10 votes

Gary Johnson <1%

He got less than 1/2 of Ron's Primary popular vote, and he'll get none of the Libertarian-desired public (welfare) funding for their party.



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

There was very little

Interest and coverage in Gary' s campaign
Too bad as a Ron Paul third party run would probably earned him a place at the debates and a real chance to win

Please subscribe to smaulgld.com

What exactly is the damage ..

.. on some of the people that post here.

The votes are all rigged and meaningless

Did you not see what happened in the primary?

Did you not see the many documentaries on the subject?

We don't know "how many people voted for candidate X"

Because there is NO ACCURATE COUNT OF THE ACTUAL VOTES

If GJ got more than 5%? In reality?

They would make DAMN sure that the public would never know about it.

What is it going to take for people to get the freaking memo man.

Libertarian for congress got

Libertarian for congress got 4.7% in New Hampshire, thanks to the Free State Project

In other news, can you guys

In other news, can you guys believe Ron Paul came in third in Iowa?

If you disagree with me on anything you are not a real libertarian...

Link?

I was wondering if anyone had counted RP's write-ins, the only results I can find says "others" 1.4%

I was kidding and IO was

I was kidding and IO was referring to the primary.... mocking the OP's thread about votes...

If you disagree with me on anything you are not a real libertarian...

Do we even need this thread?

There's only like 2 or 3 people in this site who are still interested in stirring up this BS. Election is over and it is time to start running people for 2014.

Those of us who voted for

Those of us who voted for Gary already know this, so what exactly is the point of the post? What percentage of the vote did your candidate get?

For one

so it's indelibly burned into your cranium so this bullshit is never pulled here again with a candidate that is so lacking character and confused on the issues he wasn't worth even being mentioned on this site once exposed.

Don't come back with that idiot 2016 because we will not forget who he is.

Matter of fact unless it's someone of Justin Amash's calibre don't even bother with the LP here because in the 40 years of existence they haven't gotten out of the 1% bracket.They are a dead end.

Back to Ron Pauls plan until we control the GOP entirely.

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

not welfare

its not welfare. it comes from voluntary contributions. the only difference between that money and the contributions you gave to ron paul is that the people who give to that fund want the money to go to all of the candidates.

there is no initiation of force in the raising of that money.

Except that it comes from

Except that it comes from money taken by force. So to think that there is no initiation of force from the money is false. A voluntary contribution is just that, money going directly from a person to a candidate. To go through forced collection of taxes to candidates makes it money taken by force. Doesn't matter that you get to earmark $3 of it.

Blessings )o(

How is it forced?

I thought there was a little box you checked on some form from the DMV, or voting registrar, or somewhere that said "would you like to contribute x amount of dollars to the Presidential election fund" or something to that effect.

Why do you have the form in the first place?

It's on the form people use when filing federal income tax. That's what the other posters are getting at.

Yep, failure

I voted for him. I wish more Paulites had too. All we wanted was 5% to make the LP more viable in the future. But, it's small potatoes anyway, just a plan B. Plan A is winning Republican primaries, so I'm not losing any sleep.

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

LP has promise

Obama received 9 million less votes than he did in '08.
Romney received 2.5 million less votes than McCain in '08.
Johnson received 600,000 MORE votes than Barr in '08.

Dems and GOP should be concerned. This is a net 13 million votes swinging away from the establishment parties. Where are those 9 million Obama supporters from '08? The 2.5 million GOP supporters from '08?

who do you think

made that happen? Certainly not GJ, it pretty much happened because of RON PAUL.

LP is just a party, let's focus on getting liberty candidates in power, local, state, or federal! And one of the MANY things Ron Paul taught me is that, your love of liberty certainly isn't labeled by your party.

"Truth is Treason in an Empire that lies" - Ron Paul

Educate the masses, and win in the end.

Also since both Romney and Obama got 60 times more votes than

Gary Johnson - but SPENT 333 times as much - each of those Obama and Romney votes cost 5.5 times as much, as each Gary Johnson vote.

"Economy of scale" principal suggests that large numbers of votes should be LESS expensive per vote compared to smaller numbers. But both Romney and Obama had to pay 5.5 times as much for each vote as Gary Johnson did.

Just think how Gary Johnson would have done if he had had a billion dollars like these other guys did, instead of just $3 million. Or even $90 million like Linda McMahon did in her fail attempt to win a Connecticut Senate seat.

Therefore Johnson was

Therefore Johnson was cheaper?

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

Oh come on, surely someone

Oh come on, surely someone that supported Johnson has a sense of humor.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

Not sure what you mean but

If you only have $3 million and they have a $1 billion (a THOUSAND million) - I guess you have to be cheaper.

When?

When?

Gary Johnson Breaks Ed Clark’s 1980 Vote Record of 921,128 Votes

1,139,562 Votes for Gov. Gary Johnson. Record-Setting Libertarian Party Presidential Vote

New Mexico - 3.5% of the Vote

Montana – 2.9% of the Vote

Alaska – 2.5% of the Vote

Republicans and Democrats Spent $2 Billion on the Presidential Campaigns of Barack Obama and Mitt Romney.

Libertarians raised and spent $3 Million for the Presidential Campaign of Gov. Gary Johnson.

Romney and Obama Outspent Gary Johnson 667 to 1.

-He got just over 1%

Brad

And Perot was at 33% at one

And Perot was at 33% at one point. Having started campaigning late.

And then after all the funny business with threatening his family and temporary dropping out, he still received:

In the 1992 election, he received 18.9% of the popular vote, approximately 19,741,065 votes.

Perot was a big tent candidate - "United We Stand". The Libertarian party is small tent, and frequently filled with people that attack even other liberty minded folks.

Reason why the only way that is going to work is to take over the GOP. The LP isn't a viable party.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

Perot used his own money to

Perot used his own money to his advantage. Clearly, a grassroots effort is preferable and longer-lasting.

Had grassroots. Also talk of sabotage in 1992 like in 2012 RP

Perot had grassroots. In fact, grassroots started it before Perot.

At the time, there was some talk that Perot was just a rich guy trying to take control and get ahead of grassroots.

The other perspective at that time was Perot didn't have his family threatened when he reached 33%, but that he intentionally sabotaged his own campaign - which talk existed when people were talking about whether to accept him as the candidate of this new movement.

Not too unlike the Ron Paul sabotage talk of 2012 either.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

Ross Perot IS a billionaire - willing to spend $100 million of

his own money he said in an Interview on the Today Show, in 1992 dollars.

I can't find exact figures but I am aware that the Reform Party spent as much or more than the two major parties did at that time to get that 18.9%.

Again, contrast that to Gary Johnson who certainly didn't have the extrordinary $1 billion that a campaign costs today. In fact he had far, far, less than the $100 million Perot had in 1992 - with just $3 million in 2012.

With adequate money, the successful two term governor of New Mexico could have done very well.

A perspective from someone at that time

The thing most people ignore who weren't actually there is the reform party or whatever it became was forming before Perot started, including using the motto "united we stand". Perot was a late comer to a party already starting.

You can even find messages online - especially old mailing lists and usenet archives, showing that.

It directly came from two factions, Ron Paul's 1988 and an alliance with liberty minded progressives on the left, especially the think local people.

Fallout included the early militia movement, which despite being billed as a "right wing movement", was actually filled with people from the left as well, and was a reaction against George Bush Sr, his new world order speech, etc.

This isn't too unlike Ron Paul reaching out to third parties in 2008.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

The lesson to learn

The lesson to learn isn't "Perot had a lot of money, woe is me".

Grassroots for the reform party was already forming before Perot.

The lesson to learn is that when you are big tent and reach out to everyone, instead of being narrow minded, you go far quick. "United we Stand".

I'm sure Perot helped. But - perhaps you don't attract money to help you when you're small tent either. The Libertarian party is designed to lose. A third party doesn't have to be, witness the Reform party. But nothing will fix the LP. It's been 40 years of nothing, and willing to run candidates like Bob Barr, certainly not libertarian, or Garry Johnson. Ideology obviously has nothing to do with it. Marginalization and control of opposition does.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

The simple fact remains that you need MONEY to get VOTES.

I'd like to buy into the romantic notion that a man and a group with an idea can go ahead and win it all. But its ridiculous,

In that 40 years I doubt the Libertarian Party had $100 million to spend altogether - in the ENTIRE 40 years.

Ross Perot did. He was willing to kick that amoun in himslef in 1992. For Republicans and Democrats, thats chicken feed. Karl Rove himself controlled $300 million for one PAC.

Gary Johnson had a measly $3 million.

The Libertarian Party is not designed to lose. If it had money and could really spread its message it would win.

Simply fact, Romney won, right?

As I recall, Romney had a lot of money and lost.

The fact is, the Libertarian Party is an extremely small tent that won't even tolerate traditional conservatives and Christians.

Having been active with the local LPs in two different States in the late 80s and early 90s, I'm going to guess I'm the only one of the two of us speaking from experience about the LP or the Perot election.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.