Johnson on FNC Special Report

[jonny5]

And this is the problem I have with voting for him, even though Im philosophically aligned with the LP.

First off, they waste time on how LP cant win, the horse races. Then they focus on drugs, popular issue with LP, but one of the least important. Regardless, this will be the signature issue to paint the LP with as always. And Johnson doesn't answer with a consistent answer. He says legalize marijuana, but cant commit on other drugs. Its a real easy answer. Either people are free to do whatever drugs they want or not. That's the LP position, whether its practical or not.

On immigration, he says dont deport anyone, make it easy for anyone who wants to work to get a VISA. But wont answer about criminals, enemies, slackers. How do you keep them out and only let the good ones in without border control?

Fair Tax
Repeal dept of education
term limits

Foreign Policy, involve congress. North Korea more dangerous than islamic terrorists. Even though only one of them is actually attacking the world.

And then he really slips up. He is asked about gay marriage. He supports it. Then hes asked, what about polygamy? Should be an easy answer, but he waffles, says its a state issue. But its not. LP is about smaller govt, not just smaller federal govt. He thinks states govt shouldnt tell people what geneder they can marry, but they should tell them how many they can marry.

Just a bad showing from the LP candidate. And why they should have nominated someone else.

Video | Special Report | Bret Baier | Fox News Channel

 

[CanadaJohn]

The Libertarian Party does itself no favours by nominating the same dull, uninspiring candidate over and over again in the blind hope that one day he may catch fire. It would be like the Republicans nominating Bob Dole endlessly or the Democrats nominating John Kerry endlessly.

If at first you don't succeed, try, try again, seldom works in politics, particularly at the highest levels. If so few people are willing and/or excited to carry the Libertarian banner, that tells voters to stay away, and they will.

 

[Cyrylek]

The Libertarian Party does itself no favours by nominating the same dull, uninspiring candidate over and over again.

Johnson is a bit goofy, but at least he is a governor with solid record - as is Bill Weld. As opposed to the usual "ideologically pure" delusional jerks who never held even the proverbial dogcatcher's office.

 

[CanadaJohn]

Johnson is a bit goofy, but at least he is a governor with solid record - as is Bill Weld. As opposed to the usual "ideologically pure" delusional jerks who never held even the proverbial dogcatcher's office.

Apparently, you missed the fact that the American electorate has no desire to elect to the Presidency a competent, able, governor with a solid record. Ever heard of Governor Bush, Governor Kasich, Governor O'Malley - just three of the fine, successful, Governors the American electorate rejected as boring.

Apparently, you also missed the fact that the only time an independent candidate made any serious inroads against the two party juggernaut that is American politics was the larger than life, interesting, personable, irreverent, Ross Perot.

Johnson will neither demand nor garner any media attention. You need someone like a Perot whose character and personality would force his way into the conversation. Perot owned the debates - will Johnson do that, if he even gets an invite?

 

[Cyrylek]

Apparently, you missed the fact that the American electorate has no desire to elect to the Presidency a competent, able, governor with a solid record?

Yes, of course. But Perot was a celebrity-millionaire, not unlike Trump. No such figure had offered himself to Libertarians in the recent memory. Out of the Libertarian candidates this year, Johnson/Weld is the strongest ticket, but an order of magnitude. And yes, there's a small but real chance that they will take away a few electoral votes and prevent either abomination from getting 270. Then it is a whole new ball game.

 

[CanadaJohn]

Yes, of course. But Perot was a celebrity-millionaire, not unlike Trump. No such figure had offered himself to Libertarians in the recent memory. Out of the Libertarian candidates this year, Johnson/Weld is the strongest ticket, but an order of magnitude. And yes, there's a small but real chance that they will take away a few electoral votes and prevent either abomination from getting 270. Then it is a whole new ball game.

Why not seek out a "celebrity" candidate? Surely there are some who would fit the Libertarian philosophy out there. What about someone like Mark Cuban? Since American politics today seems to be all about the "celebrity", you'll go nowhere with a guy like Johnson, no matter how competent he may be.

 

[Cyrylek]

And here's a poll from Utah: Trump 29%, Clinton 26%, Johnson 16%, 29% "other."
(New poll shows Libertarian candidate may help Clinton upset Trump in, of all places, Utah | The Salt Lake Tribune)

This year, anything is possible. 16% for a candidate whose campaign hasn't really started yet - that's actually a lot.

 

[gavinfielder]

And this is the problem I have with voting for him, even though Im philosophically aligned with the LP.

First off, they waste time on how LP cant win, the horse races. Then they focus on drugs, popular issue with LP, but one of the least important. Regardless, this will be the signature issue to paint the LP with as always. And Johnson doesn't answer with a consistent answer. He says legalize marijuana, but cant commit on other drugs. Its a real easy answer. Either people are free to do whatever drugs they want or not. That's the LP position, whether its practical or not.

On immigration, he says dont deport anyone, make it easy for anyone who wants to work to get a VISA. But wont answer about criminals, enemies, slackers. How do you keep them out and only let the good ones in without border control?

Fair Tax
Repeal dept of education
term limits

Foreign Policy, involve congress. North Korea more dangerous than islamic terrorists. Even though only one of them is actually attacking the world.

And then he really slips up. He is asked about gay marriage. He supports it. Then hes asked, what about polygamy? Should be an easy answer, but he waffles, says its a state issue. But its not. LP is about smaller govt, not just smaller federal govt. He thinks states govt shouldnt tell people what geneder they can marry, but they should tell them how many they can marry.

Just a bad showing from the LP candidate. And why they should have nominated someone else.

Video | Special Report | Bret Baier | Fox News Channel

There's a difference between taking a stance that is counter to the professed ideology, and taking a stance that avoids promoting the entire horse pill. It's the smarter play. Nothing you've pointed to indicates Johnson doesn't accept the whole ideology, but only that Johnson isn't going to try to radically revolutionize the entire US governmental system, which is kinda necessary to convince any reasonable number of people to vote for him.

 

[jonny5]

There's a difference between taking a stance that is counter to the professed ideology, and taking a stance that avoids promoting the entire horse pill. It's the smarter play. Nothing you've pointed to indicates Johnson doesn't accept the whole ideology, but only that Johnson isn't going to try to radically revolutionize the entire US governmental system, which is kinda necessary to convince any reasonable number of people to vote for him.

That fact that he is unable to answer a simple gotcha question with even the most basic talking points: "we support liberty" is telling. People want someone who actually beleives what they say, as opposed to saying whatever people want to hear, or worse, not saying the truth.

It takes all of 2 seconds to understand that libertarians dont care what consenting adults do, whether its calling yourself married to the same gender, or multiple people. But he couldnt answer.