Skip to main content

Is Libertarian Gary Johnson too extreme to be elected? The American people say no.

Gary Johnson: the one candidate
that most Americans agree with.
Too often, the things that "everybody knows" turn out not to be true.

One of the things that "everybody knows" is that Libertarian candidates are "too extreme" to ever be electable, or to govern if elected.

Let's see how that works out with 2012 Libertarian Presidential candidate Gary Johnson, the only successful two-term governor in the race.

77% of the American people support the legalization of medical marijuana.
So does Gary Johnson.  Barack Obama and Mitt Romney don't want patients to have that option.

75% of the American people think the defense budget should be cut.
So does Gary Johnson.  Barack Obama and Mitt Romney both want to spend more.

74% of the American people want the Federal budget balanced.
So does Gary Johnson.  Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, not so much.

72% of the American people think we're spending too much money on foreign aid.
So does Gary Johnson.  Barack Obama and Mitt Romney want to keep spending.

66% of the American people now oppose the war in Afghanistan.  
So does Gary Johnson.  Barack Obama and Mitt Romney both want to stay.

65% of the American people think we should be involved in far fewer military interventions overseas.
So does Gary Johnson.  Barack Obama and Mitt Romney are happy to send our troops out.

50% of the American people favor legalizing marijuana.
So does Gary Johnson.  Barack Obama and Mitt Romney want to continue the drug war.

50% of the American people favor marriage equality.
So does Gary Johnson.  Barack Obama is a recent convert; Mitt Romney isn't.

So why do the polls show that Barack Obama is polling at about 47%, Mitt Romney at 42%, and Gary Johnson at only 6%?

. . . because 75-80% of the American people don't know who he is, or what he stands for.

That's the problem.

Comments

Dana Garrett said…
What percentage of people would be for selling off public park lands to developers? What percentage of people would be for trashing the Dept of Education and greatly curtailing if not eliminating the regulatory functions of the Dept of Interior? What percentage of people would be for supporting a presidential candidate who is running on a ticket whose party has supported the elimination of minimum wage laws? How many Americans would support a presidential candidate who would in all likelihood greatly reduce if not eliminate health inspections for various products and foods and safety standards for various products and the workplace? How many Americans would support replacing medicare and social security for plans that would subject health care and income for the elderly to the vagaries of Wall Street? Etc., etc.
Dana,

I will be glad to respond to any of those the moment you show me a single piece of evidence that Gary Johnson supports any of your straw men.

As governor of New Mexico Gary Johnson was actually noted for his land conservation measures.

Find me the slightest evidence that he has ever called for the elimination of minimum wage laws before you ask the rhetorical question.

Find me any information to support your allegation about health inspections. In fact, as governor, Gary Johnson worked closely with EPA to clean up superfund sites and pursue polluters.

The health care plan that President Obama gave you is already a shil to the insurance companies, so don't hand me that crap. There is no negotiating for lower drug prices with manufacturers, there are customer guarantees for private insurers, and the entire house of cards rests on a set of assumptions about long-term cost savings in managed geriatric care that the GAO debunked BEFORE the damn bill passed.

Gary Johnson, please check, has never advocated the elimination of social security.

Gary Johnson has advocated the elimination of the Federal Department of Education with the replacement of straight funding to the States. For about three reasons I disagree with him on that. I also know it will never happen, just like most of the things that Obama and Romney promised will never happen.

I am surprised at you, Dana, that you confuse the basic truth that the ability to ask partisan rhetorical questions is somehow equivalent to the presentation of evidence.
By the way, Dana, Gary Johnson on C-Span just said he would fix Social Security by (1) changing the wage escalator; (2) increasing revenues into the system to match expenditures of avoid deficit financing; (3) finance social security directly through revenues from a consumption tax; (4) means test benefits; and (5) allow people to opt out once the funding is severed from individual contributions. Social Security is "iminently fixable."

That's at roughly 28 or 29 minute mark in the video in the following post.

So there goes one of your straw men, Dana. You may disagree with part or all of his prescription, but it is certainly not "replacing social security" with "the vagaries of Wall Street"
Ah, at 39:40 Gary Johnson is in favor of accurate food labeling enforced by the government. There goes another myth.
Dana said: What percentage of people would be for trashing the Dept of Education

Count me in!
Yeah we can't trash the Dept of Education! It's done such a wonderful job after all. More and more money every year, billions upon billions and test scores remain the same.
Dana Garrett said…
Actually, Steve, I heard him at least two times on MSNBC while he was running for Prez as a GOPer. He said the following: privatize SS & Medicare & eliminate DOE. As for the rest of my questions, he carries the baggage of the party he is running for--baggage that Libertarians have supported. You know it and I know it. Take the elimination of minimum wage laws. Libertarians often advocate it, although it has hard to get one you know to personally admit. I even recall trying to get you once to express your view on the topic and, in a move that was apparently straight from the playbook, you acted as if it was beneath you to answer such a question. Nevertheless, Johnson is running on a party ticket whose members FREQUENTLY advocate the elimination of minimum wage laws...as well as health and safety inspections on the canard that the market make companies paragons of virtue and civic mindedness, blah, blah, blah.
Alvaro said…
Hi

Tks very much for post:

I like it and hope that you continue posting.

Let me show other source that may be good for community.

Source: Johnson & Johnson interview questions

Best rgs
David
Anonymous said…
If you want to get more materials that related to this topic, you can visit: Johnson & Johnson interview questions

Best regards.

Popular posts from this blog

Comment Rescue (?) and child-related gun violence in Delaware

In my post about the idiotic over-reaction to a New Jersey 10-year-old posing with his new squirrel rifle , Dana Garrett left me this response: One waits, apparently in vain, for you to post the annual rates of children who either shoot themselves or someone else with a gun. But then you Libertarians are notoriously ambivalent to and silent about data and facts and would rather talk abstract principles and fear monger (like the government will confiscate your guns). It doesn't require any degree of subtlety to see why you are data and fact adverse. The facts indicate we have a crisis with gun violence and accidents in the USA, and Libertarians offer nothing credible to address it. Lives, even the lives of children, get sacrificed to the fetishism of liberty. That's intellectual cowardice. OK, Dana, let's talk facts. According to the Children's Defense Fund , which is itself only querying the CDCP data base, fewer than 10 children/teens were killed per year in Delaw

With apologies to Hube: dopey WNJ comments of the week

(Well, Hube, at least I'm pulling out Facebook comments and not poaching on your preserve in the Letters.) You will all remember the case this week of the photo of the young man posing with the .22LR squirrel rifle that his Dad got him for his birthday with resulted in Family Services and the local police attempting to search his house.  The story itself is a travesty since neither the father nor the boy had done anything remotely illegal (and check out the picture for how careful the son is being not to have his finger inside the trigger guard when the photo was taken). But the incident is chiefly important for revealing in the Comments Section--within Delaware--the fact that many backers of "common sense gun laws" really do have the elimination of 2nd Amendment rights and eventual outright confiscation of all privately held firearms as their objective: Let's run that by again: Elliot Jacobson says, This instance is not a case of a father bonding with h

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and