146 votes

Quantify the Movement: The Case for Gary Johnson

Quantify the Movement: The Case for Gary Johnson
Written by a Massachusetts Delegate

The Liberty Movement has a tremendous amount of momentum, and with the convention behind us we must set our sights on November and the next four years. We have made great strides in winning offices at the grass-roots level and must continue to do so if we are to affect change, but there is one thing we have not yet been able to accomplish, and that is to show the world exactly how big our movement can be in a general election. We all know there are droves of Ron Paul and Liberty-minded supporters who did not cast votes in primaries either because they are Democrats, Independents, or only interested in participating in a general election. By all casting votes for Gary Johnson we can in the course of just one day show the world how strong we truly are. I call this "Quantifying the Movement" and venture to list several rationales for a Johnson vote below.

The Case for the Republican Party: Often times, out of love, children must be disciplined to help shape them into better people. So is the case with political parties. It is no secret the Republican Party has gone out of their way, even breaking their own rules, to kick the sand in the face of the Liberty Movement. It is true we must transform the party from within in order to change this, but we must also show in no uncertain terms that the Republican Party needs to want and accept this change if it is to maintain and grow the support of such a critical wing of the party. The two agendas are mutually beneficial, not mutually exclusive.

The Case for Rand Paul: If Mitt Romney loses the election "because of Gary Johnson," how powerful would it be for Rand Paul to be able to approach the Republican Party with a quantifiable number of how many voters he could potentially bring back to the party if he were to become the next nominee? Some would argue that Liberty supporters voting against the party would hurt Rand Paul's chances – in truth it only makes them stronger.

The Case of Conscience: For too long have people been subscribing to the notion they must vote for the lesser of two evils. We are at a point in American history where 40% of the population does not identify as either a Democrat or a Republican. This presents an incredible opportunity to show the two parties that the system must evolve in order to survive.

The Case for the Message: A large voter turnout for Gary Johnson and Libertarian beliefs will force the general public to at the very lease ask why, and asking this important question is the first step towards discovering what the Liberty Message actually is.

In the following sections, I would like to offer several alternatives to the Johnson vote and why they are not as supportive of the Liberty Movement.

The No-Vote: Not voting is the weakest form of protest vote an individual can ever perform, simply because it is a protest that will never be heard. Staying home and not voting is quite possibly the worst thing a supporter of the Liberty Movement can do on Election Day.

The Write-In: The unfortunate truth of the matter is that write-ins simply are not counted. The candidate has to make themselves eligible as a write-in in most states and therefore a write-in is the practical equivalent of a no-vote. Gary Johnson will be on the ballot in all 50 states, guaranteeing that those votes for the Liberty Movement have the highest likelihood of being counted.

The Other Third Parties: The other third parties will most likely not be on the ballot in all 50 states. Therefore, not all of the Liberty Movement will be able to cast a unified vote at the national level.

The Romney Vote: The proper way to affect change within the Republican Party is to get and stay organized at the local and grass-roots level. Members of the Liberty Movement must get themselves elected into positions from school boards and town committees all the way up to the Senate. However, thinking change will come by voting for a man who has repeatedly shunned the Liberty Movement is unrealistic and effectively gives permission to the Republican Party to continue business as usual.

The Obama Vote: Many Liberty supporters were once Obama supporters, but it is clear that he has failed in his promise to end wars and promote Liberty. In fact, he has done the exact opposite by creating more wars and passing legislation that erodes personal liberties. The Liberty Movement cannot endorse this and still call itself a Liberty Movement.

Finally, those who take issue with Gary Johnson’s position on abortion must keep in mind that although Ron Paul and Gary Johnson’s personal opinions on abortion differ, their actual policy opinions are not all that different. Both believe that legislation should happen at the state level and not in the courts.

Whatever you do in November, do it at the polls and feel good about the vote you place in the box. We are in a unique position as a movement to parlay great momentum into a very loud and clear message to the Republican Party and the Nation as a whole that the Liberty Movement is alive, well, and indeed the future. Let's show the world what the Liberty Movement means numerically in a General Election so that we may grow in strength and continue to right the path of These United States.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Interesting article...thanks

Interesting article...thanks for posting this. I still think Johnson is the best choice that can play the biggest role. To each their own

One world, under government, with power and money for the elite

They fell into our trap...

At any rate, we should play it that way. No, I have no inside info on this, just speculation.

You can't be in politics as long as Ron has and not learn a trick or two. I want to suggest that this whole scenario of being insulted, lied to, ignored, votes stolen, shut out of a speaking spot or nomination even with enough states petitioning, was expected all along, at least to the point of there being a Plan B.

After seeing what could happen in 2008, Ron apparently, wisely planned for failure within the famous “Big Tent” which as it turns out contains nothing but a black hole of ignorance, jingoism and unrelenting police-statism rather than a coalition of ethical, right-thinking adults. Here we are with this tremendous momentum, now insulted, scarred, sneered at, assaulted, cheated and disenfranchised, with no place to go, but one, the eternally flawed Libertarian Party route. Ok, I'm in, here's why.

Yes Gary Johnson is pro choice – like Ron, with the issue left to the states. This is not enough to argue with. Like gay marriage, it's a not an immediate-survival issue. Striking down Roe v Wade will mean nothing if all the mothers are malnourished or dead from the economic collapse and depression brought on by Obama's bail-out-the-rich-and-soak-the-middle-class tax plans and total cluelessness about how to deal with the two-hundred-trillion-dollar debt bomb. And Romney is no better. If you can't tell the difference between a guy who will liberate you, from a guy who gleefully acquiesces with your enslavement, then you need to think a little harder. What's weird about continuing to stand on principle?

The trap is that of ignoring, then denigrating and assuming they can steal the tremendous momentum, hard work, energy and enthusiasm of this whole new generation of potential Republicans Ron brought to the Party. If being a Republican means standing for fair play, sensible foreign policy, balanced budgets, lower taxes and, ahem, “less government,” as it nominally has until now, but Ron loses, then yes, we let them have it, with our reservations.

They had their chance.

Unfortunately that is no longer what “Republican” means, as has been amply demonstrated in recent days. The Party has just turned itself into a politburo-type cabal that would be instantly recognizable in North Korean circles, and apparently with many of the same values. This dog does not hunt, it only snarls and bites the hands that feed it.

Got the message? Our driving values are liberty and justice, not party, not nationalism, not victory for white people, not “let's intimidate the world for democracy.” So let's hit the door for the guys across the street who have been laying in the weeds even longer than Ron Paul has been running. All the years and energy spent building the Libertarian Party as a device for education not available in mainstream society... it ought to have been worth something besides a comfy opportunity for talentless hacks (we call them agents incompetente; some probably are) to prosper while the party vegetates. Here is a job they can handle, and by golly we hear that they are. The LP appears to be doing it's part to make sure Gary (or...) is on the ballot everywhere it counts.

Because Gary Johnson is a real libertarian, a non-career politician, a non-lawyer, a REAL tax-and-spending-cutting, reelected, voluntarily term-limited governor, and will leave our internecine controversies like immigration and abortion to the states, he is easily the best and most qualified candidate for President, besides Ron, this movement has ever seen.

He is also relatively young, extremely healthy and very intelligent. America's sensible young adults and voting youth, as Ron will tell you, must take this matter into their own hands, now. In many states it is still possible to register to vote until very late. The opportunity of a lifetime awaits, whether with Gary or Ron at the top of the Libertarian Party ticket. Don't miss the REAL party.

"To the morally inverted, war appears as a quick, clear path to the top." -- Preston Parker

I dont agree with eveything Gary Johnson is for

but I disagree with a Hell of a lot more with Romney and Obama.

Im voting for Gary Johnson!

Pro-Lifer For Gary

Well, I am a pro-life individual that Ron Paul convinced from a pro-choice stance at the beginning of his campaign. I will most likely be voting for Gary. Even after working in the State of Nevada and my state of Missouri for Ron Paul. (becoming a state delegate) I remember being pro-choice and supporting Paul even tho I was terribly against his anti abortion policy. Why can a pro-choice individual overcome this obstacle and not the other way around. It baffles me, it is one issue just like the war on drugs, the wars, prostitution, freedom in medical care, freedom in education, etc etc.... It is time to grow up Lifers. From a lifer. Abortion will happen anyway... it is about the education.


I used to think killing unborn babies was ok, then I realized it was wrong because RP said it was, now that RP has not won the Rep. Nom. and killing babies will happen anyway, I think it's OK again.

How is this not flip-floping

I see that someone downvoted without even a logical reasponse.

One More Not Gary Johnson

I am one more who could never vote for Gary Johnson because of his pro-choice stance. Ron Paul is a unique candidate because he follows principle, and principle cuts across pragmatic party lines. - Ron Paul is a great man because he is a good man. He is a good man because he is a principled man.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. -- That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men

As to who to vote for - not sure yet - perhaps Constitution Party.

I think Ron Paul illustrated reality the best regarding abortion

In the first chapter of Liberty Defined, Ron tackles the issue of abortion.

The chapter begins in a setting where Ron Paul is a young, still learning physician during the 1960s - when abortion was still completely illegal. The youthful Paul found himself witnessing a late term abortion. The first paragraph of the chapter reads as follows -

"On one occasion in the 1960s when abortion was still illegal, I witnessed, while visiting a surgical suite as an OB/GYN resident, the abortion of a fetus that weighed approximately two pounds. It was placed in a bucket, crying and struggling to breathe, and the medical personnel pretended not to notice. Soon the crying stopped. This harrowing event forced me to think more seriously about this important issue."

Again - during that event - abortion was illegal. Passing a law won't change it. You can't legislate morality.

Outlawing abortion would do nothing except to send women across national borders to get the procedure. Those that can't afford to do so may just resort to a coat hanger abortion at home.

Sounds like America to me. Let's do it.

so you think the person that preformed...

that abortion, pulled the crying baby out and placed it in the bucket should not not be able to be brought to trial for their crime!? As long as it's lawful then we can be more sophisticated about it so no one will have to hear a baby crying and struggling to take it's last breath?

Principle must rule - law is moral

Morality is all that can be legislated - that is why I quoted from the declaration - Governments are instituted solely to enforce morality because it is morality that protects our inalienable rights. Traffic laws are moral - they protect life. Laws concerning all forms of fraud and stealing protect property. Abortion laws protect life. There is such a thing as a just war, which is just only so far as it is a moral war - meaning it protects our inalienable rights. We are in this mess precisely because the government has stopped enforcing morality (and that means primarily enforcing constitutional limits on itself - which are all moral). - non-moral law is intrusive law.

Those who will not protect life - eventually will not protect property.

The issue is who to vote for - I’m just saying principle must rule.

You have that exactly

You have that exactly backward. Morality CANNOT be legislated. The death penalty exists as a deterrent to murderers, yet murders are committed every day. Prisons exist as a punishment for "criminal acts" of all kinds, yet all kinds of "crimes" are committed anyway. Morality cannot be legislated and people will do exactly as they want, regardless of the potential punishment.

so are you saying murder...

should also go unpunished?

Nope. And I have no idea how

Nope. And I have no idea how you made that assumption.

well you said...

"people will do exactly as they want, regardless of the potential punishment."

So it seems you are inferring that it is useless to have punishment for crimes because people will still commit them anyway. Is that not what you meant?

Not exactly. It depends on

Not exactly. It depends on whether the murder is a spur of the moment "crime of passion" or pre-meditated, doesn't it? At least that seems to be a factor in the legal system. In both cases, death is the result, but the act of planning seems to add to the severity of the crime. However, we may assume the 'murderer' had no intention of being punished for their actions, or they did not foresee a scenario where they answer for their crime with life imprisonment or death. In the case of pre-meditation, is it more likely the planned murderer weighed the odds of being caught?

well it seems to be most...

abortions are pre-meditated

As far as abortion goes, you

As far as abortion goes, you know what chaps my effing hide? These women have a right to KILL their unborn child, but I did not have a RIGHT to have a natural birth and was chopped open like a slab of beef 4 times over. Even though I flat out refused to have it done. Drugged and chopped open in my sleep since I refused. So my right to my body only goes as far as the right to kill not kill, but not the right to say how my body should be treated during the birth. Yeah really sensible system here.

great comment

well said !!


reedr3v's picture

Was this decision to treat you as an owned

animal made at the order of a City or State official? What agency overstepped any moral responsibility for this heinous decision? And then what medical institution facilitated the order? Please educate me, I want to understand how widespread such violations may be.

Has anyone considered

Has anyone considered GJ stepping down and allowing RP to take over the Libertarian nomination. At which time RP could name GJ as his running mate? I just don't see how Ron Paul as GJ's running mate makes any sence.

Law and liberty cannot rationally become the objects of our love, unless they first become the objects of our knowledge.

James Wilson


of sore loser laws. He needs to be running for a different office and that's VP. At least that's how I understand it.

Oh I see


Law and liberty cannot rationally become the objects of our love, unless they first become the objects of our knowledge.

James Wilson

Wait one minute!

There's laws pertaining to the electoral process??? I thought we were just winging it this year?

Law and liberty cannot rationally become the objects of our love, unless they first become the objects of our knowledge.

James Wilson

I agree completely

Given the fraud that they have resorted to in the primaries and the convention, this is the only path forward. Dont stay home, if you do that they win. Dont write-in a vote for a candidate who isnt campaigning, that just makes it easy to ignore us. Vote Johnson. He's on the ballot in every state, the vote will be counted, and it will be clear.

Go on down the ballot and vote for liberty Republicans in any race we have a candidate. If there is a machine candidate (which we can define as anyone who does not clearly denounce this fraudulent convention and mittens) on the R side instead, vote for the strongest opposing candidate, even if it's a D. The most important line of attack is to keep as many of these guys as possible from winning any public office ever again. When they lose their seats their masters in the RNC are weakened as well. This opens up several lines of attack against a hostile national that we dont have open to us today.

We tried to build this party and they threw it back in our teeth. They would rather see us vote Democrat than let Dr. Paul speak a word. It is time for them to lose some elections as a consequence.


How about this: Why not have a vote on the Daily Paul. The vote will be set for a certain day. We will agree to vote for whomever wins. RON PAUL, Gary Johnson, or whoever. The important thing is that we come together and hold the RNC accountable for their corrupt actions. We can do this. I think, right now, Gary Johnson looks like the best choice. But if you guys vote different, I'm with you.

There is no point in nit-picking a libertarian

The whole point of a libertarian is that you don't have to agree on everything. Our freedoms are the ultimate form of democracy. This policy bickering is pointless. There is no other way to cast a protest vote, and no better way to be heard. This country will not look back on Gary Johnson and assume that we all agree with him on every position he has ever held. They will know and the media will report that Romney lost the election because he abandoned us. He will be the cautionary tale for a generation of Republican candidates.

But you disagree with me? Good, then let's talk reality and keep our ideals. Gary Johnson will not win the presidency. If we protest in mass Obama will be reelected. Then we will have a weak democrat president, a divided, or republican congress, and the next four years will be like the last two. The government will do NOTHING. Isn't that exactly what we are hoping for out of Romney?

Anyone who can should write

Anyone who can should write in the Good Doctor. If you state does not count a write in than you should vote a 3rd party. It doesn't matter whom you vote for, just don't vote Romney or Obama. The numbers will show.

No, I do not *WANT* GJ in the debates

Let me keep this simple: I do not *WANT* GJ in the debates (as if he'd get enough support to make that happen, anyway). Why? He'll only serve to dilute the real message of liberty. GJ's message is not the same as RP's message. It sure *sounds* an awful lot like RP's message, but it's based entirely on pragmatism. End the wars because we can't afford them. Legalize marijuana because the drug war isn't working, and we could tax it and help pay off debt. Etc., etc., etc.

RP's message is one about personal, natural/God-given liberty. Do you GJ supporters not get that distinction? It's a super-important distinction.

If GJ became president, we'd see a repeat of Obama 2008. He ran on an RP-lite message of ending wars, more government transparency, etc. But once in office, the storyline changed to one of pragmatism. The world was a scary place, he was naive, the wars would continue, the government would need to remain secretive, etc.

GJ's message is not the same as RP's message, precisely because it lacks the solid foundation that RP explain so well: God-given personal liberty and the Golden Rule. GJ's policy ideas are built on sand.

Right now, the most important purpose of the liberty movement is to educate yourself, then educate your family and friends, and anyone else who will listen. But the average person needs to be educated on the basics. They need to understand and agree with that rock foundation. Then everything else is easy and they'll see it for themselves.

First, Ron rarely brought in

First, Ron rarely brought in the word "God" in his speeches at least compared to frothy. Ron is too skeptical of religious appeals to wear that on his sleeve. Second, 90 percent of Ron's arguments were pragmatic e.g. liberty works and here's why.

Educate yourself

Not sure of the pertinence of your comments.

But regarding RP's belief that our rights are God-given, read this:

Re-read my post. Sure, he

Re-read my post. Sure, he has said that rights are God-given but, as I said, he rarely emphasizes this point. Dr. Paul, unlike theocrats like Santorum, has a primary agenda of uniting everyone who believes in rights, whether they are religious or not. As I also said, Paul is the least likely of all the candidates (including Democrats) to wear religion on his sleeve.