May 29, 2016

Gary Johnson wins the Libertarian Party nomination.

Just now, on C-SPAN.

I'm very glad to see this. What a great alternative to Trump and Hillary.

68 comments:

Curious George said...

And unicorns are great alternatives to horses.

dreams said...

"What a great alternative to Trump and Hillary."

Apparently Althouse isn't feeling the burn.

LYNNDH said...

Stupid is as stupid does. Their egos are too big.

Ann Althouse said...

I don't think Bernie can get the Democratic Party nomination and can't picture him going third party this late stage.

dreams said...

Bernie is enjoying the attention and he might not want the party to end.

JAORE said...

"And unicorns are great alternatives to horses."

Bingo. He's a great alternative is the purpose of your vote is to feelz guud.

SteveR said...

"Don't bogart that joint my friend"

David Begley said...

A decent showing by Johnson is how Hillary wins. Perot: The Sequel.

Constitutional Insurgent said...

Vote your conscience, not with the herd. Voting for Johnson without fail, as opposed to the two liberal alternatives.

chickelit said...

I'm very glad to see this. What a great alternative to Trump and Hillary

How does the Libertarian stance on illegal immigration differ from Hillary/Obama?

mockturtle said...

Sounds like some of his rivals were more anarchist than libertarian.

I used to be a Libertarian, supported Ron Paul [wrote him in twice for prez] and also gave Rand support but finally concluded that libertarianism is far too ideological and impractical for the present situation. I'd still like to think that, at some time in the future, Atlas may finally shrug.

dreams said...

Johnson won't get very many votes.

Hunter said...

JAAORE said...

He's a great alternative is the purpose of your vote is to feelz guud.

That's no less the purpose of your vote. Or do you think your one vote in any direction will change the outcome?

This thinking is the reason we get shittier and shittier candidates every time around. Because people are too afraid to vote for what they would actually like to see the country become, they are too scared the person wearing their team jersey might lose, even if they don't find anything appealing about that person.

I expect Hillary to be probably the most awful president in my lifetime if she wins. I would probably prefer Trump. What I would prefer more is for Libertarians and libertarian ideas to break into the national consciousness. That is something that could make a difference long term, and I'm happy to cast my vote for that possibility.

What America needs is more people who are willing to fight for what they believe, even it means they might lose.

JZ said...

Green Party! Jill Stein!

Ron Snyder said...

Wow. All 1% of the voters can now vote for a candidate whose party has NEVER elected any candidate to Federal Office. What a way to throw away your vote.

Gahrie said...

Wait a minute...

The last time you met real Libertarians you had a total meltdown. I bet Johnson believes that store owners should be able to discriminate based on race...if not, most of his followers do.

What has changed?

dreams said...

Will the Amish vote for Trump, Hillary or Gary Johnson? And or Bernie?

"Will the bearded, the bonneted, the barn-building Amish vote for the clean-shaven, combed-over, casino-building Donald Trump?

“The purpose of Amish PAC’s Plain Voter Project is to beat Hillary Clinton in 2016.”
A new political action committee is betting $41,000 they will.

Called Amish PAC, the new organization will target Amish voters in Pennsylvania and Ohio, Vice News reported earlier this month. The PAC is not affiliated with a single candidate but has Republican roots."

http://www.lifezette.com/faithzette/trumps-new-supporters-amish/

Constitutional Insurgent said...

@Ron Snyder - "What a way to throw away your vote."

Is it any less of a thrown away vote to cast for a candidate that is in opposition to your values?

AllenS said...

I'm not sure why voting Libertarian because of your dislike of Trump or Hillary is that good of an idea. There are a lot of alternatives begging for your vote.

List of candidates for POTUS


Gahrie said...

Wow..looks like Johnson is exactly the type of "Libertarian" that Althouse can support.

How can you possibly believe that the State should have the power to compel you to bake a wedding cake for a gay wedding, and still call yourself libertarian?

Michael K said...

"How does the Libertarian stance on illegal immigration differ from Hillary/Obama?"

It's more extreme. Trump will send him home in a barrel.

stevo said...

I don't see why having a large ego should disqualify anyone. Seems to me essential to any world leadership role.

Birkel said...

I will take this comment, by an Obama voter, under advisement.
.
.
.
After those milliseconds of delay I will dismiss anybody who thought Obama in 2008 was anything but a Big Government Progressive who would grow the federal debt, disregard the Constitution and lower America's defenses.

Birkel said...

How McCain lost me to the Red Diaper Candidate...

David said...

Already feeling a lean away from Cruel Neutrality.

JPS said...

Gahrie,

"How can you possibly believe that the State should have the power to compel you to bake a wedding cake for a gay wedding, and still call yourself libertarian?"

I was a little surprised at that. I'm by no means a doctrinaire libertarian, and I think a baker should have the right to say No thanks, and everybody who has a problem with it should be free to buy from his competitor who has no such objection.

But even if I don't like Johnson's stance there, it's one stance I don't like. He's got a long, long way to go before he catches up with the likely major party nominees.

Plus I have a sneaking affection for his VP pick, who after all became governor of Massachusetts because he was more liberal than, and not nearly as smart as, his scary right-leaning Democrat opponent; who lost a Senate race to John Effin Kerry; who resigned to become Bill Clinton's ambassador to Mexico, because, why the hell not?; and who, his nominated thwarted by the e-ville Jesse Helms, went off and wrote a flop of a novel he titled "Mackerel by Moonlight" (a tribute to the old line, "He shines and stinks like…").

In a year when it looks like Hillary Clinton may be running against Donald Trump, I owe it to myself to vote for these two. And to hope that pissed-off Bernie voters give Jill Stein about an equal share of the vote after his bid finally ends.

chickelit said...

Already feeling a lean away from Cruel Neutrality.

When the flesh hits the lever, Althouse never fails. Remember her proud vote for Cruz against Trump in the WI primary? She could have voted for Hillary, Bernie, or Trump. Instead she chose someone she despised in order to make a statement. Althouse will definitely go third party this year. NTTIAWWT

traditionalguy said...

Libertarians are so smart they insist on the ultimate freedom: suicide.

That will teach everybody! They were free.

Hagar said...

You should probably do some research on Gary Johnson's actual record as governor of New Mexico before you jump onto his wagon.

Fen said...

"You should probably do some research on Gary Johnson's actual record as governor of New Mexico before you jump onto his wagon."

Nah. I'm only supporting Gary Johnson so I can Virtue Signal on how I'm Too Pure to cast my vote for those other two losers. This is about me, not him.

M Jordan said...

A great alternative to Clinton and Trump?

I'm betting, Ms. Althouse, you know don't know google about him. Maybe one wiki-peek. I'm betting you did not follow his career as a governor. I'm betting you like him for less reasons than I don't. But maybe I'm wrong. Maybe you know Gary Johnson like the back of your hand. If so, my apologies. Now tell me why he's a "great alternative."

M Jordan said...

"Will the Amish vote for Trump, Hillary or Gary Johnson? And or Bernie?"

As the resident Amish expert here, I can tell you who they'll vote for: Trump.

Char Char Binks said...

I'm surprised he garnered enough delegates.

Ann Althouse said...

I mostly know him from watching about 3 hours of debate.

mockturtle said...

You should probably do some research on Gary Johnson's actual record as governor of New Mexico before you jump onto his wagon.

New Mexico is possibly the worst-run state in the US but maybe that's good libertarianism. The best government is no government but bad government is second best?

Sharc said...

Okay, I'll say it. Feel the Johnson!

eric said...

Everyone loves third party candidates because we don't focus on them.

Often times, when I'm at the mall or driving in my car, I see a very pretty girl far off. As she gets closer, I start to notice, she aint that pretty. I start to notice all the blemishes.

In my older age I've realized that when a pretty girl is far off, my mind fills in the details and makes them prettier than they really are. Sometimes they are quite hideous close up.

Our focus on the Democrat and Republican candidate, on the other hand, is so close, so constant, so in our face, that we can't help but notice just how blemished they are. We over focus on these two candidates so that we even know how often they poop. Who wants to know that?

And in that way, the Republican and the Democrat will always be "The lesser of two evils" because we can't help but find faults in them.

Gary Johnson, or whoever else pops up, only looks good because he's a little blurry. We just don't know enough about him. If the media focuses on him as they do on Hillary and Trump, he'll be just as bad.

eric said...

Blogger Ann Althouse said...
I mostly know him from watching about 3 hours of debate.


My point above succinctly illustrated.

JCCamp said...

"What a great alternative to Trump and Hillary."

Sorry. I fail to see any logic to this. Why not just write in the name to your dog, or your favorite aunt? Mr Ed, the talking horse? Any of those have the same effect, which is to allow the victory of one of the two major party candidates. Your vote is wasted, along with those of every other person who votes Libertarian.

Except you possibly encourage the lunatics in the L Party that they are a reality, and not a bad plot line in a typical liberal-sourced TV show about right-wing fanatics. Frankly, the Libertarian Party platform scares me too. If i thought they actually had a chance to gain real political power, I'd have to reevaluate my stance on a lot of issues. Luckily, I think they are a tiny fringe group empowered by people who may agree on only one or two issues, and who are fed up with the current atmosphere in DC.

Constitutional Insurgent said...

"Your vote is wasted, along with those of every other person who votes Libertarian."

Again, how is a vote wasted, when the alternative is to vote for values and candidates that you don't support. Seems a it illogical.

Lawcruiter said...

Who? I mean, seriously?

JPS said...

Fen:

"I'm only supporting Gary Johnson so I can Virtue Signal on how I'm Too Pure to cast my vote for those other two losers. This is about me, not him."

What if I just like him and his positions better than the major alternatives? Gosh - guess I'd better jump on the Trump bandwagon, and say so. Otherwise a fellow blog-commenter might think I'm virtue-signaling.

Virtue's got nothin' to do with it.

Hagar said...

New Mexico is not even close to being "the worst governed state in the union"; in fact at present we are doing rather well with la tejana Susana.

The worst governed states in the union in recent history have been New York and Illinois, but both seem now to be well behind California in the race to the bottom.

John Althouse Cohen said...

I bet Johnson believes that store owners should be able to discriminate based on race...if not, most of his followers do.

No, Johnson just said yesterday that he would have signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. And he doesn't believe bakeries should be allowed to discriminate against same-sex couples.

As for "his followers," who cares? They're not running for president. President Gary Johnson would need to moderate his positions to work with Congress and keep the support of the people. We're not going to have purely libertarian government even if Johnson wins.

Guildofcannonballs said...

Having read The Unmaking of a Mayor by self-described "Libertarian Journalist" W. Frank Buckley Jr. allows one valuable insight: the path of merely limited blindness compared to the standard near-total.

Satan will show persons of good-faith the error of Hillary assuming office for reasons ultramega sundry.

Once I conceded my principals by voting McCain, I gained more knowledge than I would wish on non-mortal enemies. Others now though face their Kepler's Ledge, and I trust in their judgment.

Coconuss Network said...

Curious about Johnson. Generally speaking I'm Democrat, but from CNN's 2 minute newscast on him, he sounds promising. New Mexico, pro-immigrants ? seems old enough, young enough for President. Waiting for the debates.

Guildofcannonballs said...

If the thinking is Johnson is great, what could describe Justice Breyer being appointed the D nomination, therefore in addition to being an alternative to current frontrunners being one that could indeed win?

Super fantastic great?

Doubled?

Guildofcannonballs said...

"We over focus on these two candidates so that we even know how often they poop. Who wants to know that?"

Henry Rollins. Using the bathroom too often makes you not just ugly but horrendously so, in many ways less than animals with more well-regulated shits.

Lydia said...

When asked if the U.S. should have fought in World War II, Johnson said "I don't know". A real vote-getter.

Clyde said...

Our elections are binary. You have two choices: The Democrat nominee or the Republican nominee. Voting for anyone else is pissing your vote away, because nobody else has a chance in Hell of winning. Realistically, you must choose either the Democrat or the Republican. In the words of some wise Canadians, "If you choose not to decide you still have made a choice." Or as Robert Heinlein said, there may not be anyone you want to vote for but there's someone you want to vote against. Choose accordingly.

Saint Croix said...

I'm very glad to see this.

Ditto!

David Aitken said...

All these comments about wasted votes are a good argument for Approval Voting which lets each voter cast 1 vote for as many of the candidates he/she likes. Highest number of votes wins.

Michael said...

LOL. Our hostess and her son are down with libertarians. "...even if Johnson wins." LOL.

We live in clown world.

Fen said...

And he doesn't believe bakeries should be allowed to discriminate against same-sex couples.

I'm so sick of gays distorting this. The bakeries were not discriminating against same-sex couples. We have example after example of the bakeries serving same-sex couples all the cookies and cupcakes they could want. Even cakes with "Ben + Bob" on them.

What the bakers objected to was being forced to use their artistic speech (crafting a wedding cake) in support of a what they consider to be the desecration of marriage. It's the same reason they refused to make "Divorce Celebration" cakes for straight couples.

JCCamp said...

@ Constitutional Insurgent -

Have you actually read the Libertarian Party platform? Can any rational, sane person read that and think it makes sense in the world today?

There is much wrong with the Federal government we have allowed to fester and metastasize, but committing ritual suicide with the fringe lunatics won't solve any of that, except it might create a backlash left-wing dictatorship.

And again, when you vote for a candidate that has zero chance, none, nade, zip, of being elected, or of even influencing anything ever, why not look at the two major candidates and pick one based on some issue that matters. That old saying: we don't go to war with the army we want, we go with the army we have.

And much of the squealing we're hearing from the purists on the right are the same nabobs who got us here by making deals with the left. I have no love for that buffoon who is running as a Republican, but I'll probably vote for him on the sole thought that I don't want a Clinton appointing Supreme Court justices who will be on the court for the next 20 years and making a mockery of the Constitution.

I have no clue why a rational person would vote for a third party candidate and miss a chance to meaningfully exercise your citizen's prerogative.

Like I say, why not just vote for some write-in that will make it clear how you feel?

Constitutional Insurgent said...

@JCCamp - Why would I vote for a write-in, when I'm a Libertarian? The mistake most people make, when they rely on the "throwing away your vote" throw-away line...is that they believe folks like me can't be any more than disaffected Republicans or Democrats. This is bolstered by the compliant and lazy media, force feeding Option A and Option B, then lumping in everyone else as "Undecideds". Simple and convenient, for a simple consumer base.

My prerogative is excessed quite nicely by working to grow another option beyond two horrible choices, cycle after cycle after cycle. My vote has an astronomically better chance of ensuring automatic ballot access and exposure for the LP, than it ever could hope to affect, voting for the cartoon or the criminal.

Similar to you, I have no clue why someone would surrender their citizens prerogative and be willingly force fed the soylent green of the political duopoly. Ritual suicide is playing this same game every four years and expecting something to change.

Curious George said...

"John Althouse Cohen said...
We're not going to have purely libertarian government even if Johnson wins."

LOL Thanks for that insight. Genius. Pure genius.

Ken B said...

Lydia fingers the real problem. There are libertarian Hawks who favor defending freedom even for others. But most are isolationist "I'm alright Jack" types. Ron Paul thought Lend-Lease a bad idea. Much about Johnson appeals, but fundamentally presidents are about foreign policy. Isolationism is unacceptable to me.

Ken B said...

"Vote your conscience, not with the herd."
Exactly right. I cannot vote for a man who thinks letting Hitler keep conquered Europe was a reasonable alternative.

JCCamp said...

Con Insurgent -

Then I ask, have you truly read their L/Party platform? Do you really credit it with being based in reality? Assume for a moment, a U S government actually implemented those articles of the platform. This country would degenerate into anarchy within years, a decade at most. Some rules, some regulations actually are needed. Some taxes, some gov't borrowing, also immigration controls, some gov't ability to maintain secrecy. Some international treaties...etc etc. what might have worked in the 17th century just isn't going to do it anymore.

Do we really want political subdivisions to be allowed to secede at will? A Peoples Socialist Republic of Berkeley, a Principality of San Francisco, the Duchy of New York, Republic of Texas (the Detroit Superfund Site, we could go on)...

By the way, did you catch the guy stripping on the Libertarian Party stage? Kind of says it all.

https://t.co/s6aURJZFEy

grackle said...

I like some of what the Libertarians have to say on certain issues. But we must have a strong military. A strong American military is an existential need and not to be neglected because of impractical ideological restrictions.

A decent showing by Johnson is how Hillary wins. Perot: The Sequel.

I like Johnson. I’ve seen him on TV many times. He has a nice self-deprecating sense of humor. But as has already been pointed out when he was asked was it moral for the US to have intervened in WW1 and WW2 his answer was “I don’t know.” And Johnson is the least far out of the bunch – a real middle-of-the-road’er from the viewpoint of the Libertarian base.

In the general election I think the Libertarians will draw votes mainly from the Lefty side of the political spectrum. For instance, I’ll bet that more Democrats than Republicans want to legalize drugs and open the borders. Ergo, Johnson will hurt Hillary, not Trump.

And Perot was no Libertarian. Actually, Perot was sort of a proto-Trump.

In regards to AllenS’s list of candidates for POTUS begging for our vote:

How about Pogo Mochello Allen-Reese? I mean … the name alone …

Because “Gary Johnson” is so … so darned ordinary. If I were going to vote alternative I would go for a name with some degree of originality.

MAKE AMERICA BOUNCE AGAIN!

I’ve always liked the word, “pogo.” The word springs off the tongue, through the lips and out of the mouth. The word sounds bouncy. It even looks bouncy on the printed page. Po-GO!

Thanks, AllenS.

Constitutional Insurgent said...

@JCCamp - Of course I've read the platform, and while I don't support every plank [immigration], I also do not share your dire pessimism and faux-relation to anarchy. The criticism appears to be based on an invented belief that were Johnson to win the office of POTUS, the Dem and GOP would simply cease to exist and every plank of the LP platform would be enacted. This is simple for mongering. But only one party in this conversation is actually committed to reducing the size and scope of the federal government....and it has been clearly evidenced to not be the GOP.

The current paradigm isn't sustainable, yet that is exactly what Trump and Clinton support. And while the LP has it's share of clowns and buffoons [guy stripping on stage], the GOP has one as it's nominee....so all criticism of the LP can be measured by that fact alone.

If Trump embodies your values and goals, then by all means vote for him; but if he doesn't....merely the fact that he can guile enough votes with his appeals to emotion [a liberal tactic]....does not make for a rational decision.

@grackle - While I would argue with Johnson on the need to intervene in WWII, I absolutely pops [in hindsight] our intervention in WWI; an intervention that very likely was a primary driver of WWII.

JCCamp said...

Con Insurgent -

I don't want to beat this to death, but rather than say you don't support every single plank, why not suggest which plank you do think is reasonable. They are all nuts, positive thoughts taken to extremes.

Trump can't possibly embody anyone's values and goals, because no one knows where he really stands on anything, except that he will be 'great', but that doesn't mean we don't know where his opponent is on almost anything. But wishful thinking isn't going to change anything for four years at least, so time to be an adult.

And the LP isn't for reducing the size of government. It stands for dismembering the central government and creating a Balkan confederacy of independent city-states. If your argument is to ignore that because it will never happen, you're making my point. But that's the central tenet of the LP platform as written. If it ever was achieved, this country would cease to exist.

Black Dog said...

Did I hear him say that he has no opinion on the US participating in WWI and WWII? We're supposed to take him seriously?

JCCamp said...

And the US intervention in WWI leading to WWII? Doubtful. It may have prevented the map from being reconstructed in even more shocking ways, but Europe was going to be Europe regardless of the outcome of WWI, because no one would have been satisfied with being on the losing side of the First World War.

Remember too that Germany made unsuccessful attempts to recruit a Mexican invasion of the US before our entry into the war, and attacked neutral U S shipping, among other things. Imperial Germany was the evil empire of the day, and it easily can be said it lead to US entry to the war with its civilian atrocities and provocations. Recall Imperial Germany invaded neutral Belgium, murdered and executed innocent civilians including women, violated numerous conventions of war in what we would now call war crimes, etc. Rewriting history 100 years later is in keeping with the isolationism of the L party theme though, so one should expect no less. But a US of today faced with those same circumstances would have bombed and/or invaded such a country within weeks or months, not the years Wilson waited.

mikeyes said...

Libertarians only want the recognition and will not have much of an effect this year on the presidential election. Their platform reflects the image that Johnson gave in his speech to the convention (that the monthly meeting could be held in a treehouse) and because the people who wrote it are crazy, it is, well, crazy. The major party platforms are developed by hundreds of committee members who put in all sorts of improbable things themselves and are mostly rhetoric. Very few voters can tell you what is in the platforms and they are discarded as soon as the new terms begin.

It will be fun if the Libertarians are allowed on the debate platform, assuming they can do a better job than the last time a third party candidate was present. Since Johnson will have nothing to lose, he may try to meet Trump head on which will make for good TV. Maybe that's what Ann meant.

Constitutional Insurgent said...

@JCCamp - Your accusation of a balkanization of the federal government is not borne out by the LP platform. You may divine that intent or end state through your own lens, but it's simply not there. You deride the LP platform [as you interpret it] by contrasting it with support for a candidate that you admittedly have no idea how he will attempt to govern, and them admonish us to "be an adult". This is actually a bit entertaining, as we' are taking about a pathological liar, who uses bombastic buffoonery to such an extent, that it's actually a plausible theory to think he may really be a Democrat plant.

Now, your argument might be that the current duopoly in Congress would keep him somewhat in check, but that merely waters down your derision for a Johnson candidacy. You may think that Libertarians are nuts, and that's fine.....but similarly, I believe most Republicans to have lost [if they ever really knew] any semblance of adherence to the core tenets of Conservatism [minus the social red meat issues].

Regarding WWI, there is every indication to believe that Ludendorff's spring offensive very nearly succeeded even with American involvement. Had that involvement not occurred, the war would have likely ended in similar terms as previous 19th century continental wars, and would have not prompted the Germans to facilitate Lenin's travel from Switzerland to Mother Russia. Rewriting history through the terms of today's empty rhetoric ["evil empire"] might be fun and kitchy, but doesn't really lend to serious discussion, anyone than you think it's being viewed through an isolationist lens.

ken in tx said...

If it is a toss up between the Stupid Party and the Crazy/Evil Party in the state where I vote, I will vote for the Stupid Party. If either one of them has a strong lead, I will vote Libertarian because I want them to get enough votes for their ideas to be taken seriously.