-34 votes

Ron Paul Should Have Endorsed Gary Johnson

Ron should have endorsed Gary just based on his stellar record of fiscal conservatism as Governor of New Mexico.

This election isn't about social issues like abortion, it is about fiscal conservatism and civil liberties! Gary Johnson has a superb resume and is just as qualified to be President as Ron Paul.

I suspect Ron Paul is protecting the GOP and Rand Paul just like he did all year by refusing to confront Romney with OUR MONEY! It's too bad Ron chose to end his career in such a deceitful way. It is a huge stain on his otherwise flawless record of integrity.

Comment viewing options

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

Low bar for endorsing someone

Ron Paul doesn't endorse someone unless he agrees with practically everything the other person stands for. And if Dr. Paul has made an oath to not support anyone who's not pro-life, that sadly disqualifies Governor Johnson due to the oath. Maybe Dr. Paul values his word more highly than others, and won't endorse someone unless he can back them completely, which he can't with Johnson.

Sure, Dr. paul endorsed Chuck Baldwin, and he had endorsed the candidate Ronald Reagan. Name me anyone else he has endorsed in his 30 years of politics that weren't little people in individual states?

"Moderation in temper is always a virtue; but moderation in principle is always a vice." -- Thomas Paine

Good luck with that.

Ron doesn't endorse statist liberals.

I don't play, I commission the league.

He already did - in his Ron Paul way. He called Gary Johnson...

..."A wonderful candidate who everyone should take a look at."

Don't you take that as an endorsement?

If not, then what is it?

"We have allowed our nation to be over-taxed, over-regulated, and overrun by bureaucrats. The founders would be ashamed of us for what we are putting up with."
-Ron Paul

Um, an actual endorsement.

Um, an actual endorsement. lol

Of course he should have

but its hard to control such mistakes when family is involved.

I think Ron

may have endorsed if he thought Gary could win. But, he really has no chance so I think Ron is looking at the long game and that means Rand. I think Ron doesn't want to hurt Rand's chances in 2016. he os probably right about that strategy.

Rand has ZERO chance in 2016

1) Because he endorsed Romney (Pissed off a bunch of liberty supporters who now believe (including me) that he is a shill for the GOP).

2) Because the PTB would never trust him with the nomination.

3) Because of all the rule changes at the last RNC which VOIDED every advance made by libertarians in the GOP.

If you wanna be libertarian - JOIN THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY!

Do or do not, there is no should.

Ron Paul should only endorse the people Ron Paul wants to endorse. Would I have like to have seen him endorse Gary Johnson? Sure, but I don't feel Dr. Paul is obligated to in anyway. I voted for Gary Johnson and the Libertarian Party ticket regardless.

“Politicians are like diapers; they need to be changed often and for the same reason.” ― Mark Twain

"Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank. Give a man a bank and he can rob the world."

I represent those who have . . .

serious reservations about GJ.

I never did believe RP would become president; I believed that he would help wake people up--

People are waking up--

This is such a silly discussion; so why did I make a comment on it?

!

It's not about a 'man', my friends--

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

I told a friend of mine, more than a year ago, the agenda folks

already have their guy picked. She asked, "Well, why are we doing this than?" My reply, "to wake people up, to plant seeds and watch them grow." Ron Paul has given us a stage, a talking place, a launch pad. However individuals choose to use their voice during this time is important and more importantly we all need to use it.

Ron Paul is amazing and I will be canvassing for the write-in this weekend. BUT, I know the MSM is owned and it is called Corporatism. All we can do is try and wake up the masses and get them involved, and then pray a lot.

He STILL can..still a few days left.

to make the endorsement.

As a leader, Ron has the Midas touch in reverse.

And Rand is thoroughly despised.

Ron has absolutely nothing to lose by endorsing Gary Johnson. I'm sorry I ever donated for Ron.

Famous Quote from Justice William O. Douglas

"The Constitution is not neutral.
It was designed to take the government
off the backs of people."

I'm sorry you did too.

What a bunch of little bitches.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

I saw on a post here that you are Jesse Benton.

A couple of folks have questioned this. Can you provide proof that you are not him? The other people said they have proof.

Couldn't agree more.

Ron Paul is putting party before country by not endorsing GJ. He's also allowing an already embattled alternative vote to be splintered among at least 5 candidates when one (GJ) is clearly going to be the winner of the 5.

Ron Paul is ARGUABLY the ONLY GUY capable of rallying the troops behind a viable third party (which if GJ can get +5% Libertarians have a bonafide "major" party).

For the good of the country - Gary Johnson needs to get every alternative vote if not for the ONE reason that Americans are FED UP WITH THE TWO PARTY DUOPOLY.

I'll go even further: Every third party candidate should official drop out and endorse Gary Johnson for that same reason - we need to UNIFY THE OPPOSITION TO THIS DUOPOLY CRIME SYNDICATE!

Call it "voting for the lesser of three evils" if you want - but I think that's BS - GJ does not have evil intent. His views are his true beliefs. Voting for anyone else other than GJ is your acceptance that the TWO PARTY DUOPOLY will progress into the next cycle. We all know GJ won't win if not for the fact that VOTING MACHINES are "counting" votes... even if GJ got the majority of voters voting for him.

I agree RVp

...let's give the establishment a third party whether they like it or not - Ron Paul and all current 3rd party candidates should coalesce and endorse Johnson

Preparation through education is less costly than learning through tragedy

This is why Ron Paul has failed his own movement


First, Ron Paul hung his own supporters out-to-dry when he pre-emptively declared Mitt Romney "the winner" way back in April, and refused to fight for the nomination (and refused to even wish for his name to be placed into nomination).

Secondly, he asked his supporters to not rock any boats at the Convention, and basically fall-in-line at Romney's coronation.

And Third, since then there has been total silence from him while Gary Johnson presents a Libertarian platform for voters which calls for most all of the most critical issues that Ron Paul himself was supposedly fighting for.

From: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/11/01/colorado-vote-on-marij...

"You know you’re a libertarian when you hate speed limits." Johnson condemned the Patriot Act and the National Defense Authorization act as civil rights violations.

Johnson also said he would abolish the federal reserve, the department of education, the IRS, income tax and corporate tax. A smaller government and a federal consumption tax would tame the deficit.

"I’m the only candidate that doesn’t want to bomb Iran. And that wants to pull our troops out of Afghanistan tomorrow. Some say a vote for me is wasting your vote. Wasting your vote is voting for someone you don’t believe in. So I say waste your vote, vote for Gary Johnson. If everyone does that, I’ll be the next president of the United States."

__

Now, if Ron Paul had any credibility or integrity here, he would obviously be making joint appearances all around the Country with Gary Johnson, and helping to raise money for him, and be publically promoting his platform and his candidacy as the Libertarian alternative to the status-quo.

But it seems that Ron Paul really isn't interested in bucking the Establishment. His silence here obviously helps Mitt Romney (who he refers to as "his friend"), and it deliberately undercuts the efforts of the Libertarian alternative.

Clearly Ron Paul doesn't care a damn bit about upsetting the status-quo or "the movement". He turtled-up back in April, and morphed into just another hypocrite-coward.

Ron Paul can be summed-up in two words: Never mind...

Don't you get it?

It's not about the man. It about his message of freedom which empower each and every one of us to actively do something about it instead of voting in a rigged election. Neither Johnson nor Paul will be allowed to win fairly, so stop making divisive arguments which does nothing for the liberty movement. Even if Ron Paul endorsed Johnson, nothing will come out of it. The establishment has a track record to see that this will not happen.

The RP grassroots have taken upon themselves to assimilate into their world as local representatives and offices of political influence to make some inroads for positive change. This has been going on for at least 5 years now, and we cannot abandon this effort. It is slow, but we have made great strides together. I owe this to RP. I will vote for Paul, knowing that the election will be rigged (for the most part) There are not enough liberty-minded sentinels to observe and verify all votes.

I wish Johnson and his supporters the best of luck, but don't give up on liberty if Johnson fails to reach 5%. Instead, I hope that his supporters can continue the strategies of RP, because I believe its the most peaceful and realistic one we have currently.

"society could go in a thousand directions as to how it would exist and how it would be, but the public mustn't know that. The generations must believe that the one that they're born into is naturally evolved."-Lenin/Alan Watt/cuttingthroughthematrix.com

You make no sense...


First you say, "Neither Johnson nor Paul will be allowed to win fairly", which may be a true statement. But of course, that doesn't mean that you take that lying down: Every effort should still be made to help maximize the vote for the Libertarian candidate (Gary Johnson), and for the anti-Status-Quo policy agenda.

Second you say that by abandoning Gary Johnson, that this is somehow justified and helps the Grassroots? Nonsense. Just imagine if Ron Paul had gone around the Country in State-after-State drawing huge crowds, and raising money for Gary Johnson, (and also similar Libertarian candidates)? This would electrify the Grassroots tremendously, and you might see Johnson at 10%-15% in the polls right now, maybe more.

Finally, whether Johnson actually can "win", or not is irrelevant. You must stand on the principle of the Libertarian Anti-War, Anti-FederalReserve, Anti-PoliceState policy platform, and that means you stand for Gary Johnson since he is the candidate. If you refuse to do that, then you're just making a statement of slience, and making life even easier for the Establishment. Either you stay true to the alternative policy agenda, or you're a fake.

Ron Paul could have thrown his weight around, and used his popularity for great good. Instead, he just happily curled right up into Mitt Romney's lap, and flipped Gary Johnson the finger (by his abandonment). He's done nothing to help the movement for the past 6 months, and only made Romney's life much easier....

I call that what it is....phony, pure hypocrisy.

He ran away from the whole battle, and did nothing for the one guy who wanted to stay and fight.

I Agree LibertyBaby,

Not backing Johnson makes Ron Paul into a partisan Republican and not the ideologue he has been for 30 odd years. Ron Paul could not win the Nomination, through foul means or fair but he should endorse Johnson if for no other reason than he espouses the same foreign and civil liberties policy. Gary Johnson can't win either, but he change the face of US elections for years to come by getting over 5% of the popular vote and knocking down the duopoly.

Preparation through education is less costly than learning through tragedy

Oh puh-leez! Paul has been

Oh puh-leez! Paul has been the most consistent when it comes to honesty, integrity and often standing alone against the status quo. Johnson, on the other hand is the most inconsistent when it comes to the FED and sound money, drones, kony, war on terror etc.

Johnson is a panderer and will sway whichever way the wind blows. Paul is solid as a rock when it comes to his principles. Paul's limited government philosophy is rooted in liberty, whereas, Johnson's limited government iconoclasm is more that of an accountant/businessman, than that of a philosopher rooted in liberty.

Paul is no coward and is still fighting the good fight.

Ron Paul: Forget A 3rd Party, We Need A 2nd Party

http://www.dailypaul.com/260450/ron-paul-forget-a-3rd-party-...

Oh puh-leez! RON PAUL QUIT IN APRIL 2012


He's done absolutely diddley-squat since then....

Johnson is the one fighting here, not Paul.

I wouldn't call teaching

I wouldn't call teaching freedom doing diddley - squat. Fighting? Fighting to stay on Ron's coat tails is more like it. Possibly why his robo calls will name drop and mention, as if it's a fact, that Johnson sides with Ron on most issues. What like keeping guantanamo open, military tribunals, privatized prisons, staying vigilant on the war on terror, humanitarian wars, NAFTA/CAFTA, open borders, a "fair" tax, etc? What a joke.

Poor Johnson can't stand on his own merits and has to erect a small tent inside the big top ,,, like some side show attraction.

Pure Lies...


You are describing Mitt Romney (Ron Paul's buddy), and not Gary Johnson.

Gary Johnson is very clear about getting out of Afghanistan, No War with Iran, Ending NDAA, Ending The Patriot Act, opposing NAFTA, Ending the Drug War, legalizing Marijuana, Ending the Federal Reserve, cutting Military Spending, scaling back the IRS, cutting Cabinet Departments, and less overall Taxes.

This is the freedom agenda. And it is night and day better than Mitt Romney.

You've got it all wrong boy: We don't need a "teacher"; We need a real fighter, like a second Andrew Jackson. Gary Johnson is out there and fighting. Ron Paul just ducked and ran away way like a whimp back in April.

Quitters don't impress me; Fighters do. Give me a guy who fights to the end....any day. Support the candidate, not some useless 'teacher' who passively supports the wholly corrupt Mitt Romney, and refuses to support the one good guy who is out there trying!

Sorry charlie, you are

Sorry charlie, you are misinformed. Johnson is not clear about the fed and sound money. First he wanted to work within the fed and micro manage it, now he says he wants to abolish it. Which one is it Gary? He does want to stay vigilant on the war on terror and has said so. He will not take the use of drones off the table. He will keep guantanamo open. He has stated he would end foreign aid, except to Israel. He is for building more privatized, for profit prisons. Open borders, NAFTA/CAFTA, the misnamed "fair" tax. Need I go on?

You can keep the "second" Andrew Jackson. I'll stick with Paul, the second Thomas Jefferson.

So whats your point?

Cause GJ name drops Ron Paul he is no good? Half the liberty candidates out there talk about Ron Paul, so we should vote for any of them? You can't compare anyone to Ron Paul or his record, so I guess none of them are deserving of our votes, right?

No, Johnson is not deserving

No, Johnson is not deserving of my vote because he name drops, it's a host of other reasons. He is a liar, a cheap knock off, a counterfeit. I can't vote for someone who is not credible. Credibility is something that has to be earned - and Paul has certainly earned it.

Please

Please provide evidence that he is a liar? I've watched many videos and viewed many articles on him, never seen any thing on him being a liar or a cheap knock off. I would love to see it.

http://market-ticker.org/akcs

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=213366&page=1

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2012/06/how-libertarian...

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2011/06/gary-johnson-as...

http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2011/04/21/gary-johnson-c...

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=210803

There's a few links to get you started. Gary seems great to those who haven't scratched beneath the surface. I would also suggest you look into Johnson's dungeons for dollars scheme, aka privatized, for profit prisons. Quite an eyeopener. 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. Government is not a business. Once profit is introduced as a motivator, it becomes the only motivator.

Not accurate

Dr. Paul sees it as a movement within the GOP. You can't forget that part of the equation.

Johnson believes it is a near impossible task to reform the GOP. Johnson was always a GOP outsider who was tolerated.

Man to man Dr. Paul respects the Gov. But he won't endorse him because it is counter to his goals and strategy and on certain topics his principles.

It's called integrity.

"One resists the invasion of armies; one does not resist the invasion of ideas" Victor Hugo