Third party running as spoiler. Then with such ideas, forget it. He's got a lot of campaigning to do starting 2017 if he wants to be a viable candidate and even get into the debates. But this elections, spoiler.

Gary Johnson...the failed libertarian...so disappointed ...

And the alternative would be?

It's not a tax, it's a fee.
Instead of making a decision on a chopped down interview, and speculating what "fee" means go READ his platform and stance on the issue and you'll at least understand his mind set regarding his environmental concerns.
Yes, Gary is environmentally conscience (I have no problem with that), but he does not believe in penalizing Business, he wants to incentivize them to be clean.
Hillary wants to tax all of us, and send that revenue to China.
Trump is just a fail all around.
And we can't have "NOTA" for President - hell, if that actually happened we might get Zippy for 4 more years.
Pick your battles - Johnson is a far better choice than Hillary or Trump.
I agree, I would like more details on that "fee", but regardless of what it is - I'm sure Johnson would make a better President then the other 2 chuckle-heads.
Further, I'm sure it's a low priority item for a Johnson administration, and was primarily stated to appease Bernie people he's trying to swing.

Well, for me, that's the carbon emission icing on the cake for the phony baloney Libertarian Party cow pie that is Gary Johnson.
Me dino started to get put off when Gary said that there was an eleven foot ladder for a ten-foot fence, but even then I did not know there were libtard libertarians up until now.

I thought so, too. Johnson is a poor candidate, a poor speaker, a poor statesman, a pathetic excuse for a libertarian, but much less damaging to liberty than the statist twins of the DemRep party.
But proposing that a carbon tax is a free market approach is unforgivable, utterly irrational, and just as new-speakish as the evil twins. His choice of running mate Weld the Wicked was prophetic, and in retrospect the Libertarian convention delegates should have insisted on a true libertarian as VP to keep Johnson from straying too far from principles. Instead Johnson has apparently taken Weld's idiotic statist position for his own. Johnson doesn't represent me or the free market or liberty.

It's true that he's fallen pretty far away from a lot of libertarian principles. BUT....

BUT.

He's still a damned sight more libertarian-minded than either of the other two contenders. In a race where -- finally -- a third party candidate might get at least some attention, would you rather:

1.) Go full on "extreme" to the full-bore libertarian principles, possibly alienating good chunks of the folks who might be in the market to jump ship, or
2.) Be more "centrist-libertarian", or "libertarian lite" or whatever euphemism you want to use, and accumulate a decent amount of votes, possibly enough to garner better attention in future elections?

I mean, because let's be clear: No libertarian candidate was going to win. Period. Full-stop. Not a full-bore libertarian, not lib-lite Johnson.

So, with "victory" off the the table, would you rather be the party the squandered its opportunity for attention of the masses by putting up someone whose ideas the electorate simply isn't ready for yet, or put up someone who can act as a ... gateway drug... to libertarianism. Someone who still says a lot of the things they like to hear, but also believes a lot of the things we do. As a perk, they're someone with executive success as governor and so aren't immediately dismissed on credibility issues.

I might not agree with everything GJ proposes, but I think he was the best long-term nominee for the party, given the playing field as it exists today.

If not any of them, WHO?!?

Memo to Gary Johnson--or rather, forwarded and blind carbon copy of a memo from Phil Jones, Director, CRU, University of East Anglia, Norwich, England, UK, to his partners-in-crime:

"I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to the [various proxy] series...to hide the decline."

Surely Mr. Johnson knows: no mere tax would suffice, if "global warming" is half the threat he now seems to think it is. He would at once have to convert to building a special train and laying on "whistle stops" to campaign. But not one of these global warming activists (except perhaps Ed Begley, Jr.) want to pay any of the price they demand we pay.

Hello jimjamesjames,
Too bad he has a few poison pills in his thinking.
Maybe he should have put down the bong a bit sooner.
There is no acceptable choice for objectivists that will end up on the ballot in every state. Perhaps it is time to give the Constitution Party another look and some support... Who is John Galt?
Respectfully,
O.A.

I just hate for people to vote for him thinking he's great, when he's not, and it's a wasted vote. Of course I think all of them are wasted

This is more like a shotgun blast in the mouth than a shot to the foot. I don't want anyone (else) in the oval office who is so utterly clueless about the political fraud of climate change.
imo, he listened to Trump speak like an idiot without any focus one time too many and thought he could do the same, but that still doesn't excuse the fact he can't rationally examine facts, ignore propaganda, and come to a reasonable conclusion.
I am delighted that he made this error and completely exposed his stupidity. I only wish he had done so before the Libertarian Convention.
Libertarians gave him the rope, and now he has used it to hang himself along with the party.

I can't figure out what happened to his thinking. Did he fall, like Hildebeast, have a TBI, and lost his senses?

I agree, JJJ. It could only have been worse if he promised to have a sex change and supported a carbon tax.
Johnson is a frakking idiot, and has lost any façade of being libertarian.
NOT HRM Trump.
NOT Shitlery.
NOT Johnson (and his statist running mate Weld.)
NOTA is a better choice than any of these tax and spenders.