Is Gary Johnson the biggest disappointment of this campaign?

[renard_ruse]

If you're an actual libertarian ideologically, you should be really really disappointed in this guy running for the "Libertarian" Party.

This guy is about as far from libertarian beliefs as Anton LaVey was from fundamentalist Christianity.

Libertarians can brag about the "best showing ever" (if the polls hold), but what profiteth a party if it wins 6-8% and loses its own soul?

 

[Bert Notorius]

There's so much much bad here
I just got a migraine.

If you're a liber...
Oh, what' the point?

 

[BotanyBoy]

If you're an actual libertarian ideologically, you should be really really disappointed in this guy running for the "Libertarian" Party.

Why?

Because he's not an anarchist?

 

[patient1]

Oh come on Renard.

You are a cultural conservative. A Theocon. You're stuck with Trump.

If elected Gary will submit an actual balanced budget plan for the next cycle in the first 100 days. Not some 10 year plan that doesn't take effect until after he leaves office. It remains to be seen what he can actually pass or repeal, but we will have some interesting political conversations as a nation about the Constitution and the role of the federal government. By persuasion or veto he will move the needle away from state control towards freedom.

By executive order he will remove marijuana from the Class I narcotic schedule, enabling medical research, and allowing banking for marijuana businesses in states where it's legal.

Sure, Gary's not a purist when it comes to Libertarianism, but a purest wouldn't file with the FEC or even vote, as that would indicate acceptance of the government authority.

I think you're complaining because a pragmatic Libertarian is actually succeeding in getting people to hear the message that the War on Drugs is a Trillion dollar failure, that we can't keep the drugs out of most of our jails and prisons, that a wellness approach to the drug problem would work better than Prohibition and Warfare, that the War on Drugs and mandatory sentencing is a root cause of the adversarial relationship between minorities and police.

Or maybe it's the message that meddling in the Middle East has the unintended consequence of making us less safe, rather than more.

Maybe you're actually concerned that he will exceed 5% nationally, establishing the party in the eyes of the government, granting it funds and affordable ballot access, opening the door to all kinds of Libertarian candidates at all levels. That's what he promised the party at the convention if they gave him their vote one time. He's about to deliver.

That's it, isn't it? He's about to put the party that has stood up for gay rights since it was founded on the map.

 

[underguy1]

Oh come on Renard.

You are a cultural conservative. A Theocon. You're stuck with Trump.

If elected Gary will submit an actual balanced budget plan for the next cycle in the first 100 days. .

Which, if enacted would cause a depression like no other, unemployment through the roof and a social catastrophe.

Only an economic illiterate would thing that a fiscal balance would be a good thing.

 

[Liar]

Which, if enacted would cause a depression like no other, unemployment through the roof and a social catastrophe.

Only an economic illiterate would thing that a fiscal balance would be a good thing.

Or rather, which wouldn't be enacted. End of story.

 

[underguy1]

Or rather, which wouldn't be enacted. End of story.

Just trying to run a fiscal balance would cause a full blown depression.

You can't cut your way out of a demand crisis.

It's maths though and the libertoonians don't do maths. They think maths is witch doctor stuff.

 

[Liar]

Just trying to run a fiscal balance would cause a full blown depression.

You can't cut your way out of a demand crisis.

It's maths though and the libertoonians don't do maths. They think maths is witch doctor stuff.

I'm not debating it's merit. Just the delusion of some that anyone, even a POTUS, can unclog the sausage factory enough to get such a radical change through in Washington.

 

[underguy1]

I'm not debating it's merit. Just the delusion of some that anyone, even a POTUS, can unclog the sausage factory enough to get such a radical change through in Washington.

They all talk about 'balancing the budget' as though it would be a good thing. And most of the public seems to believe it.

It's one of the ways that the rich have conditioned the general public to act against their self interest.

The 'libertarian movement' is a ginger group for the oligarchs.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Which, if enacted would cause a depression like no other, unemployment through the roof and a social catastrophe.

Only an economic illiterate would thing that a fiscal balance would be a good thing.

Explain why professor...

You cannot.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

They all talk about 'balancing the budget' as though it would be a good thing. And most of the public seems to believe it.

It's one of the ways that the rich have conditioned the general public to act against their self interest.

The 'libertarian movement' is a ginger group for the oligarchs.

Outside of imparting how much you hate everyone and everything, that is not even a cogent argument. It is no more than a collection of sophist mantras.

 

[Disgustipated]

He's admitted he's not the right person for the message.

 

[BotanyBoy]

They all talk about 'balancing the budget' as though it would be a good thing. And most of the public seems to believe it.

It's one of the ways that the rich have conditioned the general public to act against their self interest.

The 'libertarian movement' is a ginger group for the oligarchs.

Why would oligarchs who derive their power from the government want to undermine that power by promoting libertarians ideals?

If anything (R)/(D) are the groups for oligarchs and libertarians are the anti-oligarch. Hard to be an oligarch when the government is toothless.