Ventura: Come in as a Libertarian in May, then “steal the election and win the whole thing” in November

JesseVentura-290x250
Former Independent governor of Minnesota and former visiting fellow at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government Jesse Ventura, appeared on Coast to Coast AM, a nationally syndicated overnight radio talk show, the evening of October 6/7 2015. During his interview with show host George Noory, Governor Ventura shared his conclusions about a wide variety of conspiracies and offered his insights into the 2016 presidential election and his potential role in it.

Portions potentially relevant to IPR readers are transcribed below.

VENTURA: “We need to pass a law that you cannot even form a campaign committee until the year of the election. You have all of these senators, like Rubio, who are missing votes. They are not doing their jobs. We are paying them to be senators; we are paying them to be governors, and they are off running for president. When Scott Walker was running, who was governing Wisconsin?”

“ . . . I also believe if you hold a current office, you should not be allowed to run for another one. Imagine. if you came up to your boss and you said, “Boss, I am going to be gone for the next six months looking for a better job, but I want you to pay me while I am gone.” He would say, “Don’t let the door hit you on the ass on your way out.”

NOORY: “The last couple of days World Net Daily and Huffington Post did a story about me possibly running. Like you, it’s one of those, “If people push you, you might consider it.” But you are absolutely right; it is way too early. It is like Christmas decorations up before Halloween. It is crazy.”

VENTURA: “In my case when they ask me, I always say, “Why would I get in now and waste the money?” Wait until they get down to the final two. Then you come in as the Libertarian candidate – which holds their convention next May or June. That gives you time until November when they are down to two, to come in and steal the election and win the whole thing. Why would you get in it now? It would be ridiculous to get into it at this point.”

. . .

NOORY:”I want everybody to know, I spent nine years in the navy, you were in the navy; we love this country. What we are talking about are certain individuals within government over the years who have manipulated, schemed, and planned to do what they have done to try to grease their own skids and destroy this country at the same time.”

VENTURA: “I do not know about destroying the country, but they have no regard for the country. They are just using it like you said to, “grease their own skids” and whatever happens to the country happens to it. My position is that I would like to see us get completely out of the Middle East and bring all of our troops home. Trump talks about immigration and building walls at the border and all of that. Here’s my trade-off. I will accept the walls at the borders but you have got to do one on Canada too because we do not want to be racist. So you need to put one on the Canadian border and on the Mexican border. “

NOORY: “Walls don’t work Jesse.”

VENTURA: “We will turn the country into East Berlin. “

NORRY: “People have ladders; they will get over that.”

VENTURA: “I know that, but please bear with me on this one. We will turn the country into East Berlin. “

NOORY: “I know. You are right. Doing that, building a wall is tantamount to what happened.”

VENTURA: “Let me put it this way then George, the great icon of the Republican Party, Ronald Reagan, if I remember correctly, one of his most famous quotes was, “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!”

NOORY: “What do you see as the most dangerous thing facing Americans?”

VENTURA: “The most dangerous thing, I think, is getting our country back from the system that we have that the Democrats and Republicans have created with the help, now, of the Supreme Court, of getting corporations out of the election process. They can contribute an unlimited amount of money; they control our elections. This system of bribery has gone far over the extreme level now to where the elected officials no longer represent the people at all. They simply represent the people who have bribed them (through) campaign contributions and that is who controls them. . . . When you define the word “fascism” it fits to the United States now and what the corporations have done. Mussolini would be proud of us today.”

NOORY: . . . “Are you convinced that some of these electronic voting machines are being tampered with?”

VENTURA: “Absolutely. I believe they are. We wrote the chapters on it in the book AMERICAN CONSPIRACIES. Why would votes from Ohio need to be sent to Chattanooga Tennessee ? . . . Sometimes modern technology isn’t the best.”

. . .

NOORY: “So the war on drugs, it’s not working.”

VENTURA: “It is a miserable failure.”

NOORY: “Why don’t they just legalize drugs?”

VENTURA: “On my OFF THE GRID show, I had this police officer on, a ten year veteran from Baltimore. We were discussing this tragedy in America today with the police and the people. He said that it all stems from the war on drugs. All of it. Because it was the war on drugs that started the police to violate our Constitutional rights. They confiscate things from you; they crash into houses without warrants. Our police look like military today.”

NOORY: “And our jails are packed with people for petty drug crimes.”

VENTURA: “We could save our country immediately by ending the ridiculous war on drugs. . . . I am so anti-war right now, and we will count the war on drugs too because that is a war. I am sixty-four (years old) now. I am post-World-War-Two. The United States has literally been at war my entire life. I want to quote John Lennon and say, “Can’t we just give Peace a chance?” Just once; and see what happens. Everything is geared to war, war, war.”

NOTE: The Libertarian National Convention is scheduled to be held in Orlando Florida, May 27 to 30, 2016.

84 thoughts on “Ventura: Come in as a Libertarian in May, then “steal the election and win the whole thing” in November

  1. bruuno

    He really thinks he can walk into that convention and just have it handed to him after having done nothing for the Party and nothing to earn the delegates votes, doesn’t he? He comes across as very arrogant.

  2. Jill Pyeatt

    “My position is that I would like to see us get completely out of the Middle East and bring all of our troops home.”

    That’s just about the best thing I’ve heard any Presidential candidate say, ever.

    However, I agree that it’s phenomenally arrogant to think he can just mosey over in May, not join the Party (as we’ve heard him say), and expect to be our candidate.

  3. NewFederalist

    I’m not so sure he would lose the nomination. If Johnson decides against running again Ventura would be the only “name” candidate present unless someone else declares their intentions in the meanwhile. Libertarian delegates have a checkered track record at best at refusing to nominate a “name”. It usually doesn’t work out but hope springs eternal.

  4. Mark Axinn

    Yes, but your premise fails because Johnson will run again.

    He’s doing a fundraiser in Manhattan tomorrow night and speaking at Liberty Fest (rock & roll & anarchists) on Saturday in Brooklyn.

    Why the &$%@* would he waste his time doing that shit if he weren’t running in 2016?

    Geeks like us might think suing the CPD is cool. Would Gary Johnson waste his time doing so if he were not going to run again?

  5. Andy

    Ron Paul could just show up at the LP National Convention and win the nomination. I don’t think Jesse Ventura could do this.

  6. Andy Craig

    Barr had also spent a few then-recent years in the party and even on the LNC. He had a much better understanding of internal dynamics, and the precise objections he would have to satisfy to win the nomination, vs Gravel, or Root, or now Ventura. It was because of that, that Barr was aware of the need of a ground game for the convention (and he still barely pulled it off.)

    Other than Johnson’12 and Barr’08, I can’t think of any case where a “name” candidate beat out a substantially lesser-known candidate. When Paul beat Means, he might have had the edge on gov’t experience, but not I think in national notoriety. But Badnarik? Browne? Bergland? Marrou? Hardly candidates running on the strength of their name recognition. I think the shadow of 2008 looms larger, due to it being more recent, than it actually merits in the total history of the party and its 10 presidential nominations. It really wasn’t a typical convention, to the degree you can ever say there is such a norm.

  7. Richard Winger

    It isn’t true that Jesse Ventura has done “nothing” for the Libertarian Party recently. Every time he talks about the Libertarian Party, he is giving the party publicity. And with all the bad publicity recently for the LP from Sol Invictus in Florida, good for Jesse.

  8. Andy

    True, but on the flip side, Jesse has never been an LP member, he’s not a consistent libertarian, and he recently endorsed Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders, neither of whom are libertarian.

  9. Andy

    Bob Barr joined the LP in December of 2006, which was about 1 year and 5 months before the 2008 National Convention. He was immediately handed a seat on the LNC after joining the party (he filled a vacancy).

    I recall Wayne Root joining the LP around the same time as Bob Barr.

  10. George Phillies

    “He’s doing a fundraiser in Manhattan tomorrow night and speaking at Liberty Fest (rock & roll & anarchists) on Saturday in Brooklyn.

    Why the &$%@* would he waste his time doing that shit if he weren’t running in 2016? ”

    Because he owes from his last campaign about 1.4 million dollars, a fair piece not to his campaign manager? That appears to include a chunk of change owed to the Federal Government.

    “Ask Mike Gravel how it works to come in last minute and expect a nomination.

    Barr had a ground game.”

    This is exactly backwards. Gravel was in the race from early on. Root was in the race from early on. Barr and Ruwart jumped into the race late.

  11. Andy

    George Phillies said: “This is exactly backwards. Gravel was in the race from early on. Root was in the race from early on. Barr and Ruwart jumped into the race late.”

    Mike Gravel was in the race early on as a Democrat. He jumped in late as a Libertarian.

    I have reason to believe that Barr was planning to run all along, but that he jumped in the race late intentionally. I do know that he purposely waited to announce that he was running after all of the state LP conventions were over, so he could avoid participating in any of the debates that were held at those conventions.

    Barr did officially get in the race for the LP Presidential nomination late, but he most definitely had ground game.

  12. Steven Berson

    Jesse Ventura is on record in the recent past supporting government mandates for maximum income caps, as well as single payer government controlled health care. Not exactly platform points that would go well with typical LP National Convention delegates.

  13. Nicholas Sarwark

    Barr did announce late, but he had a ground game going well in advance of the announcement.

    Gravel was more like Johnson, having sought another party’s nomination, gotten no traction, and switching.

    Johnson had a ground game going into convention, Gravel did not.

  14. Andy Craig

    Part of what delayed Barr’s announcement, was not wanting to step on Ron Paul’s toes. If he declared while that was ongoing, he’d get accused of backstabbing and draining away from Ron Paul while he was still in the race. It ended up being moot for other reasons, but he wasn’t wrong about that. It was known and understood prior to his announcement, that he was waiting for that to position himself as the “Ron Paul fallback option.”

    And even though I haven’t been told this by anybody who would know, I suspect that’s part of the same calculation delaying Gary Johnson’s announcement (along with the focus on the FairDebates lawsuit for now). Rand Paul supporters primarily (particularly when Rand might not even make it to IA and NH at this point) but not just therm- the same dynamic applies to all the other will-be losers in the major-party primaries. There is that angle to it, which Johnson has mentioned (in addition to the expense) and which Ventura alludes to with his talk of waiting until it’s narrowed down to the “final two.” While Ventura is wrong about how close to the convention he can cut it, that doesn’t mean three or four or even two months before the convention is unreasonable or unworkable. And we’re still a ways off from that.

    The Libertarian Party doesn’t get the big state-run multi-state primary election process starting in January of the election year, and the attendant media circus and televised debates, etc.. We have our convention after the major-party primaries are effectively over. The assumption that a Libertarian candidate formally in the race now would accrue some of the attention going to the two-party primaries, is misunderstanding how that works. Closer to the convention, there will be a larger number of people alienated by the recent defeat of their candidate for a major-party nomination. They might not be Libertarians, but they are potential third-party voters in a way they currently aren’t.

    Short version:

    http://www.cbsstore.com/imgcache/product/resized/000/920/540/catl/the-late-show-with-stephen-colbert-bite-me-its-still-2015-pin-828_1000.jpg?k=6780f42e&pid=920540&s=catl&sn=cbs

  15. Dave

    First I heard of George Noory running. I hope he does. Always liked the man, and his show is hilarious/disturbing, and occasionally insightful . Surprised he would run as a Democrat though, according to the article.

    As for Ventura, meh, just an attempt at more publicity I think.

  16. Andy

    “Andy Craig

    October 7, 2015 at 11:30 pm

    Part of what delayed Barr’s announcement, was not wanting to step on Ron Paul’s toes. If he declared while that was ongoing, he’d get accused of backstabbing and draining away from Ron Paul while he was still in the race. It ended up being moot for other reasons, but he wasn’t wrong about that. It was known and understood prior to his announcement, that he was waiting for that to position himself as the ‘Ron Paul fallback option.'”

    Announcing that he was running was not “stepping on Ron Paul’s toes.” Steve Kubby was one of the first candidates to announce that he was seeking the LP nomination for President in 2008 (he announced at Hempfest in Seattle, WA, which was held in August or September of 2006), and when the Ron Paul campaign started to get big, Steve Kubby put out a press release where he said that he’d drop out of the race and campaign for Ron Paul if by the time of the LP Convention, it looked like Ron Paul was going to win the Republican nomination, and Kubby also officially endorsed Ron Paul for President.

    Mary Ruwart got in the race for the nomination much later, but she had also endorsed Ron Paul for President.

    It was clearly apparent several weeks before the LP National Convention, and really, after the results of Super Tuesday were known, that Ron Paul stood no chance of winning the Republican nomination (and it was pretty apparent from those of us who understand how corrupt the political system is that Ron Paul was not going to win the Republican nomination for President, and I think that Ron himself realized this).

    I heard it from a reliable source that Bob Barr did in fact announce that he was running for the LP nomination late so that he would not have to participate in any of the debates that were held at the LP state conventions prior to the National Convention. Also, there were actually three Presidential debates that were held at the National Convention, two of which were not scripted (as in the candidates were not given the questions in advance of the debate), yet Barr skipped the two debates that were not scripted, and only participated in the debate that was held on the main convention stage, which was the only debate where all of the questions were known to the candidates in advance. So out of all of the candidates who ran for the LP nomination for President in 2008, Barr was the only one who did not participate in any unscripted debates.

  17. Joseph Buchman Post author

    Governor Ventura was also on CNN late Tuesday (6 OCT 2016)

    “I loved listening to you talk to those other talking heads about (how) ‘Donald Trump could be the destruction of the whole Republican Party.’ I throw my hands up in the air and cheer. I hope it happens. And I hope Bernie Sanders is the destruction of the Democratic Party. . . . It’s time to break up the two-party dictatorship. . . . Because we deserve more than two choices. I am fiscally conservative but I am socially liberal.”

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6k0Jm-WS3FA

  18. Andy

    Andy Craig said: “The Libertarian Party doesn’t get the big state-run multi-state primary election process starting in January of the election year, and the attendant media circus and televised debates, etc.. We have our convention after the major-party primaries are effectively over. The assumption that a Libertarian candidate formally in the race now would accrue some of the attention going to the two-party primaries, is misunderstanding how that works. Closer to the convention, there will be a larger number of people alienated by the recent defeat of their candidate for a major-party nomination. They might not be Libertarians, but they are potential third-party voters in a way they currently aren’t.”

    While it is true that candidates for the Libertarian Party’s nomination for President are not going to get the same attention that is given to the candidates running in the major party primaries, there are still lots of benefits for a candidate for the LP nomination to announce that they are running now. It takes time to build a campaign and to gets one’s name out, and throwing together a campaign at the last minute is just not an effective thing to do. Also, there is really very little excitement right now for anything that the Libertarian Party is doing, and I think that this is one of the reasons that the party’s fundraising is down right now.

    I have had lots of people ask me who the Libertarian Party’s candidate for President is for 2016 and I just do not have a good answer to give them. Right now we have the weakest field of candidates for the nomination since I’ve been involved with the party (which goes back to 1996). This is not meant as a personal attack against any of the declared candidates, as I’m sure that at least a few of them are fine Libertarians, but in all honesty, none of them are running resembling an effective campaign for the nomination. I have brought up a few of the names of candidates who have announced that they are running to a few people, and I’ve been met with blank stares. I have said to some other people that Gary Johnson was the candidate in 2012, and that he might run again, but that he has yet to officially announce that he’s running. I’ve told other people that the Libertarian Party nominates candidates by convention, and that the convention is not until May of 2016, so we won’t know who the candidate will be by then.

    I think that it would be better for the party if we had a few strong candidates who were running active campaigns for the nomination right now.

  19. Joseph Buchman Post author

    I get the same blank stares when I mention Governor Johnson. Governor Ventura has substantially higher name recognition, at least in my convenience sampling of friends and others who know of my interest in all things libertarianish.

  20. Andy

    “Joseph Buchman Post author

    October 8, 2015 at 1:13 am

    I get the same blank stares when I mention Governor Johnson. Governor Ventura has substantially more name recognition, at least in my convenience sampling of friends and others who know of my interest in all things libertarianish.”

    A lot of Libertarian Party members do over-estimate the percentage of the population who know who Gary Johnson is (the same went for Bob Barr), but even so, a heck of a lot more people know who Gary Johnson is than know who any of the currently declared candidates for the Libertarian Party’s Presidential nomination are.

    People who are not well known running for the Libertarian Party’s Presidential nomination is of course nothing new, but at least in the past by this time in the election cycle we had candidates that were running something that looked like a political campaign. I have seen very little out of the current crop of candidates for the nomination, and I’m just not seeing any excitement or interest at all being generated by anyone who is running.

    I agree that Jesse Ventura has greater name recognition than Gary Johnson, but unfortunately, Jesse Ventura also has some very unrealistic expectations (such as saying that the LP should nominate him to run for President if he just shows up at the National Convention and does not even bother to join the party), plus he is not a solid libertarian himself, and he’s also endorsed Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders, neither of whom are libertarian, and these endorsements would cause him to lose some LP Convention delegates.

    I think that Jesse Ventura had the potential to be a very good candidate for the Libertarian Party, but his lack of understanding of libertarian philosophy and political strategy has likely blown this potential.

  21. bruuno

    I have little doubt that Ventura has more name recognition. Unfortunately much of the population also thinks he is completely nuts.

  22. Root's Teeth Are Awesome

    Andy: a heck of a lot more people know who Gary Johnson is than know who any of the currently declared candidates for the Libertarian Party’s Presidential nomination are.

    I suppose that 50 is “a heck of a lot more” than 2.

    But even so, in a pool of 1,000,000 people, there isn’t all that much difference between 50 and 2.

    (Above numbers are used to illustrate my point, and do not refer to anything specifically.)

  23. Andy

    “bruuno

    October 8, 2015 at 7:18 am

    I have little doubt that Ventura has more name recognition. Unfortunately much of the population also thinks he is completely nuts.”

    A lot of people like Jesse Ventura as well. Also, a lot of people think that all Libertarian Party candidates are nuts. A lot of people think that anyone who runs for office outside of the major political parties is nuts.

  24. bruuno

    I am not an LP member so really not my business but I do want you guys to have some success. I have a lot more respect for you folks than the current GOP and I believe you are a valuable voice in American politics.
    You may have a point about some of the electorate assuming any 3rd Partier is a little off but I don’t feel that is a particularly significant number. I actually believe this is an attitude that you see much more among the Beltway crowd (DC cocktail parties) than the rest of the country. Having said that, I am telling you right now that if Jesse Ventura runs than the LP runs the risk of being labelled a whacko 3rd Party by a majority of Americans and the brand could well be permanently damaged. I don’t think some folks realize just how badly Jesse Ventura has destroyed his reputation of the last few years. Just look up James Adomian if you don’t believe me. My guess is that if he was the LP nominee, the entire campaign would be dominated by damage control for whatever the latest crazy thing to pop out of his mouth was. So you have to ask yourself this question- do you want to run the risk of permanently damaging the Party just so you might have an outside chance of getting 5% (I am sure he will poll a little better than this at first but I guarantee his numbers will plummet and plummet fast)? Gary Johnson (or Ron Paul or others) may not be the perfect candidate but he certainly is unlikely to embarrass the Party and will put forth an experienced and respected voice who can engage in a lengthy, coherent and intellectual discussion of the issues. In the long term I have zero doubt that Ventura would be a huge mistake. I also have zero doubt that he will bale on the Party the second the slightest thing goes wrong or he feels he doesn’t need you any more.

  25. stevekerbel

    We need continuity in our message and representation if we are ever to lead the nation politically. I believe this is an eventuality if we stay the course. If we were to nominate Jesse Ventura, our message would not get out at all. We need to put up a real Libertarian that is charismatic, explains the existence and concepts of Liberty to the voters, and builds momentum for the future growth. In my opinion, the table is set this election for a big move for our party if we don’t mess it up. Basics such as “Don’t hurt others and don’t take their stuff”,, the NAP, the benefits of decreased government as a benefit to the individual, the truth about the drug war, victimless crimes, prisons for profit, stopping income tax the impact of the fed and government regulation and so much more would not be presented to the public.. We can’t afford to put up a non libertarian for our nominee, period.

  26. George Phillies

    Evidence that Ventura is actually libertarian is quite limited.
    One of the consequences of limited news coverage is that we tend to have many uninformed delegates who fall for things.

    Celegrity candidates such as they are have been a failure for us. Harry Browne was supposed to bring the bullion fetishists into the aprt. Fail. Mike Badnarik was supposed to bring the “constitutionalists” into our party. Fail. Bob Barr was supposed to bring in 30 million bucks. Fail. Gary Johnson was supposed to be a breakthrough candidate. Fail.

    The largest problem we have had is campaign organizations that spent their money on themselves rather than the campaign, and the trend there has been down hill.

  27. bruuno

    No offense but if you think either Harry Browne Browne or Michael Badnarik were ‘celebrity’ candidates then you really need to get out of your bubble.

  28. Wang Tang-Fu

    LOL really. And how much of a breakout was expected from Johnson? His numbers ended up IIRC pretty much being in line with predictions here and better than some of them.

  29. Mark Axinn

    Andy wrote, in part:
    >I have reason to believe that Barr was planning to run all along, but that he jumped in the race late intentionally. I do know that he purposely waited to announce that he was running after all of the state LP conventions were over, so he could avoid participating in any of the debates that were held at those conventions.

    I agree he declared late, and as Nick pointed out, he had a game plan in place when he did (as opposed to Gravel). But, even though he had not yet officially declared, Barr came to the LPNY Convention and debated several others who were ther (Root, Ruwart, et al.) in April 2008.

  30. Robert Capozzi

    I wonder how many really thought/think GJ is a celeb. I don’t.

    He does have a credible resume…former guv.

    So far, the majors seem to want an “outsider”…so far. I suspect none of the “outsiders” will be the nominee.

    In this sense, GJ is not an “outsider,” since he’s a 2 term guv. OTOH, he is outside of the Rs and Ds.

    Might be that he can get more traction in 16 than 12. Hopefully he’ll be more organized, better funded, etc. Hopefully he’ll be better coached. And, despite recent comments, hopefully he’ll lose the FAIR tax.

    Here’s a campaign narrative:

    I hate running for president. Hate it! But I’m concerned — deeply concerned — about the path this great country is on.

    I’d rather be home, running my business, riding my bike, scaling mountains, being with my family, and just loving life.

    But there are some issues that I aim to put on the table. The Rs and Ds are the disease, how can we possibly expect them to offer the cure?!

    We need to get back to first principles. We need to remember that the United States of America is, first and foremost, about freedom. Economic freedom. Privacy freedom. Lifestyle freedom. And freedom from these insane wars overseas that only serve to make a tragedy into a full-blown catastrophe.

    Etc.

    Oh, yes, Ventura should stick to his media efforts, IMO.

  31. Andy Craig

    @Andy J.

    I agree, the current field of candidates is spectacularly weak. None of them has attracted significant mainstream media coverage, none of them have a campaign operation beyond themselves and maybe one or two volunteers, and most of them aren’t even that well-known among Libertarians. There are candidates running for state legislature who’ve had more substantive campaign operations than any of the currently declared POTUS field.

    If for whatever reason the party doesn’t nominate Johnson again, I’d place better odds on us nominating somebody not in the current field, than one of those who jumped into the race knowing they’d probably be a not-Gary gadfly. I don’t think there are any “big name” or former-officeholder candidates waiting who’d run if Gary doesn’t, but I do think there are several people more prominent in the party who would.

    When I’m asked who the 2016 Libertarian for President is, other than explaining we haven’t nominated yet, I find “Probably Gary Johnson, our 2012 candidate, but he hasn’t announced yet.” to be good enough answer for most people.

    There are always different factors pulling in different directions as to when to announce. I myself chose to do so very early for my current election, basically as soon as the incumbent was sworn-in for her current two-year term. So I recognize that can often be the case. But the dynamic is very different for a House seat than for President, it’s not like there were other Libertarians waiting to possibly run for Wisconsin’s 4th CD, or a competitive major-party primary going on.

    I was just outlining some of the logic and strategy that can point towards a later announcement for a third-party candidate. You’re not wrong about some of the factors weighing in the other direction, towards announcing earlier. I just think that on balance, it’s probably not that big a difference, and that right now things in the Presidential race points toward a later announcement being more favorable.

    When it comes to how close to cut it to the convention, barring unforeseen circumstances I would say as late as two months prior is not unreasonable, and leaves plenty of time for an active pre-nomination campaign and debate within the party, including plenty of state conventions that will be held within that window. Other nations manage to conduct entire general election campaigns in that amount of time, I think it’s plenty for the LP to decide its nomination. I don’t think Gary is going to push it that close, but he could and still be perfectly safe.

  32. Bondurant

    Jesse must be suffering from too many chair shots to the noggin. He’s not a libertarian, he likes Trump, he likes Sanders, he wrote in one of his books that he admired Che Guevara…yet he thinks the LP rank-and-file will support him?

  33. Joseph Buchman Post author

    Maybe he thinks he can bring enough new delegates with him to ensure he would win the nomination, either to Orlando, or to enough state conventions?

  34. Andy

    “Joseph Buchman Post author

    October 8, 2015 at 6:15 pm

    Maybe he thinks he can bring enough new delegates with him to ensure he would win the nomination, either to Orlando, or to enough state conventions?”

    I doubt this would happen. A lot of the delegations will already be set by the time of the convention. There have=e always empty seats at LP Conventions, but he’d have to have this planned out in advance if he wanted to be assured of packing the convention with his delegates in those empty seats.

    The fact that Jesse have never been a member of the LP, and he apparently thinks that he can get nominated as a candidate without joining the party, will work against him. He’s also made a few issue statements that are not in line with the Libertarian Party platform, and his recent endorsements of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders will not go over well with a lot of the delegates.

    There are still things that I like about Jesse Ventura, but I think that he’s probably blown his chance of ever being a part of an LP Presidential ticket.

  35. paulie

    I take it you haven’t had time to read the Ames link from the other thread yet. Granted, disreputable source, but it may put what you just said in some different perspective. For the benefit of anyone coming along later who hasn’t read the other thread and has no idea what I am talking about:

    http://beforeitsnews.com/gold-and-precious-metals/2015/08/behind-the-scenes-of-the-donald-trump-roger-stone-show-2654434.html?currentSplittedPage=0

    Consider the long term alliance between Stone, Ventura and Trump, that Stone may be running for Senate in Florida, and that that is where the convention will be.

  36. Jed Ziggler

    If you’ve ever read either of Jesse’s books, you’d know that his brain works a little differently than most. I truly believe he believes he can do this, the question is whether he’ll actually go through with it.

  37. Jed Ziggler

    Roger Stone doesn’t help. And don’t take Ventura lightly, for all the crazy talk he’s a lot smarter than people give him credit for. He managed to win a major election as a third party candidate, something many people with equal name recognition didn’t come close to doing. He can totally do this, and without anyone’s help. I just don’t think he will.

  38. paulie

    Stone is a specialist at things like packing conventions. Ventura is not. That’s not at all to say he is stupid, he just had very different rules to deal with in his elections as mayor and governor.

  39. George Phillies

    Browne was a celebrity among gold people. Badnarik was a celebrity in a narrow group of people whose knowledge of he Constitution is different than some of ours.

  40. paulie

    Badnarik was a celebrity in a narrow group of people whose knowledge of he Constitution is different than some of ours.

    That happened after his presidential run.

  41. Andy

    “George Phillies

    October 8, 2015 at 11:57 pm

    Browne was a celebrity among gold people. Badnarik was a celebrity in a narrow group of people whose knowledge of he Constitution is different than some of ours.”

    These were very small groups of people. Neither Harry Browne or Michael Badnarik were anything close to being celebrity candidates, particularly Badnarik.

  42. paulie

    Badnarik in 2004 was as far from celebrity as you can get. He raised enough money at each campaign stop to get to the next stop, and beat two better known and better financed opponents for the nomination, not that either of them were huge celebrities either.. but more so than Badnarik.

  43. Joseph Buchman Post author

    What we need are “ultra” fiscally conservative/”ultra” socially liberal candidates AKA “purist” (but why do I need to add that adjective here) Libertarians who by persuasion and education and principled political performance art cause others to join in the cause of restoring the priceless blessings of Liberty for, if not ourselves, our progeny. Jesse, while self-destructively flawed in other areas, brings some of those qualities that have been missing in our other candidates.

    If only we could, like Dr. Frankenstein, combine the best of each . . . I’m sure we’d want to use some of Governor Ventura in the mix.

  44. paulie

    I think it was Aaron Russo that was somewhat of a celebrity among Constitutionalists in 2004, thanks to Freedom to Fascism, not Badnarik.

  45. Andy

    “paulie

    October 9, 2015 at 12:47 pm

    I think it was Aaron Russo that was somewhat of a celebrity among Constitutionalists in 2004, thanks to Freedom to Fascism, not Badnarik.”

    America: From Freedom To Fascism, did not come out until 2006.

    Aaron Russo had been a producer for some movies and TV shows, so this is what he was best known for at the time of the 2004 LP National Convention. He was only a minor celebrity though, and he had not really done anything notable in the entertainment industry since the 1980’s.

  46. paulie

    He was releasing some teasers for what eventually became Freedom to Fascism.

    Aaron Russo had been a producer for some movies and TV shows, so this is what he was best known for at the time of the 2004 LP National Convention. He was only a minor celebrity though, and he had not really done anything notable in the entertainment industry since the 1980’s.

    Correct.

    And Gary Nolan was a radio host. I believe still is.

    Not exactly huge celebrities, but still bigger “celebrities” than Badnarik was.

  47. Andy

    “paulie

    October 9, 2015 at 2:27 pm

    He was releasing some teasers for what eventually became Freedom to Fascism.”

    I don’t recall anything that was in America: From Freedom To Fascism being released until after 2004.

    “And Gary Nolan was a radio host. I believe still is. ”

    Yes, Gary Nolan was a radio host, but he was only on in a few markets, as in he was not nationally syndicated.

    I remember hearing a while back that he was looking to get back into radio, but I don’t know if he ever got another show or not, and I have not heard anything about him in a few years. The last time I heard anything about him is when he endorsed Ron Paul for President.

  48. James Meteskey

    Ventura would be the most successful LP candidate ever, by far. Probably would get more votes than all the other previous LP Presidential candidates combined, who as we all know, struggle to get over 1% of the vote. The LP would blow it terribly by not considering Ventura.

  49. paulie

    Even if that were true, he’s not a libertarian, so it’s besides the point how well you think he would do, and I don’t think he would do nearly as well as you think .. not that it matters.

  50. Joe

    I tend to agree with James Meteskey @ October 12, 2015 at 4:47 am in the same sense that if the LP were to run Bernie Sanders we would get more votes than ever — problem is it would destroy the brand, be unprincipled, do long-term harm.

    And yet the same arguments can be made regarding Barr/Root and Governor Johnson (Albeit to a far lesser degree). As for Governor Ventura, I am open to the possibility that he could be educated, change, come around to a purist Libertarian way of thinking and be a GREAT candidate. I mean, isn’t that our hope for EVERYONE ON THE PLANET?

    When do we write someone off as “not-Libertarian” as opposed to “not yet Libertarian enough?”

  51. Andy

    “James Meteskey

    October 12, 2015 at 4:47 am

    Ventura would be the most successful LP candidate ever, by far. Probably would get more votes than all the other previous LP Presidential candidates combined, who as we all know, struggle to get over 1% of the vote. The LP would blow it terribly by not considering Ventura.”

    Jesse Ventura had lots of potential as a Libertarian Party candidate, the problem is that he’s weak on some issues from a libertarian perspective, and he’s also weak on political strategy.

    Yes, he was able to get elected as Governor of Minnesota, and as Mayor of Brooklyn Park, Minnesota before that, but he also had several things working in his favor, such as:

    1) He was already a celebrity, especially in his home state of Minnesota.

    2) He was able to participate in the Governor’s debate against the Democrat and the Republican.

    3) Minnesota is one of 7 states that has election day voter registration, and a lot of the people who voted for Jesse Ventura were people who registered to vote at the polling places on the day of the election.

    Getting elected Mayor was also a big accomplishment, but the Libertarian Party has elected Mayors before, like Art Olivier, who had been elected as to the office of Mayor of Bellflower, California, which is around the same size as Brooklyn Park, Minnesota.

    Running for President as a minor party candidate is a different ball game, particularly when one considers that Jesse Ventura has never even been involved in the Libertarian Party.

  52. paulie

    When do we write someone off as “not-Libertarian” as opposed to “not yet Libertarian enough?”

    Somewhere between Johnson and Barr. YMMV.

  53. paulie

    1) He was already a celebrity, especially in his home state of Minnesota.

    2) He was able to participate in the Governor’s debate against the Democrat and the Republican.

    3) Minnesota is one of 7 states that has election day voter registration, and a lot of the people who voted for Jesse Ventura were people who registered to vote at the polling places on the day of the election.

    He also received government financing for the campaign.

  54. NewFederalist

    If the goal is getting lots of votes then Mr. Meteskey may be right. God forbid Ventura actually win on the LP ticket in this crazy political year. The question: is it better to run a philosophical libertarian on the LP ticket or someone who might be close to libertarian on some important issues with a big name? That is what the delegates will have to decide.

  55. Andy

    Paul said: “He also received government financing for the campaign.”

    I don’t recall anything about that. I do recall that his campaign for Governor spent around $300,000 and something

    Gary Johnson received matching funds from the federal government for his LP Presidential run. I don’t know how much it helped, but he did not come anywhere close to being elected President.

  56. Andy

    I’d say that Jesse Venutra falls somewhere around the line between Centrist and Libertarian on the Nolan Chart. He does hold a lot of libertarian views, but he’s not consistent, and he’s far from being at the top of Nolan Chart.

  57. Wang Tang-Fu

    http://www.ontheissues.org/Celeb/Jesse_Ventura_Government_Reform.htm

    “We learned more about end-running the media during our visit with Governor Jesse Ventura. How did you reach the people of Minnesota to win the election? I asked him. He replied that he was at about 10% in the polls and then got on 10 statewide debates with the other major candidates. Second, the state provided substantial public funding of election campaigns, and third, Minnesota had same-day voter registration. In about a month, Ventura went from 10% to 38% and won the governorship in a three-way race. Same-day registration led to a last-minute surge of voters for him that helped raise the total average in an off-year election.”

    As for Gary Johnson… he did not receive much in the way of matching funds, and either had to pay back what he did receive or owes it to the FEC.

  58. paulie

    The primary matching funds did not put Johnson anywhere near the ballpark of the literally billions spent by the Democrats, Republicans and their candidates. He was still outspent by something like a thousand to one. Ventura’s government campaign funds for governor, while they did not put him on a perfectly level playing field, did put him in the ballpark. With the debates and election day voter registration he was able to become competitive. After this trend showed in the polls the “wasted vote” became a non-issue because he was no longer seen as someone who had no real chance to win. With a presidential run he will not have any of these advantages and would be outspent by a thousand to one just like Johnson would.

  59. Andy Craig

    Johnson and Stein were only eligible for matching funds for the primary, the kind where you can qualify by getting at least $5000 from each of at least 20 states. Stein is currently going for it again, from what I hear the Johnson camp felt burned by the process and won’t try it again. In theory, any of the other candidates for the nomination could do it, but I don’t see any of them raising $100k pre-convention.

    The general election funding (from the $3 tax checkoff) is still only available to nominees of parties whose nominee polled at least 5% the previous election. Perot ’92 and ’96 were the only times that was met by a third party, so the Reform ticket got funding in ’96 (Perot) and 2000 (Buchanan). Anderson’s 1980 result (7%) also would have qualified, had it been attached to a new party nomination instead of just his independent candidacy.

    Whether or not that system will continue is in doubt, since Obama (both times) and Romney both opted-out of it. If the whole general election scheme is scrapped (along with convention funding, which has already been diverted to cancer research), it’s likely the primary matching funds that top-tier third-party candidates sometimes benefit from will be scrapped too. That would also mean 5% for POTUS will no longer be a significant threshold for third-party candidates to shoot for.

  60. Joe

    More news from Governor Ventura earlier today on “The Alan Colmes Show” —

    VENTURA: . . . the Libertarians have contacted me, and have opened the door for me to come to the convention.”

    (NOTE — WHO are “the Libertarians” who have contacted Governor Ventura?)

    “COLMES: You would challenge Johnson for the nomination?

    VENTURA: No, I would try to team up with him. Johnson and Ventura.

    COLMES: How close are you? Ventura and Johnson?

    VENTURA: We’re pretty close.

    COLMES: When will that decision be made?

    VENTURA: It will have to be made before the convention.. . .

    The rest of the transcript can be found at —

    http://radio.foxnews.com/2015/10/12/ventura-i-would-run-for-president-without-a-party/

  61. Joseph Buchman Post author

    The audio of the full interview is also available at the link above.

    It begins with Governor Ventura praising Obamacare as a step toward single payer national health care. He then presents his hypothesis that Bush/Cheney knew the Saudis financed 9-11 to get us to go to war with Iraq to oust Saddam and for profit for Halliburton. He then recounted how the CIA put the Shah in power in Iran in the 1950s and how that is the basis for the Middle East’s hatred of the USA.

    Governor Ventura then argued that Lee Harvey Oswald may have actually been working to protect JFK, how Oswald may have been the informant who stopped the assignation from happening in Chicago, suggested reading the book The Echo from Dealey Plaza, etc . . . LBJ and Hoover covered up the JFK assassination. Also how the government wants us to believe in single assassins by always giving them three names — starting with John WIlkes Booth (when 6 others were executed in the conspiracy to kill Lincoln, including the first woman executed in the USA) through Lee Harvey Oswald — and how Mark David Chapman may have been hypnotized as part of a CIA MK Ultra attempt to kill John Lennon.

    “Trump is doing to the Republicans exactly what Buchanan did to the Reform Party.”

    “I am in the weeds like a good Navy seal observing and waiting my next move. What trouble I’ll cause if I get the Libertarian (nomination). . .”

    The discussion transcribed at the link above regarding the Libertarian Party and its convention begins at the 28:00 minute mark.

    WHO invited Governor Ventura to the convention? WHY? Or is the Governor misrepresenting the nature of the conversation?

  62. Nicholas Sarwark

    It begins with Governor Ventura praising Obamacare as a step toward single payer national health care. He then presents his hypothesis that Bush/Cheney knew the Saudis financed 9-11 to get us to go to war with Iraq to oust Saddam and for profit for Halliburton. He then recounted how the CIA put the Shah in power in Iran in the 1950s and how that is the basis for the Middle East’s hatred of the USA.

    Governor Ventura then argued that Lee Harvey Oswald may have actually been working to protect JFK, how Oswald may have been the informant who stopped the assignation from happening in Chicago, suggested reading the book The Echo from Dealey Plaza, etc . . . LBJ and Hoover covered up the JFK assassination. Also how the government wants us to believe in single assassins by always giving them three names — starting with John WIlkes Booth (when 6 others were executed in the conspiracy to kill Lincoln, including the first woman executed in the USA) through Lee Harvey Oswald — and how Mark David Chapman may have been hypnotized as part of a CIA MK Ultra attempt to kill John Lennon.

    With such laser focus on the important issues of the day, it’s hard to imagine how he could not win the nomination.

  63. bruuno

    “Also how the government wants us to believe in single assassins by always giving them three names”
    Wow, so he just demonstrated that he has no problem putting forth a crackpot theory without the slightest bit of effort into doing research or basic common sense. They do the three name thing because it helps cut down on innocent people with the same name from getting harassed. Or, in the case of Booth, Oswald and Ray, that is how they referred to themselves.
    Also the ‘government’ are the ones who very publicly executed and hunted down Booth’s collaborators so they did a really terrible job of ‘covering that up’.
    See people, this is why Ventura would be a ticking time bomb as a candidate.

  64. Wang Tang-Fu

    “COLMES: How close are you? Ventura and Johnson?

    VENTURA: We’re pretty close.”

    A lot of you will be seeing Gary Johnson in person between now and the convention (hopefully). Ask him about this. Is it true? Is he interested in being on a ticket with Ventura?

    “WHO invited Governor Ventura to the convention? WHY?”

    If he called the national office and talked to, say, Wes Benedict, he may have been told what the procedure is if he wants to run for the nomination. Is that an invitation?

  65. Andy Craig

    “A lot of you will be seeing Gary Johnson in person between now and the convention (hopefully). Ask him about this. Is it true? Is he interested in being on a ticket with Ventura?”

    I’m not under the impression they’re exactly friends or anything, much less ‘pretty close.’ I’m sure they have met a few times, spoken at the same events and that sort of thing, but that’s not saying much.

    Gary has publicly commented, when he was asked about it, that Ventura seeking the nomination could potentially be the set-up for a higher-profile televised nomination debate. But I’d be surprised if he’d seriously consider the possibility of Ventura as a running mate. He didn’t in 2012, after all, and there were some other pretty amusing possibilities on the short list.

  66. Wang Tang-Fu

    Perhaps Ventura mistakes people wanting him to be at the convention and in the party’s debate to draw more media attention with an actual desire to nominate him or make him part of a ticket.

  67. Joseph Buchman Post author

    Nicholas Sarwark @October 13, 2015 at 8:35 am wrote:

    “It begins with Governor Ventura praising Obamacare . . . and how Mark David Chapman may have been hypnotized as part of a CIA MK Ultra attempt to kill John Lennon.”

    “With such laser focus on the important issues of the day, it’s hard to imagine how he could not win the nomination.”

    One does wonder, at times, about the “laser focus” of the delegates. Let’s hope they/we at least get Oregon right this time . . .

  68. NewFederalist

    Great post! It really is amazing the variety of kooks, crazies, weirdoes and other such fellow travelers the LP can attract. It would be nice to nominate a solid ticket in 2016.

  69. Joseph Buchman Post author

    paulie @October 13, 2015 at 12:34 pm wrote:

    “Not much chance of that, as Wagner et al will not send a delegation this time.”

    I believe an apology from the delegates to the affiliate in Oregon would be in order. As for what Wes et al, may or may not do, I find my ability to prophesy too close to the Biblical standard for a stoning to be worth fully engaging, at least on this issue.

  70. Joseph Buchman Post author

    From 29 July 2012 –

    “VENTURA: “I made myself available to Dr. Paul if he would leave the Republican Party . . . I would have joined him had that happened because he carries power. He has power on the Internet; he has power with young people; he’s certainly going to carry some power at the Republican Convention. He won Minnesota hands down . . . Minnesota is loaded with Ron Paul Republicans and what I’m trying to urge all of them to do now is . . . switch over to Governor Gary Johnson like I am. He’s the Libertarian candidate, the former Governor of New Mexico who is a brilliant, honest man.”

    http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2012/07/jesse-ventura-if-they-allow-johnson-to-debate-you-could-see-him-win/

  71. paulie

    No crystal ball required; the Oregon LP (Wagner/Hedbor et al) has already passed a resolution that they will not participate in the Orlando convention and are not bound by anything decided there.

  72. Joe

    Governor Ventura seems to be getting more explicit. From yesterday’s The Steve Malzberg Show. — “Jesse Ventura: I Want to Run Against Clinton and Bush as Libertarian Candidate”

    “I could run against them [on the platform] that we fought a war with Britain so we don’t have kings and queens. . . . I mean if Bush runs, that’d be the third Bush in how many years of my lifetime? Half of it? And if Clinton runs, it’ll be their second? I thought we fought the British so we didn’t have kings and queens.”

    http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/jesse-ventura-libertarian-run-president/2015/10/13/id/696044

  73. paulie

    I’ve heard him use that line before. It seems slightly less relevant now that Bush is so far back in the polls and Clinton, while still ahead, no longer seems “inevitable” and has scandals lapping at her heels. I personally still think they will end up being the nominees but we’ll see.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *