Video From Texas Presidential ‘Job Interview’

“I want to be your next president so I can leave you alone.” – R. Lee Wrights

Kudos to the Harris County (Texas) Libertarian Party and Guy McClendon for organizing the latest Libertarian presidential debate, or as Lee Wrights likes to describes these events, the Libertarian presidential job interview. Here is the video.

13 thoughts on “Video From Texas Presidential ‘Job Interview’

  1. Trent Hill

    I wonder if some libertarian delegate will ask Johnson to cover his own GOP Presidential debt (200k)?

  2. Kleptocracy And You

    Well gentlemen, looks like you will be joined shortly. Pistols UP !

    There are three kinds of people in the world:
    1) Those who do what they’re told without question,
    2) Those who control them, and
    3) Those who refuse to play the game!

    “ Maryland is an extremely liberal state. It’s so liberal, even our crabs are blue.” – Patrick Citroni

    ¡Viva la Migra!

    You pick the ONE precinct at a time !

    To build the libertarian movement to a point of change for the better, it must be done one precinct @ a time. It’s ALWAYS a great time to do some local politicking and walk some precincts. The good news is you can pick the precincts !
    Some items that can help…

    Help FIND the LIBERTARIANS in your area WITH the QUIZ ACROSS AMERICA: http://www.lp.org/blogs/staff/quiz-across-america-door-hangers-5-per-100

    Become a LP ACTIVIST where you live, SPREAD THE MESSAGE: http://www.lp.org/take-a-look

    Libertarian Products and Supplies make GREAT GIFTS too: http://www.LPSTUFF.COM/shop

    Have a great Holiday Season and ENJOY spreading the word ONE precinct at a time !

    Thanks !

    If the First Amendment fails, use the Second one.

  3. Common Tater

    Richard Winger is in favor of taking matching funds IIRC and there are others.

    It was hotly debated back in the 90s when the LP was more radical oriented than now.

  4. George Phillies

    If he changes parties and takes matching funds, he is under the rules for Libertarian Presidential candidates taking Presidential matching funds.

    They’re sort of like Russian Roulette, as played with an electronic Gatling gun.

  5. Jeremy C. Young

    It’s too bad that none of these guys is going to be the LP nominee, because all of them have made amazing strides in presentation since the campaign season’s first debates. That goes for Roger Gary, too. The field’s elder statesman had his “Rick Perry moment,” but for the most part he seemed more alert and polished than before, full of innovative framings that should help sell the Libertarian message. He still wasn’t in the same league as Harris and Wrights, but he turned in a creditable performance nevertheless. Note to Harris and Wrights: take some cues about standing at the podium from Gary. Your job is to stand stolidly and look distinguished, not to sway back and forth and look uncomfortable.

    Wrights is by now a polished and eloquent speaker. His early awkwardness is completely gone; every answer he gave was to the point, clear, and polished. I think his podium presence may have finished developing at this point. He did an impressive job and made a fine case for why he should be the LP’s nominee.

    Harris debuted a new, faster-paced debating style. It still needs some work, as evidenced by his stuttering toward the end of the debate, but when it’s fully polished it will be a huge improvement over his previous slower and more didactic style. He had moments of startling eloquence when everything seemed to come together; he just needs a few more of those moments and he will be a very impressive candidate.

    It’s hard for me to see guys like Harris and Wrights turn in such brilliant performances and to know that Gary Johnson’s 9% in the polls is too important to let either of them be the party’s standard-bearer this cycle. That said, either of them would be a fantastic vice presidential nominee. And should Johnson falter before the convention, either of them would do a great job picking up the pieces.

  6. George Phillies

    Johnson’s 9% in the polls is an illusion signifying nothing. We have been here before, for example for two of the 2008 candidates for nomination, both with standard professional polling groups.

  7. Jeremy C. Young

    It means nothing as far as actual vote-getting, true. What interests me is that it’s tantalizingly close to the “15% in five national polls” required for debate participation. To get into the debates, I’d be willing to nominate Wayne Root for the Green Party, let alone Johnson for the LP.

  8. George Phillies

    @11

    There were two candidates in 2008 who did professional polling at about this date, give or take. 9% is 3% better than one of them and 3% worse than the other.

  9. Jeremy C. Young

    George @12 (sorry for the delayed response), the key difference is that this isn’t from a candidate’s poll; it’s from PPP, a nationally-respected pollster with Democratic leanings. Johnson didn’t commission that poll, so it’s much more believable.

Leave a Reply

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