-18 votes

Gary Johnson: Ron Paul write in is meaningless


Yes, voting your conscious is meaningless. That doesn't stop him from pandering in order to pick up those "meaningless" votes. Voting for the lesser of 3 evils is the way to go.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

Consider the source in this case, GJ.

If Romney was asked, he would say that a vote for GJ is a wasted vote.
If Obama was asked, he would say that a vote for GJ is not a wasted vote.
If Jesse Ventura was asked, he would say that a vote for either Obama or Romney is a wasted vote.

The word "meaningless" in not an absolute term. Meaningless to whom is the question?

Well, he's not wrong...

If you want to make an impact against the two party duopoly then yes, vote for Gary Johnson. If you don't want to make an impact, and just want to feel good about your vote then write in Ron Paul. IMO the feel good vote is selfish because it does nothing to tear down the two party system, but hey, what do I know?

Missed the point

You people really missed the point if you don't get what Gary was saying here. You are also sadly ignorant of election law. A write-in for Ron Paul is literally meaningless because in almost EVERY state, write-in votes ARE NOT COUNTED. Maybe you should review this post: http://www.dailypaul.com/248500/presidential-write-in-laws-b...
MAYBE ten states allow write-in votes but even those might not be counted. If you can't see how meaningless it is to write-in Ron Paul in a state that does not allow OR EVEN COUNT write-in votes, then you are just mindless robots following a personality rather than the ideals of Ron Paul.
Additionally, is there ANY evidence that Ron Paul wants you to write his name in? Let's say everyone does it and he wins, has he indicated that he even wants to be the President anymore? Maybe the man just wants to take his well-deserved retirement.
As a matter of fact, I have watched a number of interviews with Ron since the convention, and he has NEVER even mentioned writing him in.


Who is gary johnson?

Must be someone important since he's telling people how they should vote, right?

Imagine that! No vote is

Imagine that, Gary Johnson thinks a vote for Ron is meaningless!

No vote is meaningless..Not even a vote for a pandering, flip-flopping, sell-out like Gary. Every vote means something to the person who casts it.

My write-in vote will be for Ron Paul...Proudly.

Ron Paul 2012 - It's Almost Here!

just tweeted this

‏@LibertyPoet “The biggest thing we can do right now is to give the two big parties the middle finger,” - Andrea Garcia #tcot #tlot @GovGaryJohnson

LL on Twitter: http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
sometimes LL can suck & sometimes LL rocks!
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15


I will only write in Ron Paul.Romney should step down or be disqualified for all of the corruption that has gone on period!Ron Paul should be the Republican nominee and they know this!Why are we not fighting for that??Where is the campaign on this???
Ballot Box Switcheroo?

Ron Paul voting record alone proves my point,he has NEVER FLIPPED OR FLOPPED EVER!
I want my family home!Enough of these wars!NOT ONE CANDIDATE HAS EVER SERVED!Only Ron Paul has served!I will not back a candidate that changes his mind especially on Foreign Policy ever!Ron Paul has 30 years of standing of what is right,honesty,and believes in us"We The People"to take care of ourselves not the government to do it for us!


I will be able to lay my head down at night knowing that my vote went to a man that truly loves this country and US!
I'm Gonna Write In Ron Paul
Guess what I am not the only one that is doing this either!
Found this site a while back and wanted to share,ties alot together,and yes I do know you have to be careful to what you find on the internet but this answers a lot!

Unfortunately the practice of

Unfortunately the practice of voting itself is likely meaningless. Gary Johnson could garner 51% of the vote, but Diebold would tell us otherwise.

"Voting for the lesser of 3

"Voting for the lesser of 3 evils is the way to go."
That's the same flawed logic as voting for the lesser of 2 evils.

well, YES, he wants the votes--


it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

Write in votes are just protest votes....period.

Gary Johnson is right, and Ron paul would even back him up on that one I believe.
I "was going to" write in Ron Paul.
But we DO have a serious option here now to consider.
I have considered hard...and will vote for Gary Johnson.
Hell! I'm campaigning for him.


Better change your sig then.

Mine's staying the same.

"What if the American people learn the truth" - Ron Paul

I would love to see

some of these write in campaigns work, Iowa for instance. If you can get it done in your state, more power to you, get Dr. Pauls' name on the final tally in in the MSM. But for any of us in states that will just toss write in votes away, (NJ), it is meaningless, and it does not in any way help the revolution, it is a selfish vote.

I personally believe the libertarian party in its very nature is hypocritical, but my vote will be going to GJ, it will be for the revolution, not for him.

How about "all the votes are meaningless"

seriously. The game is rigged.
Goldman Sachs will be the only winner and the Powers that Be will be looking to see which message they should co-opt next.

I PROMISE you the Libertarian Party will be the "NEW MONEY PARTY" within 10 years. See Peter Theil

Are you suggesting we all just give in and give up?

More defeatism.
You: "There's so much corruption - let's just never even bother."

Very unPaulian.



This is the LIBERTY movement.
We never give up.


Ron Paul agrees with Gary Johnson on this

Ron Paul - 2008:
"I don’t think that’s very productive. Supporters can do it, of course, but in most of the states it won’t count. And if they can change the rules in a primary and not count all the votes, imagine what they could do with write-in votes!"

In 2008 he did a press conference to promote voting for third party candidates.
Here, he explains why:


egapele's picture

Well that may change things for me,

I had been planning on abstaining on the presidential vote but maybe I'll go with Gary Johnson. I don't think I'll consider a write-in vote, though. I tried that the last election and I can't say I felt like I made any kind of impact.

Im voting for

Gary Johnson!

Vote your conscience.

Strategies sometimes fail. Rules are sometimes broken. Corruption sometimes win [temporarily].

The only recourse is to vote your conscience. Be the example that we want to promote. Our numbers are still growing.

If GJ by miracle happens to win, we do not have enough Liberty minded house/senate seats to effect the change that we demand. Make your voice heard this election, while preparing for the next. Meantime, vote Liberty candidates local and state.

"What if the American people learn the truth" - Ron Paul

Ron Paul has influenced my conscience

I value Ron Paul's opinion. I believe that he has seen up close what's wrong with the election process and how we might begin to regain some fairness within it. Therefore, when he suggests an action that can lead to a more honest election process, I opt to take that action.

A write-in vote that serves only to soothe your conscience, is effectively a passive move. I see no argument against Paul's rationale. Does anyone care to try and make that argument?


I.ll take the bait. To say

I.ll take the bait. To say write ins are ineffective can also be applied to ballot voting. If our votes actually mattered, they wouldn't let us vote. Vote flipping, dead people voting, illegal immigrants voting, counting votes in secret.....does it really matter If I choose to cast a write in? My vote has just as good of a chance to be thrown away as anyone elses. Prove me wrong.

Gary Johnson's stench of desperation is overwhelming. I am surprised so many here on the dp have fell for it. Oh but, Ron Paul says GJ is wonderful, I hear. Yeah that's nice. Sounds like praise a parent might give to a young child for putting their toys away. I know for a fact that RP doesn't think keeping guantanamo open is wonderful, or hunting down another US/corporate backed boogeyman for years to come, ie Kony. Or how about strengthening the bond between corporations and government via privatized prisons that gary is so fond of? Is that wonderful? A continuation of drone strikes and staying vigilant on the war on terror...wonderful? Wait, it must be the fact that gary thinks we should continue to prop up and fund Israel, right? Oh my, I almost forgot about the misnamed "fair" tax! Open borders, NAFTA/CAFTA , etc

I think the wonderful comment was Paul's way of encouraging gary to continue to learn - or, in GJ's case, at least pretend too.

Is Ron Paul "baiting" you?

I keep seeing the same defeatist argument which is essentially:

"if you think writing in Ron Paul is ineffective/meaningless… well… all votes are meaningless anyway, because of assorted corruption… so why shouldn't I just intentionally cast an entirely meaningless vote that at least makes me feel good about myself?"

Your saying that because corruption exists your vote can never matter, and you just want to assuage your own feelings. You've already given up, and decided that your feelings are more important than taking the action that Ron Paul believes would be more productive.

Ron Paul has already advised against writing him in. He went to a great deal of trouble to publicly make the case for voting third party. Why do you reject his argument? Instead of repeating the defeatist argument, listen to his press conference and then explain why you feel his opinion is wrong.

RON PAUL PRESS CONFERENCE 9/10/08 Part 1 (9:35)
With Chuck Baldwin, Ralph Nader, and Cynthia McKinney
Part 2 (6:19)
Ron Paul on the electoral process. - "any candidate who has gone through the onerous process, which is so biased against us, and is still on enough states' (ballots) that they theoretically can get enough electoral votes to win, ought to be in the debates."
Part 3 (4:15) Cynthia McKinney
Part 4 (4:37) Chuck Baldwin
Part 5 (9:25) Ralph Nader
Part 6 (8:29)
50 debates in 50 days?
Ralph Nader: "What good are voter rights without candidate rights to get on the ballot and give us choices?"
Part 7 (7:38)
Cynthia McKinny on election integrity, Chuck Baldwin on "the evil of 2 lessers", sacrificing principles will bring about the loss of freedom, independence and our constitutional form of government…
Part 8 (8:29)
"the term 'spoiler' is political bigotry"
Paul reiterates the purpose of this press conference, bringing a coalition together to address the subject of the electoral process, the oppressively, burdensome task of getting on the ballots.
Part 9 (6:35) Ron Paul on Georgia & Russia, rejects committing another billion dollars to Georgia, - McKinney on foreign Aid, Nato, Ukraine & Georgia

I think your criticism of Gary Johnson is way overblown. You can't support a man that vetoed 750 spending bills while he was in office? Cut Taxes 14 times? Reduced the size of government? These aren't campaign promises - they are things he's actually done.


"if you think writing in Ron

"if you think writing in Ron Paul is ineffective/meaningless… well… all votes are meaningless anyway, because of assorted corruption… so why shouldn't I just intentionally cast an entirely meaningless vote that at least makes me feel good about myself?"

That is not my quote/post. You then go on to write,

Your saying that because corruption exists your vote can never matter, and you just want to assuage your own feelings. You've already given up,....

I would appreciate it if you didn't put words in my mouth! Where did I EVER say votes don't matter!?! Even with some write ins being thrown out, and ballot votes being lost, tossed or flipped-I still believe it is important to vote. To remain silent, or to stay at home is silent complicity, either actively through our vote or inactively through our apathy and silence, we create the government of the United States and approve its actions. If we don't vote, it makes it easier for them and they don't have to cheat.

Paul advised against writing him in back in 2008. Paul actually endorsed a third party candidate in 2008, as you are aware. That was 2008, this is 2012. Where is Paul's endorsement of GJ? Have any videos or links for that? Who knows, maybe Paul intends to write himself in on Nov. 6th.?

As for GJ, I hardly call privatizing state prisons reducing the size of government. GJ is a businessman, which is all well and good. But government is not a business, it is parasitic in nature. I have not overblown Gj's positions - all are easily verifiable.

I was not quoting you

I thought I made it obvious that I was not quoting you. I said:
I keep seeing the same defeatist argument which is essentially:...
I paraphrased what I keep hearing from different people who believe writing in Ron Paul's name is the best possible vote in the general election. It's a defeatist message that inhibits change for the better. I think Ron Paul's idea is wiser.

If there's one thing Paul supporters know, it's that Ron Paul is consistent. If he felt in 2008 that voting 3rd party accomplished more than writing in his name, you can be quite certain he still feels the same way.

Prisons are already privatized and business is booming.
Gary Johnson supports policies that would mean getting rid of a lot of the tyrannical legislation that keeps Americans locked up in them, and he has already demonstrated that he can downsize government, cut taxes, and veto hundreds of wasteful spending bills.

I do not support everything I've heard Johnson say, but he want's to bring the troops home, NO war with Iran, Audit the FED, have marijuana laws no harsher than alcohol laws, and protect internet freedom. That's an immense improvement over the other candidates, and not just "less evil". We will continue arguing over everything els whether or not we regain a few of the freedoms Johnson will be pushing for if elected.


Ron Paul is a wise man,

Ron Paul is a wise man, indeed. He is also very consistent, except when it comes to handing out endorsements. In his entire political career, he has only endorsed a handful of potential candidates. He endorsed Baldwin in 2008 and has NOT endorsed anyone for 2012. We have made a lot of inroads since the 2008 election. We have joined the rank and file of the Rep. party, taken committee seats and some of us are working really hard on a local/state level. It was wise of Ron Paul to ask us to do so, just as it is wise of us to continue to do. It is a long, hard road to take, and it's an uphill battle. But, we haven't given up. That is how we will continue to inact change and the growth of Paul's rEVOLution. Sorry, but GJ cannot fill the void left by Paul. No one man/woman can fill Paul's shoes. It will take all of us together, working locally to fill that void.

Johnson erected the first two for profit prisons in New Mexico as governor. Wackenhut hired New Mexico legislator, Manny Aragon as a lobbyist for the "dungeons for dollars" program, which Johnson helped push through. Correctional Corporations have amassed large political influence through government ties, lobbying power and campaign contributions, while attempting to convert the discourse of justice into the language of the marketplace

There have been many instances of prisoner abuses stemming from the privatized prison industrial complex. One of many examples... Former Pennsylvania juvenile court Judge Mark Ciavarella was found guilty of 12 counts of racketeering and conspiracy in February for sending youthful offenders to detention centers in exchange for $2 million in kickbacks from the builder of the for-profit facility.

Johnson's limited government iconoclasm is more that of an accountant - or motivational speaker - than that of a philosopher rooted in liberty. As I stated in an earlier post - government is not a business. Once profit is introduced as a motivator, it becomes the only motivator.

My vote goes to the Dr - not the three businessmen we are expected to choose from.


Bump!Thank You!

Very well said


"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."

You're wrong about not being able to effect change.

The President can suspend the income tax on Tuesday and immediately the average Friday paycheck will have $115 more money in it to be spent on Saturday, creating an economic boom the world has never seen.
President Johnson could pull all American troops back from the 750 foriegn military bases, give them their promised GI bills and let them buy all the empty houses around the country.

He can pardon all the drug convicted daddies from prison and reunite families all across the land.

As Governor, Johnson vetoed 750 spending bills, which as I understand it, was more than all the other Governors combined during the same period.

If this very imperfect Johnson character did nothing but veto 750 bills at the Federal level, he'd be a Helluva President.

"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty" TJ

I stand corrected.

I have made the case before that a president can utilize executive order, among other things, to effect change.

Still, we need to focus on local/state.

I will respect your decision to vote GJ. I will stand firm on RP. RNC/ptb need to know that I (maybe others) mean business and will not cave/falter/change direction the next time. This is MY message to them, whether they give a rats ass or not.

"What if the American people learn the truth" - Ron Paul