"Democratic secretary of state in heavily Democratic state unilaterally changes voting rule in a way that favors Democrats (and punishes Libertarians). Republicans say they’ll sue."

Reason reports.

Nice of the Republicans to do the suing to help Gary, but it's in their interest to keep a Democrat from winning a Senate race.

In a sudden move with suspicious timing, New Mexico Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver, an elected Democrat, announced today that voters in November will once again be able to vote for every candidate of a political party on the ballot by filling in just one blank. The option, known as the "straight-party" device, gives obvious advantage to parties with high voter-registration totals, while erecting roadblocks to otherwise over-performing candidates from third parties.

Like, say, Libertarian Senate candidate Gary Johnson.

We've had this option in Wisconsin, and I'd never thought of it as a special problem. But adopting it so specifically to fight off one candidate seems like such obvious corruption of the office of Secretary of State that it deserves a legal challenge and it should be usable as a neatly packaged political issue for Johnson. The state is "heavily Democratic," so why the temptation to depart from winning fair and square? I can only think that the sense of entitlement is so strong, they forget not to show it.

"Suggesting that New Mexico voters don't want to take the time to actually indicate their preferences for each office is ridiculous," [Gary Johnson] wrote in an email. "Pushing voters toward straight ticket voting is a worn-out staple of major party incumbents, and flies in the face of the reality that the great majority of voters are independent-minded and don't need or appreciate a ballot that provides a short-cut to partisanship."...

States have repealed straight ticket devices in the past fifty years are Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Missouri, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Texas (effective 2019), and Wisconsin.

I'm surprised to see Wisconsin on that list. I didn't notice the repeal (which, I see elsewhere, happened in 2011).

Michigan repealed its device in 2016, but a U.S. District Court recently struck down the Michigan repeal.

 On what basis? Race discrimination?

Besides Michigan and New Mexico, the only states that still have straight-ticket devices are Alabama, Indiana, Kentucky, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, and Utah.

It is hard to read straight-ticket voting as anything but representatives from the two major parties blunting third-party competition and cementing their own incumbency, regardless of voters' growing disaffection with party membership and loyalty over time.

So it's a great issue to have coming to the forefront in this time of creative destruction.

After writing everything you see above, I looked up the Michigan case, and my guess was right. The court found it racially discriminatory! Reuters reported on August 1st:

The ruling permanently blocks what U.S. District Judge Gershwin Drain called a politically motivated move by the Republican-controlled state legislature in a state that backed President Donald Trump in 2016 after twice choosing Democratic former President Barack Obama....

Drain cited research finding African-American voters are more likely than voters of other races to cast a straight-ticket ballot and are more likely to vote Democratic than Republican. “The goal of ending the Democratic Party’s success with straight-ticket voters, therefore, was achieved at the expense of African-Americans’ access to the ballot,” Drain wrote in a 103-page ruling....

I wonder, did the New Mexico Secretary of State present her action in terms of protecting racial minorities. The quote from her in Reason is:

"The more options people have, the easier it is for more eligible voters to participate—and participation is the key to our democratic process," she said in her statement. "As Secretary of State, I am committed to making it easier—not harder—for New Mexicans to vote….From moms juggling work and kids to elderly veterans who find it hard to stand for long, straight-party voting provides an option for voters that allows their voices to be heard while cutting in half the time it takes them to cast their ballot."

She used juggling "moms" and "elderly veterans." They're the ones she invites you to picture struggling to get through a long ballot. She didn't use the idea in the Michigan case, and I can see why. It's insulting!

"How should Democrats respond to Gary Johnson and Jill Stein supporters?"

My son John, a Johnson voter, opines.

Think about this: a candidate as bumbling as Johnson, who was ignored by the mainstream media except when there was a story that allowed the media to ridicule him for supposedly not knowing about the world, did far better than any other Libertarian candidate in history. That should send a message....

How hard did the Libertarians have to try to blow it this badly?

They were in a fabulous position a couple months ago — what with the horrible nominations from the 2 major parties — and Johnson and Weld threw it away.

Between "What's Aleppo?" and Hillary Clinton is "reliable and honest," they made the Libertarian option less attractive than Evan McMullin, and I don't even know who his running mate is. Mindy something.

"What went wrong for Gary Johnson?"

At FiveThirtyEight.

Overheard at Meadhouse.

"Why don't we all just switch to Gary?"

"Because he's a stupid stoner."

"I still can’t come up with one. Well, that I admire? That I’m going to have to defend a foreign leader?"

Gary Johnson resists the pick-a-hero bullshit. Good! I'm glad to see he's finally getting cheeky about it. Go, Gary!

Okay, America, Gary Johnson has a pop quiz.

Okay America, we are going to have a pop quiz. Take all the time you need. #teamgov pic.twitter.com/ejLFtIKejo

— Gov. Gary Johnson (@GovGaryJohnson) October 2, 2016

"I guess I am having an Aleppo moment... I am having a brain freeze...."

Too bad Gary Johnson is so... weak/ tired/ lackadaisical/ apathetic/ dull...

What is this man's problem?!

Oh, Gary.

The dream is over.

Gary said "What's Aleppo?"

Mr. Johnson expressed disappointment about the lapse in a brief follow-up interview that was broadcast on MSNBC and canceled some of his other scheduled interviews planned for later in the day.

“I’m incredibly frustrated with myself,” he said. “I have to get smarter and that’s just part of the process.”

I've watched Gary Johnson in a number of debates and consider him famous for saying "I don't know." In the past, I've been able to admire him for that. But now... I don't know.

Gary Johnson agrees with Trump that Obama and Hillary are the co-founders of ISIS... unintentionally.

The great big, open, loving William Weld.

Here, I made this clip for you from last night's CNN town hall with William Weld, the Libertarian Party VP candidate, and Gary Johnson, the candidate for President:



Here's the transcript, which identifies Johnson as saying what, in fact, Weld says. The question asked comes from a college student who is a Muslim and a veteran, who says he can't vote for Trump or Hillary Clinton and wants to know "Why are you a better choice for somebody like me?" Johnson goes first and, in something not included in my clip, lists his positions, which are "the best of what Republicans are supposed to be about" and the best of what Democrats are supposed to be. Weld then takes his turn, thanks the student for his service, and — in the part that's in my clip — says:

If I could just throw an arrow in the air. To me, the real reason might be that we're decent people, we are both inclusive to the tips of our toes, great big, open, loving, if you will, society. And we know that this country has always been a melting pot. We know that's the strength -- the sinew of this country and we want to keep it that way. 

Anderson Cooper then says:

Governor Johnson, I've heard you use some words tonight. I don't think I've heard a politician use in a long time. At one point you said, I may be wrong, which I haven't heard a politician say that in a long time. And just now you said, well perhaps we're this, and perhaps, you know. Those are, I haven't heard a politician - -

Weld bursts in with: "Well, he's just an elegant guy, Anderson." And I just want to say that Weld is an elegant guy. Weld is great. I'm loving Weld.

Gary Johnson and William Weld deliver their message to Republicans.

From yesterday's CNN town hall, the Libertarian Party's candidates for President and Vice President respond to a prompt from Anderson Cooper saying it must be "frustrating" that some high profile Republicans who say they can't vote for Trump are switching to Hillary without considering them:

JOHNSON: Well, two former Republican governors, that got re-elected in heavily Democrat states, I think that speaks volumes. I'm not really frustrated. I'm just understanding how difficult it is to cross over the line if you're an elected Republican or if you've been a former elected Republican....

WELD: Well, I think the message to Republicans is that we were two of the most fiscally responsible, i.e.; conservative governors in the United States when we served together, back in the 90s. Gary and I were good friends then, we're good friends now. But we were each rated the fiscally most conservative governor in the United States and that takes some doing. We are socially inclusive, tolerant, whatever word you want. In fact, we've been leaders on those issues.... We want the government out of your pocketbook and out of your bedroom. And I tell you the polling shows that a majority of Americans think that....

On how they might bring people together:

WELD: I think it might be refreshing to have a party that was not terribly partisan holding the White House. We would hire the best people from the Democratic Party that we could find, the smartest people from the Republican party that we could find, the best people in the Libertarian party. Our proposals out of the White House would not say take that you stupid "D" party, or you stupid "R" party. It would be, you know, here's what we think this is, maybe, kind of in the middle. Could we kind of come together around this, and the recipients of that information would not feel attacked, so they might be more likely to come to the table because they wouldn't feel like they were going to be made fools of.

JOHNSON: We're also proposing something unique, I believe, in that we're planning to do this as a partnership.

Note that Johnson said that right after Weld took the lead. Perhaps Weld is the dominant character here. Johnson proceeds to call Weld his "role model" when he became governor, and: "Really, I hold him up on a pedestal, so having him on the ticket is beyond my wildest dreams."

ADDED: In answer to a question from the audience, Johnson got to deliver their message to Democrats. How much did they have to offer someone who supported Bernie Sanders?

JOHNSON: Well, I think Bernie and I are similar on about 75 percent of what's out there. And, of course, that would be marriage equality, a woman's right to choose, legalizing marijuana, let's stop with the military interventions. The crony capitalism is alive and well, but when from an economic standpoint here's my hypothesis, and I might be wrong, if Bernie supporters are really looking for income equality, I don't think that is something that government can accomplish. Taking from Peter to rob Paul, that's a equation that Peter really loves. But, if Bernie supporters are looking for equal opportunity, I think that that is something that can be accomplished, and as governor of New Mexico, arguably having vetoed more legislation than all the other governors in the country combined -- I vetoed a whole lot of legislation that wasn't about equal opportunity. It was about giving a continued upper-hand to those that could pay for influence, and the ability to game the system, if you will. In politics you can definitely stand up against gaming the system. In politics you can definitely stand up for equal opportunity.

Have you watched last night's Libertarian town hall?

I forgot to watch or record it, so I need to find it on line. I'd prefer to post CNN's video, but can only find this 90-second highlight reel (featuring William Weld saying that Donald Trump has "a screw loose"):



Here's the full version, posted by the Libertarian Party:



I'm not seeing a transcript on line. That makes it hard to blog, unfortunately. I hope to get around to watching this soon.

UPDATE: Here's a transcript. And I've watched the video... but slept through part of it. I'll try to do a new post excerpting something from the transcript.

This CNN column about libertarians is so basic that I'm wondering — one way and then the other — about whether Gary Johnson and William Weld have a chance.

Look at this: "Libertarian ticket could spoil Clinton party," by Matt Zwolinski, who is a philosophy professor.

Most people think of libertarianism as a kind of right-wing ideology...  But Gary Johnson is actually drawing just as much support from self-identified Democrats as he does from Republicans... On the surface, this might seem surprising.... 

But let's go for "a deeper understanding":

First, libertarianism is more than just an economic ideology. It's a social one...

Second, even on strictly economic issues, Libertarians have a lot to say that should appeal to those on the left.... They've fought against subsidies, bailouts, and other forms of "crony capitalism" that benefit the few at the expense of the masses. And...  Libertarians have often argued in favor of a well-designed social safety net to protect those who fail to benefit from the economic dynamism of a free economy....

Does this mean Johnson and Weld could win? I'm thinking...

First, Zwolinski makes it sound as though people know next to nothing about libertarians. So maybe Johnson and Weld could just be 2 normal-seeming former governors who happen to be on the ballot in all 50 states. Who cares what libertarians generally are or have been? This is a completely weird election cycle in which the major parties have failed to give us the usual dismal choice and have, instead, served up 2 very strange characters. The Johnson/Weld ticket is the closest we can get to something ordinary. No need to take a long detour into the outré topic of libertarians. These 2 guys are practical and sensible and properly experienced.

But... if people are so far from noticing and thinking about libertarians, there's just too much ground to cover before the election. There are too many steps to take, and it can't all be accomplished in one election cycle. Americans would need to come around to thinking of this party as capable of producing a President. We've got to work through the weirdness of all that marijuana and prostitution — issues that should be marginal in presidential politics but that jump right into the foreground when people start to toy with the idea of going libertarian. We might feel like crying if we feel the severity and coldness of the party's hard core. If the stress is on inviting Democrats and Republicans to consider how much their sentiments really do overlap with libertarians, we might have some ferment that would enrich American politics in the long run, but it's not going to catapult Johnson and Weld to victory.

Trump took over the Republican Party structure and it's working out well for him. He doesn't slow down what he is doing to promote the Republican Party in general. He's trying to win. (I think! (Maybe he's just enjoying himself, playing havoc with America.)) Gary Johnson and William Weld should do the same thing. They have the nomination. They've captured the party's structure. Go straight for the win. Let the libertarians take care of themselves.

"Feel the Johnson."

Just a little something I found searching the phrase "Feel the Johnson," which I thought was pretty funny. The song doesn't play on the sexual meaning in the phrase, however. It's completely marijuana-focused.

Gary Johnson "tells Sanders supporters to take an ideological quiz at the Web site ISideWith.com."

"'You get paired up with a Presidential candidate most in line with your views,' he said. 'I side with myself the most, and then, amazingly, I side with Bernie next closest.' Polls so far show that Johnson actually takes more voters from Clinton than from Trump. 'It’s about everything but economics,' Johnson said, ticking off the issues on which he and Sanders agree: 'on legalizing marijuana, on "Let’s stop dropping bombs," crony capitalism.'... Johnson’s theory of politics is highly rational. He assumes that voters don’t need to know much more than his positions to make up their minds. In his stump speech, he goes through a long list of his stances on issues in the areas of fiscal matters, social concerns, and foreign policy. It’s the live equivalent of the ISideWith.com quiz."

From "THE LIBERTARIANS’ SECRET WEAPON/The third-party candidacy of Gary Johnson might make the most unpredictable election in modern times even weirder," by Ryan Lizza (in The New Yorker).

The New Yorker really forefronted the stuff about marijuana. In the "history" tab in my browser, the article shows up as having the title "Flying High," and it begins: "Not long ago, Gary Johnson..., put a halt to his considerable consumption of marijuana. 'The last time I indulged is about two months ago, with some edibles,' Johnson..." The edibles, we're told, were "Cheeba Chews, a Colorado brand that High Times has called 'America’s favorite edible.'" And while we're on the subject of edible marijuana, Johnson, until recently, was C.E.O. of Cannabis Sativa, Inc., "a marijuana-branding company that hopes to benefit as legalization spreads":

At the company, Johnson told me, he hired the person who developed the branding for a product line called hi. “Small ‘H,’ small ‘I’—really cool logo,” he said. He also contributed to the development of a strain-specific edible lozenge that he said “is as good a marijuana high that exists on the planet.” How did he know? “As C.E.O., I did some testing,” he said. “Nothing was better.”

“So, if someone wanted to try that strain, how would they acquire it?” I asked.

“Legally, they couldn’t,” Johnson said.

“What about illegally?”

“Well, I’d probably be able to connect you up illegally.”

Seems like good branding. Why not a lozenge? It seems to suggest an anti-smoking message, soothing rather than irritating.

The Gary Johnson/William Weld alternative.

Are #youin? Check out our new video -- and spread it around. #election2016 #TeamGov pic.twitter.com/9X6iNNzZW2

— Gov. Gary Johnson (@GovGaryJohnson) June 30, 2016

"Gary Johnson and William Weld are fake libertarians"... but isn't that just perfect for 2016?

I'm seeing that a lot of people are reading a RedState article, "Gary Johnson and William Weld are fake libertarians miseducating the public."

I can’t support Johnson because his role as a minor party candidate is not necessarily to win, but to be a spokesman for libertarian principles. As a libertarian myself, I certainly want more Americans to hear and understand the libertarian philosophy....

It seems to me that this is the year for party insiders to get burned by someone who's dropping in to take over their structure and ballot access.

If the RedState diarist — southernconstitutionalist — is correct, it puts Johnson in the same category as Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump.

This is the essence of 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.

The Libertarian Party picks its candidate today.

"Unlike the major party conventions later this summer where the nominees will likely be known well in advance, there's no telling who will come out on top of Sunday's Libertarian vote."

I hope they pick Gary Johnson. He's sensible enough to offer a real choice to the many, many people who are horrified at the choices we're getting from the 2 major parties.

But Austin Petersen is an attractive, articulate guy. If he could poll 15% and take the debate stage alongside Hillary and Trump, it would be a sight to behold.

Mary Matalin wrote a piece in National Review endorsing him. Why Petersen over Johnson?

Because Austin Petersen represents the best opportunity for a principle-based victory this November. Inasmuch as Petersen is a consistent advocate for constitutional government, the free-market economics of Friedman and Hayek, reverence for the dignity of universal human liberty (which necessarily includes unborn Americans), and a classical liberal understanding of the pursuit of happiness — not to mention his next-generation promise — he hits the political sweet spot for millions of fed-up Americans. He is skilled and ready to compete in our information-age political arena: Petersen is studied, thoughtful, curious, practical and personable — and capable of more than just delivering a clever quip. Most importantly, Petersen is principled.

But that's the problem. By "principled," she means ideologically hardcore, and that's fine for the fans, and that will be one more thing — after Hillary and Trump — for those of us who want something more normal to freak out about.

Here's Gary:



ADDED: Here's a Politico article about Johnson's VP pick, William Weld, the former governor of Massachusetts: "Libertarian ‘dream ticket’ in peril as Weld bombs in Orlando/Party activists could reject the two-term Massachusetts governor as ‘Republican-lite.'"

Asked if his reception [at the convention] was worrisome, Weld told POLITICO, “I wouldn’t use the word worrisome, but I would say the convention is highly unpredictable. And having two former Republican governors who were successful in blue states — who knows — that could turn out to be a negative in the minds of delegates. Stranger things have happened.”

AND: Johnson wins the nomination.