3 votes

What Gary Johnson Supporters Don't Understand...

"Credibility" for the LP doesn't come from 5% of the vote. You can't buy credibility with federal matching funds. Credibility comes from the PEOPLE who populate the LP. It comes from being a principled statesman, not a flip-flopping hack. It comes from logic and reason, not attempts to browbeat people into voting for your guy and censoring his negative traits. It comes from being a leader, not a coat-tail rider.

Ron Paul's credibility isn't derived from a party or an amount of votes. It comes from decades of holding steadfast to PRINCIPLE, of speaking truth to power, and of doing the right things, not saying things that sound good. The LP, GJ, and their base will never be credible until they understand this concept.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

Clearly you missed the point of the MONEYBOMBS...

...which was to, you know, RAISE MONEY, since money is essential for political success.

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

Well, duh...

but raising money =/= buying elections. And the moneybombs wouldn't have raised one red cent if Dr. Paul hadn't proven himself to be a consistent pro-liberty voice for decades.

I don't play, I commission the league.

Yes, but that's as far as only credibility gets you.

If you don't have the money as well, for get it.

Money is required. Credibility is not.

That doesn't mean I don't prefer credibility. It doesn't mean I'll support anyone without it. But credibility alone is not what wins.

You don't have to have any credibility, but if you have enough money - you can win.

Obama is proof. Zero credibility. He never really won an election until 2008. Now he's won twice.

As I said before, if credibility was a necessity, then neither Romney nor Obama would have been nominated or had a chance to win and Paul would have been at the top of the heap.

But it didn't turn out that way did it?

I don't like it any more than you, but that doesn't change the reality of it.

When people seem so far apart on fundamental issues

it's usually a clue that they never were of the same cloth as you to begin with. Look at some of the ridiculous things he is saying.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

How Does That Explain the GOP and Democrats?

Are you really saying that the LP has no credibility compared to the dominant parties?

The fact is, that no one runs in the LP for the advantage it gives them, so they have no reason to lie to the members and delegates, or to the voters.

Just joining the LP is for the principle of it. There's no other advantage or reason for doing so.

We have legitimate disagreements and various values and personalities, but the bottom line is that we all support the non-agression principle or we get kicked out. The rest is just differences between people that will never go away. Freedom is what brings us together.

What do you think? http://consequeries.com/

You can't be that naive.

So Bob Barr was a true Libertarian of principles.. both him and Root were great men of Liberty.

I think you should probably boot GJ over NAP then.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

Credibility? Did you even

Credibility? Did you even listen to what Gary Johnson said?

It's about exposure. 5% means guaranteed federal matching funds and possible entry into the debates (that part I'm unclear on), meaning lots of money, meaning advertising funds, meaning exposure. Once his exposure rises to closer to his 5% polling numbers, his current polling will rise. That part is just a fact. It would be true for Jill Stein or Virgin Goode or just about anyone. But the idea is that lots of people are just waiting to hear the libertarian message explained and the critical mass will cause more momentum to bring the polling numbers up into winnable territory.

Credibility? Gary Johnson has none!

because he laid his foundation with this backstabbing smear using the infamous racist newsletters against Ron Paul right on his official 2012 Gary Johnson Campaign website.I will reiterate my current tagline in bold:

Gary Johnson is like a farm dog that sucks eggs


This article was on Gary Johnsons official 2012 campaign website.

The Pragmatic Libertarian

As we pleaded for it to be removed what was done?It was put it on his facebook page complete with the word racist that was a hyperlink to this "newsletter expose" on Ron Paul. http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/angry-white-man

How soon you people forget.

RPF Article

And that was after Ron Paul endorsed Gary in 2011 before Ron entered the race. Gary has never apologized for this to my knowledge and I think it really hurt Ron that he would stoop that low to try to make himself appear a better candidate than Ron and providing links to the famed "racist newsletters" on his campaign website.

And that I surmise is why Jesse Benton stated unequivocally that Ron will not endorse him.

Gary Johnson being guided by CFR operative.

Just How Libertarian is Gary Johnson? (interview with Bob Wenzel)

November 6th 2012 I voted for Dr.Ron Paul
"We must remember, elections are short-term efforts. Revolutions are long-term projects." ~ Ron Paul

I'm not referencing GJ himself...

I'm referencing a few of GJ's supporters on here who have claimed we need to get Gary to 5% so the LP can be credible.

I don't play, I commission the league.

I don't see it as getting

I don't see it as getting "credibility". I'm mainly voting for the LP so that it's a possible viable alternative in 2016. If Romney wins today, he'll obviously be the GOP nominee in 2016. If Obama wins, there's no guarantee we'll be able to get a Liberty candidate in as the GOP nominee, especially with all the new rules. What if Ron Paul wasn't joking on Jay Leno and really will run in 2016? The LP will already be set up for him with ballot access and (voluntary) federal matching funds. He could actually use contributions on getting the message out instead of spending it all on getting ballot access and litigation. If Ron doesn't run, who knows? There could be another candidate that could unite the Liberty movement much better than Johnson and we'll have the LP all set up for them. Even though he said he'd run again, there's no guarantee Johnson would be the LP nominee in 2016. Basically, I want as many viable options as possible in 2016. I dunno, that's just my opinion.

C_T_CZ's picture

Enough already

There are lots of perfectly valid reasons for voting for Johnson, and denying those valid reasons offhand the way the OP does means he loses much credibility himself.

Proclaim LIBERTY throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof

There IS one valid reason to vote GJ, the only one necessary:

voting your conscience.

That being said, we should all strive to be informed voters, and not to fall for misconceptions. The LP can get their 5%, but what does that matter if they don't run consistent libertarian voices?

I don't play, I commission the league.

Lots of downvotes...

no real rebuttals to my points, other than personal attacks. Who's dividing the movement again?

I'm a registered Libertarian. I WANT the party to have credibility. But they need to make some changes going forward.

I don't play, I commission the league.

There can't be any rebuttals...

...as you presented no arguments: ahem, troll.

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

What kind of nonsense

What kind of nonsense emotionalism is this?

Ventura 2012

Enough already!

Whats the purpose behind this post other then to fan the flames of division within the Liberty movement? Just shut the hell up about this and vote whomever you're going to vote for and leave it at that. The same goes for people calling Ron Paul write-ins a waste too.

I voted for Gary Johnson and am damn proud of it, I didn't do it because of the 5% threshold either. I did it because I share the same concepts as he AND Ron Paul share.

With that said, good day.

The purpose of this post...

is to refute the common premise that we should all vote for Gary Johnson because if he gets 5% of the vote and federal funds, the Libertarian Party will somehow gain "credibility". It doesn't work that way. I'm trying to explain why some of us feel more secure in writing in Ron Paul than giving the LP their 5%.

I don't play, I commission the league.

You prove only that there

You prove only that there should be an IQ test as a prerequisite to voting.

How so?

Do you think money buys true credibility? Have you forgotten that actions speak louder than words?

I don't play, I commission the league.

C_T_CZ's picture

Johnson's actions are credible

Actions like Johnson endorsing Ron Paul in 2008? Or in 2012? Actions like Johnson saying he will end drone strikes and unconstitutional wars overseas? Or perhaps actions like Johnson's two term record as New Mexico Governor?

Proclaim LIBERTY throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof

Those aren't actions, they're hollow words...

considering Gary admits he won't take drones off the table, would support military intervention in Uganda, and smeared Ron Paul with the newsletters Paul didn't write on his very own campaign website.

I don't play, I commission the league.

C_T_CZ's picture

Have fun!

Have fun writing in Ron Paul in every election from now on!

Proclaim LIBERTY throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof

I will.

Have fun compromising your principles every election from now on!

I don't play, I commission the league.

You realize that's not a good comeback, right?

Someone says you're wasting your vote completely, and you respond: O yea, well you're choosing marginally flawed candidates, so there! LOL...obviously you don't see the inequality between the two accusations, or we wouldn't be having this debate.

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


OP thinks having a solid record while being the Governor of New Mexico constitutes having "hollow words". OP just wants to pick an unnecessary fight. All candidates are flawed, and yes that includes Ron Paul.

GJ's flaws are not marginal.

Wars, drones, the Fed, and life are pretty major issues in this movement, which Gary has been wrong on.

I don't play, I commission the league.


Ummm Gary wants to end the wars, and abolish the Fed. I disagree with him on Abortion, but that's a state issue, and like all social issues. Troll harder next time buddy.

Gary SAID that he would send the troops into Uganda to get Kony.

He also SAID in a Libertarian debate that the Fed is a "public entity" that we're all shareholders in, and we can micromanage them. That displays a fundamental lack of understanding about how the Federal Reserve operates. One of THE biggest goals of this movement is ending the Fed, and Gary can't even get that right.

I don't play, I commission the league.

Dude really?

If you really believe he wouldn't abolish the Fed even though he has stated he would countless times then you're an idiot. As for Uganda, we're already there, and this is why education is so important. Because of the Kony issue I've changed the minds of quite a few people I know who were into that and they saw it for the scam that it was.

And you're a liar...Trolling Is My Hobby

Everyone knows the problems with Gary's positions , and everyone knows that it is not as severe as you suggest. Not that, in this election, it even matters. Gary is a non-entity. This is purely about the party. At some point in the future, if they actually have a chance of winning, then the candidate would matter. Now, he doesn't.

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