4 votes

Romney is losing this election, could letting Gary Johnson in the debates be the hail Mary pass he needs to win?

Its appearing evident Romney is about to lose this election and it's also evident that Obama is as unpopular an incumbent that we have had since Jimmy Carter. Maybe its time for Romney to do a hail Mary pass and get Johnson in the debates? The thought I had was that if Gary Johnson was in the debates, which party would he draw the most votes from? I believe he would gain more votes from the Democrats than from the Republicans, this is why. The anti war voters are a large block of votes, both Democrats and independents would side with Johnson on that issue. Since the Republicans have no anti war voters, the loss there is zero. Johnson would appeal to the end the drug war group and to those who are civil liberties voters, which traditionally would tend to side with Democrats, again no loss there for the Republicans. Many younger voters who propelled Obama to a victory in 2008 have not been happy with how Obama has governed, given an option they may vote for Johnson. There again I don't think that will hurt the Republicans either, as their average voter tends to be higher income and mature. In an election this close a few percentages can make the difference between winning and losing. If Romney wants to win, and I have my doubts if he does, he would be wise to get Gary Johnson in the debates to out flank Obama and go for a hail Mary pass, whats he have to lose?

PS I'm not a Romney supporter, so don't beat me up too bad, I just thought I would put this out for discussion.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

Romney doesn't really do

Romney doesn't really do anything. Some would say he's a puppet. The people in control are people like Priebus, who don't want Romney to win in the first place, hence the fact they are sabotaging their own campaign.

Support Rand, Amash & other liberty candidates? Check out: http://www.LibertyConservatives.com/

Romney is not that smart.

I suspect, as others, that Gary Johnson is getting better treatment because the MSM thinks he can ensure an Obama victory by taking votes from Romney. This proves the MSM is no smarter than Romney. If they inadvertently create a groundswell of momentum behind Johnson, Johnson could peak on election day and possibly eck out a victory or relegate Romney to a third place finish, which would destroy the Republican establishment. If Johnson is perceived as a real alternative to Romney, he could win much of the country; even if the election were thrown into the House, the ensuing chaos would NOT ensure a Romney victory, as the Congress would rightly see awarding the presidency to the third place finisher could result in a violent overthrow of the government. Likewise, Congress is not likely to choose a president who failed to win the electoral college, for the same reason.

One thing is certain. We will be in uncharted territory, more so than any time since the election of 1800.

Nothing will save Romney

You may not call Ron Paul supporters ,Republicans, hence "no anti war republicans" but without us Romney has already lost by a long shot and letting Gary debate will not persuade Paul supporters to vote for Romney.


Mitt's not man enough to do

Mitt's not man enough to do that

Johnson only needs to win a few states

then none will get the 270 electoral votes. Therefore, the House of Representatives will pick the president. Guess who that would be?

Romney could benefit by helping Johnson win a few states.

Thats right, I never thought of that

Gary Johnson could take enough states to throw the election to the House. So I guess if Romney is opposed to Gary Johnson in the debates, it looks logical to me, combined with his performance in this campaign, that Mitt is taking a fall on this election. I bet the plan is to come back in 2016, after the crash and blame the economy on Obama. It stops Hillery and leaves an open field for the Republicans. That fits in with the rule changes, they laid the ground work for their hand picked guy so they won't be challenged by a liberty candidate.

this would work even better

if the states Johnson would win would be taken from the Obama win column.


Romney will be the next president of the US, and Rand Paul is right.
You really dont think a guy like Romney runs 2 times in row, for his health do you?

"OH NO! He has a SON?" Neoconservatives and Liberals EVERYWHERE!

Rand Paul 2016

He runs to beat his Dad


egapele's picture

The fact that you might be right is obnoxious,

not that you are obnoxious for saying it, I guess.

If you are correct, we'll ALL be saying a Hail Mary.

Wow. Just wow. I don't

Wow. Just wow. I don't even know how to respond to this. Not that it's bad thing to dream if one is a Romney fan....


dont let it be said no one ever told you.
romney has been chosen and they must get Obama out of there NOW.

There's only ONE I want, and that has never changed.

"OH NO! He has a SON?" Neoconservatives and Liberals EVERYWHERE!

Rand Paul 2016

There's as much chance of them letting Ron into the debates

as this happening.


Looks like freethink2012 takes it.

I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: "O Lord make my enemies ridiculous." And God granted it.

hello YES

The winning threshold is lower in a 3man race than it is in a 2man race. I thought everyone knew that since grade school.

If this were a 3man race Romney would be leading. Leading with fewer points than he currently has in this 2man contest.

There's a misconception out there that if Romney comes in 3rd that it would be a result of Johnson winning and Obama finishing 2nd or vice versa. Whereas the proper way to look at it is - if Johnson finishes 2nd, who finishes 3rd is up for grabs.

Now that's probably dreaming I know. So to be more realistic I'd estimate Johnson getting 10%-15% of the vote, would be a Romney win by 2-3 points. Get up in the high teens or 20% for Johnson and Romney and Obama's numbers flatten out. Anything higher than 20% and it's to close to call for the 2 front-runners.


stated, "...Since the Republicans have no anti war voters, the loss there is zero..."

Huh? I think I'm registered as a Republican, and I am definitely anti-war. Perhaps you meant the traditional Republican, as opposed to the "Ron Paul faction" of the Republican Party?

I think everybody running for the Presidency should be allowed in the debates...

O.P.O.G.G. - Fighting the attempted devolution of the rEVOLution
Ron Paul 2012...and beyond

yes, when I wrote that I had thought about putting a LOL

Behind the word voters (LOL) I know there are quite a few anti war Republicans, I am one. It does seem most of the Republicans I know are all about blowing up Iran, they listen to Hannity, Levin, Rush etc. So the point I was trying to make was Johnson would draw more heavily from the Obama votes.

GJ would pull from both camps

Remember Perot was all about reducing the debt and cutting spending but was not aligned with the homosexual community. GJ however makes excellent points about budget cuts and deficit spending in addition to supporting gay marriage as a top issue. Both BO and MR would lose votes if they were all three on the stage so BO would have the most to lose at this point by having him up there.


Johnsons tapped the disappointed voters on the right. There's only so many he can get through to. Johnsons boat is heavy on it's right side. There is lots more room to tap from the disappointed left to double his numbers and level the boat.

How about this idea? Romney

How about this idea?

Romney gets very desperate and sees that his chances of winning the election are slim to none. Hence, he wants to try and sway those Paulites that are strongly considering voting for Gary Johnson.

Solution: he demands the CPD to get Johnson in the debates.

He gets the feeling that if he'll let Gary debate, he could try and offer him a Cabinet post or promise to enact some major issue legislation.

I know it's a dream world but who knows!

If Gary Johnson was allowed to debate

It's entirely possible that he would take the oath of office in January.

Thats right, but we need to get him in the debates first

and he is more likely to get in the debates if one of the establishment parties pulls for him and its in Romneys best interest to do so. Assuming, of course Romney wants to win.

Taking one for the team

I would bet both Obama and Romney would rather maintain the duopoly's power than allow a 3rd party candidate into the clubhouse.

HOWEVER, your logic is sound. This is exactly why the Liberal Controlled Media let Ross Perot in the debates in 1992. They knew he would take away from Bush and not hurt Clinton.

Exactly, Ross Perot cost HW Bush his re-election

Perot pulled from the more conservative voter base and HW was a moderate big government Republican. In this election Johnson could do the same to Obama, seems logical to me. My guess is Romney is not wanting to win from the way his campaign is being run, or he would pull to get Johnson in the debates. Of course it could backfire, with Johnson in the debates, Gary could take the election. Either way its Obamas to lose.