Comment: I like Gary Johnson....there, I said it!

(See in situ)

I like Gary Johnson....there, I said it!

The negativity is definitely confusing. Johnson is better than Barr and not as good as Paul. If Ron Paul has not won the nomination, then writing his name in will -actually- mean nothing. By that, I mean that he will not be a qualified candidate, and therefore the vote will indeed be thrown in the circular file. In the case of an "Obamney / Rombama / Johnson" choice at the ballot, I plan to do what I do in all races, pick the most Republican...which is clearly Johnson.

Your point runs much deeper. Why do we enlightened people collectively cut off our noses to spite our faces? I promote extremism in purity, at all levels and without exception. Pure anarchocapitalism is a goal, and we point ourselves towards it. Republicrats point themselves towards the goal of socialism/fascism. Gary Johnson is indeed a viable candidate, and he is clearly better than Romney and Obama. I listened to all of the Republican candidates, and I even waited to see if Kucinich might choose to fight Obama. If Rick Perry sprung up as a very libertarian candidate and ended up winning the nomination, I would have been very interested in what he had been saying throughout the campaign.

Ron Paul is my first choice. Gary Johnson is my second choice. None of the above is my third choice. Barack Obama is my fourth choice. Mitt Romney is my fifth choice. I base this list on what I have heard from them so far in the debates.

Since we know that Mitt Romney doesn't have what it takes, we can be sure that he will fail miserably. He will lose the nomination at the convention, or he will lose in the general election, or he will win the election and be a terrible failure as a president. I really don't need to hear anything more about him.

Gary Johnson holds a small amount of my interest....

.....a very small amount.

I'm more critical than most people I know, so it really puzzles me why so many on the Daily Paul are AGAINST Gary Johnson.

It may seem like a paradox, but it confuses me why more people are not against Rand Paul (politically, not personally of course). Rand Paul has gone out of his way, ahead of the nomination, to "happily" endorse Mitt Romney. I have been wrestling with the logic behind why other people who support Ron Paul don't consider this to be antithetical to the candidacy of Ron Paul.

Gary Johnson is wrong on some policies, and they tend to be ones he admits he hasn't fully researched. Rand, on the other hand, made exactly the wrong choice in exactly the clearest decision of this political season. Yet, it seems that Rand is treated like one who jumped in front of a bullet for George Washington. Gary Johnson, who has in fact on multiple times, including at a debate in this election season, endorsed Ron Paul for president, is treated like a pure neocon.


I've tried for so long to find the logic in the reasoning of many here. Please, if there is something that I am missing, tell me. It all seems so clear to me, and I STILL find myself in 100% agreement with Ron Paul, Adam Kokesh, Andrew Napolitano, and Tom Woods on every piece of dogma they've offered.

So I'm left asking this: What's wrong with you people?!

Michael Nystrom's fists can punch through FUD.