Article from Alex Pappas at The Daily Caller:
Gary Johnson, the Libertarian Party’s nominee for president in 2012, tells The Daily Caller he is gearing up to run for the White House again.
“Unless something catastrophic happens in my life, I hope to do that,” Johnson said in an interview at The Daily Caller’s newsroom in Washington on Wednesday.
Johnson — the former governor of New Mexico who ran for president as a Republican in 2011 before dropping out to run on the Libertarian Party ticket — said “there’s no real rush” to announce though he is actively preparing for a campaign.
Asked about the libertarian-leaning Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul’s entrance into the race this week, Johnson said: “I like the fact that he’s running. I mean of all the Republicans, he’s the closest to my ideology. The things that we differ are immigration, marriage equality, women’s right to choose, drug policy and military intervention.”
But Johnson said of Paul: “He has to pander to the right to get the nomination. And it’s a process where Republicans right now are putting out candidates I think are unelectable in a general election.”
Johnson also disputed the characterization that Rand Paul is a libertarian. “Out of his own mouth, he in no way would describe himself as a libertarian,” Johnson said. “Because that is something he is running from right now to get the Republican nomination.”
Johnson, who is now CEO of Cannabis Sativa Inc., which sells medical marijuana, said he’d welcome Jesse Ventura, the former Minnesota governor into the race for the Libertarian Party’s nomination for president. Ventura has expressed interest in a campaign.
“If that happened, that would be terrific because that potentially could be a televised-kind-of-a-debate situation,” Johnson said of a matchup with Ventura.
For now, Johnson’s political group is working on a lawsuit to help third-party candidates get into the presidential debates.
“Our America Initiative is going to sue the presidential debate commission on anti-trust grounds, on the notion that although it sounds very official and it sounds very fair and it sounds very governmental, it’s nothing but,” Johnson said. “It’s the two parties.”
Maybe they will converge over time. I think the establishment will have to slowly become more “libertarianish” to preserve their power and head us off at the pass as our ideas continue to penetrate the general public more and more.
That may be an apt comparison. I think Rand Paul has more future potential, but I don’t see him being nominated in 2016, except maybe for VP, and probably not even that. I doubt Jim Webb will ever be nominated for any part of the D ticket.
I agree. At one point, I thought Rand had a real (albeit slim) chance at the top of the ticket. But after seeing how opposed many of the establishment types (e.g. Lindsey Graham) still are to him, even after all his recent sucking up, I don’t think he has any chance. The major parties simply won’t take a chance on nominating anyone who doesn’t have a long history of strict adherence to the party line. Of course, it’s possible that if he continues to suck up to them for the next decade or two, they might eventually relent, like they did with McCain, who, ironically, was once considered too much of a “maverick” to get the nomination.
…Rand Paul in the Senate for the next two decades will probably be a much more libertarian Rand Paul than we have any hope of seeing in the next two years. Then again, maybe not. Could just as easily be that his conversion to establishment conservative GOP shill is permanent. I do think that’s mostly a result of his Presidential aspirations, though. Once he’s ensconced in his permanent Senate seat as a perpetual incumbent, he’ll have much less motivation to try to suck up to the GOP presidential primary electorate, and maybe he’ll revert to something more like the Rand we saw 2010-2012.
Honestly, I’m not sure what to expect from Rand going forward. But I hope you’re right, and he will return to being at least a partially libertarian voice in the Senate.
Yep… that is about how I see it too.
Webb is too much of a loose cannon for the Ds.
I agree, Rand Paul in the Senate for the next two decades will probably be a much more libertarian Rand Paul than we have any hope of seeing in the next two years. Then again, maybe not. Could just as easily be that his conversion to establishment conservative GOP shill is permanent. I do think that’s mostly a result of his Presidential aspirations, though. Once he’s ensconced in his permanent Senate seat as a perpetual incumbent, he’ll have much less motivation to try to suck up to the GOP presidential primary electorate, and maybe he’ll revert to something more like the Rand we saw 2010-2012.
He’ll probably still happily serve as the GOP’s favorite campaign surrogate/attack-dog in races with a strong Libertarian candidate, though. Every Republican candidate facing a strong Libertarian opponent is going to want Rand Paul campaigning for them, for years to come, starting with whoever beats Rand to be the 2016 presidential nominee. And I’m sure he’ll oblige, like he always has thus far.
That may be an apt comparison. I think Rand Paul has more future potential, but I don’t see him being nominated in 2016, except maybe for VP, and probably not even that. I doubt Jim Webb will ever be nominated for any part of the D ticket.
Steve M: “you heard it here first… Mark Hurd gets to decide who is and who isn’t a real libertarian… isn’t that special”
That’s dishonest of you, Steve M. Dishonest.
You KNOW that Mark never said that he “gets to decide” who’s a libertarian. Mark simply gave his opinion on who is and isn’t a libertarian.
Over the past several decades I’ve heard or read dozens, maybe 100s, of libertarians opine over whether this or that person was a true libertarian. Assessing others’ degree of purity is a common topic among libertarians.
Doesn’t matter if they’re minarchists or anarchists, radicals or reformers. Almost all of us do it. You’ve probably done it yourself.
Jim Webb actually reminds me of Rand Paul. Neither of them are really libertarians, but they are too close to being libertarian to have any chance of getting nominated by the major parties.
Webb may have no interest in the LP but before Rand Paul dumped his load in D.C. Webb was sounding more libertarian than most. Here is an article from MoJo http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/01/jim-webb-democrats-rand-paul
Paulie – you are correct, any announced candidate for the LP nomination will be invited to CT’s debate – including, of course, Gary Johnson and Jesse Ventura, if they announced prior to that date.
We will also have, as our keynote speaker, prominent disrobement expert (thank you Dr. Phillies for this turn of phrase) Belle Knox.
I like the fact that he was caught carrying a handgun in the Senate chambers but not the fact that a staffer took the fall for him.
I’m not aware of Sen. Webb having any interest in the LP nomination.
Really? Why?
How about former Senator Jim Webb instead of Jesse?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6AhebEj21Y
I haven’t had the chance to watch it, but here’s the video of the foreign policy panel Johnson did at CPAC:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8EZN_Z3Rag
I agree with Langa that the word “liberal” is too far gone to reducate the public as to its original meaning. “Liberal ” and “lib” are used as a pejorative term almost every time I read them.
When I defend the word “libertarian” people come out of the woodwork to talk about the (mythical) “purity police”. This is an example, though, of why protecting the word and what it really means is important.
Darryl Perry- Fantastic point! I too will be in attendance. I look forward to meeting you there!
Actually, I think we should start reclaiming the word liberal. The progressives have now mostly abandoned it, after staging a hostile takeover of the concept a century ago. Nowadays it is mostly an epithet used by conservatives and reich wingers, and I am OK with them not liking us. If we are going to reclaim a word, “liberal” seems a much better one to me for libertarians to try to redefine from how most people use it today than, say, “capitalism.”
I think “capitalism” and “liberalism” are both lost causes. If we’re going to engage in semantic battles, I’d prefer trying to fight the attempted co-option of “libertarian” and “free market” than chasing after trains that long ago left the station.
I hope that all of those will happen (that he will announce before then, that he will be invited, and that he accepts). Also hope to see video of the debates whether Johnson is in them or not.
If he announces by then, I expect he will be invited and hopefully will accept.
There will be two debates this fall among LP Presidential candidates: Sept 19 at the Connecticut LP convention, and October 17 at the Massachusetts LP convention. I’m not sure if Johnson has been invited, however I do know that I will be attending both!
“Jesse Ventura could be used as a jobber here to put Gary Johnson over.”
Just as long as he doesn’t do a blade job.
Actually, I think we should start reclaiming the word liberal. The progressives have now mostly abandoned it, after staging a hostile takeover of the concept a century ago. Nowadays it is mostly an epithet used by conservatives and reich wingers, and I am OK with them not liking us. If we are going to reclaim a word, “liberal” seems a much better one to me for libertarians to try to redefine from how most people use it today than, say, “capitalism.”
He has flip flopped on the issue maybe more than once.
“Starting point for a conversation” – Gary does not necessarily agree with the “prebate” idiocy, revenue neutral tax rate, etc.
Johnson is a lot closer.
Mark Herd, please don’t refer to Libertarians as “libs”. People take that to mean “liberals”, and Libertarians are different than liberals. Most people say the whole word of “Libertarian” or “LPers” to refer to the people in the party that believes in liberty.
Seems Jesse is also a fair-taxer, or some variant thereof:
I’d like to see us do away with income tax entirely and go for a national sales tax. The government could collect the money it needs by placing a tax on the goods and services we buy. Then states could add their own taxes on top of that.
A fair national sales tax wouldn’t touch the necessities of life like food and clothing. It would make sure that people were able to provide for themselves with the basics before it collected any tax. Taxes would only be collected on optional purchases. That would make the taxpayers much more powerful. We could decide how much tax we’re going to pay by controlling our level of consumption. We would have the option of hanging onto our money and living off the basics, or of spending as much as we feel like. We wouldn’t be penalized for saving or investing. We wouldn’t have to hand the government money just because we’re looking our for our own financial welfare.
No libertarian embraces the Fair Tax.
I eagerly await other nominees to step forward.
you heard it here first… Mark Hurd gets to decide who is and who isn’t a real libertarian… isn’t that special
“Mark Herd
April 9, 2015 at 11:20 pm
Sure but gary really isn’t a true lib. His past shows that. If anything Jesse is a realist. His problem, our problem will be getting Jesse to join the party. He’s very independant.”
Neither Gary Johnson or Jesse Ventura are what I’d call hardcore libertarians. There are a lot of things that I like about Jesse Ventura, but he is weak on several issues from a hardcore libertarian perspective.
I wish that there was a more hardcore libertarian who was running something that looked like a real campaign that I could enthusiastically get behind.
Sure but gary really isn’t a true lib. His past shows that. If anything Jesse is a realist. His problem, our problem will be getting Jesse to join the party. He’s very independant.
Jesse Ventura could be used as a jobber here to put Gary Johnson over.
Excerpt from above post…………………”Johnson — the former governor of New Mexico who ran for president as a Republican in 2011 before dropping out to run on the Libertarian Party ticket — said “there’s no real rush” to announce though he is actively preparing for a campaign”
So what that means is Gary Johnson is a Republican who realized he wasn’t going anywhere so now he’s trying to use the lp for a virtually free ride to the ballot. His unfair/unflat punitive tax policy punishes the poor and favors the wealthy. I’m not sure who I’d vote for, too early but so far Jesse and our grassroots lp candidates are still in the game. Gary has been flushed.
Ventura and Johnson would probably get better media hits than Johnson and (say, the current field).
I’d like to see Johnson debate Feldman, Perry, et al too, though.
” bit I’d prefer”
Should read, “but I’d prefer…”
How about Johnson, Ventura and Tom Knapp representing NOTA?
Not a bad idea, bit I’d prefer to see him debate somebody who is a more hardcore libertarian.