I conducted an initial phone interview with Gary Johnson campaign manager Ron Nielson on Thursday. The interview was based on questions asked by our readers in this thread.
Because I had additional notes that were not with me at the time, and because IPR was experiencing site outages before and during this time, we are tentatively planning on a second interview in the next few days, allowing our readers to ask additional questions in the comments here.
Because I was not able to do both effectively at the same time, I read off IPR readers’ questions and Joe Buchman took notes. There’s no verbatim transcript of the interview, but these notes seem pretty accurate to me based on my recollection of the call.
Editor’s notes are from Joe; I note my own editor’s notes separately.
PAULIE: One of our readers asks “I want to know where radio/tv ads have been run and how much they’re planning to invest in this in the near future. What states have been targeted? (i.e., battleground states or safe states?)”
RON NIELSON: We’ve spend about $180,000 on radio advertising.
(Editor’s Note: You can listen to the radio ads here: http://soundcloud.com/garyJohnson2012)
RON: Our strategy for radio was first to solidify the Libertarian Party vote and secondly to appeal to former Ron Paul voters. We bought time on radio programs that typically attracted Ron Paul listeners and/or were Libertarian-leaning programs.
Our television advertising has been present on our website (garyjohnson2012.com) and starts streaming as soon as you go there. Those television ads have been shared on lots of social media, in emails and other formats, but our paid television advertising on major media outlets has just started. We have bought television time in nine markets – New Hampshire, Burlington Vermont, Washington, DC, New Mexico, Denver and other markets mostly in the west.
PAULIE: What about Swing States vs. Safe States?
RON: In battleground, or so called “swing states” the media is so saturated with ads from the Republicans and Democrats that we are unlikely to break through to the point we could even be noticed or heard. Those markets, due to classic supply and demand, are among the most expensive. So in terms of our goal of maximizing the value of each dollar donated to us – as measured by votes for Gary and Jim, it just doesn’t make sense for us to invest our resources in those markets first. So we’re looking for the biggest bang – the greatest return – for the hard-earned dollars that have been donated to the campaign.
Now Colorado is something of a battleground state. But there we also have viewership in Boulder, where we have traction in terms of calling for an end to the war on drugs, and thanks to cable systems in Wyoming which carry the Denver market stations, we also get viewers there. Otherwise we’re not in any battleground states.
[Note from paulie: Of the markets named, NH and NM have also been characterized as swing states, and the DC market includes northern Virginia, a swing state. Other parts of the DC media market, Wyoming, and Vermont are considered safe states. I hope to get the rest of the list of nine media markets, but haven’t received it yet.]
RON: Also, television has been a part of our strategic discussions since the very early discussions with Governor Johnson about how to best run this campaign. Rather than simply spend every dollar donated on television advertising – which would have made my job a heck of a lot easier (LAUGHS), what the Governor and I set out to do from the very beginning was to build a grassroots movement for Liberty. We knew to win the Presidency that we needed a solid foundation of supporters. So that means putting money into travel, organizing, building teams, connecting supporters with each other through social media and other methods, printing support materials, paying for rally venues, gaining free media, putting our video and audio advertising online for that grassroots movement to begin sharing — and all that as a strategy before looking at investing in paid, major media television advertising – especially where that advertising is lost in a sea of other political commercials.
Again, two million in television ads for Gary would have been up against two thousand million (2 billion) in ads from the other candidates. It’d have been wasted.
So our strategy was to support the Libertarian base, then reach out to Ron Paul supporters to build on that base, and expand our efforts to reach out to progressives on social issues. We’ve built momentum through those efforts and the free media associated with them. And I think we’ve been better at investing the dollars donated to us by doing that, rather than by simply putting it all into a series of media buys.
PAULIE: Another reader at IPR asks if you could provide, along those lines, a general accounting of expenditures and how decisions were made.
RON: We’ve put that out in the form of a letter from our Treasurer for our spending through the end of September.
(Editor’s Note: Available here: https://independentpoliticalreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/GJ-2012-General-Election-Summary1.pdf)
RON: Our Treasurer will update those numbers for October and at the end of the campaign.
PAULIE: Another reader asks: As the campaign ends, how can the national Libertarian Party best integrate, support and build on the Johnson 2012 campaign organization to maintain the momentum for the future of the LP? [A similar question: How can the campaign and the state affiliates work together more efficiently in the future?]
RON: I hope everyone can find a way to continue to work together. We all need to work to build a Liberty movement and to increase membership in the Libertarian Party. I think every American needs to be engaged in the ideas that show how Liberty is what is best for all of us. So I believe all of us here with the campaign, Gary, Jim, many of our volunteers and staff plan to continue building momentum by speaking at rallies, on campuses, in the media as much as they will have us. We have Our American Initiative, a 501 C4, as one foundation for that.
(Editor’s Note: See —http://ouramericainitiative.com/)
PAULIE: In terms of campus events, isn’t it difficult to organize those when you have only the fall semester? In the past, when our candidates were nominated earlier, they had a lot more time for campus organizing – over a full school year. One reader asks, do you wish now that you would have started the “college tour” in 2010?
RON: I wish the nomination had been earlier. It would have helped us to build a base and would have worked a lot better in terms of campus organizing.
PAULIE: What states do you expect to break 2 percent in?
RON: Our goal is to exceed expectations. I believe we will do that to a greater degree in many of the Western states and that we will also find we have some surprising strong pockets of support in other areas. We certainly expect to gain the highest vote total for a Libertarian Presidential candidate ever — something significantly beyond that.
PAULIE: What LP state affiliates seem to have their act together the best and gave you the best support?
RON: In each state we had two groups that we worked with. First we had the already organized existing state party organizations, many of which were very, very well organized. But we also had, in each state, as a part of the campaign our State Director, a State Campus Organizer, and a State Finance Chair for the campaign.
(Editor’s Note: Much of this organization was put in place prior to or during the Governor’s campaign for the Republican Party nomination, and was continued through the campaign for the Libertarian nomination, and then through the general election).
RON: We also have four regional directors coordinating the activities of our 150 campus, finance and state directors.
So in each state we had those two groups coordinating with each other and as a back-up to each other.
And we reached out to all the various Libertarian candidates and campaigns in each state as well.
So in no place were we weak in any way. In fact almost all our volunteers were working hard, giving it their all. I know both the Governor and the Judge who have met many, if not almost all of them in person are very grateful to them.
PAULIE: Another reader asks, do you feel you have been treated fairly by the major media in the US this election cycle?)
RON: We have not been treated fairly by the major media.
Gary Johnson should have been in every one of the Republican Primary debates. He clearly met their stated criteria by their own guidelines. He was in two of them, but even then not treated with equity.
Gary should have been in the CPD (Commission on Presidential Debates) debates. His exclusion from those was due to a combination of media bias, and the efforts of the Republican and Democratic Parties through the CPD to limit competition.
In many of the polls this past summer Gary was reported to be well above five percent. But let’s just take five percent. Over this campaign season, for every 100 times a presidential candidate was mentioned by the major media, did you hear Gary’s name five of those times? There’s no way.
We did manage to get some coverage, and we’re grateful for that. But there’s no way that coverage was either proportional or fair.
PAULIE: Have you read Harry Browne’s post-campaign reports?
RON: No. I would like to see Harry Browne’s materials.
(Editor’s Note: Interested readers can find an index of articles by Harry Browne, here: http://www.harrybrowne.org/ArticlesIndex.htm)
[Paulie’s note: While I highly recommend those as well, I was more specifically talking about Harry Browne’s campaign journals during the campaign and his post-campaign analysis and the insights they provide for Libertarian presidential campaigns].
PAULIE: What do you say to people who are afraid of wasting a vote*?
RON: I think there are two answers to that question.
First, Gary says that if you don’t like the choices you have then don’t waste your vote on someone whose values you do not support. The whole scenario of a spoiler is only relevant in swing states. Where there is no possibility of being a spoiler – for example in California or New York whose electoral college votes are going to President Obama, or in Utah or Texas whose electoral college votes are going to Romney, everyone should feel free to vote their conscience. To cast a vote for the values they truly believe in. To send a message to the major parties to move in the direction you really want.
Secondly, if you are not happy with the results of Republican and Democratic policies/governance and you want your vote to really count as a protest for gaining ballot access and general campaign funding then you have the opportunity to fundamentally change the dynamic of the Party system in this country.
PAULIE: I want to thank you for your time. IPR readers really appreciate this. Could we do a follow-up sometime next week, before the election?
RON: I’d love to. Sure.
* The “wasted vote” question appears to have been gobbled up along with a few other comments in the site switchover to a new hosting company. It was emailed to me in the format below. It was too long to read in full during the limited time we had for the interview but is included here for informational purposes:
Spencer Awes // Oct 25, 2012 at 12:57 pm
Dear Mr. Nielson,
I believe in what Mr. Johnson stands for and your team has done great work since taking up the Libertarian ticket, however, I am weighing my belief as to whether or not a protest vote for Johnson is the best I can do at this time for furthering the political and economic change our country needs to make. How is a protest vote that fails to win, better that a winning vote backed by people who pursue change?
When a heart patient is on the table after years of feeding on bacon and butter, switching to vegetable soup the night before isn’t going to make a difference. Surgery with the Dr. available has to go forward. Now, if we can get the patient through surgery, changes to our diet can be helpful, and new medicinal discoveries may even emerge over time to repair all the damage done; then, selecting a new Dr. that advances these proactive remedies would be sensible.
So the question; what is the benefit to Americans of a 5% protest vote for Johnson, if it means Obama will retain the Presidency, and given my belief that his administration will accelerate the deterioration of our nation’s financial and sovereign health?
Assuming one believes that a Romney administration will do more for free market mechanisms than Obama, and be a more adept negotiator on the military and economic fronts in the Middle East and with China — both which appear to present a crisis-event-horizon within less than 4 years — is THIS the time for changing our diet, or choosing between doctors “in travel range” for surgery in the morning?
Mr. Nielson, while I applied the metaphor above for attention, please if possible give me some substance on which to value a protest vote at this junction.
Sincerely,
Spencer Awes
The substance of Mr. Awes’ contention that Gov. Romney represents the “lesser evil” was not discussed, although I will be happy to debate it in the comments.
The 5% threshold was not discussed in specific terms, but the “general election funding” refers to millions of dollars in Federal money that would be made available to the Libertarian Party if Gary Johnson gets 5% or more in the election, allowing the party to provide much more support for the nominee next time. I’m not sure whether Mr. Awes was aware of this threshold when he used the 5% figure or whether it was just a coincidence.
In other news, Dr. Walter Block has been announced as an economic adviser to campaign after having supported Ron Paul through the Republican Primary. His endorsement is expected to serve as a bridge to many Ron Paul supporters who are primarily concerned about economic and foreign policy issues.
This is a resolution for the Constitution Party’s National Committee against the Fair Tax. They hit the nail on the head here without getting into any anarchist philosophical arguments (which they’d probably oppose anyway).
http://constitutionparty.com/OurPrinciples/Resolutions/tabid/129/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/3/Resolution-for-Opposition-to-the-Fair-Tax-As-Approved.aspx
Resolution for Opposition to the Fair Tax – As Approved April 29, 2011 18:20
by Constitution Party National Committee
Harrisburg, PA
Whereas, Constitution Party candidates are often asked for their position on the Fair Tax; and
Whereas, potential supporters of Constitution Party candidates often favor the Fair Tax, and
Whereas, Constitution Party candidates and leaders are being asked and will be asked their party’s position on the Fair Tax and the reasons for that position,
Whereas, the Fair Tax is a direct tax upon the people, not authorized by the US Constitution nor under the 16th Amendment; and
Whereas, the Fair Tax does not guarantee a lower overall level of taxation but could result in a higher level of taxation than is currently being paid by Americans; and
Whereas, the Fair Tax continues and expands the welfare state by establishing a “Family Consumption Allowance” (FCA) provided to every registered household, regardless of income, which, if implemented, would constitute the single largest entitlement program in American history; and
Whereas, the Fair Tax expands the size of government by replacing the Internal Revenue Service with two new federal agencies, the Excise Tax Bureau and Sales Tax Bureau, as well as state-level agencies, where the primary collecting of revenues would take place; and
Whereas, the Fair Tax makes the states the primary federal tax collection agency, and requires state taxing authorities to annually register every household and household member in the state, accelerating the current trend towards treating states as mere administrative and political subdivisions of the federal government, thus putting the Constitutional principle of state sovereignty (under the 10th Amendment) in even greater peril; and
Whereas, the Fair Tax is a new method of funding extra-Constitutional activities outside the enumerated powers of the General Welfare clause, ignoring the clear intent of the Article I, Section 8 powers of Congress; and
Whereas, only the electing of individuals with a good understanding of America’s founding principles and a firm commitment to frugality and fiscal accountability can fix what the Fair Tax pretends to address; and
Whereas, we see no constitutional authority whatsoever to support the case for the Fair Tax, therefore be it
Resolved, that the Constitution Party does not endorse the Fair Tax; and further be it
Resolved, that the Constitution Party supports instead a constitutionally-correct state-based apportioned tax system.
It’s pretty sad that the Libertarian Party – which is SUPPOSED to be the most anti-taxes party that there is – has not put out a resolution against the Fair Tax.
I do know that the current Constitution Party candidate for President, Virgil Goode, has said that he’s in favor of the Fair Tax. This is probably one of the reasons why he’s not doing so well in the election (of course there are other reasons on top of this, but alienating your base with this issue doesn’t help).
“paulie // Oct 31, 2012 at 4:43 pm
@64
Ron Paul did give some numbers…1 trillion in spending cuts, vs 1.4 trillion in cuts for Johnson. The additional $400 billion that Ron Paul would want to spend his first year would have to be paid through taxes or debt (future taxes) of some kind.”
I think that what happened here is that Ron Paul’s advisors urged him to put out a more moderate platform this time than what he put out the last two times he ran for President.
I’ve been following Ron Paul since 1996 and I’ve got no doubt that he wants to make very large cuts in the size of government.
Also, keep in mind that if Ron Paul were to actually be elected, and were he to put an end to the federal personal income tax and replace it with nothing, the economy would be booming like it hasn’t boomed in a long time, so given the increase in economic activity, any taxes that remained at the federal level would likely bring in more revenue (remember the Laffer Curve) than now.
@64
Ron Paul did give some numbers…1 trillion in spending cuts, vs 1.4 trillion in cuts for Johnson. The additional $400 billion that Ron Paul would want to spend his first year would have to be paid through taxes or debt (future taxes) of some kind.
“Johnson’s plan, other than the prebate, which he has begun to slowly move away from, is more serious and doable. Without the prebate, eliminating all taxes and replacing them with a single consumption tax and a 43% spending cut to start (although we’d all like to see more in the way of cuts) is the best – doable – plan on the road to a libertarian society.”
Johnson has NOT backed away from the Fair Tax. I heard that he was just promoting it on a recent campaign stop.
Most of his plan is good, but this part of it really sucks.
The Fair Tax is NOT an incremental step toward more liberty.
@62 Those items do NOT add up to the amount raised from the Income Tax. Ron Paul knows it. That’s why he gives no numbers.
@59 Johnson has said that he would end ALL federal taxes and replace them with a single consumption tax – his words – on numerous videos linked on IPR.
That’s one reason it’s a superior plan. Its a single tax system.
“He’s never promised enough in short term spending cuts to make that feasible.”
He wants to end all unconstitutional spending and pull the US military out of all of these foreign entanglements, plus he wants to eliminate the Federal Reserve System. If these things were done there’d be no need for an income tax, or for anything to replace it.
“Many people disagree on who should have the burden of proof here.”
This is not the point.
Also, Gary Johnson and Ron Paul really aren’t that far a part on the issue of abortion.
Oh, and I did not even get into the whole prebate scheme portion of the Fair Tax plan which gives everybody a welfare check from Uncle Sam.
“zapper // Oct 31, 2012 at 3:41 pm
Gary Johnson, to be accurate, wants to end ALL federal taxes and replace them with a single consumption tax, eliminate the deficit, balance the budget, and cut spending 43% to make it all work out.”
No, he wants to replace the federal personal and corporate income tax with the Fair Tax, which is a 30% national sales tax on goods and services.
You can sugar coat the plan however you want but it still tastes like shit.
Look at it this way, on one hand you’ve got Ron Paul who wants to end the income tax and replace it with nothing, and on the other hand you’ve got Gary Johnson who wants to end the income tax and replace it with a 30% national sales tax on goods and services.
Not quite. Johnson’s plan also gets rid of all the other taxes and balances the budget. Paul’s plan, at best, might get rid of one tax, and even there he hasn’t laid out enough spending cuts to fully do that. Even if he can cut enough spending to get rid of that one tax, he’d be keeping the payroll (FICA) tax, deficits, and a bunch of other taxes.
Spending is a bigger issue than taxes, since all spending has to be paid for one way or another. Paul proposed $1 trillion in cuts; Johnson, 1.4 trillion.
I think that the real answer is that both Paul and Johnson like the so-called “fair” tax in the short run, and both may want to one day in the nebulous future see a world where all funding is voluntary or at least based on a strict reading of the original Constitution, but Johnson focuses his rhetoric on the short term and Paul focuses on the long term – which, unfortunately, means that Johnson pushes the “fair” tax scheme whereas Paul says he gets rid of the income tax and replaces it with nothing (which many people mistakenly equate to all federal taxes) without laying out that much in spending cuts and without addressing debt.
In other words their tax and spending positions are much closer than most people realize, but the rhetorical emphases on long term versus short term reflect somewhat the differences between executive and legislative experience in government.
Gary Johnson, to be accurate, wants to end ALL federal taxes and replace them with a single consumption tax, eliminate the deficit, balance the budget, and cut spending 43% to make it all work out.
The difference between Johnson and Paul on the tax issue is that Johnson’s plan would work. Paul’s plan would require massive borrowing that would destroy the dollar, massive new replacement taxes or massive cuts that he is unwilling to own up to. The cuts would be fine, of course, but he should present a workable plan if he is a serious candidate. Johnson’s plan, other than the prebate, which he has begun to slowly move away from, is more serious and doable. Without the prebate, eliminating all taxes and replacing them with a single consumption tax and a 43% spending cut to start (although we’d all like to see more in the way of cuts) is the best – doable – plan on the road to a libertarian society.
The only argument that you’d have against him here is if you can prove that life does not begin at conception.
Many people disagree on who should have the burden of proof here.
He also happens to correctly point out that it is not a federal issue. This is not the same thing as wanting to ban gay marriage.
Civil rights are a federal issue. Until the Supreme Court intervened in 1967 many states outlawed so called interracial marriage. You can’t have a married couple in one state and not have your marriage recognized when you move to or travel to another state. Getting rid of state marriage licenses can’t happen in the short term because there are thousands of other laws involved.
When it comes to the income tax, Ron Paul’s stance has always been to end it and replace it with nothing, and for this reason alone he’s more libertarian than Gary Johnson.
He’s never promised enough in short term spending cuts to make that feasible.
Also, what about payroll tax and debt? Those are big issues, at least as big or bigger than income tax.
Look at it this way, on one hand you’ve got Ron Paul who wants to end the income tax and replace it with nothing, and on the other hand you’ve got Gary Johnson who wants to end the income tax and replace it with a 30% national sales tax on goods and services.
Taxation is really the biggest issue (well, along with monetary policy). It is through taxes and control of the monetary system that governments control populations. Without taxes and control of the monetary system governments can’t do anything. So taxation and monetary policy trumps EVERYTHING.
Eliminate taxes and government control over money and the government can’t hire thugs to arrest people for marijuana or any other victimless crime. Eliminate taxes and government control over money and the government can’t launch wars of aggression.
Eliminate taxes and government control over money and you can effectively eliminate government.
Tim Doran // Oct 31, 2012 at 11:23 am
“Ron Paul believes that our government should should build a fence at the border,”
Wow, you don’t know what you are talking about. Ron Paul voted against putting a fence on the border several times, and Ron Paul also voted for INCREASE visas to foreign workers.
The real, hardcore anti-immigration Republicans and conservatives actually don’t even like Ron Paul.
Here is a facebook page that I just found about why anti-immigration folks should NOT vote for Ron Paul:
http://www.facebook.com/notes/republican-security-council/if-you-want-open-borders-no-fence-and-increased-illegal-immigration-ron-paul-is-/192361047529741
“that homosexuals should be denied the right to form a legally recognized union (and all the benefits hetero marriages receive) if state voters decide it,”
Ron Paul has said repeatedly that the government should not be licensing marriage in the first place and that people should be able to marry whoever they want.
He also happens to correctly point out that it is not a federal issue. This is not the same thing as wanting to ban gay marriage. Eliminating state marriage licenses is the true libertarian position on the issue anyway.
“and he also believes that Government force should be used to punish or prevent women from making choices about their pregnancy that it decides are improper.”
Since he is of the school of thought that life begins at conception, he views abortion as murder. Murder is the initiation of force. There’s nothing inconsistent in his view here. The only argument that you’d have against him here is if you can prove that life does not begin at conception.
Also, it should be pointed out that Gary Johnson came out against late term abortions (as Governor of New Mexico, GARY JOHNSON SIGNED A BILL THAT BANNED LATE TERM ABORTIONS), and that Gary Johnson has said that abortion should be left to the states (not far from Ron Paul’s position). Also, as Governor of New Mexico, Gary Johnson SUPPORTED parental notification in when it came to minors seeking abortions.
“Those are all immensely incorrect to me and many others and Ron Paul fails with his support of those wrong-headed views.”
The only thing that is incorrect here is that you don’t have your facts straight.
“You sound ridiculous when you claim to be able to objectively judge someone’s personal/political philosophy and that your exercise of this ‘super-power’ allows you to determine conclusively that GJ is unworthy.”
Where did I say this? I can’t get inside Gary Johnson’s head so I don’t know what he’s really thinking. I’m just commenting on what he’s saying and what his campaign is doing. I think that he’s saying a lot of good things and that his campaign is doing a lot of good things, but there’s some bad stuff mixed in like the Fair Tax. I consider the Fair Tax to be a highly toxic issue for libertarians and I’m concerned about why Gary Johnson is pushing it.
Gary Johnson may indeed be a good sincere fellow, maybe he’s just misguided when it comes to the Fair Tax, I don’t know. Time will tell and the jury is still out.
“paulie // Oct 31, 2012 at 12:58 pm
Ron Paul has also said he would vote for the ‘fair’ tax, even though he is not a co-sponsor and doesn’t push the plan.”
He paid lip service to the issue one time and then he dropped it. He never incorporated it into his platform and he never pushed the issue like Gary Johnson does. When it comes to the income tax, Ron Paul’s stance has always been to end it and replace it with nothing, and for this reason alone he’s more libertarian than Gary Johnson.
Ron Paul has also said he would vote for the “fair” tax, even though he is not a co-sponsor and doesn’t push the plan.
Ron Paul has pushed no short term tax plan that explains how he would pay for the amount of government he would want to keep over the short term. Saying he is against all taxes is great, but he doesn’t want to cut all spending, or even anywhere near the amount of spending that would allow anything like current levels of tariffs and excise taxes to pay for what he wants to keep in the short term.
I’m a big fan of Ron Paul’s lone “no” votes and his radical bills that he introduced. However, his no votes rarely if ever stop any legislation from passing and he has authored exactly one bill that has been enacted into law in all his years in Congress – and that was back in the ’80s. He does get his share of pork for his district, and then votes against the overall bill knowing it will pass. Gary Johnson’s vetoes and his pardons – while I agree there should have been a lot more – had a lot more real world impact than Ron Paul’s votes and bills.
Andy and some other people say libertarians are split on abortion, immigration and gay rights, but only one type of libertarian is split on these issues. Others are united by these issues but split on other issues such as foreign policy or monetary policy. Ron Paul is only objectively more libertarian than Gary Johnson when you define “libertarian” as “something like Ron Paul.”
Generally, I would say that Ron Paul is better on foreign policy and monetary policy, but Johnson is coming around very nicely on those issues, and on civil liberties issues surround the “war on terror,” while Ron Paul is not quite as good as Johnson (but still much better than most Republicans) on purely domestic social issues such as abortion, immigration and gay rights.
I’m hoping the LP ticket in 2016 can build on the name recognition, supporter database and experience, such as it is, that was earned with great difficulty over the last few months, and that the support continues to be built without stopping over the next four years with numerous campus speeches and media appearances (among other things). Running Johnson again would see to be, by far, the easiest way to do that.
Ron Paul believes that our government should should build a fence at the border, that homosexuals should be denied the right to form a legally recognized union (and all the benefits hetero marriages receive) if state voters decide it, and he also believes that Government force should be used to punish or prevent women from making choices about their pregnancy that it decides are improper.
Those are all immensely incorrect to me and many others and Ron Paul fails with his support of those wrong-headed views.
You sound ridiculous when you claim to be able to objectively judge someone’s personal/political philosophy and that your exercise of this “super-power” allows you to determine conclusively that GJ is unworthy.
“he cast the only write-in vote for Ron Paul for the presidential nomination as a delegate at the LP national convention.”
Well, it was either that or vote for Jim Burns, or perhaps a write in vote for Doug Stanhope, or maybe Alex Jones or Andrew Napolitano.
I sure hope that the Libertarian Party has some better candidates in 2016.
I hate to sound completely negative here. I will say that the Gary Johnson campaign is doing a lot of of good things and his campaign is definitely better than the Barr/Root fiasco 4 years ago. I’m just pointing out the bad along with the good.
“zapper // Oct 30, 2012 at 11:15 am
As much as I like and support Ron Paul, and as much as I oppose the prebate of the unFair tax, I believe that Johnson is the more libertarian of the two.”
Oh come on, this statement is laughable. Gary Johnson’s attachment to the Fair Tax fraud alone makes him less libertarian than Ron Paul. Also, check out some of the statements that Gary Johnson has made on foreign policy. He has not gone as far as Ron Paul has when it comes to supporting a non-interventionist foreign policy.
Ron Paul has publicly endorsed jury nullification. Does Gary Johnson even know what jury nullification is? I know that his running mate Jim Gray came out against jury nullification.
Did you listen to Jim Wenzel’s interview with Gary Johnson a few months where the topic of Austrian economics came up and Gary Johnson didn’t sound very well informed? Do you think that a scholar like Ron Paul would have sounded that bad? I think not.
Ron Paul issued bills in Congress that are more radically libertarian than anything that Gary Johnson ever did as Governor. Sure, I understand that those bills did not pass, but it still took a lot of guts to issue them, and putting those bills out there at least caused some debate on subjects which otherwise would not have been discussed.
“750 vetoes in 8 years
When asked about his process for deciding on passing/vetoing a bill he responds,
‘Before deciding how a program should work or how much we should spend, the first question must always be: Should government even be doing it in the first place? ‘
This is the essence of libertarianism in elected office. HE GETS IT.
He has a record of 8 years in office. That is how you judge him. Barr record is atrocious. Johnson did what Paul never did, implement a libertarian philosophy into actual executive policy.
So critique his current views, but stop the Barr comparisons. stop the ‘but is he really really really libertarian?’.”
Look, I will say that Gary Johnson’s record in office was better than Bob Barr’s record in office from a libertarian perspective, but it should also be pointed out that New Mexico was NOT anywhere close to a libertarian paradise while Gary Johnson was Governor.
Now some may point out that Gary Johnson did not a a libertarian legislature to work with and this is certainly true, however, it should also be pointed out that there are a lot of things that a Governor can do to effect change without the legislature.
A Governor can grant pardons. I looked up Gary Johnson’s record of granting pardons, and during 8 years as Governor he only pardoned around 128 people. Does anyone here really believe that during his 8 years as Governor of New Mexico that there were only 128 people who were convicted for victimless “crimes” or were otherwise rail roaded by the police and courts? Why didn’t he grant pardons to everyone who was convicted for victimless “crimes”? If he was afraid of a backlash for doing it he could have waited to do it until he was close to leaving office.
Also, why didn’t he instruct the police in New Mexico to stop arresting people for victimless crimes and to uphold the Bill of Rights or else they’d be fired from their jobs and he’d press criminal charges against them?
Why didn’t he let everyone in the state know about their right to nullify unjust laws in the courts via jury nullification?
Why didn’t he invoke the 10th amendment and kick the federal government out of New Mexico when it comes to any issue that is to be left for the states or the people?
I keep hearing about the 750 bills that he vetoed, but how many bills did he sign and what all was contained in those bills? Sure, vetoing 750 bills was probably good, but I’m just wondering if a more principled libertarian would have vetoed 2,000 bills.
If were elected Governor of New Mexico I’d call a press conference and announce that nobody has to pay income taxes anymore, and that’d I’d grant pardons to anyone who the government went after for not filing. I’d also announce that anyone can carry a gun, and that the police would no longer be allowed to prosecute anyone under any vice laws (drugs, prostitution, gambling), and that any police officer or other government agent (I don’t care if it’s a librarian) would be fired and prosecuted if they infringe on anyone’s right to free speech, the right to keep and bear arms, or any other freedom that is supposed to be guaranteed under the US or New Mexico State Constitution. I would also instruct the police that they are to arrest any agent of the federal government (the IRS, DEA, BATFE, etc…) that comes into New Mexico to enforce any “law” which is repugnant to the Constitution.
Did Gary Johnson do anything that was remotely close to any of this stuff?
I’ve heard that Gary Johnson reduced the amount of government employees by 10% while Governor. OK, that’s a start, but wouldn’t all libertarians agree that a lot more than 10% should have been cut? How about 90%? Heck, what about 100%? Geez, is 50% too much to ask for?
Uh oh. Did someone just open up a can of worms? 🙂
As much as I like and support Ron Paul, and as much as I oppose the prebate of the unFair tax, I believe that Johnson is the more libertarian of the two. And further, I prefer Gary Johnson for President to Ron Paul and would vote for Johnson over Paul in a primary, at a convention or even in a general election should both names appear.
Tim and Thomas – you are both correct, but you won’t convince Andy that way. He doesn’t like Lee Wrights any more than Gary Johnson; he cast the only write-in vote for Ron Paul for the presidential nomination as a delegate at the LP national convention.
https://www.lp.org/files/2012%20Libertarian%20Party%20Convention%20Minutes.pdf
Pages 24 and 39 (Alabama).
Thanks, Thomas.
You also reminded me of someone else who deserves tremendous respect for the dignity and integrity with which he ran his campaign and with which he handled himself after Gov. Johnson’s nomination. His tremendous campaign (in no small part due to Thomas Hill and also Brian Irving) set the tone for a riveting primary and ultimately a difficult choice between two very worthy choices.
His words, actions and presence at the convention this year are also a major reason the LP has really come together this election season around all our candidates.
That is, of course, Mr. Lee Wrights
Well said, Tim. As Lee Wright’s campaign manager this election and second in command on Dr. Mary Ruwart’s 2008 campaign, I can assure anyone the Gary Johnson and his campaign is nothing like the Barr debacle.
Sure I have some differences with the Governor, but he has exceeded my expectations and I was thrilled to tell him in Chicago last week.
The Johnson/Gray ticket has brought a level of excitement and activism the LP desperately needs. Look no further than NC, where the state party has grown by 40% in the past quarter.
Andy@35 – “How do you know that it is a whole different game?”
750 vetoes in 8 years
When asked about his process for deciding on passing/vetoing a bill he responds,
“Before deciding how a program should work or how much we should spend, the first question must always be: Should government even be doing it in the first place? ”
This is the essence of libertarianism in elected office. HE GETS IT.
He has a record of 8 years in office. That is how you judge him. Barr record is atrocious. Johnson did what Paul never did, implement a libertarian philosophy into actual executive policy.
So critique his current views, but stop the Barr comparisons. stop the “but is he really really really libertarian?”.
We are past this and you come across as bitter and/or intellectually dishonest when you apply that false criticism. I have not met a single Libertarian in 5 states that is not proud to vote for Gov. Johnson. They may not like specific views or stances, but no candidate will ever please every member of our party 100%.
If you want to invoke Barr, how about this:
Gov. Johnson has helped unify the Libertarian Party in a way I thought was impossible after the rift and recriminations that occurred from the debacle that was 2008 LP Nominating convention and Bob Barr as LP Pres. Candidate.
Mark @ 37
Agreed on all of those things (although Tim actually think the “fair” tax is a good step – we can agree to disagree on that one).
I don’t think we are going to be able to keep the thread on topic, but that’s OK. I’ll be able to find the questions and make a list before the interview tomorrow.
Tim @33 raises a good point (okay, now I am going off topic too, but I’ll be succinct!).
When we do OPH booths, do we only talk to the people who score 100/100? Of course not! We tell many people that they are Libertarians even though they did not realize it, even when their score is far from perfect.
Like Tim, I think the Fair Tax is a bad idea, but overall, I think supporting Gary Johnson is a really good one nevertheless.
So let’s not demand perfection from the candidates as long as they are promoting freedom, and let’s applaud Gary and Ron for bringing someone such s Walter Block on board.
From my involvement with and reporting on the campaign, following all of the Johnson campaign literature, tweets, blog posts and videos I can find, watching, reading and listening to tons of media clips. Also from talking to Johnson in person.
“paulie // Oct 29, 2012 at 3:33 pm
‘Hopefully you are correct, however, keep in mind that the same thing was said about Bob Barr and Wayne Root and look how they turned out.’
Whole different ball game.”
How do you know that it is a whole different game? I see a lot of similarities myself. I’m not saying that Gary Johnson is the same as Bob Barr or Wayne Root, I’m just pointing out that there are similarities.
So far Gary Johnson has been better for the LP than Bob Barr and Wayne Root, but as far as I’m concerned the jury is still out.
PS sorry to stray from the topic, Paulie. I just had a minute and needed to get that out there. I will add a question just tp make amends.
Will the campaign consider increasing coordination with other parties (such as the Greens and/or Constitution party) to help combat ballot access laws and the CPD over the next few years? Occasionally we do, but often we seem to fight these battles in a vacuum, though we have the shared goals.
“Hopefully you are correct, however, keep in mind that the same thing was said about Bob Barr and Wayne Root and look how they turned out. ”
Gov. Johnson GOVERNED as a libertarian for 8 years in New Mexico. This cannot be said for Root or Barr. Has not transitioned to Libertarianism – he has adopted a new party for his goal of becoming an elected official. This is the misconception about him and his party switch that many angry about Barr’s nomination have held.
A quick look at his record as governor will show you what he thinks about the role of government. When he has stumbled it has been in articulating libertarianism. That is much different than him not being libertarian or trying to learn it.
Those who read Rothbard and Mises do not have a monopoly or get to define libertarian philosophy (though they may better articulate them).
Many people are libertarian in their views because they are peace-loving individuals who wish to live free of the over-burdensome constraints of our government.
Those of us working within the party for years need to be careful about excluding and criticizing others for not practicing our “perfect” idea of libertarianism and who don’t share our specific strategy for increasing its influence. Case and point – I disagree completely about the fair Tax. i have been a libertarian for years and am well read in Rothbard, Mises, Hayek, Hazlitt etc etc. I do think the FT is a good stepping stone because as bad as it is, it taxes spending rather than income and production. That is a much better step towards lowering and eliminating taxes altogether. you don’t have to agree with me, but you are incorrect to think you can define call that view “wrong”. It is a difference in strategy, not an objective measure.
We may be doing a third interview on Thursday now. Tuesday and Thursday is the current tentative plan. 5 mountain time each time, if I understand correctly.
Paulie @30–
In addition to the great new ad, what specific efforts are being made to get to the 5% threshold?
Any and all additional questions appreciated between now and then.
Try to make them about campaign strategy.
Whole different ball game.
BTW the second interview will be 5 PM Tuesday Mountain time and there may be a third one on Friday also 5 PM Mountain.
“I’m glad he is exploring and evolving towards more hardcore libertarianism.”
Hopefully you are correct, however, keep in mind that the same thing was said about Bob Barr and Wayne Root and look how they turned out.
I will say that thus far, Gary Johnson appears to be a better candidate for the LP than Barr or Root. His current campaign has certainly been better than Barr’s disastrous run in 2008 was.
Joe @ 9–Thank you; you’re very kind. I was blessed to have many, many people contribute, both financially and by getting out to petition, so we were able to amass 25,000 signatures for gary Johnson in just under six weeks.
Regarding the many entries regarding Walter Block–I am particularly pleased to see the campaign relying upon Libertarians from the libertarian wing of the Party, with a long history of promoting freedom qua freedom rather than some watered down Republican-lite message. Dr. Block is a frequent contributor to Lew Rockwell.com and of course is the author of a terrific book on defending the indefensible. He is a terrific addition to the campaign.
Two ways of saying the same thing.
The LP’s views are only one kind of libertarianism. The larger movement includes many other strains – the Cato/Reason people, left-anarchist libertarians, “paleo” libertarians, liberventionists, and so on. Johnson a year ago was more along Cato/Reason lines, and to some extent still is, but I think he is evolving somewhat towards more radical stances and/or positioning.
You may also want to consider that a large chunk of the LP left the party after the 1983 convention. To some extent, Johnson’s views are more in line with the people that left the party in 1983.
Another chunk of the LP walked out in 1989, and Johnson is now working on ways of bringing more of them back in. There was yet another (somewhat less pronounced, but still palpable) rift in 1987, and Johnson is to at least some extent reaching out to the people that left then with his heavy emphasis on civil liberties issues and calling himself a bleeding heart libertarian.
As you know, I agree with you about the “fair” tax. I’m hoping that Johnson’s continuing education will lead him to adopt a better plan in the future.
I’m also trying to get the campaign to read more of Harry Browne’s work, both on the campaign strategy side as well as on issue positioning.
However, this thread is supposed to be more about questions for Ron Nielson. As campaign manager, he doesn’t choose the candidate’s views – he decides how best to market them.
Continuing education and ideological evolution is a part of that, but only a very small part. If I get to interview Gary Johnson AFTER the election I might ask him about that – I wouldn’t even want to waste his time with that right now, he has better media opportunities than IPR at the moment and even if I wanted to go there it’s highly unlikely he would have time.
I’m more interested in questions about campaign strategy for this interview.
“Totally agreed…and I have an even worse view of the ‘fair’ tax than Andy does!”
I don’t know if that is possible.
“I don’t think we should assume that our kind of libertarianism is the only one.”
I’m not really talking about my kind or “our kind” of libertarianism. I’m talking about what have been considered to be the mainstream of Libertarian Party members views since I joined the party back in 1996, and from what I can tell, were considered to be mainstream views in the Libertarian Party for years before I joined the party.
I’m not saying that Gary Johnson necessarily has to adopt an anarcho=capitalist / voluntaryist position on taxes. However, I don’t think that it is unreasonable to suggest that whatever plan he puts forth on taxes should actually lead to large cuts in the size of government. Gary Johnson’s plan is calling for a 43% cut in government spending, and while I’d obviously like to see much bigger cuts than that, a 43% cut in spending is still a pretty good sized cut. However, the federal tax plan that he’s pushing is just as repressive – and maybe even more repressive – than the present system. I really fail to see any way that the Fair Tax plan is going to make anything better or is anything that any libertarian (whether they are members of the LP or not) should get behind.
We addressed that in the first interview. Ron would like the nomination to be earlier like it was back in ’79-’80, as would I. That allowed Ed Clark to campaign at far more colleges and other places as the nominee than it did Gary Johnson. Colleges especially, we both agree, are key. However, I think that by declaring for 2016 ASAP Gary Johnson can still do this, as the likely 2016 nominee. I would also welcome other candidates for the 2016 nomination to do the same thing.
As far as actually changing the 2016 convention to 2015, I don’t think that will happen. There is already a contract with a hotel in Orlando for 2016 with specific dates in May, and the LNC will be looking at 2018 venues in 2013. I think we would need a bylaws change to have the nomination in 2014, but that could only be done at the 2014 convention, so that probably won’t happen either – although it might be a good idea.
The rest of your questions are good, and I will of course thank him.
Well, then, that’s good news for the 2016 run, and even for the closing weeks of the 2012 run to some degree.
I don’t think we should assume that our kind of libertarianism is the only one. The positions that Gary Johnson comes from are relatively libertarian, certainly in comparison with other people who have been elected Governors. I’m glad he is exploring and evolving towards more hardcore libertarianism.
Totally agreed…and I have an even worse view of the “fair” tax than Andy does!
@19
Thanks, I was looking for those numbers. The high water mark % wise is AK 11.66% in 1980 and CA for the vote total mark(I think we’ll beat CA vote total in other states this cycle). AK is the ONLY one of those I don’t think we’ll beat(I could be wrong though as AK has a strong Independent streak).
@15,
1.) They were aiming higher.
2.) It’s not $90 Million (you only get that much at 25%). It a sliding scale based on performance for PotUS in the prior cycle going from 5% to 25%+. 5% nets you ~$18Million(still multiple times what we raised, the Super PACs raised and the LP raised in total), 10% = ~$36Million, etc…
Finally, for someone coming from the two party system I know this has been a learning experience for many(including Gov. Johnson) in the campaign. It has been for myself as well even though I was an Independent prior to this cycle. Personally, I believe I’ve found a political home with the LP. I haven’t decided where I’ll be focusing my future efforts yet, but I will be doing everything I can to build the LP, promote LP candidates, and grow the Liberty movement though the spread of ideas as much as I can.
Using Dave Leip’s Atlas of US POTUS race numbers, here are the numbers to beat in LP votes and % to set new records. Look at it as a MAJOR VICTORY if your state tops these numbers. (MI and OK excluded of course) I have these listed in order of EC votes, highest to lowest.
’80 CA -148,434 1.73%
’80 TX – 37,643 0.83%
’80 FL – 30,524 0.83%
’80 NY – 52,648 0.85%
’80 IL – 38,939 0.82%
’80 PA – 33,263 0.73%
’80 OH – 49,033 1.14%
’80 MI – 41,597 1.06%
’00 GA – 36,332 1.40%
’08 NC – 25,722 0.60%
’80 NJ – 20,652 0.69%
’80 VA – 12,821 0.69% ’00 – 15,198 0.55%
’80 WA – 29,213 1.68%
’80 AZ – 18,784 2.15%
’08 IN – 29,257 1.06%
’80 MA – 22,038 0.87%
’80 TN – 7,116 0.44% ’08 8,547 0.33%
’80 MO – 14,422 0.69%
’80 MN – 31,592 1.54%
’80 MY – 14,192 0.92%
’80 WI – 29,135 1.28%
’80 AL – 13,318 0.99%
’80 CO – 25,744 2.17%
’80 SC – 4,975 0.56% ’08 7,283 0.38%
’80 KY – 5,531 0.43% ’08 5,989 0.33%
’80 LA – 8,240 0.53%
’88 CT – 14,071 0.97%
’80 OK – 13,828 1.20%
’80 OR – 25,838 2.19%
’80 AR – 8,970 1.07%
’80 IA – 13,123 1.00%
’80 KS – 14,470 1.48%
’80 MS – 5,465 0.61%
’80 NV – 4,358 1.76% ’96 4,460 0.96%
’80 UT – 7,226 1.20% ’88 7,473 1.16%
’80 NE – 9,073 1.42%
’80 NM – 4,365 0.96%
’80 WV – 4,356 0.59%
’80 HI – 3,269 1.08%
’80 ID – 8,425 1.93%
’80 ME – 5,119 0.98%
’88 NH – 4,502 1.00%
’80 RI – 2,458 0.59%
’80 AK – 18,479 11.66%
’80 DC – 1,104 0.63%
’80 DE – 1,974 0.84% ’96 2,052 0.76%
’80 MT – 9,825 2.70%
’80 ND – 3,743 1.24%
’80 SD – 3,824 1.17%
’80 VT – 1,900 0.89%
’80 WY – 4,514 2.55%
Should be EASY hey? I won’t limit anyone’s expectations, but you need to understand in a recent poll 74% of the people still don’t know who GJ is or anything about his past. Thinking 5% of the vote with the almost 100% major media blackout isn’t sensible. If we can top most of these numbers listed above this WILL BE a major SUCCESS in 2012. ALL politics is LOCAL. Use this election to build your local LP and if you do you have been a huge SUCCESS ! Retaining Ballot Access in a down ticket race, in most cases, must always be a prime goal of each state LP! No need for burnout if progress no matter how large or small is made.
CARPE DIEM
-Butch S.
I’ve tried to be accurate, I apologize for any mistakes in the listings.
Thanks for the lecture.
Any succinct questions for Ron Nielson in there? We want to discuss campaign strategy questions.
Joe Buchman said: “To still be willing and interested in learning is not a flaw or shortcoming, at least in terms of how I look at candidate.”
I agree that a willingness to learn new things is good, however, I think that a candidate who is running for office as a Libertarian should already have Libertarianism 101 down BEFORE they become a candidate.
I don’t claim to know everything, nor do I expect any candidate to know everything, however, I do expect a candidate to have all of the basics of the philosophy down, as well as at least an above average (as compared to most LP members) amount of knowledge of the issues.
I see Gary Johnson’s advocacy of the Fair Tax as a big flaw. Is it due to him just not being libertarian enough, or is it due to a lack of knowledge of issues and/or philosophy?
Looking at it from a purist anarcho-capitalist/voluntaryist libertarian perspective, all taxation is theft and is therefore immoral, so the Fair Tax should be rejected based on this school of though.
Looking at it from a practical Libertarian perspective, the Fair Tax is not an incremental step toward less government. The proponents of the Fair Tax boast that it is revenue neutral, which means that it is designed to bring in about the same amount of tax money that the current income tax brings in for the government, so therefore it does not reduce government. Sure, it’s less paperwork for the average person, but it places yet another burden on businesses, and it is actually going to be more difficult for the average person to avoid the Fair Tax than it is the income tax and it creates a new system of bureaucracy. The Fair Tax is not a step in the right direction. It is just as bad – or maybe even worse – than the present federal income tax system.
Looking at it from a constitutionalist minarchist perspective, the Fair Tax has got some real problems because it is direct tax on the American people. The Constitution says that direct taxes must be apportioned among the states. This is backed up by several Supreme Court rulings (which, unfortunately are being ignored today). Going from one form of direct taxation from the federal government on the American people to another form of direct taxation from the federal government on the American people does not restore constitutional restraints on the federal government.
The Fair Tax is bad marketing. Why would anyone who is fed up with taxes and big government get excited over a plan that is going to have them paying a 30% federal tax when they purchase goods and services? The proponents of the Fair Tax are selling it as a 23% tax, but it is really a 30% tax? Does Gary Johnson know this? Heck, even if it really were a 23% tax, it would still be too high even from a minarchist limited government libertarian perspective. Why are the proponents of the Fair Tax selling the plan as a 23% tax when it is really a 30% tax? I’d call this deceptive advertising. Part of their selling point is that the Fair Tax would eliminate corporate income taxes and that this would create more jobs. I’m not really opposed to eliminating any tax (including corporate taxes), but there is actually more of a constitutional case for taxing corporations because corporations are legal fictions and not people. Also, getting back to the marketing perspective, a lot of people will see this as Libertarians favoring corporations over the average person. They will say something like, “See, I told you that Libertarians were for rich corporations and don’t care about the average person. They don’t think that corporations should pay taxes, but they think that regular people should pay a 30% sales tax. Sales taxes hurt the poor. Libertarians are greedy corporatist. The heck with them!” I think that the bigger point here though is that it is not necessarily the manner in which tax money is collected that is the most important issue, but rather how much tax money is collected that is the far more important issue. The fact of the matter is that the Fair Tax is a 30% federal sales tax on goods and services which is designed to bring in just as much revenue for the government as the federal income tax. How is getting money extorted at the point of sale of goods and services by the federal government any better than getting money extorted out of one’s earnings? I really don’t see how this is a good at all from a marketing perspective. I certainly would not have liked it when I first heard about the Libertarian Party back in 1996. Fortunately, the Libertarian Party’s Presidential candidate back then, Harry Browne, was not marketing such an absurd, anti-libertarian plan.
It’s not 90 million at 5%, it’s about a tenth of that, and grows to 90 million as you approach parity with Democrats and Republicans. The campaign HAS been pushing it. I suppose I can ask why they haven’t pushed it more, but there are other people who have complained that they are pushing it too much already – either because it admits defeat before the fact or because it sets an unreasonably high expectation that would cause burnout after we come nowhere close to getting that.
Why was the campaign not pushing the fact that if we got 5% we would gain $90 million for the LP?
Also on the grassroots side of things, there were other efforts besides TV spots were ads were concerned. Several groups I know ran billboards in various markets.
@6
“Why do your donation drop cards, on the back where people will not see them, say that the money is for the primary campaign rather than the general election campaign?”
My best guess would be to avoid having them go to waste and need reprinting which would eat up more resources.
In addition on TV coverage, the Texas GJ2012 campaign did an in-kind chip-in program to run 75 one minute ads on a local Chinese TV affilaite, and two runs of a 15 minute interviews with Judge Gray.
Andy @ 11,
Walter Block was supporting Ron Paul through the Republican nomination. Now that’s he’s come on as an adviser, and has endorsed Governor Johnson for President I, for one, think it’s terrific of Governor Johnson seek out his advice as well as the advice and counsel of many others (Gary specifically thanked Lee Wrights, for example, in May for “making him a better candidate.” I sure think that’s far better than others, our 2008 ticket, for example for putting out the image of already knowing everything). I hold a PhD with an MBA in Finance and sure as heck will listen to anything Dr. Block has to say as well as read (or re-read) anything he has to recommend!
That makes for a better candidate, I believe, than one who has the false position of claiming to know everything. Obviously Governor Johnson’s record in fiscal matters during his term in office was far more Libertarian than that of any other Governor in the USA then, or perhaps ever.
To still be willing and interested in learning is not a flaw or shortcoming, at least in terms of how I look at candidates.
“In other news, Ron Nielson also mentioned that Walter Block is working with the Governor and campaign staff on furthering understanding of Austrian economics and foreign policy issues that have represented a rift between Gary Johnson and some Ron Paul supporters.”
A candidate should have all of this stuff down BEFORE they run for office.
So pleased to see Block is working with him. He does need work in the areas mentioned (and in some MORE areas also)! Let’s hope if he does go again in ’16 that he will DROP the “fairtax” crap!
I thought you could speak at most campuses without a fee. With very good pre-planning that would be a great way to build a strong base. They need to invite ALL local non-students and MEDIA to each event. I think 100 a year in non-election years would be a bit much to ask but say 30 a year for each, Johnson/Gray should be doable. Gary has truly put the effort into it as he looks tired. He deserves a nice rest after Nov.6.
Questions –
Do you know of anyone running GJ ads in their local areas on their own dimes ? (if so in what areas-city-state)
Would you be opposed to the LP nominating convention being held over Labor Day Weekend in 2015 ?
Did you and your staff understand the difficulties and unfairness placed on third Party ballot access when GJ changed Parties?
Paulie thank him for us !
We the members of the LP want to thank you, your staff and GJ for joining us and putting forth the fine effort for LIBERTY and we wish you all well in the future.
* * * * * * *
The “Lesser” of Two Crooked Politicians Is Still A Crooked Politician- https://plus.google.com/u/0/102638191745753164056/posts/B665TqmhSqc#102638191745753164056/posts/B665TqmhSqc
New Obama slogan has long ties to Marxism, socialism- http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2012/apr/30/new-obama-slogan-has-long-ties-marxism-socialism/
Every Cent You Make (I’ll be taxing you) – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRRsfCD1Bh0&feature=endscreen&NR=1
LP Observer @ 5,
One state that I’d like to especially recognize is the LPNY. Mark Axinn and those Libertarians out there did a tremendous job on ballot access and should be a model for the rest of the state Libertarian Parties.
Wes Wagner was also great to work with. His team rewrote our initial voter’s guide statement in a way that seems to be resonating in Oregon, and he came through with putting Governor Johnson on the ballot there despite various legal threats, what seems like slander to me, and nearly endless drama. His group is also running more local and state candidates than any state except Texas.
Speaking of Texas — WOW what a great convention they had there! I felt right at home. Stunning hospitality and a US Senate candidate debate worthy of anything seen in the CPD or Free and Equal debates. I could listen to John Jay Myers for hours.
Colorado is also running lots of candidates and I’m probably going to be in trouble for leaving some states, and some state party officials out. I’ll apologize in advance for that and post more here later . . .
Ask Ron if Gary Johnson will start talking about Instant Runoff Voting. Any state is free to pass that for presidential elections, and Vermont did so 12 years ago, except the Governor vetoed it. That would end the “wasted-vote” problem.
If Gary runs in 2016, would you be serving as Campaign Manager again?
An interesting question is “When you laid out a budget at the start of the campaign, how much money did you plan to raise?”
Another is “Why do your donation drop cards, on the back where people will not see them, say that the money is for the primary campaign rather than the general election campaign?”
Would still like to know which states the GJ campaign expects to do better in. Plus, which specific states have more activism and organization in place that helps the GJ campaign.
http://reason.com/blog/2012/10/25/gary-johnson-launches-first-tv-ad
Other targeted media markets include Montana, Idaho and Oregon.
http://www.harrybrowne.org/2000/toc.htm
Lots to study there, after the election of course.
Paulie,
Is there a link to the best of the Harry Browne materials that you’d like Ron to read?
Spoke with Andre Marrou today. He is proud to report casting his vote, without reservation for Gary Johnson/Jim Gray. Still very pleased with the kind reception he received from the Texas State LP Convention Delegates, and with what he’s seen of the campaign.
(Wish I could say the same for our utterly disloyal 2008 Republican-endorsing ticket.)
I’m going to shoot for Monday or Tuesday for a followup interview. Please post questions in the comments here for that.