels.

    Goal is to break the back ot he establishment by splitting the RINO Republicans and causing a lot of establishment money and resources to be spent fighting brush fires all over the place. Do not make deals with them. They can't be trusted.

    The rest are do nothing obstructionist defeatists so just shine them on. d

    That is the short version the long version is off the couch and do something that is useful. If not Johnson then who or whom?

    Fact of Life.... No matter how good the intention you will get nothing done without the followinig

    Quit Enabling
    Work with not against
    Take control
    Make changes

    Cannot do the last without the first three. Words alone never grew one tomato or fixed the roof on one house.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 9 years, 3 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Hello DeanStriker,
    The "Great Collapse" is already upon us. It is just that many in power, have been sheltered from it and the political ramifications by means of bread and circuses. Those in power, or pulling the strings and the receivers of the unearned have had too much power over producers. Those that carry the burden have been too patient and benevolent. I am encouraged that at least it seems as if many have had enough. I mean, could you have imagined the fervor over Trump? The populism evinces a great deal of discontent. It is a strange political season. Prepare for a bumpy ride.
    Respectfully,
    O.A.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by DeanStriker 9 years, 3 months ago
    Yes, Johnson is the best (and ony) option, but the Dem-Rep monopoly has the game rigged, and no other party counts.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 3 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Optimist. I gave the Rinos three strikes and watched/listened to the others jump the fence into that cess pool. Only one Democrat and Zero Republicians had the balls or whatever the PC term s...Never mind PC is just short hand for eunuch.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 9 years, 3 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Hello, hello, hello... ... ... Nope, nobody out there... :)

    Hello Herb7734,
    A reasonable prognostication based on precedent.
    Regards,
    O.A.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 3 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The only ones that would come close are Webb and Jindal. I hear the guy that followed Jindal has Louisiana already back in debt.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by DeanStriker 9 years, 3 months ago in reply to this comment.
    No, I wouldn't, nor do I see any Republican who wants to make much difference. I voted for Johnson last round, and will again if I even bother to vote. America is screwed.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by DeanStriker 9 years, 3 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Yes, it's all a MellUvaMess. When a good man like Johnson can garner only 2% of the vote, we're done for. The LP keeps struggling along, but the bucks are not coming in. Sad, but it's all about the money, so it's said!
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jdg 9 years, 3 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I agree. He cut the budget in each of his 8 years as governor. No other candidate can make that claim.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo